Tweet
KARABAKH PEACE REQUIRES 'NEW WAYS OF THINKING'
Kamala Mammadova News.Az
news.az
July 19 2010
Azerbaijan
Georgi Vanyan News.Az interviews Georgi Vanyan, Armenian expert and
chairman of the Caucasus Center of Peacekeeping Initiatives.
What can you say about the intensification of talks on Karabakh,
specifically the meeting of the presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia
in St Petersburg and the visit of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs to
the region?
Armenian and Azerbaijani servicemen clashed between these two events.
Can this be considered a sign of the intensification of negotiations?
Can the official debates about this incident be considered the
intensification of negotiations? Can active forecasts of imminent war
by the analytical community be considered a sign of the intensification
of negotiations? The same can be applied to the different versions
of what districts Armenia has agreed to surrender, the deployment
of foreign bases and different versions of accelerated changes in
the situation. Can we consider the differences in the Russian and
English versions of the statements of the presidents of the co-chairing
countries a sign of the intensification of negotiations?
The visit of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to our region was
important. What can you say about her statement that "it is time to
complete work on the main principles to launch the development of
the final peace agreement"?
The visit of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to the region had
an important moral and psychological effect. It reminded us of the
chance to be a part of a civilian world.
State Department official Mark Toner said the process of normalization
of Armenian-Turkish relations and the Nagorno Karabakh conflict
settlement were complementary. What is your opinion?
The process of normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations is a
qualitatively new regional process that can put an end to the so-called
"post-Soviet" regional situation in which Armenia acted as a brake on
integration and peace negotiations. The process of normalization of
Armenian-Turkish relations is important as the catalyst for resolution
of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. The Bolshevik-Fedayeen Armenian
ostrich is finally obliged to take its head out of the sand and accept
the realities.
How do you assess current developments in Armenian-Turkish relations?
Armenian-Turkish relations have moved to a high level. This is a great
achievement. The process of normalization of relations between the
two countries has been planned and implemented has started in a new
space for political culture. Unlike the format for the OSCE Minsk
Group, this process cannot be frozen, since the responsibility of
the parties is clearly fixed and it is impossible to put on a show
of activity in this case.
Should we expect the opening of the Armenian-Turkish border this year?
We shouldn't. There is the problem of the ratification of the
Armenian-Turkish protocols in the parliaments of the two countries.
There is the of the decision of the Constitutional Court of Armenia
which the Turkish side has protested about. The normalization process
is in deadlock, it requires political will and active diplomatic work
to return to dialogue. This should be expected in the near future. The
limit of destructive steps has been exhausted and Armenia and Turkey
should either have relations or the normalization process should be
declared to have failed.
What are the prospects for a Karabakh conflict settlement? Is there
a peace solution to the issue?
There is a peace solution to the issue. The peace solution is not
kilometres of land or the status of Nagorno-Karabakh. The peace
solution is a solution that will ensure security in the conflict
area and the security of the region. Today it is difficult to say
whether the process within the framework of the OSCE Minsk Group
fosters the search for this peace solution or not. Unfortunately,
we, the conflict parties, and the community and political leadership,
deceive ourselves - the current perception of the OSCE Minsk Group as
the international community's mechanism of negotiations about which
there is no choice does not mean that only this process should dictate
to us what to do, what to think and where to look. On the contrary,
the peace solution can be found only in alternatives - new processes,
new formats, new ways of thinking.
Do you consider the resumption of hostilities in the conflict area
possible?
Until a peace solution is found, there is a threat of a resumption of
hostilities and there is an equal threat of the adoption of solutions
by force, i.e., the creation of a new status quo which maintains the
risk of a resumption of war.
From: A. Papazian
Kamala Mammadova News.Az
news.az
July 19 2010
Azerbaijan
Georgi Vanyan News.Az interviews Georgi Vanyan, Armenian expert and
chairman of the Caucasus Center of Peacekeeping Initiatives.
What can you say about the intensification of talks on Karabakh,
specifically the meeting of the presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia
in St Petersburg and the visit of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs to
the region?
Armenian and Azerbaijani servicemen clashed between these two events.
Can this be considered a sign of the intensification of negotiations?
Can the official debates about this incident be considered the
intensification of negotiations? Can active forecasts of imminent war
by the analytical community be considered a sign of the intensification
of negotiations? The same can be applied to the different versions
of what districts Armenia has agreed to surrender, the deployment
of foreign bases and different versions of accelerated changes in
the situation. Can we consider the differences in the Russian and
English versions of the statements of the presidents of the co-chairing
countries a sign of the intensification of negotiations?
The visit of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to our region was
important. What can you say about her statement that "it is time to
complete work on the main principles to launch the development of
the final peace agreement"?
The visit of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to the region had
an important moral and psychological effect. It reminded us of the
chance to be a part of a civilian world.
State Department official Mark Toner said the process of normalization
of Armenian-Turkish relations and the Nagorno Karabakh conflict
settlement were complementary. What is your opinion?
The process of normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations is a
qualitatively new regional process that can put an end to the so-called
"post-Soviet" regional situation in which Armenia acted as a brake on
integration and peace negotiations. The process of normalization of
Armenian-Turkish relations is important as the catalyst for resolution
of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. The Bolshevik-Fedayeen Armenian
ostrich is finally obliged to take its head out of the sand and accept
the realities.
How do you assess current developments in Armenian-Turkish relations?
Armenian-Turkish relations have moved to a high level. This is a great
achievement. The process of normalization of relations between the
two countries has been planned and implemented has started in a new
space for political culture. Unlike the format for the OSCE Minsk
Group, this process cannot be frozen, since the responsibility of
the parties is clearly fixed and it is impossible to put on a show
of activity in this case.
Should we expect the opening of the Armenian-Turkish border this year?
We shouldn't. There is the problem of the ratification of the
Armenian-Turkish protocols in the parliaments of the two countries.
There is the of the decision of the Constitutional Court of Armenia
which the Turkish side has protested about. The normalization process
is in deadlock, it requires political will and active diplomatic work
to return to dialogue. This should be expected in the near future. The
limit of destructive steps has been exhausted and Armenia and Turkey
should either have relations or the normalization process should be
declared to have failed.
What are the prospects for a Karabakh conflict settlement? Is there
a peace solution to the issue?
There is a peace solution to the issue. The peace solution is not
kilometres of land or the status of Nagorno-Karabakh. The peace
solution is a solution that will ensure security in the conflict
area and the security of the region. Today it is difficult to say
whether the process within the framework of the OSCE Minsk Group
fosters the search for this peace solution or not. Unfortunately,
we, the conflict parties, and the community and political leadership,
deceive ourselves - the current perception of the OSCE Minsk Group as
the international community's mechanism of negotiations about which
there is no choice does not mean that only this process should dictate
to us what to do, what to think and where to look. On the contrary,
the peace solution can be found only in alternatives - new processes,
new formats, new ways of thinking.
Do you consider the resumption of hostilities in the conflict area
possible?
Until a peace solution is found, there is a threat of a resumption of
hostilities and there is an equal threat of the adoption of solutions
by force, i.e., the creation of a new status quo which maintains the
risk of a resumption of war.
From: A. Papazian