Tweet
HOPE IS A GOOD THING, BUT...
Azat Artsakh Daily
04 Feb 09
Republic of Nagorno Karabakh [NKR]
So one more - the first in 2009 - meeting of the presidents and the
heads of the Ministries of Foreign Affairs of Armenia and Azerbaijan
on settlement of Nagorno Karabahk conflict held in Zurich on January
28 is behind. The basic question which, for sure, the societies of
the conflicting parties are interested in is whether they achieved
any progress in the negotiation process. It's worth to say at once
that most of the experts and politicians did not expect too much from
the Swiss meeting of Serzh Sargsyan and Ilham Aliyev. Even American
co-chairmen Matthew Bryza, who usually excels as an unflagging
optimism, the day before rendezvous of the presidents also admitted,
that serious progress was not expected. In a certain sense such a
skeptic attitude toward the meeting can be explained by accruing it
within the framework of Davos World Economic Forum, due to importance
of which the meeting became of secondary meaning. But is it the only
reason why a diplomatic breakthrough did not happen? Certainly,
the reasons are deeper and they lie in the positions of parties,
or rather in the absolute polarity of those positions on the key
points of the regulation. It is known that now on the negotiation
table lie so called Madrid Principles, named by mediators as basic,
after reconciliation of 0Awhich the co-chairmen of the Minsk Group
intend to get the final agreement signed by the parties. But are
their expectations realizable? After the presidents meeting in
Zurich, Matthew Bryza, true to form, underlined with optimism that
the positions of Azerbaijan and Armenia on the basic principles of
the regulation of the Karabahk conflict notably drew together.
Though the American diplomat did not work out in details, in which
principles the approachment took place, yet there is no doubt,
that it was certainly not the status of NKR and the territory
which practically appears to be the stumbling block in the process
of regulation. The co-chairmen themselves realize the difficulty
of achieving mutual compromise. In their joint statement on the
results of the meeting of the presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia in
Zurich, they announced their willingness to work with the Ministers
of Foreign Affairs to develop a detailed proposal and submit for
consideration by two presidents of the most essential distinctions
between the parties by the base principles of settlement. The
mediators expressed the hope that in the near future, the parties
could overcome those distinctions for the achievement of the secure
peace agreement. Hope is a good thing, but... Right after the
meeting of the presidents in Zurich, the head of MFA of Azerbaijan
E. Mamedyarov announced that "The negotiations held in the frame
of territorial inte grity of Azerbaijan". And he declared this,
despite the fact that in the above mentioned statement, issued by
the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairmen, directly stated that the balanced
agreement must be based on the Principles of the Helsinki Final Act -
territorial integrity, self-determination and peaceful settlement of
disputes. As seen, this was far not the first time Azeri officials
selectively and to the best advantage for themselves interpret
the process of settlement of the conflict. Nevertheless, I want
to believe, that Swiss meetings of the presidents and the heads of
Foreign Ministries of Azerbaijan and Armenia were not just ordinary
consultations and an imitation of negotiation process. Let's trust
the Armenian foreign minister Eduard Nalbandyan in whose words the
two presidents underlined the presence of definite dynamics in the
settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh problem. In any case, even in the
lack of appreciable results the dialogue of parties helps to maintain
the process of regulation afloat. Consequently, in a certain extend it
reduces the risk of resumption of the war. Undoubtedly, this creates
conditions for further search of a realistic solution of the problems,
more precisely - a full-scale solution with obligatory participation
of official Stepanakert in the negotiations.
Azat Artsakh Daily
04 Feb 09
Republic of Nagorno Karabakh [NKR]
So one more - the first in 2009 - meeting of the presidents and the
heads of the Ministries of Foreign Affairs of Armenia and Azerbaijan
on settlement of Nagorno Karabahk conflict held in Zurich on January
28 is behind. The basic question which, for sure, the societies of
the conflicting parties are interested in is whether they achieved
any progress in the negotiation process. It's worth to say at once
that most of the experts and politicians did not expect too much from
the Swiss meeting of Serzh Sargsyan and Ilham Aliyev. Even American
co-chairmen Matthew Bryza, who usually excels as an unflagging
optimism, the day before rendezvous of the presidents also admitted,
that serious progress was not expected. In a certain sense such a
skeptic attitude toward the meeting can be explained by accruing it
within the framework of Davos World Economic Forum, due to importance
of which the meeting became of secondary meaning. But is it the only
reason why a diplomatic breakthrough did not happen? Certainly,
the reasons are deeper and they lie in the positions of parties,
or rather in the absolute polarity of those positions on the key
points of the regulation. It is known that now on the negotiation
table lie so called Madrid Principles, named by mediators as basic,
after reconciliation of 0Awhich the co-chairmen of the Minsk Group
intend to get the final agreement signed by the parties. But are
their expectations realizable? After the presidents meeting in
Zurich, Matthew Bryza, true to form, underlined with optimism that
the positions of Azerbaijan and Armenia on the basic principles of
the regulation of the Karabahk conflict notably drew together.
Though the American diplomat did not work out in details, in which
principles the approachment took place, yet there is no doubt,
that it was certainly not the status of NKR and the territory
which practically appears to be the stumbling block in the process
of regulation. The co-chairmen themselves realize the difficulty
of achieving mutual compromise. In their joint statement on the
results of the meeting of the presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia in
Zurich, they announced their willingness to work with the Ministers
of Foreign Affairs to develop a detailed proposal and submit for
consideration by two presidents of the most essential distinctions
between the parties by the base principles of settlement. The
mediators expressed the hope that in the near future, the parties
could overcome those distinctions for the achievement of the secure
peace agreement. Hope is a good thing, but... Right after the
meeting of the presidents in Zurich, the head of MFA of Azerbaijan
E. Mamedyarov announced that "The negotiations held in the frame
of territorial inte grity of Azerbaijan". And he declared this,
despite the fact that in the above mentioned statement, issued by
the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairmen, directly stated that the balanced
agreement must be based on the Principles of the Helsinki Final Act -
territorial integrity, self-determination and peaceful settlement of
disputes. As seen, this was far not the first time Azeri officials
selectively and to the best advantage for themselves interpret
the process of settlement of the conflict. Nevertheless, I want
to believe, that Swiss meetings of the presidents and the heads of
Foreign Ministries of Azerbaijan and Armenia were not just ordinary
consultations and an imitation of negotiation process. Let's trust
the Armenian foreign minister Eduard Nalbandyan in whose words the
two presidents underlined the presence of definite dynamics in the
settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh problem. In any case, even in the
lack of appreciable results the dialogue of parties helps to maintain
the process of regulation afloat. Consequently, in a certain extend it
reduces the risk of resumption of the war. Undoubtedly, this creates
conditions for further search of a realistic solution of the problems,
more precisely - a full-scale solution with obligatory participation
of official Stepanakert in the negotiations.