Tweet
Trend, Azerbaijan
Dec 22 2011
Talks on Nagorno-Karabakh: the annual déjà vu
22 December 2011, 13:29 (GMT+04:00) Elmira Tariverdiev, Trend European
desk commentator
According to tradition it is acceptable to sum up and talk about the
prospects of some important events in political life by the end of the
year, but there is almost nothing to talk about with the peace process
over the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
Alas, a couple of words are enough to understand what is happening in
the negotiations of Azerbaijan and Armenia - complete stagnation.
There were negotiations, as in 2010, but they failed. The FMC OSCE
meeting in Vilnius did not introduce anything new in the process of
negotiations.
All three co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group, called on the conflicting
parties to come to an agreement at the end of 2010. The Russian
Foreign Minister made a proposal to take advantage of developments
announced recently as a result of the parties in the conflict making
contact with President Medvedev. Moreover, all the intermediaries
noted that real progress had not been achieved in the negotiations
over Nagorno-Karabakh in recent years.
Of course, one would assume a positive development in the adoption of
the joint statement of the OSCE Minsk Group delegation head and the
parties in the conflict in the framework of FMC OSCE, but this is not
the first time there have not been any results.
The futility of the Minsk group co-chairs annual appeals is easily
explained. It is unprofitable for Yerevan to take real steps towards a
settlement despite the clear international attention on the problem of
Nagorno-Karabakh.
It is significant that Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian
unleashed a storm of criticism in Azerbaijan, devoting all of his
performance to "injustices committed against Yerevan" immediately
after the joint statement in the framework of FMC. This position is
not surprising. It is easier for Yerevan to maintain the status quo as
long as possible, delaying the settlement process for an indefinite
period.
Moreover, even the initiative of Azerbaijan to hold a meeting of
representatives of the Armenian and Azerbaijan communities of
Nagorno-Karabakh in November 2011 crashed against the reluctance of
Yerevan.
At the same time the international community did not seem to
understand that the only way out of the situation should be the active
participation of all mediators in the negotiations and their
increasing pressure on Yerevan.
Russia was the most active mediator during 2011, as well as in 2010.
President Dmitry Medvedev has spent a lot of time and effort to ensure
that the negotiation process moved forward. It is recognised
officially by Baku, making reservations on the participation of France
and the United States in the negotiations.
Alas, Paris and Washington seem to be more concerned by their
presidential election campaigns than by the fulfilment of their
obligations.
And while all three countries will not put enough effort to convince
Yerevan to take a step toward resolving the conflict, we shouldn't
hope for progress in the settlement. This is especially considering
the fact that officially Yerevan does not make a concession in matters
of the liberation of occupied Azerbaijani lands, does not agree to a
compromise of Azerbaijan and periodically makes provocative statements
to recognise the independence of Nagorno Karabakh and rename the
Azerbaijani districts.
Armenia's actions are contrary to the real desire of Azerbaijan to
reach an agreement on Nagorno-Karabakh, and neither Russia nor
Washington, nor the OSCE nor any other international mediator can
advance the negotiations by persuasion, taking into account the fact
that Yerevan is satisfied with the current state of affairs and isn't
going to move from its non-constructive, but convenient position.
The stagnation will continue if the mediating countries do not make a
genuine effort and not insist on the fact that Armenia has finally
changed its position and refused to delay tactics of the conflict for
all eternity in 2012. And it isn't known what results will bring such
appeasement to Yerevan from the international players' side, taking
into account the growing tensions on the frontline.
The mediators cannot understand that Baku has every reason to be
impatient with this situation, while Armenia has no right to delay the
negotiations, finding more and more absurd pretexts for maintaining
the status quo.
Another important issue may be a question of involving the EU in the
activities of OSCE Minsk Group in 2012. It became particularly
relevant against the backdrop of strengthening the Armenian diaspora
role in talks on Nagorno-Karabakh in France and in the U.S. The
Armenian lobby in the West has played an active political role amongst
the decision-making authorities in the U.S. and France in contrast to
the Russian diaspora.
In this context, it would be better if the European Union took over
the political involvement in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict along with
the Minsk Group. In particular EU mediation could be successful,
taking into account the project of European integration, in which all
the countries of South Caucasus are equally interested.
