Tweet
AGAIN ABOUT COMPROMISES, AND NOT ONLY...
By Kim Gabrielian
AZG Armenian Daily
13/11/2008
Karabakh conflict
We should not put the political conception of compromise in a formula
"Return of territories equals recognition of independence". It has
no prospects, and this kind of approach is only a type of commercial
psychology. The issue should be presented taking into account the
fact that Azerbaijan has blockaded NKR during the last two decades
depriving it of vital roads, also making attempts at physical
annihilation of Karabakh.
The meaning of the conflict is separation of Karabakh from Azerbaijan,
and if it is out of discussions, speaking of any compromise becomes
meaningless.
Keeping of the security zone is of vital importance not only at
present but also in the future, as Karabakh will remain an apple of
discord in the region whether we want it or not..
When Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov after August incidents
insisted that Ossian-Abkhazian solution could not be a precedent for
Karabakh we saw that his announcement were in double standards. It is
evident that with recognition of independence of Ossetia and Abkhazia
Russia corrected the Soviet mistake - it only retuned its previous
prefects. Russia is outlining the new citadels of the superpower.
Attempts will be made to turn Karabakh into a citadel as well, but
not by means of recognition.
What about the "south" project, we can have a certain view of it
through the Maindorf declaration signed trilaterally. The result of
the distressing discussions may be a sharp resolution - a swift war;
an approbated method in different conflicts. In order to avoid global
transformations it is the best way to undo the Gordian knot and only
after that to proofread the political results of it.
In this sense, if Azerbaijan succeeds in narrowing Karabakh security
zone by means of a blitz, international opinion will become unimportant
to it. At the best, it will be condemned for breaking the agreements,
and sanctions will not be imposed by the mediator countries. Quite
the reverse, they will take the opportunity to bring peacekeeping
troops into the region.
In case of nearing the territory of Nagorno Karabakh by means of a
blitz or compromise, Azerbaijan will benefit, as the contact line will
be already within the bounds of its territorial inviolability. After
that, Azerbaijan will agree to negotiate at any level. And Karabakh
issue will appear in a situation where the importance of the Armenian
participation will decrease, and involvement of Karabakh will take
a formal turn.
>From the above-mentioned we come to a conclusion that we should not
think of ceding territories, but reinforcing them.
By Kim Gabrielian
AZG Armenian Daily
13/11/2008
Karabakh conflict
We should not put the political conception of compromise in a formula
"Return of territories equals recognition of independence". It has
no prospects, and this kind of approach is only a type of commercial
psychology. The issue should be presented taking into account the
fact that Azerbaijan has blockaded NKR during the last two decades
depriving it of vital roads, also making attempts at physical
annihilation of Karabakh.
The meaning of the conflict is separation of Karabakh from Azerbaijan,
and if it is out of discussions, speaking of any compromise becomes
meaningless.
Keeping of the security zone is of vital importance not only at
present but also in the future, as Karabakh will remain an apple of
discord in the region whether we want it or not..
When Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov after August incidents
insisted that Ossian-Abkhazian solution could not be a precedent for
Karabakh we saw that his announcement were in double standards. It is
evident that with recognition of independence of Ossetia and Abkhazia
Russia corrected the Soviet mistake - it only retuned its previous
prefects. Russia is outlining the new citadels of the superpower.
Attempts will be made to turn Karabakh into a citadel as well, but
not by means of recognition.
What about the "south" project, we can have a certain view of it
through the Maindorf declaration signed trilaterally. The result of
the distressing discussions may be a sharp resolution - a swift war;
an approbated method in different conflicts. In order to avoid global
transformations it is the best way to undo the Gordian knot and only
after that to proofread the political results of it.
In this sense, if Azerbaijan succeeds in narrowing Karabakh security
zone by means of a blitz, international opinion will become unimportant
to it. At the best, it will be condemned for breaking the agreements,
and sanctions will not be imposed by the mediator countries. Quite
the reverse, they will take the opportunity to bring peacekeeping
troops into the region.
In case of nearing the territory of Nagorno Karabakh by means of a
blitz or compromise, Azerbaijan will benefit, as the contact line will
be already within the bounds of its territorial inviolability. After
that, Azerbaijan will agree to negotiate at any level. And Karabakh
issue will appear in a situation where the importance of the Armenian
participation will decrease, and involvement of Karabakh will take
a formal turn.
>From the above-mentioned we come to a conclusion that we should not
think of ceding territories, but reinforcing them.