Tweet
SERGEY SARGSYAN: NEW WAR TO OVERTHROW ALIYEV CLAN
News.Am
Oct 23 2009
Armenia
"It has become obvious lately that the OSCE Minsk Group for the
settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict are trying to persuade the
two Armenian sides to accept the Madrid Principles, which are actually
a repeat of the settlement plan worked out by the Bolsheviks in 1920s,
when the 11th army seized Nagorno-Karabakh. The Bolshevik authorities
viewed Nagorno-Karabakh as a disputed territory whose fate was to be
decided later, by means of talks or a plebiscite.
What really happened? Nagorno-Karabakh was made part of Azerbaijan,
with no talks or plebiscite ever held in the region. In determining
Nagorno-Karabakh's status in 1920s, Soviet Russia did not observe
an all-important principle - nations' right to self-determination,"
said Doctor of Philosophy, Professor Sergey Sargsyan.
"The USSR leader assumed a similar attitude in 1988-1991, which
resulted in a 3-year bloody war Azerbaijan unleashed against
Nagorno-Karabakh. That war claimed tens of thousands of lives on
both sides. By sacrificing their best sons' lives the Armenians of
Nagorno-Karabakh defended their freedom in that aggressive war,"
Sargsyan said.
The security of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (NKR) is not to be
discussed and "signing any document under pressure will inevitably
result in a war in the region, as the Azerbaijani leaders will create
intolerable conditions for the Armenian population in the NKR."
As regards official Baku's warlike statements, Professor Sargsyan
said: "It is not difficult to predict that new hostilities will turn
the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline and the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum gas
main into pyre. The Karabakh Armenians have an extensive experience of
guerrilla warfare, do they not? A new war, if unleashed by Azerbaijan
against the NKR and Armenia, will last for many years - it will not
be a Blitzkrieg as the Aliyev clan plans. In any case Azerbaijan will
lose that war as well. The result will be Azerbaijan's return of the
Nagorno-Karabakh's territories occupied during the first war, overthrow
of the Aliyev regime, destruction of the oil and communication sectors
of Azerbaijan's economy and other losses."
Professor Sargsyan believes that a new war between Azerbaijan and
Nagorno-Karabakh would cause a political chaos, which would undermine
the fragile peace the South Caucasus and create favorable conditions
for Georgia's war with South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
"Russia -- whether she liked it or not -- would be involved in a
long-lasting war with Georgia. I think that war would be radically
different from the war last August. Its scenario will resemble that
of the Vietnam War, with some differences: Russia would wage the war
at its southern borders, with not only hot spots, but also terrorists
intensifying their activities there," the Professor said.
As regards the "gas for Karabakh" formula being discussed by some
circles, Sergey Sargsyan said: "The 'surrender' of Karabakh (if we can
use such terms at all) does not in any way meet Russia's interests,
as such an agreement would run counter to the logical development
of political processes. Such a step would be tantamount to Russia's
political and geopolitical suicide. Russia is certainly well aware
of that - after the last Armenians have been driven out of Karabakh,
Russia's presence in the South, and later in the North, Caucasus will
come to its end. On the other hand, that would cause resumption of
hostilities with Georgia."
The Professor pointed out that present top-level Armenian-Azerbaijani
meetings do not at all reflect the essence of the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict, the NKR and Azerbaijan being the principal parties to it.
"Without Nagorno-Karabakh being immediately involved in the
negotiations as a party to the conflict, and its interests, rights
and duties considered, the main problem - the country's status -
is impossible to solve. Alas, no progress has ever been made in this
matter. No tendency to a change in the format of negotiations can be
observed," Professor Sargsyan said.
The settlement scheme provided by the Madrid Principles is "nothing but
delayed deterioration under the pretext of empty talk bout allegedly
fair combination of the principles of territorial integrity and
nations' right to self-determination."
"More than a hundred years of the Armenian people's experience of
placing hopes on the great powers' diplomacy -- London Convention
1871, Treaty of San Stefano, 1878, Congress of Berlin, 1878, Treaty
of Sèvres, 1920, Treaty of Kars, 1921, Treaty of Lausanne, 1923,
etc.. -- has shown that diplomacy did not prevent tragedies. Rather
it brought massacre, pogroms and refugees to the Armenian people. The
paradox is that the naïve Armenian people goes on hoping for 'outward
favor'. Our people think that modern day diplomats and politicians are
persons of higher moral standards than their fathers. The Armenian
people should have relied on its own strength, looking for allies
and friends among its sons. Over centuries no one has been able to
break the freedom-loving spirit of the Karabakh people - neither
Yazdegerd II nor Genghis Khan, or Tamerlane or Stalin or Gorbachev,
many others. I think no one is able to do it now. This time, the
courage and inflexible willpower of freedom-loving Karabakh Armenians
and of the entire Armenian people, in cooperation with the leaders,
will thwart the poorly camouflaged plans of great powers," Professor
Sergey Sargsyan concluded.