Projects, the implementation of which is hampered by the lack of
stability in the region, could become the basis for dialogue between
the conflicting sides , including Armenia and Azerbaijan., The EU
should become better acquainted with the realities of the conflict to
enable it to become an active participant in the settlement, as many
European leaders are still not well informed about the nuances of the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and are not aware of the fact that 20 per
cent of Azerbaijani territory is occupied.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Dec 22 2011
Talks on Nagorno-Karabakh: the annual déjà vu
22 December 2011, 13:29 (GMT+04:00) Elmira Tariverdiev, Trend European
desk commentator
According to tradition it is acceptable to sum up and talk about the
prospects of some important events in political life by the end of the
year, but there is almost nothing to talk about with the peace process
over the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
Alas, a couple of words are enough to understand what is happening in
the negotiations of Azerbaijan and Armenia - complete stagnation.
There were negotiations, as in 2010, but they failed. The FMC OSCE
meeting in Vilnius did not introduce anything new in the process of
negotiations.
All three co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group, called on the conflicting
parties to come to an agreement at the end of 2010. The Russian
Foreign Minister made a proposal to take advantage of developments
announced recently as a result of the parties in the conflict making
contact with President Medvedev. Moreover, all the intermediaries
noted that real progress had not been achieved in the negotiations
over Nagorno-Karabakh in recent years.
Of course, one would assume a positive development in the adoption of
the joint statement of the OSCE Minsk Group delegation head and the
parties in the conflict in the framework of FMC OSCE, but this is not
the first time there have not been any results.
The futility of the Minsk group co-chairs annual appeals is easily
explained. It is unprofitable for Yerevan to take real steps towards a
settlement despite the clear international attention on the problem of
Nagorno-Karabakh.
It is significant that Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian
unleashed a storm of criticism in Azerbaijan, devoting all of his
performance to "injustices committed against Yerevan" immediately
after the joint statement in the framework of FMC. This position is
not surprising. It is easier for Yerevan to maintain the status quo as
long as possible, delaying the settlement process for an indefinite
period.
Moreover, even the initiative of Azerbaijan to hold a meeting of
representatives of the Armenian and Azerbaijan communities of
Nagorno-Karabakh in November 2011 crashed against the reluctance of
Yerevan.
At the same time the international community did not seem to
understand that the only way out of the situation should be the active
participation of all mediators in the negotiations and their
increasing pressure on Yerevan.
Russia was the most active mediator during 2011, as well as in 2010.
President Dmitry Medvedev has spent a lot of time and effort to ensure
that the negotiation process moved forward. It is recognised
officially by Baku, making reservations on the participation of France
and the United States in the negotiations.
Alas, Paris and Washington seem to be more concerned by their
presidential election campaigns than by the fulfilment of their
obligations.
And while all three countries will not put enough effort to convince
Yerevan to take a step toward resolving the conflict, we shouldn't
hope for progress in the settlement. This is especially considering
the fact that officially Yerevan does not make a concession in matters
of the liberation of occupied Azerbaijani lands, does not agree to a
compromise of Azerbaijan and periodically makes provocative statements
to recognise the independence of Nagorno Karabakh and rename the
Azerbaijani districts.
Armenia's actions are contrary to the real desire of Azerbaijan to
reach an agreement on Nagorno-Karabakh, and neither Russia nor
Washington, nor the OSCE nor any other international mediator can
advance the negotiations by persuasion, taking into account the fact
that Yerevan is satisfied with the current state of affairs and isn't
going to move from its non-constructive, but convenient position.
The stagnation will continue if the mediating countries do not make a
genuine effort and not insist on the fact that Armenia has finally
changed its position and refused to delay tactics of the conflict for
all eternity in 2012. And it isn't known what results will bring such
appeasement to Yerevan from the international players' side, taking
into account the growing tensions on the frontline.
The mediators cannot understand that Baku has every reason to be
impatient with this situation, while Armenia has no right to delay the
negotiations, finding more and more absurd pretexts for maintaining
the status quo.
Another important issue may be a question of involving the EU in the
activities of OSCE Minsk Group in 2012. It became particularly
relevant against the backdrop of strengthening the Armenian diaspora
role in talks on Nagorno-Karabakh in France and in the U.S. The
Armenian lobby in the West has played an active political role amongst
the decision-making authorities in the U.S. and France in contrast to
the Russian diaspora.
In this context, it would be better if the European Union took over
the political involvement in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict along with
the Minsk Group. In particular EU mediation could be successful,
taking into account the project of European integration, in which all
the countries of South Caucasus are equally interested.
Projects, the implementation of which is hampered by the lack of
stability in the region, could become the basis for dialogue between
the conflicting sides , including Armenia and Azerbaijan., The EU
should become better acquainted with the realities of the conflict to
enable it to become an active participant in the settlement, as many
European leaders are still not well informed about the nuances of the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and are not aware of the fact that 20 per
cent of Azerbaijani territory is occupied.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress