Tweet
VLADIMIR KAZIMIROV: IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO UNDERSTAND THE CONFLICT IN KARABAKH WITHOUT NAKHIJEVAN
ArmInfo
2010-05-05 11:19:00
ArmInfo. It is impossible to understand the conflict in Karabakh
without Nakhijevan, says Vladimir Kazimirov, the ex-co-chair of
the OSCE Minsk Group for settlement of the Karabakh conflict, in
an interview with Azerbaijani 3View News and Analytical Agency in
response to allegations by Araz Alizade, Chairman of the Social
Democratic Party of Azerbaijan.
"A series of conflicts between Armenians and Azerbaijanis resulted in
delimitation, by force and through "soft" pressing. It is not easy to
overcome this. It requires time and cautiousness. Mass outcomes are
very rarely voluntary. One can hardy remember now how many Armenian
lived in Nakhijevan. Let's imagine that they want to return there
within shortest period of time. What will Baku say? It can say
demagogically "Welcome", but what it will actually mean?" Kazimirov
says. Casting doubt on Alizade's figures related "the refugees from
Karabakh," Kazimirov says that "it is one thing if the residents
of the entire Karabakh, and not only of the Nagorny Karabakh, are
in question, but it is quite another thing if it is the number of
refugees from Nagorny Karabakh. That is really out of sight!" The
former mediator recalled that the census of 1989 in Nagorny Karabakh
registered a little more than 40,000 Azerbaijanis
"If several thousands of them had already left Nagorny Karabakh then,
the number of Azerbaijanis could be hardly 45,000 in Nagorny Karabakh.
This figure could not grow to 227,000 over 10 years and reach 250,000
by present. Demography cannot develop so sharply," Kazimirov says.
"What's the good of recalling who and where lived centuries ago? No
one will return the US territory to Red Indians. No one will offer
Seljuks to return deep into Asia etc. "What has happened cannot be
undone even if the balance is negative, for instance, in the case of
the Crimea. One must reason from the given situation and not from
the past. It is better leaving wars in past centuries. I trust in
human intellect and ability to find a good way from any deadlock,"
Kazimirov says.
As regards propaganda, Kazmirov says "propaganda feeds peoples with
impurity and miasmas." "They in Azerbaijan often complain that the
world community does not display understanding and solidarity with the
victim of aggression, does not exert pressure on aggressor and does
not properly demand it to return the territories. But, many countries
and international organizations understand this complicate conflict
differently than you propagate. Not everything is so easy. The
conflict has prehistory. It was the other party that resorted to
force settlement and military actions. It was not an armed attack by
Armenians, it was a complex and multidimensional escalation of mutual
enmity. The right to self-defense is stipulated by the UN Statute
as a response by a country to an armed attack and not as replay
of war in 16 years," Kazimirov says. He recalls that the general
demand then was to cease the fire. "Who opposed that demand with
hope to defeat the rival? Who had been rejecting the 4 resolutions
of the UN Security Council for a year? Who had led everything to the
situation when it stopped accepting the resolutions on Karabakh? It
is only the UN Security Council that is empowered to define the act
of aggression like the threat to peace. Is there any UN Security
Council resolution that defines an aggression by Armenia? Occupation
that was the result of continuing military actions was registered but
classified as occupation by "local Armenian forces". Russia more than
any other country has directly told Yerevan that Armenia is also a
party to the conflict and not only Nagorny Karabakh. But Yerevan had
not been ready to perceive that for a long time," Kazimirov says. He
highlights that propaganda restraint is one of the key requirements
to the parties to the conflict in the way towards peace in the region.
ArmInfo
2010-05-05 11:19:00
ArmInfo. It is impossible to understand the conflict in Karabakh
without Nakhijevan, says Vladimir Kazimirov, the ex-co-chair of
the OSCE Minsk Group for settlement of the Karabakh conflict, in
an interview with Azerbaijani 3View News and Analytical Agency in
response to allegations by Araz Alizade, Chairman of the Social
Democratic Party of Azerbaijan.
"A series of conflicts between Armenians and Azerbaijanis resulted in
delimitation, by force and through "soft" pressing. It is not easy to
overcome this. It requires time and cautiousness. Mass outcomes are
very rarely voluntary. One can hardy remember now how many Armenian
lived in Nakhijevan. Let's imagine that they want to return there
within shortest period of time. What will Baku say? It can say
demagogically "Welcome", but what it will actually mean?" Kazimirov
says. Casting doubt on Alizade's figures related "the refugees from
Karabakh," Kazimirov says that "it is one thing if the residents
of the entire Karabakh, and not only of the Nagorny Karabakh, are
in question, but it is quite another thing if it is the number of
refugees from Nagorny Karabakh. That is really out of sight!" The
former mediator recalled that the census of 1989 in Nagorny Karabakh
registered a little more than 40,000 Azerbaijanis
"If several thousands of them had already left Nagorny Karabakh then,
the number of Azerbaijanis could be hardly 45,000 in Nagorny Karabakh.
This figure could not grow to 227,000 over 10 years and reach 250,000
by present. Demography cannot develop so sharply," Kazimirov says.
"What's the good of recalling who and where lived centuries ago? No
one will return the US territory to Red Indians. No one will offer
Seljuks to return deep into Asia etc. "What has happened cannot be
undone even if the balance is negative, for instance, in the case of
the Crimea. One must reason from the given situation and not from
the past. It is better leaving wars in past centuries. I trust in
human intellect and ability to find a good way from any deadlock,"
Kazimirov says.
As regards propaganda, Kazmirov says "propaganda feeds peoples with
impurity and miasmas." "They in Azerbaijan often complain that the
world community does not display understanding and solidarity with the
victim of aggression, does not exert pressure on aggressor and does
not properly demand it to return the territories. But, many countries
and international organizations understand this complicate conflict
differently than you propagate. Not everything is so easy. The
conflict has prehistory. It was the other party that resorted to
force settlement and military actions. It was not an armed attack by
Armenians, it was a complex and multidimensional escalation of mutual
enmity. The right to self-defense is stipulated by the UN Statute
as a response by a country to an armed attack and not as replay
of war in 16 years," Kazimirov says. He recalls that the general
demand then was to cease the fire. "Who opposed that demand with
hope to defeat the rival? Who had been rejecting the 4 resolutions
of the UN Security Council for a year? Who had led everything to the
situation when it stopped accepting the resolutions on Karabakh? It
is only the UN Security Council that is empowered to define the act
of aggression like the threat to peace. Is there any UN Security
Council resolution that defines an aggression by Armenia? Occupation
that was the result of continuing military actions was registered but
classified as occupation by "local Armenian forces". Russia more than
any other country has directly told Yerevan that Armenia is also a
party to the conflict and not only Nagorny Karabakh. But Yerevan had
not been ready to perceive that for a long time," Kazimirov says. He
highlights that propaganda restraint is one of the key requirements
to the parties to the conflict in the way towards peace in the region.