Tweet
news.az, Azerbaijan
Nov 11 2010
Current state of Karabakh diplomacy 'risks resumption of war'
Thu 11 November 2010 08:13 GMT | 10:13 Local Time
Text size:
Manvel Sargsyan News.Az interviews Manvel Sargsyan, an expert at the
Armenian Centre of Strategic and National Studies.
Azerbaijan and Armenia have exchanged prisoners of war following an
agreement signed at the Astrakhan meeting of the presidents of Russia,
Azerbaijan and Armenia. How do you assess this step in terms of the
overall resolution of the Karabakh conflict?
The exchange of bodies and prisoners of war is an act that improves
discipline in relations in the conflict zone. This sphere of relations
allows a move away from excessive formality in favour of a humane
approach to the victims of the conflict. Azerbaijan's tacit agreement
to contact (admittedly indirectly) the leadership of Nagorno-Karabakh
to exchange bodies on the front line can be seen as an example. This
may influence the overall atmosphere of the negotiations and the
readiness for more serious discussion on the positions of the conflict
parties. Consequently, the negotiating process can be expected to
become more constructive and stereotypes on some aspects of the
conflict situation to be overcome, since it must be clear that a firm
refusal to review most positions is just hampering the negotiating
process.
During the OSCE Minsk Group field assessment in and around
Nagorno-Karabakh, the co-chairs visited all the regions for the first
time. What is your view of the mission?
Every conflicting party has its expectations of these missions.
Undoubtedly, Azerbaijan hopes for the closer involvement of
international instances in the conflict area as well as for
international recognition of most of its claims on the problems
related to the territory controlled by the NKR [the self-proclaimed
Nagorno Karabakh republic - Ed.]. In particular, it is obvious that
Azerbaijan wants to raise the political problem of Azerbaijani
refugees from the area of military actions. They probably hope to
stimulate the involvement of international powers in the conflict
area. Meanwhile, the leadership of Nagorno-Karabakh hopes that similar
missions will be held in other war-hit areas, in particular Shaumyan
District [Goranboy District, to the north of Karabakh] which was
settled by Armenians before the war and some other
Azerbaijani-controlled lands.
Anyway, the transparency of the actions of the conflict parties in all
aspects is useful. This may be the driver for the international
mediators to carry out these missions. It is hard to say whether this
will have a positive effect on the negotiating process.
Will the December OSCE summit change anything in the Nagorno-Karabakh
peace process or the normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations?
Judging by the statements of officials, the Minsk Group co-chairs hope
to make a breakthrough in the negotiating process at the summit in
Astana. The Azerbaijani leadership also hopes for the signing of a
roadmap at the summit. However, it is difficult to see the basis of
these hopes. In fact, any agreement is possible only provided that
Azerbaijan agrees to Armenia's main provision - recognition of the
right of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh to self-determination - or, to
be more exact, agrees to an interim status for Nagorno-Karabakh, as
required by the Madrid principles. It doesn't look as though there are
major differences on the other issues.
It's not easy to imagine that Azerbaijan is ready to take this step.
Azerbaijan's government is well aware that its agreement to interim
status could cause a chain reaction of international recognition of
NKR independence. In the modern world no-one's likely to wait for the
results of the referendum if Azerbaijan itself has recognized the
Karabakh people's right to self-determination and the conflict zone
passes under the control of international peacekeeping troops. This
concern stops Azerbaijan from agreeing to the key paragraph of the
Madrid principles, since Azerbaijan says the independence of Nagorno
Karabakh independence is unacceptable for it.
In turn, Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh do not accept the inclusion of
the NKR under the control of Azerbaijan and have no intention of
changing their position. Theoretically, only concern at a possible
preventive war by Armenia and at the threat of Armenia's recognition
of NKR independence may force Azerbaijan to agree to this paragraph.
But this possibility seems low. Therefore, it is possible to say that
the OSCE member-states in Astana will go no further than a declaration
on the political readiness of the parties to settle the conflict
peacefully or something of this kind.
The possible recognition of the independence of Nagorno-Karabakh is
widely discussed in Armenia. The latest bill on this is to be
discussed in the Armenian parliament in late December. Do you think
Yerevan will actually recognize Karabakh?
It is not the first time that the recognition of the NKR's
independence has been put on the Armenian agenda. Periodically, each
new delay in the negotiating process raises this problem and now all
political forces in Armenia say there is no alternative to the
recognition of the independence of the NKR. There are differences only
on the terms of recognition. Many say there is no sense in creating
obstacles to the peace talks within the framework of the OSCE Minsk
Group and that we should wait for the results of the negotiations. But
some think that the current state of diplomacy on a settlement risks
the resumption of war and action should be taken against this. It is
believed that Azerbaijan does not intend to settle the issue through
negotiations. The recognition of Karabakh's independence is seen as a
step that will move the political process in a different direction.
The recent opinions are based on the increasingly frequent statements
of Azerbaijan about its readiness to settle the problem through war
and about the inadmissibility of creating an independent state in
Nagorno-Karabakh. It is clear that Armenia cannot allow the unilateral
development of this prospect and is obliged to correct its policy. The
way Armenia's parliamentary forces behave depends largely on the
actions of Azerbaijan - an escalation of its efforts towards war will
certainly leave Armenia no alternative.
