Tweet
MISREPRESENTING THE ISSUES IN NAGORNO-KARABAKHALEXANDROS PETERSON IS WRONG: THIS SOUTH CAUCASES COUNTRY IS A WELL-FUNCTIONING DEMOCRATIC ENTITY DESERVING EU RECOGNITION
Vahe Gabrielyan
guardian.co.uk
Monday June 16 2008
The article Negotiating a black hole by Alexandros Petersen on
Cif on June 7, was regretfully unbecoming for such a reputable
newspaper. The author refers to a conflict of which he either has
little understanding, or knowingly distorts the truth. He fails to
mention how the conflict evolved and grossly misjudges its character.
The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is not an "ethno-religious conflict"
and not one over a disputed territory where "Armenian Christians [are]
against Azerbaijani Muslims". It is about the fundamental human rights
issue of self-determination, one of being able to peacefully live on
the land of your ancestors and be the master of your own destiny. The
current situation is a result of decades-long systematic abuse of the
human rights and ethnic cleansing of the indigenous Armenian population
by the Soviet Azeri authorities since the unlawful annexation of the
ancient Armenian province (Artsakh) to Azerbaijan and later, of pogroms
and outright military aggression against the peaceful population.
The military phase of the conflict between Azerbaijan and
Nagorno-Karabakh ended with the victory of the latter's hastily-formed
defence forces and enabled their people to start re-building their
lives and homes. Since its independence (impeccably proclaimed
according to same laws and procedures by which Azerbaijan gained
independence from the USSR), in the political and socio-economic
turmoil following the break-up of the Soviet Union and even under
military aggression, Nagorno-Karabakh has been a surprising case
of rule of law and well-functioning state machine. Starting with
the independence referendum in 1991, all manifestations of its
people's will, which included four presidential elections and
several parliamentary and local ones, have been orderly, dignified
and democratic exercises, as witnessed by numerous independent
international observers, including, incidentally, members of the UK
parliament and the US Congress.
Indeed, Nagorno-Karabakh is not "a governance black hole", but a
well-functioning democratic entity with strengthening civil society
and full economic and cultural life, possessing all attributes of an
independent state, save for international recognition. Its elected
authorities have announced on several occasions that they would be
happy to receive international inspection missions who can study the
situation in situ and refute any groundless allegations. There have
been no volunteers to chase ghosts. The allegations of all earthly
sins in the mentioned article, happily picked en masse from the Azeri
propaganda machine of libellous campaign of hatred and misinformation
against Karabakh and enriched by references to all possible evils
of our times to scare the modern security-conscious citizen are so
bizarre that they are at best ignored or frowned upon in any more or
less informed circles.
However, the author is right in saying that the conflict should concern
Europe. It should, because although the people of Karabakh have been
able to stop the regular bombings of their homes by resorting to
self-defence, peace has not been made final yet and threats of war
are heard from the other side of the border regularly. It should,
because although we keep fingers cross for the renewed negotiations
between the presidents and foreign ministers to succeed - the last,
June 6 round was constructive and it was decided to continue them
- the continuing military rhetoric and the fierce anti-Armenian
hate campaign on all levels of society, combined with the mentioned
ever-growing military budget, are an ominous sign. It is much worrying
that today, fed on this campaign; more than one-third of Azeris are
for a military solution while international mediators (the Minsk Group
co-chair countries) are widely lambasted for their impartiality. The
oil money paid by the European companies should not facilitate the
unleashing of another war, the consequences of which will indeed be
dire. With a fragile ceasefire being maintained simply because of the
balance of power, it is easy to instigate another war that will hugely
increase the toll on human life and create new refugees. On top of
the already existing one million, about 400,000 of which by the way
are the Armenian refugees from Azerbaijan and from Nagorno-Karabakh,
this will result in a large-scale humanitarian disaster affecting whole
of Europe and beyond. This cannot be allowed to happen. This is why
both past and present Armenian authorities have readily engaged in
negotiations in good faith and have strived to find lasting peace,
despite and because of the fact that one party of the conflict,
Azerbaijan, refuses to talk to Nagorno-Karabakh, the other party.
Security in the modern world is certainly a global problem and in
order to ensure global peace and security, frozen conflicts should
be resolved in a way so that the vital interests of all parties are
taken into account. That will take concessions on both sides and it
is a hard thing to do. In order to help, the international community,
as well as its individual members, should adopt an attitude based on
values and principles that apply universally. Acknowledging that the
people of NK have the right to be in charge of their own destiny would
have helped. It has in other cases. On the other hand, giving in to
dirty propaganda and trying to discredit one side, be it with either
explicit or implied allegations does not help and raises questions.
