Tweet
PROSPECTS FOR KARABAKH PEACE RECEDE AFTER OSCE SUMMIT
Emil Danielyan
Jamestown.org
http://www.jamestown.org/programs/edm/
Eurasia Daily Monitor
Dec 16 2010
The prospects for resolving the Karabakh conflict are as uncertain
as ever after the inability of Armenia and Azerbaijan's presidents
to reach any tangible agreements on the margins of the Organization
for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) summit in Astana on
December 1-2. It marked an apparent failure of the latest international
effort to facilitate a Karabakh settlement spearheaded by Russia and
President, Dmitry Medvedev, in particular.
Medvedev invested considerable time and energy in the peace process,
hosting seven face-to-face meetings between his Armenian and
Azerbaijani counterparts since taking office in 2008. Following
the most recent of those talks held in Astrakhan, southern Russia
on October 27, Medvedev expressed "moderate optimism" that the two
sides would make decisive progress towards peace in time for the OSCE
summit. That announcement was followed by a new flurry of activity
by the Russian, US and French diplomats co-chairing the OSCE's Minsk
Group on Karabakh. Mediators shuttled between Baku and Yerevan in late
November after meeting with Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov,
in Moscow. On November 22, Lavrov had also held a trilateral meeting
with his Armenian and Azerbaijani counterparts (Regnum, ITAR-TASS,
November 22).
Presidents Serzh Sargsyan of Armenia and Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan
did not even meet in Astana and only signed a joint statement there
with Medvedev, French Prime Minister, Francois Fillon, and US Secretary
of State, Hillary Clinton.
According to the statement, the signatories "agreed that the time has
come for more decisive efforts to resolve the Karabakh conflict,"
adding "They further agreed that a peaceful, negotiated settlement
will bring stability and security and is the only way to bring real
reconciliation to the peoples of the region." The statement added
that the mediators urged Aliyev and Sargsyan to "focus with renewed
energy on the issues that still remain in the Basic Principles"
of a peaceful settlement (http://summit2010.osce.org, December 1).
It was a clear indication that the conflicting parties had failed to
move further forward in ironing out their disagreements over those
principles. Aliyev and Sargsyan made this even more evident by trading
bitter recriminations in their speeches during the two-day summit.
Aliyev accused the Armenians of committing "war crimes and a genocide"
against Karabakh's Azeri population during the 1991-1994 war and
dragging out peace talks since then (APA, December 1).
Sargsyan, for his part, alleged that Azerbaijan had unleashed a
"policy of ethnic cleansing and fully-fledged military aggression"
against the Karabakh Armenians and has now "no interest" in the
conflict's resolution. More importantly, Sargsyan threatened to
formally recognize Karabakh as an independent state if Baku acts on
its threats to try to win back the disputed territory and Azerbaijani
districts surrounding it by force (Armenian Public Television, December
2). Sargsyan repeated this threat during a December 10 summit in Moscow
of the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO).
Speaking in the Kazakh capital, Clinton said the mediators and the
parties must "renew our efforts toward a settlement in Karabakh" that
would be based on six general principles articulated by the US, French
and Russian presidents in a joint statement in July 2009 issued after
their talks in L'Aquila, Italy (www.armenialiberty.org, December 1).
Among those principles are the return of the Armenian-controlled
territories around Karabakh to Azerbaijan and an "interim status"
for Karabakh itself, which would guarantee its "security and
self-governance." The proposed peace framework also envisages that
Karabakh's final status would be determined through "a legally binding
expression of will."
Crucial details of this formula are contained in the still unpublicized
(and repeatedly modified) peace proposals submitted by the Minsk Group
co-chairs to the warring sides for the past five years. The parties
have disagreed, at various points, on the timetable for Armenian troop
withdrawal from the occupied lands, the status of a land corridor
between Armenia and Karabakh and the timing of a future referendum on
self-determination in Karabakh. The latter issue now appears to be
the main area of contention. Baku has insisted, at least until now,
that no specific date should be set for the vote. According to one of
the classified US State Department documents disclosed by WikiLeaks,
Aliyev complained to a visiting top US official in February 2010
that Yerevan wants a referendum date to be fixed in the text of
the peace accord. Also, in his public pronouncements, the Azeri
leader has repeatedly claimed that Karabakh's predominantly ethnic
Armenian population would only be able to determine the extent of the
territory's autonomy within Azerbaijan in the proposed referendum. The
Armenian side denies this, saying that the Minsk Group plan allows
for international recognition of Karabakh's secession from Azerbaijan.
This apparent impasse and other disagreements implies an uncertain
future for the Karabakh negotiating process amid what many experts
believe is a growing risk of another Armenian-Azeri war. Both Russia
and Western powers continue to voice strong opposition to a military
solution to the dispute, which is increasingly threatened by Aliyev.
The latter regularly points to his government's soaring defense
spending, due to reach a new record high of $3.1 billion in 2011,
compared with only $405 million budgeted for Armenia's armed forces.
Armenia will continue to seek to offset the Azeri military build-up
by using its military alliance with Russia, which it upgraded earlier
this year. A new defense pact signed by the two nations in late August
commits Moscow to supplying its South Caucasus ally with "modern and
compatible weaponry and special military hardware." Both Yerevan and
Karabakh's ethnic Armenian leadership now seem to regard renewed war
as a real possibility.
The Karabakh Armenian army held in mid-November what it described
as its largest ever military exercise just several kilometers away
from Azeri army positions east of Karabakh. A uniform-clad Sargsyan,
who watched the maneuvers with his senior army generals, used the
occasion to warn that Baku will be dealt a "devastating and final"
blow if it resorts to military action (www.news.am, November 14).