Kamala Mammadova
News.Az
From: A. Papazian
Nov 11 2010
Current state of Karabakh diplomacy 'risks resumption of war'
Thu 11 November 2010 08:13 GMT | 10:13 Local Time
Text size:
Manvel Sargsyan News.Az interviews Manvel Sargsyan, an expert at the
Armenian Centre of Strategic and National Studies.
Azerbaijan and Armenia have exchanged prisoners of war following an
agreement signed at the Astrakhan meeting of the presidents of Russia,
Azerbaijan and Armenia. How do you assess this step in terms of the
overall resolution of the Karabakh conflict?
The exchange of bodies and prisoners of war is an act that improves
discipline in relations in the conflict zone. This sphere of relations
allows a move away from excessive formality in favour of a humane
approach to the victims of the conflict. Azerbaijan's tacit agreement
to contact (admittedly indirectly) the leadership of Nagorno-Karabakh
to exchange bodies on the front line can be seen as an example. This
may influence the overall atmosphere of the negotiations and the
readiness for more serious discussion on the positions of the conflict
parties. Consequently, the negotiating process can be expected to
become more constructive and stereotypes on some aspects of the
conflict situation to be overcome, since it must be clear that a firm
refusal to review most positions is just hampering the negotiating
process.
During the OSCE Minsk Group field assessment in and around
Nagorno-Karabakh, the co-chairs visited all the regions for the first
time. What is your view of the mission?
Every conflicting party has its expectations of these missions.
Undoubtedly, Azerbaijan hopes for the closer involvement of
international instances in the conflict area as well as for
international recognition of most of its claims on the problems
related to the territory controlled by the NKR [the self-proclaimed
Nagorno Karabakh republic - Ed.]. In particular, it is obvious that
Azerbaijan wants to raise the political problem of Azerbaijani
refugees from the area of military actions. They probably hope to
stimulate the involvement of international powers in the conflict
area. Meanwhile, the leadership of Nagorno-Karabakh hopes that similar
missions will be held in other war-hit areas, in particular Shaumyan
District [Goranboy District, to the north of Karabakh] which was
settled by Armenians before the war and some other
Azerbaijani-controlled lands.
Anyway, the transparency of the actions of the conflict parties in all
aspects is useful. This may be the driver for the international
mediators to carry out these missions. It is hard to say whether this
will have a positive effect on the negotiating process.
Will the December OSCE summit change anything in the Nagorno-Karabakh
peace process or the normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations?
Judging by the statements of officials, the Minsk Group co-chairs hope
to make a breakthrough in the negotiating process at the summit in
Astana. The Azerbaijani leadership also hopes for the signing of a
roadmap at the summit. However, it is difficult to see the basis of
these hopes. In fact, any agreement is possible only provided that
Azerbaijan agrees to Armenia's main provision - recognition of the
right of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh to self-determination - or, to
be more exact, agrees to an interim status for Nagorno-Karabakh, as
required by the Madrid principles. It doesn't look as though there are
major differences on the other issues.
It's not easy to imagine that Azerbaijan is ready to take this step.
Azerbaijan's government is well aware that its agreement to interim
status could cause a chain reaction of international recognition of
NKR independence. In the modern world no-one's likely to wait for the
results of the referendum if Azerbaijan itself has recognized the
Karabakh people's right to self-determination and the conflict zone
passes under the control of international peacekeeping troops. This
concern stops Azerbaijan from agreeing to the key paragraph of the
Madrid principles, since Azerbaijan says the independence of Nagorno
Karabakh independence is unacceptable for it.
In turn, Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh do not accept the inclusion of
the NKR under the control of Azerbaijan and have no intention of
changing their position. Theoretically, only concern at a possible
preventive war by Armenia and at the threat of Armenia's recognition
of NKR independence may force Azerbaijan to agree to this paragraph.
But this possibility seems low. Therefore, it is possible to say that
the OSCE member-states in Astana will go no further than a declaration
on the political readiness of the parties to settle the conflict
peacefully or something of this kind.
The possible recognition of the independence of Nagorno-Karabakh is
widely discussed in Armenia. The latest bill on this is to be
discussed in the Armenian parliament in late December. Do you think
Yerevan will actually recognize Karabakh?
It is not the first time that the recognition of the NKR's
independence has been put on the Armenian agenda. Periodically, each
new delay in the negotiating process raises this problem and now all
political forces in Armenia say there is no alternative to the
recognition of the independence of the NKR. There are differences only
on the terms of recognition. Many say there is no sense in creating
obstacles to the peace talks within the framework of the OSCE Minsk
Group and that we should wait for the results of the negotiations. But
some think that the current state of diplomacy on a settlement risks
the resumption of war and action should be taken against this. It is
believed that Azerbaijan does not intend to settle the issue through
negotiations. The recognition of Karabakh's independence is seen as a
step that will move the political process in a different direction.
The recent opinions are based on the increasingly frequent statements
of Azerbaijan about its readiness to settle the problem through war
and about the inadmissibility of creating an independent state in
Nagorno-Karabakh. It is clear that Armenia cannot allow the unilateral
development of this prospect and is obliged to correct its policy. The
way Armenia's parliamentary forces behave depends largely on the
actions of Azerbaijan - an escalation of its efforts towards war will
certainly leave Armenia no alternative.
Kamala Mammadova
News.Az
From: A. Papazian