Tweet
ALIYEV HAS REPLACED ANGER WITH "MERCY"
Leonid Martirosyan
Azat Artsakh Daily
Republic of Nagorno Karabakh [NKR]
30 Sept 2010
Azerbaijan makes another attempt to mislead the international
community Lately, some softening of the public speeches of Azerbaijani
President Ilham Aliyev is noticed, while earlier they comprised
extremely tough statements. In particular, he has recently stated that
Armenian refugees can also return to their former residence places
in Azerbaijan, while earlier he noted only the return of Azerbaijani
forcedly displaced persons to Nagorno Karabakh. To be frank, such
major-constructive notes in the Azerbaijani leader's speeches are
rare, and that's why they cause some doubt and even distrust. Our
reaction is natural, as we stopped believing the Azerbaijani leaders
long ago, which is quite fair, since they have never displayed
sincerity, if not more... And what has encouraged Ilham Aliyev
for such revelations? It may seem paradoxical, but first, it is the
unreality and ephemerality of his proposal, as Aliyev himself realizes
quite well the unrealizability of such an idea and, consequently,
the lack of any risk for himself. It isn't excluded that he decided
to speak of the possibility of the Armenian refugees' return on the
advice of Ankara, which feels the political situation better and
realizes WHAT the world would like to hear from Azerbaijan, as it is
too bothered with Baku's endless militant threats. Probably, Ankara
recommended Aliyev to be more compliant and tractable. In other words,
with his non-binding statements Aliyev decided to clothe himself in
the mantle of "peacemaker" and so to gain propagandistic dividends,
which, as he guesses, can be converted into full-fledged currency
for "buying" international structures, and first of all the UN,
to the format of which he has dreamed to transfer the discussion of
the Karabakh conflict for a long period. Aliyev's hypocrisy is more
than understandable, but the international mediators' behavior is
incomprehensible, as in the context of the conflict settlement they
persistently speak of the refugees' return and only then - of the
determination of Nagorno Karabakh's political status. Let's imagine
hypothetically that "the process has started". But, it is obviously
fraught with bloodshed. The society of any party of the conflict
isn't ready for the refugees' "reception", which is fully the "merit"
of Azerbaijan, the propagandistic machine of which has sowed the seeds
of hostility between the two nations for many years. Can we currently
speak of the Armenian refugees' safe return to present-day Azerbaijan
where a cruel totalitarian regime and violent xenophobia are ruling?
This is a rhetorical question. International law definitely prohibits
exposing conflicts' victims to recurrent danger before the final
resolution of the issue. Let's recall the beginning of the Karabakh
Movement when the then leadership of Azerbaijan, aiming at the radical
change of the demographic situation in Armenian Nagorno Karabakh in
favor of the Azerbaijani population, took an inhumane and adventurous
step, populating the region with Turks-Meskhets from a conflict area
in Uzbekistan, actually making them hostages, or rather victims of
its nationalistic policy. As a result, these people found themselves
in another center of interethnic discord, and only Baku is responsible
for this political irresponsibility. The OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairmen
and the UN leadership are supposed to realize that in case of the
refugees' return before the conflict's final resolution the South
Caucasus is threatened with "Balkanization" or even "Palestinization".
Because the Balkan conflicts continued smoldering, while they haven't
diminished in Middle East for decades just because there wasn't
any ethno-territorial demarcation; instead, ethnic dissemination
and enclaves within alien state formations existed there. In this
context, the firm position of Israel is quite clear - to prevent
the Palestinians' return to Jerusalem, despite the international
community's pressure, as it considers such a situation extremely
dangerous. Is it good or bad, but in case of the Karabakh conflict
ethnic, political, and territorial demarcation of the Armenian
and Azerbaijani people took place. And the international community
shouldn't, at the instigation of Baku, make an experiment with the
refugees' return, the consequences of which are more than obvious. By
the way, the recent research of Sigma Analytical Center has disclosed
the negative attitude of the Azerbaijani forced migrants to the
prospect of their return to their former residence places in Nagorno
Karabakh - only 10% of them expressed their wish to return. The NKR
is successively building and consolidating its independent statehood
and sees no alternative to its international recognition. The issue of
the Azerbaijanis' return to Nagorno Karabakh can be resolved only at
the negotiations between Stepanakert and Baku, under the compulsory
consent of the abovementioned 10% to accept the jurisdiction of the
independent Nagorno Karabakh Republic. Though, this issue is the
matter of the future, which isn't quite definite yet.