From: A. Papazian
Emil Danielyan
Jamestown.org
http://www.jamestown.org/programs/edm/
Eurasia Daily Monitor
Dec 16 2010
The prospects for resolving the Karabakh conflict are as uncertain
as ever after the inability of Armenia and Azerbaijan's presidents
to reach any tangible agreements on the margins of the Organization
for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) summit in Astana on
December 1-2. It marked an apparent failure of the latest international
effort to facilitate a Karabakh settlement spearheaded by Russia and
President, Dmitry Medvedev, in particular.
Medvedev invested considerable time and energy in the peace process,
hosting seven face-to-face meetings between his Armenian and
Azerbaijani counterparts since taking office in 2008. Following
the most recent of those talks held in Astrakhan, southern Russia
on October 27, Medvedev expressed "moderate optimism" that the two
sides would make decisive progress towards peace in time for the OSCE
summit. That announcement was followed by a new flurry of activity
by the Russian, US and French diplomats co-chairing the OSCE's Minsk
Group on Karabakh. Mediators shuttled between Baku and Yerevan in late
November after meeting with Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov,
in Moscow. On November 22, Lavrov had also held a trilateral meeting
with his Armenian and Azerbaijani counterparts (Regnum, ITAR-TASS,
November 22).
Presidents Serzh Sargsyan of Armenia and Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan
did not even meet in Astana and only signed a joint statement there
with Medvedev, French Prime Minister, Francois Fillon, and US Secretary
of State, Hillary Clinton.
According to the statement, the signatories "agreed that the time has
come for more decisive efforts to resolve the Karabakh conflict,"
adding "They further agreed that a peaceful, negotiated settlement
will bring stability and security and is the only way to bring real
reconciliation to the peoples of the region." The statement added
that the mediators urged Aliyev and Sargsyan to "focus with renewed
energy on the issues that still remain in the Basic Principles"
of a peaceful settlement (http://summit2010.osce.org, December 1).
It was a clear indication that the conflicting parties had failed to
move further forward in ironing out their disagreements over those
principles. Aliyev and Sargsyan made this even more evident by trading
bitter recriminations in their speeches during the two-day summit.
Aliyev accused the Armenians of committing "war crimes and a genocide"
against Karabakh's Azeri population during the 1991-1994 war and
dragging out peace talks since then (APA, December 1).
Sargsyan, for his part, alleged that Azerbaijan had unleashed a
"policy of ethnic cleansing and fully-fledged military aggression"
against the Karabakh Armenians and has now "no interest" in the
conflict's resolution. More importantly, Sargsyan threatened to
formally recognize Karabakh as an independent state if Baku acts on
its threats to try to win back the disputed territory and Azerbaijani
districts surrounding it by force (Armenian Public Television, December
2). Sargsyan repeated this threat during a December 10 summit in Moscow
of the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO).
Speaking in the Kazakh capital, Clinton said the mediators and the
parties must "renew our efforts toward a settlement in Karabakh" that
would be based on six general principles articulated by the US, French
and Russian presidents in a joint statement in July 2009 issued after
their talks in L'Aquila, Italy (www.armenialiberty.org, December 1).
Among those principles are the return of the Armenian-controlled
territories around Karabakh to Azerbaijan and an "interim status"
for Karabakh itself, which would guarantee its "security and
self-governance." The proposed peace framework also envisages that
Karabakh's final status would be determined through "a legally binding
expression of will."
Crucial details of this formula are contained in the still unpublicized
(and repeatedly modified) peace proposals submitted by the Minsk Group
co-chairs to the warring sides for the past five years. The parties
have disagreed, at various points, on the timetable for Armenian troop
withdrawal from the occupied lands, the status of a land corridor
between Armenia and Karabakh and the timing of a future referendum on
self-determination in Karabakh. The latter issue now appears to be
the main area of contention. Baku has insisted, at least until now,
that no specific date should be set for the vote. According to one of
the classified US State Department documents disclosed by WikiLeaks,
Aliyev complained to a visiting top US official in February 2010
that Yerevan wants a referendum date to be fixed in the text of
the peace accord. Also, in his public pronouncements, the Azeri
leader has repeatedly claimed that Karabakh's predominantly ethnic
Armenian population would only be able to determine the extent of the
territory's autonomy within Azerbaijan in the proposed referendum. The
Armenian side denies this, saying that the Minsk Group plan allows
for international recognition of Karabakh's secession from Azerbaijan.
This apparent impasse and other disagreements implies an uncertain
future for the Karabakh negotiating process amid what many experts
believe is a growing risk of another Armenian-Azeri war. Both Russia
and Western powers continue to voice strong opposition to a military
solution to the dispute, which is increasingly threatened by Aliyev.
The latter regularly points to his government's soaring defense
spending, due to reach a new record high of $3.1 billion in 2011,
compared with only $405 million budgeted for Armenia's armed forces.
Armenia will continue to seek to offset the Azeri military build-up
by using its military alliance with Russia, which it upgraded earlier
this year. A new defense pact signed by the two nations in late August
commits Moscow to supplying its South Caucasus ally with "modern and
compatible weaponry and special military hardware." Both Yerevan and
Karabakh's ethnic Armenian leadership now seem to regard renewed war
as a real possibility.
The Karabakh Armenian army held in mid-November what it described
as its largest ever military exercise just several kilometers away
from Azeri army positions east of Karabakh. A uniform-clad Sargsyan,
who watched the maneuvers with his senior army generals, used the
occasion to warn that Baku will be dealt a "devastating and final"
blow if it resorts to military action (www.news.am, November 14).
From: A. Papazian