About this articleClose This article was first published on
guardian.co.uk on Monday June 16 2008. It was last updated at 12:13
on June 16 2008.
Vahe Gabrielyan
guardian.co.uk
Monday June 16 2008
The article Negotiating a black hole by Alexandros Petersen on
Cif on June 7, was regretfully unbecoming for such a reputable
newspaper. The author refers to a conflict of which he either has
little understanding, or knowingly distorts the truth. He fails to
mention how the conflict evolved and grossly misjudges its character.
The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is not an "ethno-religious conflict"
and not one over a disputed territory where "Armenian Christians [are]
against Azerbaijani Muslims". It is about the fundamental human rights
issue of self-determination, one of being able to peacefully live on
the land of your ancestors and be the master of your own destiny. The
current situation is a result of decades-long systematic abuse of the
human rights and ethnic cleansing of the indigenous Armenian population
by the Soviet Azeri authorities since the unlawful annexation of the
ancient Armenian province (Artsakh) to Azerbaijan and later, of pogroms
and outright military aggression against the peaceful population.
The military phase of the conflict between Azerbaijan and
Nagorno-Karabakh ended with the victory of the latter's hastily-formed
defence forces and enabled their people to start re-building their
lives and homes. Since its independence (impeccably proclaimed
according to same laws and procedures by which Azerbaijan gained
independence from the USSR), in the political and socio-economic
turmoil following the break-up of the Soviet Union and even under
military aggression, Nagorno-Karabakh has been a surprising case
of rule of law and well-functioning state machine. Starting with
the independence referendum in 1991, all manifestations of its
people's will, which included four presidential elections and
several parliamentary and local ones, have been orderly, dignified
and democratic exercises, as witnessed by numerous independent
international observers, including, incidentally, members of the UK
parliament and the US Congress.
Indeed, Nagorno-Karabakh is not "a governance black hole", but a
well-functioning democratic entity with strengthening civil society
and full economic and cultural life, possessing all attributes of an
independent state, save for international recognition. Its elected
authorities have announced on several occasions that they would be
happy to receive international inspection missions who can study the
situation in situ and refute any groundless allegations. There have
been no volunteers to chase ghosts. The allegations of all earthly
sins in the mentioned article, happily picked en masse from the Azeri
propaganda machine of libellous campaign of hatred and misinformation
against Karabakh and enriched by references to all possible evils
of our times to scare the modern security-conscious citizen are so
bizarre that they are at best ignored or frowned upon in any more or
less informed circles.
However, the author is right in saying that the conflict should concern
Europe. It should, because although the people of Karabakh have been
able to stop the regular bombings of their homes by resorting to
self-defence, peace has not been made final yet and threats of war
are heard from the other side of the border regularly. It should,
because although we keep fingers cross for the renewed negotiations
between the presidents and foreign ministers to succeed - the last,
June 6 round was constructive and it was decided to continue them
- the continuing military rhetoric and the fierce anti-Armenian
hate campaign on all levels of society, combined with the mentioned
ever-growing military budget, are an ominous sign. It is much worrying
that today, fed on this campaign; more than one-third of Azeris are
for a military solution while international mediators (the Minsk Group
co-chair countries) are widely lambasted for their impartiality. The
oil money paid by the European companies should not facilitate the
unleashing of another war, the consequences of which will indeed be
dire. With a fragile ceasefire being maintained simply because of the
balance of power, it is easy to instigate another war that will hugely
increase the toll on human life and create new refugees. On top of
the already existing one million, about 400,000 of which by the way
are the Armenian refugees from Azerbaijan and from Nagorno-Karabakh,
this will result in a large-scale humanitarian disaster affecting whole
of Europe and beyond. This cannot be allowed to happen. This is why
both past and present Armenian authorities have readily engaged in
negotiations in good faith and have strived to find lasting peace,
despite and because of the fact that one party of the conflict,
Azerbaijan, refuses to talk to Nagorno-Karabakh, the other party.
Security in the modern world is certainly a global problem and in
order to ensure global peace and security, frozen conflicts should
be resolved in a way so that the vital interests of all parties are
taken into account. That will take concessions on both sides and it
is a hard thing to do. In order to help, the international community,
as well as its individual members, should adopt an attitude based on
values and principles that apply universally. Acknowledging that the
people of NK have the right to be in charge of their own destiny would
have helped. It has in other cases. On the other hand, giving in to
dirty propaganda and trying to discredit one side, be it with either
explicit or implied allegations does not help and raises questions.
About this articleClose This article was first published on
guardian.co.uk on Monday June 16 2008. It was last updated at 12:13
on June 16 2008.