News.Am
Oct 23 2009
Armenia
"It has become obvious lately that the OSCE Minsk Group for the
settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict are trying to persuade the
two Armenian sides to accept the Madrid Principles, which are actually
a repeat of the settlement plan worked out by the Bolsheviks in 1920s,
when the 11th army seized Nagorno-Karabakh. The Bolshevik authorities
viewed Nagorno-Karabakh as a disputed territory whose fate was to be
decided later, by means of talks or a plebiscite.
What really happened? Nagorno-Karabakh was made part of Azerbaijan,
with no talks or plebiscite ever held in the region. In determining
Nagorno-Karabakh's status in 1920s, Soviet Russia did not observe
an all-important principle - nations' right to self-determination,"
said Doctor of Philosophy, Professor Sergey Sargsyan.
"The USSR leader assumed a similar attitude in 1988-1991, which
resulted in a 3-year bloody war Azerbaijan unleashed against
Nagorno-Karabakh. That war claimed tens of thousands of lives on
both sides. By sacrificing their best sons' lives the Armenians of
Nagorno-Karabakh defended their freedom in that aggressive war,"
Sargsyan said.
The security of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (NKR) is not to be
discussed and "signing any document under pressure will inevitably
result in a war in the region, as the Azerbaijani leaders will create
intolerable conditions for the Armenian population in the NKR."
As regards official Baku's warlike statements, Professor Sargsyan
said: "It is not difficult to predict that new hostilities will turn
the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline and the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum gas
main into pyre. The Karabakh Armenians have an extensive experience of
guerrilla warfare, do they not? A new war, if unleashed by Azerbaijan
against the NKR and Armenia, will last for many years - it will not
be a Blitzkrieg as the Aliyev clan plans. In any case Azerbaijan will
lose that war as well. The result will be Azerbaijan's return of the
Nagorno-Karabakh's territories occupied during the first war, overthrow
of the Aliyev regime, destruction of the oil and communication sectors
of Azerbaijan's economy and other losses."
Professor Sargsyan believes that a new war between Azerbaijan and
Nagorno-Karabakh would cause a political chaos, which would undermine
the fragile peace the South Caucasus and create favorable conditions
for Georgia's war with South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
"Russia -- whether she liked it or not -- would be involved in a
long-lasting war with Georgia. I think that war would be radically
different from the war last August. Its scenario will resemble that
of the Vietnam War, with some differences: Russia would wage the war
at its southern borders, with not only hot spots, but also terrorists
intensifying their activities there," the Professor said.
As regards the "gas for Karabakh" formula being discussed by some
circles, Sergey Sargsyan said: "The 'surrender' of Karabakh (if we can
use such terms at all) does not in any way meet Russia's interests,
as such an agreement would run counter to the logical development
of political processes. Such a step would be tantamount to Russia's
political and geopolitical suicide. Russia is certainly well aware
of that - after the last Armenians have been driven out of Karabakh,
Russia's presence in the South, and later in the North, Caucasus will
come to its end. On the other hand, that would cause resumption of
hostilities with Georgia."
The Professor pointed out that present top-level Armenian-Azerbaijani
meetings do not at all reflect the essence of the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict, the NKR and Azerbaijan being the principal parties to it.
"Without Nagorno-Karabakh being immediately involved in the
negotiations as a party to the conflict, and its interests, rights
and duties considered, the main problem - the country's status -
is impossible to solve. Alas, no progress has ever been made in this
matter. No tendency to a change in the format of negotiations can be
observed," Professor Sargsyan said.
The settlement scheme provided by the Madrid Principles is "nothing but
delayed deterioration under the pretext of empty talk bout allegedly
fair combination of the principles of territorial integrity and
nations' right to self-determination."
"More than a hundred years of the Armenian people's experience of
placing hopes on the great powers' diplomacy -- London Convention
1871, Treaty of San Stefano, 1878, Congress of Berlin, 1878, Treaty
of Sèvres, 1920, Treaty of Kars, 1921, Treaty of Lausanne, 1923,
etc.. -- has shown that diplomacy did not prevent tragedies. Rather
it brought massacre, pogroms and refugees to the Armenian people. The
paradox is that the naïve Armenian people goes on hoping for 'outward
favor'. Our people think that modern day diplomats and politicians are
persons of higher moral standards than their fathers. The Armenian
people should have relied on its own strength, looking for allies
and friends among its sons. Over centuries no one has been able to
break the freedom-loving spirit of the Karabakh people - neither
Yazdegerd II nor Genghis Khan, or Tamerlane or Stalin or Gorbachev,
many others. I think no one is able to do it now. This time, the
courage and inflexible willpower of freedom-loving Karabakh Armenians
and of the entire Armenian people, in cooperation with the leaders,
will thwart the poorly camouflaged plans of great powers," Professor
Sergey Sargsyan concluded.