Tweet
Armenian President's proposal to sign an agreement on non-use of force
once more showed the world who is threatening regional peace
2010-03-26 16:49:00
Interview of Masis Mailyan, Chairman of Foreign Policy and Security
Public Council, ex-deputy foreign minister of the Nagorny Karabakh
Republic, with ArmInfo news agency
Mr. Mailyan, how perspective is further promotion of H.Res.252 on the
Armenian Genocide? And what do you expect from President Obama's
traditional speech on April 24?
It is obvious that by affirming the Armenian Genocide resolutions, the
United States and some Western countries exert pressure on Turkey,
which is trying to evade implementing the assumed commitments on
normalization of relations with Armenia. Promotion of H.Res.252, as
well as making new decisions by the two countries' parliaments and the
extent of sincerity of President Obama's speech to be made on April 24
depend on how much adequate the Turkish leadership will behave. On the
other hand, taking into account the domestic processes in the Turkish
society and the situation in the Turkish army, considerable
intensification of the pressure on Ankara may lead to destabilization
of the situation. Therefore, further decisions on Turkey will be taken
with due regard for these and other circumstances. As regards
ratification of Armenian-Turkish Protocols, this topic cannot be
considered completely closed.
Baku is constantly stating about some mythical soon settlement of the
Karabakh conflict. Can one speak of any terms of settlement today and
how do you imagine this taking into account the current realities?
If we are stemming from the methodology of settlement applied by the
OSCE Minsk Group co-chairmen, and as a result - the Madrid proposals
of the intermediaries, the negotiating positions of the parties, the
distorted negotiating format, we may say that in this form the
negotiating process and reaching compromise have no prospect. But in
case of new approaches application and changing of international
parameters of settlement, the conflict may be resolved in a short
period of time. Compromise is possible if Russia, the USA and EU
countries give new quality to Nagorny Karabakh settlement process via
recognition of the NKR statehood. Only then the parties will be able
to agree on peaceful and even kind neighborly relations on equal
conditions. Only using of the recent precedents of Kosovo, Abkhazia
and South Ossetia by the international community for resolving of the
Karabakh conflict may prevent a new war and will guarantee regional
security and create the needed conditions for reaching strong peace as
soon as possible.
In an interview with Euronews, Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan
offered Baku to sign an agreement on non-use of force. In response,
Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry Spokesman Elkhan Polukhov said that Baku
is ready to sign the agreement on non-use of force only after
"deoccupation of the Azerbaijani territories'. How much does this
approach meet the renewed Madrid principles of the Karabakh peace
process, which rules out any use of force and is positively
characterized by Azerbaijan?
The Armenian President's proposal to sign an agreement on non-use of
force once more showed the world who is threatening peace and security
in the region. Baku's refusal showed that danger is actually not in
the existence of the conflict that does not hinder active development
of Azerbaijan and foreign investments in economy of that country, but
it is in the political ambitions of the Azerbaijani leadership. In
addition, Azerbaijan showed how easily it can neglect the commitments
it undertook when joining the UN, CSCE (OSCE) and the Council of
Europe. The basic documents of those commitments imply peaceful
resolution of disputes, non- use of force or threat of force. Even if
leave aside the NKR security problem, the territories fixed in the NKR
Constitution, etc., the talks about "de-occupation of the Azerbaijani
territories" or withdrawal of our troops beyond the line of the
"internationally recognized Azerbaijani borders" are inappropriate, as
these borders have not been determined at the international level.
Official Baku often makes reference to the international recognition
of the Republic of Azerbaijan within the "internationally recognized
borders", being voluntarily interpreted by it in its favor, that does
not meet the reality.
According to the world practice, the issue of territorial delimitation
among the neighboring states may be solved by the states themselves,
or these states may delegate the authorities on determination of
borders to a neutral mediator. A separate person, country, group of
countries or a special international conference may be a mediator.
Such issues in our regions are solved by the countries themselves.
Despite the fact the Republic of Azerbaijan was internationally
recognized for about 18 years, the process of delimitation and
demarcation of the Azerbaijani-Georgian border, Azerbaijani-Russian
border, Azerbaijani-Iranian sea border is still going on and
disputable sections remain with Turkmenistan in the water area of the
Caspian Sea. The process of determination of borders between
Azerbaijan and the NKR, Azerbaijan and Armenia did not start at all
because of the absence of diplomatic relations and an
intergovernmental commission on delimitation and demarcation of
interstate borders between these countries.
Ilham Aliyev has recently said that the main part of the negotiations
on the Karabakh conflict is over. Does this statement contain truth,
besides traditional populism?
The OSCE MG Co-Chairs stress that consultations between Armenia and
Azerbaijan as part of the Madrid process are conducted on the
principle of "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed'. Taking
into consideration the mutually exclusive and sometimes insulting
statements by officials from Baku and Yerevan, it is very difficult to
trust in the latest statement by Ilham Aliyev.
