Tweet
Real victories and faltering diplomacy
09-05-2008 11:32:57 - KarabakhOpen
`The leader of the Democratic Party of Armenia Aram Sargsyan is
dissatisfied with the statements of the foreign ministry of Armenia on
holding a plebiscite on the status of Karabakh. He thinks by similar
statements Armenia questions the legitimacy of all the acts since 1988
which enabled the foundation of the Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh, just
like the fact of legitimacy of the state.' The citation is from
information about the briefing of Armen Sargsyan.
This citation clearly reveals the main political controversy without
overcoming which the settlement of the Karabakh issue is impossible.
More exactly, it is possible but not in favor of the Armenian side. To
put it more clearly, the controversy is the lack of harmony in the
political steps of the Armenian side and the existing reality.
This disharmony of political ambitions and the reality is observed in
many countries. However, as a rule, this inconsistency is biased for
ambitions ` the societies which have no potential and force attack on
the diplomatic front at random, hoping for good luck. And they are
often lucky. Our case is the opposite ` on the diplomatic front we
question our real victories.
We have declared and built a state but another country negotiates
instead of us. We elect our government but they do not even try to take
a seat at the table of talks. We gained advantage in the unequal war
and now we are negotiating for disadvantage. What is more, we are
negotiating with the foe which does not stop threatening us. We even
agree to discuss with it the issue of declaring independence once
again, if they allow us, of course. In addition, not within the present
borders but the borders of the non-existent autonomous republic of the
non-existent country.
What does this stem from? Lack of self-confidence, complex of
geopolitical inferiority, or failure to understand of the rules of this
world which turns out to be based on the right of power rather than the
power of right. In any way, such attitude to our own strength and
interests gives birth to disrespect rather than respect.
The recurrent celebration of the day of liberation of Shushi led to
such judgments. The great victory which brought real security to
thousands of people is still being questioned. During the first meeting
with his Armenian counterpart the minister of foreign affairs of
Azerbaijan again says it is necessary to `withdraw the Armenian force,
return the refugees and create conditions for coexistence of Armenians
and Azerbaijanis in the framework of territorial integrity of
Azerbaijan.' And we continue to negotiate. We continue to pull down
buildings in Shushi and do not build new ones. We continue¦
09-05-2008 11:32:57 - KarabakhOpen
`The leader of the Democratic Party of Armenia Aram Sargsyan is
dissatisfied with the statements of the foreign ministry of Armenia on
holding a plebiscite on the status of Karabakh. He thinks by similar
statements Armenia questions the legitimacy of all the acts since 1988
which enabled the foundation of the Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh, just
like the fact of legitimacy of the state.' The citation is from
information about the briefing of Armen Sargsyan.
This citation clearly reveals the main political controversy without
overcoming which the settlement of the Karabakh issue is impossible.
More exactly, it is possible but not in favor of the Armenian side. To
put it more clearly, the controversy is the lack of harmony in the
political steps of the Armenian side and the existing reality.
This disharmony of political ambitions and the reality is observed in
many countries. However, as a rule, this inconsistency is biased for
ambitions ` the societies which have no potential and force attack on
the diplomatic front at random, hoping for good luck. And they are
often lucky. Our case is the opposite ` on the diplomatic front we
question our real victories.
We have declared and built a state but another country negotiates
instead of us. We elect our government but they do not even try to take
a seat at the table of talks. We gained advantage in the unequal war
and now we are negotiating for disadvantage. What is more, we are
negotiating with the foe which does not stop threatening us. We even
agree to discuss with it the issue of declaring independence once
again, if they allow us, of course. In addition, not within the present
borders but the borders of the non-existent autonomous republic of the
non-existent country.
What does this stem from? Lack of self-confidence, complex of
geopolitical inferiority, or failure to understand of the rules of this
world which turns out to be based on the right of power rather than the
power of right. In any way, such attitude to our own strength and
interests gives birth to disrespect rather than respect.
The recurrent celebration of the day of liberation of Shushi led to
such judgments. The great victory which brought real security to
thousands of people is still being questioned. During the first meeting
with his Armenian counterpart the minister of foreign affairs of
Azerbaijan again says it is necessary to `withdraw the Armenian force,
return the refugees and create conditions for coexistence of Armenians
and Azerbaijanis in the framework of territorial integrity of
Azerbaijan.' And we continue to negotiate. We continue to pull down
buildings in Shushi and do not build new ones. We continue¦