From: A. Papazian
Leonid Martirosyan
Azat Artsakh Daily
Republic of Nagorno Karabakh [NKR]
30 Sept 2010
Azerbaijan makes another attempt to mislead the international
community Lately, some softening of the public speeches of Azerbaijani
President Ilham Aliyev is noticed, while earlier they comprised
extremely tough statements. In particular, he has recently stated that
Armenian refugees can also return to their former residence places
in Azerbaijan, while earlier he noted only the return of Azerbaijani
forcedly displaced persons to Nagorno Karabakh. To be frank, such
major-constructive notes in the Azerbaijani leader's speeches are
rare, and that's why they cause some doubt and even distrust. Our
reaction is natural, as we stopped believing the Azerbaijani leaders
long ago, which is quite fair, since they have never displayed
sincerity, if not more... And what has encouraged Ilham Aliyev
for such revelations? It may seem paradoxical, but first, it is the
unreality and ephemerality of his proposal, as Aliyev himself realizes
quite well the unrealizability of such an idea and, consequently,
the lack of any risk for himself. It isn't excluded that he decided
to speak of the possibility of the Armenian refugees' return on the
advice of Ankara, which feels the political situation better and
realizes WHAT the world would like to hear from Azerbaijan, as it is
too bothered with Baku's endless militant threats. Probably, Ankara
recommended Aliyev to be more compliant and tractable. In other words,
with his non-binding statements Aliyev decided to clothe himself in
the mantle of "peacemaker" and so to gain propagandistic dividends,
which, as he guesses, can be converted into full-fledged currency
for "buying" international structures, and first of all the UN,
to the format of which he has dreamed to transfer the discussion of
the Karabakh conflict for a long period. Aliyev's hypocrisy is more
than understandable, but the international mediators' behavior is
incomprehensible, as in the context of the conflict settlement they
persistently speak of the refugees' return and only then - of the
determination of Nagorno Karabakh's political status. Let's imagine
hypothetically that "the process has started". But, it is obviously
fraught with bloodshed. The society of any party of the conflict
isn't ready for the refugees' "reception", which is fully the "merit"
of Azerbaijan, the propagandistic machine of which has sowed the seeds
of hostility between the two nations for many years. Can we currently
speak of the Armenian refugees' safe return to present-day Azerbaijan
where a cruel totalitarian regime and violent xenophobia are ruling?
This is a rhetorical question. International law definitely prohibits
exposing conflicts' victims to recurrent danger before the final
resolution of the issue. Let's recall the beginning of the Karabakh
Movement when the then leadership of Azerbaijan, aiming at the radical
change of the demographic situation in Armenian Nagorno Karabakh in
favor of the Azerbaijani population, took an inhumane and adventurous
step, populating the region with Turks-Meskhets from a conflict area
in Uzbekistan, actually making them hostages, or rather victims of
its nationalistic policy. As a result, these people found themselves
in another center of interethnic discord, and only Baku is responsible
for this political irresponsibility. The OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairmen
and the UN leadership are supposed to realize that in case of the
refugees' return before the conflict's final resolution the South
Caucasus is threatened with "Balkanization" or even "Palestinization".
Because the Balkan conflicts continued smoldering, while they haven't
diminished in Middle East for decades just because there wasn't
any ethno-territorial demarcation; instead, ethnic dissemination
and enclaves within alien state formations existed there. In this
context, the firm position of Israel is quite clear - to prevent
the Palestinians' return to Jerusalem, despite the international
community's pressure, as it considers such a situation extremely
dangerous. Is it good or bad, but in case of the Karabakh conflict
ethnic, political, and territorial demarcation of the Armenian
and Azerbaijani people took place. And the international community
shouldn't, at the instigation of Baku, make an experiment with the
refugees' return, the consequences of which are more than obvious. By
the way, the recent research of Sigma Analytical Center has disclosed
the negative attitude of the Azerbaijani forced migrants to the
prospect of their return to their former residence places in Nagorno
Karabakh - only 10% of them expressed their wish to return. The NKR
is successively building and consolidating its independent statehood
and sees no alternative to its international recognition. The issue of
the Azerbaijanis' return to Nagorno Karabakh can be resolved only at
the negotiations between Stepanakert and Baku, under the compulsory
consent of the abovementioned 10% to accept the jurisdiction of the
independent Nagorno Karabakh Republic. Though, this issue is the
matter of the future, which isn't quite definite yet.
From: A. Papazian