Tweet
US TO SPARE NO EFFORT TO SETTLE KARABAKH CONFLICT IN FAVOR OF CHRISTIAN ARMENIA
news.az
Dec 21 2009
Azerbaijan
The decision by the US Congress to allocate $8 mln to self-proclaimed
"NKR" in 2010 has become the most discussed event of the recent week.
Several US experts, in particular, professor of John Hopkins'
University Frederick Starr said this decision is a mistake and urged
to differentiate between the "allocation by voting in Congress" and
factual transfer of this money, stating the money will not be spent.
What can you say about it?
First of all, for some strange reasons, all actions by the United
States, Russia and France that are later recognized as mistaken are
targeting Azerbaijan. There is not a single case when any superpower
gets mistaken about Armenia. As for the second part of Starr's
statement, he is right to say that there are great doubts that this
money will reach the Karabakh separatists. I faced such a situation
for the first time when I worked in Algeria. The French government
allocated several millions of financial assistance. But during
my personal meetings, it turned out that these funds were mostly
allocated for purchase of French cars and spare parts for Algeria.
Now, it also not excluded that money allocated by the US Congress
to both Armenia and the separatists of the unrecognized "NKR" will
return to Americans, because they will specify the ways to spend these
amounts. Meanwhile, it should be noted that Azerbaijan is concerned
not with whether the millions will reach the Karabakh separatists
but the very fact of their allocation, which is a political element
of the issue.
In this respect, what do you think is the real position of the United
States on the settlement of the Karabakh conflict considering the
assistance of the US Congress to Karabakh separatist while the White
House declares support to the territorial integrity of our country?
I admit that I had been mistaken considering that the United States
is interested in the resolution of the Karabakh conflict within the
framework of international norms and principles. Now, I am confident
that the United States is the same aggressive empire as Russia.
Merely, it is more democratic. The United States put only their
national interests above everything. In case of the Karabakh conflict,
they support the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan but do not condemn
the Armenian aggression. They allocate financial assistance to Karabakh
separatists which can be viewed as assistance to the aggressor.
Isn't it more profitable for the United States to build good
relations with wealthy and rapidly developing Azerbaijan than poor
and unpromising Armenia?
I think we should forget what you have said. The United States is a
homeland of Christian fundamentalism. Therefore, they will spare no
effort to settle the Karabakh conflict in favor of Christian Armenia
rather than Muslim Azerbaijan. Russia and France, the OSCE Minsk
Group co-chairs, support the same position.
Would the situation change in case Turkey becomes the fourth Minsk
Group co-chair?
No, it would not. Turkey mostly supports the position of the United
States. In particular, I have repeatedly heard Turkish diplomats urging
to recognize the "NKR's" independence. Turkey mostly depends on the
United States which means that the fate of the Karabakh conflict will
not change depending on the participation of Turkey among the Minsk
Group co-chairing states.
news.az
Dec 21 2009
Azerbaijan
The decision by the US Congress to allocate $8 mln to self-proclaimed
"NKR" in 2010 has become the most discussed event of the recent week.
Several US experts, in particular, professor of John Hopkins'
University Frederick Starr said this decision is a mistake and urged
to differentiate between the "allocation by voting in Congress" and
factual transfer of this money, stating the money will not be spent.
What can you say about it?
First of all, for some strange reasons, all actions by the United
States, Russia and France that are later recognized as mistaken are
targeting Azerbaijan. There is not a single case when any superpower
gets mistaken about Armenia. As for the second part of Starr's
statement, he is right to say that there are great doubts that this
money will reach the Karabakh separatists. I faced such a situation
for the first time when I worked in Algeria. The French government
allocated several millions of financial assistance. But during
my personal meetings, it turned out that these funds were mostly
allocated for purchase of French cars and spare parts for Algeria.
Now, it also not excluded that money allocated by the US Congress
to both Armenia and the separatists of the unrecognized "NKR" will
return to Americans, because they will specify the ways to spend these
amounts. Meanwhile, it should be noted that Azerbaijan is concerned
not with whether the millions will reach the Karabakh separatists
but the very fact of their allocation, which is a political element
of the issue.
In this respect, what do you think is the real position of the United
States on the settlement of the Karabakh conflict considering the
assistance of the US Congress to Karabakh separatist while the White
House declares support to the territorial integrity of our country?
I admit that I had been mistaken considering that the United States
is interested in the resolution of the Karabakh conflict within the
framework of international norms and principles. Now, I am confident
that the United States is the same aggressive empire as Russia.
Merely, it is more democratic. The United States put only their
national interests above everything. In case of the Karabakh conflict,
they support the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan but do not condemn
the Armenian aggression. They allocate financial assistance to Karabakh
separatists which can be viewed as assistance to the aggressor.
Isn't it more profitable for the United States to build good
relations with wealthy and rapidly developing Azerbaijan than poor
and unpromising Armenia?
I think we should forget what you have said. The United States is a
homeland of Christian fundamentalism. Therefore, they will spare no
effort to settle the Karabakh conflict in favor of Christian Armenia
rather than Muslim Azerbaijan. Russia and France, the OSCE Minsk
Group co-chairs, support the same position.
Would the situation change in case Turkey becomes the fourth Minsk
Group co-chair?
No, it would not. Turkey mostly supports the position of the United
States. In particular, I have repeatedly heard Turkish diplomats urging
to recognize the "NKR's" independence. Turkey mostly depends on the
United States which means that the fate of the Karabakh conflict will
not change depending on the participation of Turkey among the Minsk
Group co-chairing states.