Tweet
NAGORNYY KARABAKH CONFLICT: MYTHS AND REALITY
by David Stepanyan
arminfo
Friday, August 5, 20:19
The most difficult task of the intermediaries in the matter of
reaching peaceful settlement of the old Karabakh conflict, though
it is strange, is not how to gain from the presidents of Armenia and
Azerbaijan signing of the raw document, but how to fulfill it later.
However, just as a result of its fulfillment, the regular escalation
of violence in the region will become possible.
It is no secret, that in the basic principles for the conflict
settlement there are absolutely no realistic schemes how to reach
fully-fledged peace. That's why, today the societies of both states
have to strictly differentiate myths, which permanently appear around
the settlement process, from reality...
The reality is that the new proposals of the Russian president on
taking the settlement process out deadlock appeared immediately
after the failure of the Kazan meeting of the three presidents. The
information was disseminated in Armenia and Azerbaijan about the
next trilateral meeting of the presidents, which the Kremlin has been
preparing around Mevedev's new ideas. It has become clear, that there
is no need to wait for rapprochement of positions of the parties to
the conflict based on the so-called Madrid principles.
However, against such a background, the parties to the conflict
and the external forces connected with it in this or that way, have
started inventing new myths about the receipt which will change the
situation around Nagornyy Karabakh and destroy the status-quo, which
the Azerbaijani party dreams of from the talks most of all.
Incidentally, the lovers of the modern myths are not confused for
the fact that the next meeting of the presidents did not take place,
as well as for the fact that the history of settlement has not yet
given reason for such conclusions. In fact, such mythologization of
the conflict supported and disseminated by the parties and co-sponsors
of the process, is becoming a serious factor which contradicts its
settlement. In this context, incidentally just the Kazan failure
has become the stimulus for animation of discussion about possible
settlement of the conflict through a new war.
Thus, official Baku has again started rattling the saboteur and
threatening Yerevan and Stepanakert with a stick of new war, at the
same time keeping for the intermediaries a hard carrot in the form of
"the widest autonomy". For its part, the leadership of Armenia again
is putting stress on the transitional status and the necessity of
giving an independent status to Nagornyy Karabakh, mentioned in the
basic principles for the Karabakh settlement.
So there was no real pre-condition, except mythology and groundless
optimism for signing of the real agreement on settlement of the
conflict, either in Kazan or before it. But who is blamed for not
happening of the eagerly expected "breakthrough"? The Americans and
Europeans cast responsibility for the blame on president Medvedev and
Russian diplomacy, blaming them for the fact that they do not want
"to lose their positions in the South Caucasus". As for the Russians,
they again suspected that the Americans want "to bank fires" by
Russia's hands.
As a result, in the person of the Karabakh conflict we have come across
just a part of the big geo-political game of the world superpowers, in
which all of them are guided only by the national interests. Actually,
all last processes demonstrated invalidity of the thesis "superpowers
resolve everything and every time". The positions and interests of
the ruling elites of Armenia and Azerbaijan have always been the
key stumbling stone on the way of mutual compromises in settlement,
which the superpowers want to see in their own interests. By word
of mouth president of Armenia always voices readiness to "mutual
compromises". As for the president of Azerbaijan, he cannot allow
himself even to express readiness to them, he gains his political
vitality as he has an uncompromising stance.
Both presidents undergo harsh pressing from inside as well as outside,
which in fact cannot make Baku recognize independence of the NKR,
and Yerevan - to gift an independent Karabakh to Azerbaijan. For
this reason, the intermediaries have nothing else to do than to try
to coordinate absolutely contradictory interests of the parties on
the basis of the basic principles and naively hope to turn them into
a pre-condition for final agreement.
Certainly, presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan can sign "the
principles". It is more difficult to try bring them to life, as in that
case Aliyev will be forced, for instance, to "correct" the Constitution
of Azerbaijan and integrate in it the point about autonomies in favor
of Karabakh, and give these autonomies to Lezgins, Avars, Tats and
other national minorities. After that, the head of Azerbaijan will be
forces to gather his citizens "suffered of the Armenian aggression" and
spread in all over the world and force them to return to the so-called
occupied territories of Azerbaijan", so that then de-jure to recognize
independence of Nagornyy Karabakh which is de-facto independent.
