Tweet
AZERBAIJANI ANALYST NAMED THE ONLY PEACEFUL WAY TO SETTLE NAGORNO-KARABAKH CONFLICT
Today
http://www.today.az/news/politics/ 67194.html
May 3 2010
Azerbaijan
Day.Az interview with Azerbaijani political analyst Rasim Agayev.
What are your comments on Russian Foreign Ministry official's
statement welcoming Iran's offer to mediate in settlement of the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict?
Russia wants its role in the Karabakh conflict to remain same as this
was achieved by consensus with the U.S.. Given the relations between
Tehran and Moscow, Russia takes these initiatives rather calmly. But
this is not the main point. The main issue is that position of the
parties remains intransigent largely because Russia, the United States
and especially France support Yerevan.
If Azerbaijan had not grown stronger in recent years, or if we
"stagger", I'm afraid that the attitude of mediator countries towards
us will be the same as in the first half of the 1990s, when our
diplomats were ignored and Russia with Armenia jointly organized an
information blockade against Baku.
Maybe, Iran wants to influence the course of negotiations on Karabakh.
But, another thing is whether it can do it. I think Tehran is in no
position to exert pressure on the parties to the Karabakh conflict.
In your view, what is Moscow's attitude towards initiatives for Turkey
to become co-chair of the Minsk Group?
Given deepening relations between Ankara and Moscow lately, it is
possible that Russia will not interfere with Turkey's entry to the OSCE
Minsk Group. But I do not think that this could help the negotiation
process in any way. The Minsk Group is subject to the OSCE, which, in
turn, is controlled by the United States. Therefore, this state, along
with Russia, will monitor the progress in the negotiation process.
What changes in the Minsk Group format can help to solve the Karabakh
conflict?
The Minsk Group has played a significant role in achieving a ceasefire
agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia. This organization was able
to encourage the parties to this important decision. But later all
of their initiatives met with intransigence of the parties. It must
be understood that there will be no progress while the U.S. continues
to support Yerevan.
No progress will be achieved even if the EU, China or any neutral
country joins the OSCE Minsk Group because this organization lacks
the mechanisms to make its decisions binding. All decisions will be
of a recommendatory nature. Therefore, I believe that there is a need
to hand settlement of the Karabakh conflict to the UN, as Security
Council is the only organization whose decisions are binding. Apart
from this, I do not see other possibilities of peaceful settlement
to the Karabakh conflict.
Some forces in Armenia say pressure on the country has intensified
after the Zurich protocols were signed. Do you share this opinion?
Of course, the pressure on Yerevan has increased. But I think there
is even stronger pressure on Turkey. Therefore, one should not be
deluded, but pay attention to the statement of Russian diplomat
Velichko. Once, decades ago, he wrote that Armenians are very tough
negotiators. They constantly prevaricate and dodge. Therefore, even
if they have just signed the international treaty that does not mean
that they will execute it. Armenians become amenable only when they
are defeated. The example to support this statement is 1920.
In your opinion, was Yerevan's move to suspend negotiations with
Turkey a diplomatic move before the anniversary of the "Armenian
Genocide"? Will Yerevan's interests in the opening of borders with
Turkey make it return to this process?
I think that the recent statement by Armenian Foreign Minister
Edward Nalbandian that it is early to bury the Zurich protocols is
Washington's attempt to exert pressure on Ankara. But Turkey's position
is quite resistant. Of course, Turkey is in a difficult situation,
which would be much easier, if not the Karabakh conflict.
This factor constrains Ankara. Otherwise, Turkey could have long
ago resumed diplomatic relations with Armenia and got its political
dividends. Now, Armenia wants Turkey to make unilateral concessions.
But this happens only in one case - when one state dealt a military
defeat on the other. As far as I know, Armenia has dealt no military
defeat to Turkey.
Today
http://www.today.az/news/politics/ 67194.html
May 3 2010
Azerbaijan
Day.Az interview with Azerbaijani political analyst Rasim Agayev.
What are your comments on Russian Foreign Ministry official's
statement welcoming Iran's offer to mediate in settlement of the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict?
Russia wants its role in the Karabakh conflict to remain same as this
was achieved by consensus with the U.S.. Given the relations between
Tehran and Moscow, Russia takes these initiatives rather calmly. But
this is not the main point. The main issue is that position of the
parties remains intransigent largely because Russia, the United States
and especially France support Yerevan.
If Azerbaijan had not grown stronger in recent years, or if we
"stagger", I'm afraid that the attitude of mediator countries towards
us will be the same as in the first half of the 1990s, when our
diplomats were ignored and Russia with Armenia jointly organized an
information blockade against Baku.
Maybe, Iran wants to influence the course of negotiations on Karabakh.
But, another thing is whether it can do it. I think Tehran is in no
position to exert pressure on the parties to the Karabakh conflict.
In your view, what is Moscow's attitude towards initiatives for Turkey
to become co-chair of the Minsk Group?
Given deepening relations between Ankara and Moscow lately, it is
possible that Russia will not interfere with Turkey's entry to the OSCE
Minsk Group. But I do not think that this could help the negotiation
process in any way. The Minsk Group is subject to the OSCE, which, in
turn, is controlled by the United States. Therefore, this state, along
with Russia, will monitor the progress in the negotiation process.
What changes in the Minsk Group format can help to solve the Karabakh
conflict?
The Minsk Group has played a significant role in achieving a ceasefire
agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia. This organization was able
to encourage the parties to this important decision. But later all
of their initiatives met with intransigence of the parties. It must
be understood that there will be no progress while the U.S. continues
to support Yerevan.
No progress will be achieved even if the EU, China or any neutral
country joins the OSCE Minsk Group because this organization lacks
the mechanisms to make its decisions binding. All decisions will be
of a recommendatory nature. Therefore, I believe that there is a need
to hand settlement of the Karabakh conflict to the UN, as Security
Council is the only organization whose decisions are binding. Apart
from this, I do not see other possibilities of peaceful settlement
to the Karabakh conflict.
Some forces in Armenia say pressure on the country has intensified
after the Zurich protocols were signed. Do you share this opinion?
Of course, the pressure on Yerevan has increased. But I think there
is even stronger pressure on Turkey. Therefore, one should not be
deluded, but pay attention to the statement of Russian diplomat
Velichko. Once, decades ago, he wrote that Armenians are very tough
negotiators. They constantly prevaricate and dodge. Therefore, even
if they have just signed the international treaty that does not mean
that they will execute it. Armenians become amenable only when they
are defeated. The example to support this statement is 1920.
In your opinion, was Yerevan's move to suspend negotiations with
Turkey a diplomatic move before the anniversary of the "Armenian
Genocide"? Will Yerevan's interests in the opening of borders with
Turkey make it return to this process?
I think that the recent statement by Armenian Foreign Minister
Edward Nalbandian that it is early to bury the Zurich protocols is
Washington's attempt to exert pressure on Ankara. But Turkey's position
is quite resistant. Of course, Turkey is in a difficult situation,
which would be much easier, if not the Karabakh conflict.
This factor constrains Ankara. Otherwise, Turkey could have long
ago resumed diplomatic relations with Armenia and got its political
dividends. Now, Armenia wants Turkey to make unilateral concessions.
But this happens only in one case - when one state dealt a military
defeat on the other. As far as I know, Armenia has dealt no military
defeat to Turkey.