Tweet
ISSUE OF PEACEKEEPERS
JAMES HAKOBYAN
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/politics22250.html
Published: 20:21:00 - 16/06/2011
The foreign minister of Armenia Edward Nalbandyan has announced
recently that for the past three years the issue of peacekeepers has
not been discussed in the peaceful settlement of the Karabakh conflict.
On June 15 the Haykakan Zhamanak Daily published the Basic Principles
of Madrid which had been introduced to the sides in November 2007. One
of the principles is that the Armenian forces are withdrawn from the
liberated territories, and peacekeeping forces are deployed there.
Since November 2007 Armenia has accepted the Basic Principles as the
framework of the talks. Replacing the Kocharyan-Oskanyan tandem, the
Sargsyan-Nalbandyan tandem has never rejected the so-called Madrid or
Basic Principles. It means they continue to negotiate in the framework
of these principles. If one of the points of this framework is the
issue of peacekeepers, it means this issue is also negotiated.
And it is not important whether this issue was specified or not because
Armenia has never announced for the past three years that Armenia
disagrees to the principle on the peacekeepers. Moreover, if Armenia
announces ready to return some territories to Azerbaijan, receiving a
distinct status instead, it means Armenia agrees to peacekeepers. And
for the past three years Armenia has announced ready to return the
territories for several times although one of these times is enough,
considering its highly simple and eloquent content.
~SDespite Azerbaijan~Rs claims, this area is neither populated nor used
by us. As soon as the people of Karabakh get a real opportunity to
exercise their right to self-determination, and practical mechanisms
of security and development are created, the return to Azerbaijan of
the territories surrounding Karabakh, keeping Nagorno-Karabakh and the
corridor with Armenia, it can be considered as a compromise on behalf
of the Armenian side. I have announced this for a number of times.
However, the key notion of ~Scompromise~T is mutuality, and one
should be aware that in such situations unilateral concessions only
aggravate the existing dangers and threats,~T Serzh Sargsyan said in
an interview with the Syria-based Al Vatan Newspaper on March 22, 2010.
The U.S. ambassador to Azerbaijan Matthew Bryza stated that the issue
is on the agenda of talks where there is no place for deviousness and
there is a serious discussion. So said the reports of the Azerbaijani
media. Although in this case the Armenian foreign ministry may claim
the Azerbaijanis had distorted Bryza~Rs words.
Also, it should be noted that the foreign minister of Armenia is,
nevertheless, honest when he says the issue has not been discussed
for the past three years. Agreeing to the Basic Principles of Madrid
in November 2007, Armenia has never needed to discuss the issue of
peacekeepers and has never had any objection regarding this issue. And
in this case, discussing would be pointless. Why discuss something
on which everyone has agreed, including Armenia?
JAMES HAKOBYAN
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/politics22250.html
Published: 20:21:00 - 16/06/2011
The foreign minister of Armenia Edward Nalbandyan has announced
recently that for the past three years the issue of peacekeepers has
not been discussed in the peaceful settlement of the Karabakh conflict.
On June 15 the Haykakan Zhamanak Daily published the Basic Principles
of Madrid which had been introduced to the sides in November 2007. One
of the principles is that the Armenian forces are withdrawn from the
liberated territories, and peacekeeping forces are deployed there.
Since November 2007 Armenia has accepted the Basic Principles as the
framework of the talks. Replacing the Kocharyan-Oskanyan tandem, the
Sargsyan-Nalbandyan tandem has never rejected the so-called Madrid or
Basic Principles. It means they continue to negotiate in the framework
of these principles. If one of the points of this framework is the
issue of peacekeepers, it means this issue is also negotiated.
And it is not important whether this issue was specified or not because
Armenia has never announced for the past three years that Armenia
disagrees to the principle on the peacekeepers. Moreover, if Armenia
announces ready to return some territories to Azerbaijan, receiving a
distinct status instead, it means Armenia agrees to peacekeepers. And
for the past three years Armenia has announced ready to return the
territories for several times although one of these times is enough,
considering its highly simple and eloquent content.
~SDespite Azerbaijan~Rs claims, this area is neither populated nor used
by us. As soon as the people of Karabakh get a real opportunity to
exercise their right to self-determination, and practical mechanisms
of security and development are created, the return to Azerbaijan of
the territories surrounding Karabakh, keeping Nagorno-Karabakh and the
corridor with Armenia, it can be considered as a compromise on behalf
of the Armenian side. I have announced this for a number of times.
However, the key notion of ~Scompromise~T is mutuality, and one
should be aware that in such situations unilateral concessions only
aggravate the existing dangers and threats,~T Serzh Sargsyan said in
an interview with the Syria-based Al Vatan Newspaper on March 22, 2010.
The U.S. ambassador to Azerbaijan Matthew Bryza stated that the issue
is on the agenda of talks where there is no place for deviousness and
there is a serious discussion. So said the reports of the Azerbaijani
media. Although in this case the Armenian foreign ministry may claim
the Azerbaijanis had distorted Bryza~Rs words.
Also, it should be noted that the foreign minister of Armenia is,
nevertheless, honest when he says the issue has not been discussed
for the past three years. Agreeing to the Basic Principles of Madrid
in November 2007, Armenia has never needed to discuss the issue of
peacekeepers and has never had any objection regarding this issue. And
in this case, discussing would be pointless. Why discuss something
on which everyone has agreed, including Armenia?