Tweet
EUROPEAN VOICE: THE EU NEEDS TO INTEGRATE ITSELF INTO THE MINSK GROUP AND TAKE ACTIVE PEACEMAKING PART IN ARMENIAN-AZERBAIJANI CONFLICT
ArmInfo
2009-06-09 17:19:00
ArmInfo. The conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh is, then, far from
frozen. Indeed, Nagorno-Karabakh is probably a more dangerous 'frozen
conflict' than those in Moldova and Georgia, the article "Another
peace role for the EU" published at the European Voice site says.
According to the article authors, Both sides continue to compete
in an arms race, making the region the most heavily militarised
in Europe. In both countries, the animosity is very evident, and
hate-full propaganda appears each day. Peace remains a distant
prospect, with the 'Minsk Group' talks being held under the aegis
of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE)
producing no visible results.
'A war over Nagorno-Karabakh would have devastating regional
consequences.
It would destroy the region's fragile stability and it would undermine
and seriously threaten the security of energy supplies from the
Caspian to the international markets, including the prospects of
the southern gas corridor connecting the EU gas market with Caspian
producers. Turkey and Russia might find themselves supporting opposing
sides, while Europe and the US would be hard pressed to intervene. The
price of a conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh would be extremely high for
the European Union, as it has been in the case of Georgia - and so it
is surprising how little attention Europe is giving to the conflict',
the authors say and add that while the EU is actively engaged in the
breakaway Moldovan region of Transdniester and now also in Georgia,
through the Geneva process, it has no direct role in Nagorno-Karabakh.
There is also a lack of knowledge about the conflict within EU
institutions and reluctance on the part of some member states to see
the EU become more deeply involved. At the same time, there is growing
recognition of the strategic importance of this region, not least in
terms of energy security and diversification - the major pipelines
from the Caspian to the west are mere 15 km from the ceasefire
line, and several pumping stations are exposed and vulnerable to
attack. Furthermore, there is a good chance that, if hostilities
resumed, the EU would be asked to deal with the aftermath (as was
the case in Georgia last year). And, if a peace deal were struck,
the EU would be well placed to oversee the deal's implementation,
given its experience in other conflicts. It would therefore make
sense for the EU to stake out a greater role for itself now.
The EU needs to integrate itself into the Minsk Group. If Europe is
to become the main implementer and guarantor of a peace deal, Europe
also needs to be a part of the deal- making process. That means France
will have to trade in its seat, and the new EU representative in the
Minsk Process would need a clear and strong mandate, with room to
negotiate on behalf of the twenty-seven member states.
The EU's new Eastern Partnership cites as its goal stability, security
and prosperity in the Eastern Neighbourhood. Without the resolution
of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict this will never be achievable and
the region will remain a ticking time bomb. Therefore the EU needs to
show that it has learned its lesson in Georgia and become an active
peacemaker in the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
ArmInfo
2009-06-09 17:19:00
ArmInfo. The conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh is, then, far from
frozen. Indeed, Nagorno-Karabakh is probably a more dangerous 'frozen
conflict' than those in Moldova and Georgia, the article "Another
peace role for the EU" published at the European Voice site says.
According to the article authors, Both sides continue to compete
in an arms race, making the region the most heavily militarised
in Europe. In both countries, the animosity is very evident, and
hate-full propaganda appears each day. Peace remains a distant
prospect, with the 'Minsk Group' talks being held under the aegis
of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE)
producing no visible results.
'A war over Nagorno-Karabakh would have devastating regional
consequences.
It would destroy the region's fragile stability and it would undermine
and seriously threaten the security of energy supplies from the
Caspian to the international markets, including the prospects of
the southern gas corridor connecting the EU gas market with Caspian
producers. Turkey and Russia might find themselves supporting opposing
sides, while Europe and the US would be hard pressed to intervene. The
price of a conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh would be extremely high for
the European Union, as it has been in the case of Georgia - and so it
is surprising how little attention Europe is giving to the conflict',
the authors say and add that while the EU is actively engaged in the
breakaway Moldovan region of Transdniester and now also in Georgia,
through the Geneva process, it has no direct role in Nagorno-Karabakh.
There is also a lack of knowledge about the conflict within EU
institutions and reluctance on the part of some member states to see
the EU become more deeply involved. At the same time, there is growing
recognition of the strategic importance of this region, not least in
terms of energy security and diversification - the major pipelines
from the Caspian to the west are mere 15 km from the ceasefire
line, and several pumping stations are exposed and vulnerable to
attack. Furthermore, there is a good chance that, if hostilities
resumed, the EU would be asked to deal with the aftermath (as was
the case in Georgia last year). And, if a peace deal were struck,
the EU would be well placed to oversee the deal's implementation,
given its experience in other conflicts. It would therefore make
sense for the EU to stake out a greater role for itself now.
The EU needs to integrate itself into the Minsk Group. If Europe is
to become the main implementer and guarantor of a peace deal, Europe
also needs to be a part of the deal- making process. That means France
will have to trade in its seat, and the new EU representative in the
Minsk Process would need a clear and strong mandate, with room to
negotiate on behalf of the twenty-seven member states.
The EU's new Eastern Partnership cites as its goal stability, security
and prosperity in the Eastern Neighbourhood. Without the resolution
of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict this will never be achievable and
the region will remain a ticking time bomb. Therefore the EU needs to
show that it has learned its lesson in Georgia and become an active
peacemaker in the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan.