Tweet
SUMMIT FAILURE MAY LEAD TO 'BACKLASH' ON KARABAKH FRONTLINE
news.az
June 22 2011
Azerbaijan
News.Az interviews Azerbaijani political expert Tabib Huseynov.
What are your expectations of the meeting between the Azerbaijani
and Armenian presidents to be held in Kazan later this week?
In Kazan, the presidents will try to agree on the final articulation
of the basic principles. Failure to achieve some progress, if not
a full agreement at this meeting, may significantly complicate the
talks. This in turn would lead to a negative backlash on the situation
along the frontline.
Today the maximalist and pro-status quo attitudes within Armenian
political circles and society at large are hardly conducive to the
signing of an agreement in Kazan. So, perhaps, a more realistic option
is for the presidents to adopt a statement, which would reiterate
their political commitment to seek a solution based on the basic
principles. This statement may possibly include some generalized
points from the basic principles document, similar to those which
were earlier revealed by the US, Russian and French presidents in
their joint statements in L'Aquila and Muskoka.
Such a statement, however modest it may look, would still be an
important political move to prepare the societies to accept the basic
principles. The Kazan meeting will not be the last chance for Armenia
and Azerbaijan to agree on the basic principles, but it will be an
important milestone, which will largely determine the further course
of the peace process.
At the G8 summit in Deauville, the leaders of Russia, the United
States and France called on Armenia and Azerbaijan to finalize the
basic principles of the conflict settlement at their meeting in Kazan.
What is the reason for the mediators' optimism about this meeting?
After all, it seems there are no significant changes in Armenia's
position.
The mediators' strongly worded calls to agree on the basic principles
in Kazan are a reflection not of optimism, but of concern that further
delay would discredit the diplomatic process.
Let's recall that the Kazan meeting will be the ninth trilateral
meeting between the presidents of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Russia. This
is quite an unusual format when presidents directly become
negotiators. The advantage of such a format is that it allows for
high-profile discussions and, if an agreement is reached, would provide
for its quick implementation. But the presidents cannot endlessly
discuss the same things over and over again. Lack of progress in such
high-profile talks may negatively affect personal working relationships
between the Armenian and Azerbaijani presidents and would, therefore,
further complicate the talks. Failure to achieve progress may also
damage the Russian president's and Russia's credibility as the lead
mediator.
The Minsk Group, by issuing increasingly strongly worded statements,
is building up pressure on both sides to agree without further delay
to a compromise based on the basic principles. These principles have
been extensively discussed over the course of the last few years and
the positions and arguments of the sides are now clear. It is time
to make a decision now and move on to the next phase of the talks,
that is, drafting of the comprehensive peace agreement.
Do you believe that the world powers really are interested in
resolution of the Karabakh conflict or do they make statements just
to show that they are doing something?
The international mediators increasingly realize that the status quo
does not guarantee stability and its continuation is not in their
interest, just as it is not in the best interests of the Azerbaijani
and Armenian peoples. This status quo only entrenches radicalism
and reduces chances for a negotiated settlement, thus increasing the
likelihood of war, which would have devastating consequences for both
Armenia and Azerbaijan and for wider regional security.
So, the mediating countries, including some sections of the Russian
political establishment, are now interested in peaceful, gradual and
predictable change in the status quo. But at the end of the day,
we need to bear in mind that the mediators can provide incentives
and exert some pressure, but the decision will have to come from the
Armenian and Azerbaijani leaderships.
How long may it take to solve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and resume
the normal co-existence of Azerbaijanis and Armenians in the region?
Achieving peaceful coexistence between the two peoples will be a
long and incremental process, which may take several decades, even
after the signing of a peace agreement. Armenians and Azeris lived
peacefully side by side for centuries and in that sense, any talk
about their ethnic incompatibility is nothing but a chauvinistic
attempt to justify territorial expansion. Once there is an agreement
and the process of the return of displaced Azeris begins, Armenians and
Azeris will start living side by side again. Then they will rediscover
the wealth of positive cultural and historical experiences of their
cohabitation that far outweigh their negative experiences.
news.az
June 22 2011
Azerbaijan
News.Az interviews Azerbaijani political expert Tabib Huseynov.
What are your expectations of the meeting between the Azerbaijani
and Armenian presidents to be held in Kazan later this week?
In Kazan, the presidents will try to agree on the final articulation
of the basic principles. Failure to achieve some progress, if not
a full agreement at this meeting, may significantly complicate the
talks. This in turn would lead to a negative backlash on the situation
along the frontline.
Today the maximalist and pro-status quo attitudes within Armenian
political circles and society at large are hardly conducive to the
signing of an agreement in Kazan. So, perhaps, a more realistic option
is for the presidents to adopt a statement, which would reiterate
their political commitment to seek a solution based on the basic
principles. This statement may possibly include some generalized
points from the basic principles document, similar to those which
were earlier revealed by the US, Russian and French presidents in
their joint statements in L'Aquila and Muskoka.
Such a statement, however modest it may look, would still be an
important political move to prepare the societies to accept the basic
principles. The Kazan meeting will not be the last chance for Armenia
and Azerbaijan to agree on the basic principles, but it will be an
important milestone, which will largely determine the further course
of the peace process.
At the G8 summit in Deauville, the leaders of Russia, the United
States and France called on Armenia and Azerbaijan to finalize the
basic principles of the conflict settlement at their meeting in Kazan.
What is the reason for the mediators' optimism about this meeting?
After all, it seems there are no significant changes in Armenia's
position.
The mediators' strongly worded calls to agree on the basic principles
in Kazan are a reflection not of optimism, but of concern that further
delay would discredit the diplomatic process.
Let's recall that the Kazan meeting will be the ninth trilateral
meeting between the presidents of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Russia. This
is quite an unusual format when presidents directly become
negotiators. The advantage of such a format is that it allows for
high-profile discussions and, if an agreement is reached, would provide
for its quick implementation. But the presidents cannot endlessly
discuss the same things over and over again. Lack of progress in such
high-profile talks may negatively affect personal working relationships
between the Armenian and Azerbaijani presidents and would, therefore,
further complicate the talks. Failure to achieve progress may also
damage the Russian president's and Russia's credibility as the lead
mediator.
The Minsk Group, by issuing increasingly strongly worded statements,
is building up pressure on both sides to agree without further delay
to a compromise based on the basic principles. These principles have
been extensively discussed over the course of the last few years and
the positions and arguments of the sides are now clear. It is time
to make a decision now and move on to the next phase of the talks,
that is, drafting of the comprehensive peace agreement.
Do you believe that the world powers really are interested in
resolution of the Karabakh conflict or do they make statements just
to show that they are doing something?
The international mediators increasingly realize that the status quo
does not guarantee stability and its continuation is not in their
interest, just as it is not in the best interests of the Azerbaijani
and Armenian peoples. This status quo only entrenches radicalism
and reduces chances for a negotiated settlement, thus increasing the
likelihood of war, which would have devastating consequences for both
Armenia and Azerbaijan and for wider regional security.
So, the mediating countries, including some sections of the Russian
political establishment, are now interested in peaceful, gradual and
predictable change in the status quo. But at the end of the day,
we need to bear in mind that the mediators can provide incentives
and exert some pressure, but the decision will have to come from the
Armenian and Azerbaijani leaderships.
How long may it take to solve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and resume
the normal co-existence of Azerbaijanis and Armenians in the region?
Achieving peaceful coexistence between the two peoples will be a
long and incremental process, which may take several decades, even
after the signing of a peace agreement. Armenians and Azeris lived
peacefully side by side for centuries and in that sense, any talk
about their ethnic incompatibility is nothing but a chauvinistic
attempt to justify territorial expansion. Once there is an agreement
and the process of the return of displaced Azeris begins, Armenians and
Azeris will start living side by side again. Then they will rediscover
the wealth of positive cultural and historical experiences of their
cohabitation that far outweigh their negative experiences.