Tweet
NKR MFA: MR. BRYZA LINKS THE ISSUE OF THE NAGORNO KARABAKH CONFLICT SETTLEMENT TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND DEMOCRATIC REFORMS
ArmInfo
2009-08-13 17:16:00
ArmInfo. Mr. Bryza links the issue of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict
settlement to economic development and democratic reforms, Head of the
NKR MFA Information Department Marsel Petrosian said when answering
mass media questions concerning the OSCE Minsk Group co-chair Matthew
Bryza's recent statements.
Commenting on the OSCE Minsk Group U.S. Co-chair's assertion that
the opinion of the Nagorno Karabakh "population" is reflected in the
negotiation process, Petrosian said:
"We would welcome this fact and, in this connection, would like to
remind the mediators that the people of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic
have expressed their will at the referenda on independence on December
10, 1991 as well as the NKR Constitution on December 10, 2006. We would
be thankful to the mediators if the will of the NKR people, expressed
at the referenda, would be fully reflected in the negotiation process."
When asked to comment on the OSCE Minsk Group U.S. Co-chair's
recent statements, in which he presented the details of the proposed
principles for the Azerbaijani-Karabakh conflict settlement and said
that a quick settlement to the Nagorno Karabakh conflict, to his
opinion, was advantageous to Armenia, because otherwise the economic
development of the republic would be complicated, which would in turn
create problems in carrying out democratic reforms, Petrosian said:
"First, I would like to stress that a quick settlement to the Nagorno
Karabakh conflict is a priority for the Nagorno Karabakh Republic
as well.
However, this does not mean that we favor a settlement at any cost,
and with unpredictable consequences at that. For us a settlement
is establishment of lasting and enduring peace, which is possible to
achieve only in view of the actual state of affairs. However, Mr. Bryza
links the issue of the conflict settlement to economic development
and democratic reforms. The linkage of these issues into a single
"package" resembles more a bargaining and an attempt to impose an
agreement at all costs."
"Unfortunately, recently there has been a tendency to speed up the
negotiations for settling the Nagorno Karabakh conflict based on a
formula that ignores both the essence and history of the conflict and
the existing realities. And Mr. Bryza`s statements, from our point of
view, are in line with this tendency. There is an impression that the
current haste has to do with the announced change of some of the OSCE
Minsk Group Co-chairs, and particularly Mr. Bryza. As we have already
said in a July 15, 2009 statement of the NKR MFA, an unreasonable
speedup of the negotiation process will have a negative outcome and
will lead only to escalation of tension, as the formula proposed by
the mediators is directed to changing the balance of powers underlying
peace and stability in the region."
One of the journalists asked: "According to M. Bryza, the
OSCE Minsk Group Co-chairs propose that the peacekeepers in the
Azerbaijani-Karabakh conflict zone be unarmed, perform a monitoring
function and not be able to force to peace. This, as the U.S. Co-chair
has said, is conditioned by the fact that the experience from Kosovo
and Bosnia show that peacekeepers are not capable of preventing an
armed conflict, if one of the parties does not want it.
Your comment, please."
Petrosian responded: "By this Mr. Bryza admits, as a matter of fact,
that one of the main principles proposed by the mediators, namely the
security of the Nagorno Karabakh people, cannot be accomplished, and
that the international community cannot guarantee in full the security
of the NKR people in case of implementation of the proposed settlement
formula, as peacekeepers are one of the main tools of controlling
parties to a conflict that the international community has in its
arsenal of maintaining peace in conflict regions. But once tested,
it appears that they are not so effective, if one of the parties does
not want peace."
"However, the OSCE Minsk Group U.S. Co-chair proposes to solve this
issue in the process of the Azerbaijani-Karabakh conflict settlement
by conciliating the aggressor Azerbaijan. History shows that such a
policy does not contribute in any way to establishing peace. On the
contrary, it leads to escalation of tension and war."
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
ArmInfo
2009-08-13 17:16:00
ArmInfo. Mr. Bryza links the issue of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict
settlement to economic development and democratic reforms, Head of the
NKR MFA Information Department Marsel Petrosian said when answering
mass media questions concerning the OSCE Minsk Group co-chair Matthew
Bryza's recent statements.
Commenting on the OSCE Minsk Group U.S. Co-chair's assertion that
the opinion of the Nagorno Karabakh "population" is reflected in the
negotiation process, Petrosian said:
"We would welcome this fact and, in this connection, would like to
remind the mediators that the people of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic
have expressed their will at the referenda on independence on December
10, 1991 as well as the NKR Constitution on December 10, 2006. We would
be thankful to the mediators if the will of the NKR people, expressed
at the referenda, would be fully reflected in the negotiation process."
When asked to comment on the OSCE Minsk Group U.S. Co-chair's
recent statements, in which he presented the details of the proposed
principles for the Azerbaijani-Karabakh conflict settlement and said
that a quick settlement to the Nagorno Karabakh conflict, to his
opinion, was advantageous to Armenia, because otherwise the economic
development of the republic would be complicated, which would in turn
create problems in carrying out democratic reforms, Petrosian said:
"First, I would like to stress that a quick settlement to the Nagorno
Karabakh conflict is a priority for the Nagorno Karabakh Republic
as well.
However, this does not mean that we favor a settlement at any cost,
and with unpredictable consequences at that. For us a settlement
is establishment of lasting and enduring peace, which is possible to
achieve only in view of the actual state of affairs. However, Mr. Bryza
links the issue of the conflict settlement to economic development
and democratic reforms. The linkage of these issues into a single
"package" resembles more a bargaining and an attempt to impose an
agreement at all costs."
"Unfortunately, recently there has been a tendency to speed up the
negotiations for settling the Nagorno Karabakh conflict based on a
formula that ignores both the essence and history of the conflict and
the existing realities. And Mr. Bryza`s statements, from our point of
view, are in line with this tendency. There is an impression that the
current haste has to do with the announced change of some of the OSCE
Minsk Group Co-chairs, and particularly Mr. Bryza. As we have already
said in a July 15, 2009 statement of the NKR MFA, an unreasonable
speedup of the negotiation process will have a negative outcome and
will lead only to escalation of tension, as the formula proposed by
the mediators is directed to changing the balance of powers underlying
peace and stability in the region."
One of the journalists asked: "According to M. Bryza, the
OSCE Minsk Group Co-chairs propose that the peacekeepers in the
Azerbaijani-Karabakh conflict zone be unarmed, perform a monitoring
function and not be able to force to peace. This, as the U.S. Co-chair
has said, is conditioned by the fact that the experience from Kosovo
and Bosnia show that peacekeepers are not capable of preventing an
armed conflict, if one of the parties does not want it.
Your comment, please."
Petrosian responded: "By this Mr. Bryza admits, as a matter of fact,
that one of the main principles proposed by the mediators, namely the
security of the Nagorno Karabakh people, cannot be accomplished, and
that the international community cannot guarantee in full the security
of the NKR people in case of implementation of the proposed settlement
formula, as peacekeepers are one of the main tools of controlling
parties to a conflict that the international community has in its
arsenal of maintaining peace in conflict regions. But once tested,
it appears that they are not so effective, if one of the parties does
not want peace."
"However, the OSCE Minsk Group U.S. Co-chair proposes to solve this
issue in the process of the Azerbaijani-Karabakh conflict settlement
by conciliating the aggressor Azerbaijan. History shows that such a
policy does not contribute in any way to establishing peace. On the
contrary, it leads to escalation of tension and war."
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress