Tweet
OSCE ASTANA SUMMIT TO BE 'INEFFECTIVE' ON KARABAKH
Lala B. News.Az
news.az
Nov 3 2010
Azerbaijan
Azay Guliyev News.Az interviews Azay Guliyev, a member of the
Azerbaijani parliamentary delegation at the OSCE Parliamentary
Assembly.
Will the "road map" for a Karabakh settlement, which the OSCE is
planning to present to the conflict parties at its summit on 1-2
December in Astana, help to settle the problem?
Azerbaijani society still hopes for a peaceful resolution of the
Karabakh conflict, but as someone constantly involved in OSCE events
and reasonably informed about sentiment within this organization, I
believe that the Astana summit will be ineffective, as the organization
is not yet inclined to force the aggressor to peace. I think the OSCE
summit in Astana will not take even a small step towards solving the
conflict. The reason is that the superpowers which must take this
step are not determined. This is primarily because Armenia is not an
independent state and is backed by some forces. In this situation,
the Karabakh conflict can be settled through consensus between these
powers, on the one hand, and the world community, on the other.
Does this mean that it will not be possible to take any document to
Astana that will promote a resolution of the conflict?
Of course, tough discussions will be held at the OSCE summit and,
if the OSCE summit and its participants find the courage, then the
document they adopt will at least have paragraphs from previous
documents of international organizations on the Karabakh conflict.
In other words, we expect the OSCE document, like earlier documents
adopted by international organizations on Karabakh, to include
paragraphs condemning Armenia for its continued occupation of
Azerbaijani land. We hope that the document adopted at the OSCE
summit in Astana will set time frames for the withdrawal of forces
from the occupied lands. These time frames must allow for the phased
liberation of Azerbaijani land and gradually promote the return home
of refugees and IDPs. The document should say that after liberation
of the occupied lands and return of refugees, the Azerbaijani and
Armenian communities of Karabakh will have to define the legal status
of this region. Of course, all these processes must be executed within
the framework of the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan.
How may the Astrakhan meeting of the presidents of Azerbaijan,
Armenia and Russia influence the Astana discussions on Karabakh?
Russia sought to get the psychological advantage before the OSCE
summit by organizing the meeting in Astrakhan. At the same time,
it showed that Russia can always put pressure on Armenia and get any
decision adopted. This state of affairs is at the same time a message
to other Minsk Group co-chairing states. Therefore, I think the OSCE
summit in Astana will become a specific point in the transition of the
superpowers to the next stage of combat and competition in our region.
This is also proven by the expected visit of French President Nicolas
Sarkozy to Azerbaijan.
How effective is Azerbaijan's policy in this regard?
Certainly, Azerbaijan's diplomacy has recently shown the pointlessness
of attempts to put pressure on Azerbaijan from outside. Azerbaijan
shows that it will not make any concessions on the issue of its
territorial integrity.
Is this policy useful?
I believe that when they come up against this Azerbaijani policy
the superpowers will finally take determined action on a Karabakh
settlement, though so far there are no signs or symptoms that these
countries are aware of the need to take such steps. Nevertheless,
this trend has recently been felt among the superpowers' leaders.
Is Turkey's active participation in these processes useful?
I believe there is a great need for Turkey's active participation
in the Karabakh settlement. Turkish diplomacy should step up a gear
before the OSCE summit in Astana. Turkey should help in any way it can
to seize and develop the chance of ensuring the territorial integrity
of Azerbaijan.
Diplomatic sources say that the document that the international
mediators will present at the OSCE summit will mention the need for
NATO peacekeeping troops around Karabakh. How realistic is this and
should Azerbaijan agree with it?
I do not think the location of NATO-led troops in the region is
realistic, since the Karabakh problem is a conflict whose solution
requires the formation of a peacekeeping contingent from among
several troops. These forces are directly or indirectly interested
in resolution, or on the contrary, protraction of this conflict. The
Azerbaijani side can take only a temporary placement of international
peacekeepers on a mixed basis in the conflict area. I think it is
unrealistic to place peacekeepers, formed from among the NATO-led
troops or Russian forces. It is desirable to form the peacekeeping
contingent from NATO-led, Russian and Turkish troops. Though the
latter is a NATO member, I would like to repeat that it is desirable
for Turkey to be represented in the peacekeeping forces.
Kazakhstan's chairmanship of the OSCE is coming to an end. Has
Kazakhstan been able to do anything to help resolve the Karabakh
conflict?
In reality, Kazakhstan's chairmanship of the OSCE was a formality.
Kazakhstan does not play a serious role in forming international
policy. Kazakhstan does not have major influence in the world either
that would make the conflict parties take its will or intention into
account. The superpowers sometimes agree on the OSCE chairmanship
of such countries as Kazakhstan, so that the world does not have
the impression that only the big countries lead this international
organization.
From: A. Papazian
Lala B. News.Az
news.az
Nov 3 2010
Azerbaijan
Azay Guliyev News.Az interviews Azay Guliyev, a member of the
Azerbaijani parliamentary delegation at the OSCE Parliamentary
Assembly.
Will the "road map" for a Karabakh settlement, which the OSCE is
planning to present to the conflict parties at its summit on 1-2
December in Astana, help to settle the problem?
Azerbaijani society still hopes for a peaceful resolution of the
Karabakh conflict, but as someone constantly involved in OSCE events
and reasonably informed about sentiment within this organization, I
believe that the Astana summit will be ineffective, as the organization
is not yet inclined to force the aggressor to peace. I think the OSCE
summit in Astana will not take even a small step towards solving the
conflict. The reason is that the superpowers which must take this
step are not determined. This is primarily because Armenia is not an
independent state and is backed by some forces. In this situation,
the Karabakh conflict can be settled through consensus between these
powers, on the one hand, and the world community, on the other.
Does this mean that it will not be possible to take any document to
Astana that will promote a resolution of the conflict?
Of course, tough discussions will be held at the OSCE summit and,
if the OSCE summit and its participants find the courage, then the
document they adopt will at least have paragraphs from previous
documents of international organizations on the Karabakh conflict.
In other words, we expect the OSCE document, like earlier documents
adopted by international organizations on Karabakh, to include
paragraphs condemning Armenia for its continued occupation of
Azerbaijani land. We hope that the document adopted at the OSCE
summit in Astana will set time frames for the withdrawal of forces
from the occupied lands. These time frames must allow for the phased
liberation of Azerbaijani land and gradually promote the return home
of refugees and IDPs. The document should say that after liberation
of the occupied lands and return of refugees, the Azerbaijani and
Armenian communities of Karabakh will have to define the legal status
of this region. Of course, all these processes must be executed within
the framework of the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan.
How may the Astrakhan meeting of the presidents of Azerbaijan,
Armenia and Russia influence the Astana discussions on Karabakh?
Russia sought to get the psychological advantage before the OSCE
summit by organizing the meeting in Astrakhan. At the same time,
it showed that Russia can always put pressure on Armenia and get any
decision adopted. This state of affairs is at the same time a message
to other Minsk Group co-chairing states. Therefore, I think the OSCE
summit in Astana will become a specific point in the transition of the
superpowers to the next stage of combat and competition in our region.
This is also proven by the expected visit of French President Nicolas
Sarkozy to Azerbaijan.
How effective is Azerbaijan's policy in this regard?
Certainly, Azerbaijan's diplomacy has recently shown the pointlessness
of attempts to put pressure on Azerbaijan from outside. Azerbaijan
shows that it will not make any concessions on the issue of its
territorial integrity.
Is this policy useful?
I believe that when they come up against this Azerbaijani policy
the superpowers will finally take determined action on a Karabakh
settlement, though so far there are no signs or symptoms that these
countries are aware of the need to take such steps. Nevertheless,
this trend has recently been felt among the superpowers' leaders.
Is Turkey's active participation in these processes useful?
I believe there is a great need for Turkey's active participation
in the Karabakh settlement. Turkish diplomacy should step up a gear
before the OSCE summit in Astana. Turkey should help in any way it can
to seize and develop the chance of ensuring the territorial integrity
of Azerbaijan.
Diplomatic sources say that the document that the international
mediators will present at the OSCE summit will mention the need for
NATO peacekeeping troops around Karabakh. How realistic is this and
should Azerbaijan agree with it?
I do not think the location of NATO-led troops in the region is
realistic, since the Karabakh problem is a conflict whose solution
requires the formation of a peacekeeping contingent from among
several troops. These forces are directly or indirectly interested
in resolution, or on the contrary, protraction of this conflict. The
Azerbaijani side can take only a temporary placement of international
peacekeepers on a mixed basis in the conflict area. I think it is
unrealistic to place peacekeepers, formed from among the NATO-led
troops or Russian forces. It is desirable to form the peacekeeping
contingent from NATO-led, Russian and Turkish troops. Though the
latter is a NATO member, I would like to repeat that it is desirable
for Turkey to be represented in the peacekeeping forces.
Kazakhstan's chairmanship of the OSCE is coming to an end. Has
Kazakhstan been able to do anything to help resolve the Karabakh
conflict?
In reality, Kazakhstan's chairmanship of the OSCE was a formality.
Kazakhstan does not play a serious role in forming international
policy. Kazakhstan does not have major influence in the world either
that would make the conflict parties take its will or intention into
account. The superpowers sometimes agree on the OSCE chairmanship
of such countries as Kazakhstan, so that the world does not have
the impression that only the big countries lead this international
organization.
From: A. Papazian