Tweet
Karabakh MFA Press Secretary comments on Bryza's statements
NEWS.am
17:40 / 08/13/2009
Head of the NKR MFA Information Department Marsel Petrosyan answered
the mass media's questions on OSCE MG Co-chair Matthew Bryza's recent
statements.
Q: How would you comment on the OSCE MG U.S. Co-chair's statement
that the opinion of the Nagorno-Karabakh "population" is reflected
in the negotiation process?
We would welcome this fact and, in this connection, would like to
remind the mediators that the people of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic
(NKR) have expressed their will at the referendum 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 referendum, would be fully reflected in the
negotiation process.
Q: How would you comment on the OSCE MG U.S. Co-chair's recent
statements, where he presented the details of the proposed principles
for the Azerbaijani-Karabakh conflict settlement? Matthew Bryza also
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.
First, I would like to stress that a quick settlement to the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is a priority for 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 MG 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.
Q: According to Bryza, the OSCE MG Co-chairs propose the peacekeepers
in 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
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. Please comment.
By saying this Bryza admits that one of the main principles proposed
by the mediators, namely the security of the Nagorno-Karabakh people,
cannot be accomplished, and that international community cannot fully
guarantee the security of 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 MG 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.
NEWS.am
17:40 / 08/13/2009
Head of the NKR MFA Information Department Marsel Petrosyan answered
the mass media's questions on OSCE MG Co-chair Matthew Bryza's recent
statements.
Q: How would you comment on the OSCE MG U.S. Co-chair's statement
that the opinion of the Nagorno-Karabakh "population" is reflected
in the negotiation process?
We would welcome this fact and, in this connection, would like to
remind the mediators that the people of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic
(NKR) have expressed their will at the referendum 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 referendum, would be fully reflected in the
negotiation process.
Q: How would you comment on the OSCE MG U.S. Co-chair's recent
statements, where he presented the details of the proposed principles
for the Azerbaijani-Karabakh conflict settlement? Matthew Bryza also
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.
First, I would like to stress that a quick settlement to the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is a priority for 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 MG 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.
Q: According to Bryza, the OSCE MG Co-chairs propose the peacekeepers
in 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
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. Please comment.
By saying this Bryza admits that one of the main principles proposed
by the mediators, namely the security of the Nagorno-Karabakh people,
cannot be accomplished, and that international community cannot fully
guarantee the security of 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 MG 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.