For his part, Serzh Sargsyan having got no clear guarantee of security
of the Karabakh people, will be force to trust in the co-chairs and
especially Aliyev, and make the Karabakh army leave the territories
which are the only protection of the people of Karabakh. It is not
hard to imagine what will happen in Yerevan, Stepanakert and Baku
after that. But the most important is that the presidents themselves
understand it very well, as they really differ mythology from reality.
by David Stepanyan
arminfo
Friday, August 5, 20:19
The most difficult task of the intermediaries in the matter of
reaching peaceful settlement of the old Karabakh conflict, though
it is strange, is not how to gain from the presidents of Armenia and
Azerbaijan signing of the raw document, but how to fulfill it later.
However, just as a result of its fulfillment, the regular escalation
of violence in the region will become possible.
It is no secret, that in the basic principles for the conflict
settlement there are absolutely no realistic schemes how to reach
fully-fledged peace. That's why, today the societies of both states
have to strictly differentiate myths, which permanently appear around
the settlement process, from reality...
The reality is that the new proposals of the Russian president on
taking the settlement process out deadlock appeared immediately
after the failure of the Kazan meeting of the three presidents. The
information was disseminated in Armenia and Azerbaijan about the
next trilateral meeting of the presidents, which the Kremlin has been
preparing around Mevedev's new ideas. It has become clear, that there
is no need to wait for rapprochement of positions of the parties to
the conflict based on the so-called Madrid principles.
However, against such a background, the parties to the conflict
and the external forces connected with it in this or that way, have
started inventing new myths about the receipt which will change the
situation around Nagornyy Karabakh and destroy the status-quo, which
the Azerbaijani party dreams of from the talks most of all.
Incidentally, the lovers of the modern myths are not confused for
the fact that the next meeting of the presidents did not take place,
as well as for the fact that the history of settlement has not yet
given reason for such conclusions. In fact, such mythologization of
the conflict supported and disseminated by the parties and co-sponsors
of the process, is becoming a serious factor which contradicts its
settlement. In this context, incidentally just the Kazan failure
has become the stimulus for animation of discussion about possible
settlement of the conflict through a new war.
Thus, official Baku has again started rattling the saboteur and
threatening Yerevan and Stepanakert with a stick of new war, at the
same time keeping for the intermediaries a hard carrot in the form of
"the widest autonomy". For its part, the leadership of Armenia again
is putting stress on the transitional status and the necessity of
giving an independent status to Nagornyy Karabakh, mentioned in the
basic principles for the Karabakh settlement.
So there was no real pre-condition, except mythology and groundless
optimism for signing of the real agreement on settlement of the
conflict, either in Kazan or before it. But who is blamed for not
happening of the eagerly expected "breakthrough"? The Americans and
Europeans cast responsibility for the blame on president Medvedev and
Russian diplomacy, blaming them for the fact that they do not want
"to lose their positions in the South Caucasus". As for the Russians,
they again suspected that the Americans want "to bank fires" by
Russia's hands.
As a result, in the person of the Karabakh conflict we have come across
just a part of the big geo-political game of the world superpowers, in
which all of them are guided only by the national interests. Actually,
all last processes demonstrated invalidity of the thesis "superpowers
resolve everything and every time". The positions and interests of
the ruling elites of Armenia and Azerbaijan have always been the
key stumbling stone on the way of mutual compromises in settlement,
which the superpowers want to see in their own interests. By word
of mouth president of Armenia always voices readiness to "mutual
compromises". As for the president of Azerbaijan, he cannot allow
himself even to express readiness to them, he gains his political
vitality as he has an uncompromising stance.
Both presidents undergo harsh pressing from inside as well as outside,
which in fact cannot make Baku recognize independence of the NKR,
and Yerevan - to gift an independent Karabakh to Azerbaijan. For
this reason, the intermediaries have nothing else to do than to try
to coordinate absolutely contradictory interests of the parties on
the basis of the basic principles and naively hope to turn them into
a pre-condition for final agreement.
Certainly, presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan can sign "the
principles". It is more difficult to try bring them to life, as in that
case Aliyev will be forced, for instance, to "correct" the Constitution
of Azerbaijan and integrate in it the point about autonomies in favor
of Karabakh, and give these autonomies to Lezgins, Avars, Tats and
other national minorities. After that, the head of Azerbaijan will be
forces to gather his citizens "suffered of the Armenian aggression" and
spread in all over the world and force them to return to the so-called
occupied territories of Azerbaijan", so that then de-jure to recognize
independence of Nagornyy Karabakh which is de-facto independent.
For his part, Serzh Sargsyan having got no clear guarantee of security
of the Karabakh people, will be force to trust in the co-chairs and
especially Aliyev, and make the Karabakh army leave the territories
which are the only protection of the people of Karabakh. It is not
hard to imagine what will happen in Yerevan, Stepanakert and Baku
after that. But the most important is that the presidents themselves
understand it very well, as they really differ mythology from reality.