Interviewed by David Stepanyan, 26 March 2010, ArmInfo
once more showed the world who is threatening regional peace
2010-03-26 16:49:00
Interview of Masis Mailyan, Chairman of Foreign Policy and Security
Public Council, ex-deputy foreign minister of the Nagorny Karabakh
Republic, with ArmInfo news agency
Mr. Mailyan, how perspective is further promotion of H.Res.252 on the
Armenian Genocide? And what do you expect from President Obama's
traditional speech on April 24?
It is obvious that by affirming the Armenian Genocide resolutions, the
United States and some Western countries exert pressure on Turkey,
which is trying to evade implementing the assumed commitments on
normalization of relations with Armenia. Promotion of H.Res.252, as
well as making new decisions by the two countries' parliaments and the
extent of sincerity of President Obama's speech to be made on April 24
depend on how much adequate the Turkish leadership will behave. On the
other hand, taking into account the domestic processes in the Turkish
society and the situation in the Turkish army, considerable
intensification of the pressure on Ankara may lead to destabilization
of the situation. Therefore, further decisions on Turkey will be taken
with due regard for these and other circumstances. As regards
ratification of Armenian-Turkish Protocols, this topic cannot be
considered completely closed.
Baku is constantly stating about some mythical soon settlement of the
Karabakh conflict. Can one speak of any terms of settlement today and
how do you imagine this taking into account the current realities?
If we are stemming from the methodology of settlement applied by the
OSCE Minsk Group co-chairmen, and as a result - the Madrid proposals
of the intermediaries, the negotiating positions of the parties, the
distorted negotiating format, we may say that in this form the
negotiating process and reaching compromise have no prospect. But in
case of new approaches application and changing of international
parameters of settlement, the conflict may be resolved in a short
period of time. Compromise is possible if Russia, the USA and EU
countries give new quality to Nagorny Karabakh settlement process via
recognition of the NKR statehood. Only then the parties will be able
to agree on peaceful and even kind neighborly relations on equal
conditions. Only using of the recent precedents of Kosovo, Abkhazia
and South Ossetia by the international community for resolving of the
Karabakh conflict may prevent a new war and will guarantee regional
security and create the needed conditions for reaching strong peace as
soon as possible.
In an interview with Euronews, Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan
offered Baku to sign an agreement on non-use of force. In response,
Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry Spokesman Elkhan Polukhov said that Baku
is ready to sign the agreement on non-use of force only after
"deoccupation of the Azerbaijani territories'. How much does this
approach meet the renewed Madrid principles of the Karabakh peace
process, which rules out any use of force and is positively
characterized by Azerbaijan?
The Armenian President's proposal to sign an agreement on non-use of
force once more showed the world who is threatening peace and security
in the region. Baku's refusal showed that danger is actually not in
the existence of the conflict that does not hinder active development
of Azerbaijan and foreign investments in economy of that country, but
it is in the political ambitions of the Azerbaijani leadership. In
addition, Azerbaijan showed how easily it can neglect the commitments
it undertook when joining the UN, CSCE (OSCE) and the Council of
Europe. The basic documents of those commitments imply peaceful
resolution of disputes, non- use of force or threat of force. Even if
leave aside the NKR security problem, the territories fixed in the NKR
Constitution, etc., the talks about "de-occupation of the Azerbaijani
territories" or withdrawal of our troops beyond the line of the
"internationally recognized Azerbaijani borders" are inappropriate, as
these borders have not been determined at the international level.
Official Baku often makes reference to the international recognition
of the Republic of Azerbaijan within the "internationally recognized
borders", being voluntarily interpreted by it in its favor, that does
not meet the reality.
According to the world practice, the issue of territorial delimitation
among the neighboring states may be solved by the states themselves,
or these states may delegate the authorities on determination of
borders to a neutral mediator. A separate person, country, group of
countries or a special international conference may be a mediator.
Such issues in our regions are solved by the countries themselves.
Despite the fact the Republic of Azerbaijan was internationally
recognized for about 18 years, the process of delimitation and
demarcation of the Azerbaijani-Georgian border, Azerbaijani-Russian
border, Azerbaijani-Iranian sea border is still going on and
disputable sections remain with Turkmenistan in the water area of the
Caspian Sea. The process of determination of borders between
Azerbaijan and the NKR, Azerbaijan and Armenia did not start at all
because of the absence of diplomatic relations and an
intergovernmental commission on delimitation and demarcation of
interstate borders between these countries.
Ilham Aliyev has recently said that the main part of the negotiations
on the Karabakh conflict is over. Does this statement contain truth,
besides traditional populism?
The OSCE MG Co-Chairs stress that consultations between Armenia and
Azerbaijan as part of the Madrid process are conducted on the
principle of "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed'. Taking
into consideration the mutually exclusive and sometimes insulting
statements by officials from Baku and Yerevan, it is very difficult to
trust in the latest statement by Ilham Aliyev.
Interviewed by David Stepanyan, 26 March 2010, ArmInfo