Tweet
news.az, Azerbaijan
Sept 17 2011
Armenia hinders EU admission of former Soviet states
Sat 17 September 2011 06:44 GMT | 2:44 Local Time
News.Az interviews political scientist Fikrat Sadikhov.
Euronest Parliamentary Assembly, the first meeting of which was held
in Strasbourg on 14-15 September, failed to adopt a resolution with
recommendations for the forthcoming summit of the Eastern Partnership
due to positions of delegations from Armenia and Azerbaijan, sources
in the European Parliament said.
Moreover, the draft resolution including recommendations for the
Eastern Partnership summit to be held in Warsaw, among other things,
contained a proposal to provide a perspective of EU membership to
Eastern Partnership member countries. What are your comments in this
regard?
Indeed, the debates in Strasbourg were quite dramatic, and it is quite
natural, since we are talking about the conflicting parties who are
participants of this union, or rather, not parties, but a country
which has occupied territory of another state.
Of course, Azerbaijan, as a country that suffers occupation and could
not restore its territorial integrity to this day because of Armenia's
position, took a rather harsh attitude towards Armenia and it is quite
natural and based on real situation.
As far as I know, the question of principles of sovereignty,
territorial integrity, inviolability of borders was raised in
Strasbourg. And pro-Armenian MPs even suggested to remove this
provision completely. Of course, our delegation could not accept such
a proposal and demanded to keep the text in its previous version. In
fact, after the vote, we could get the version we insisted upon
preserved.
There were, for example, some discrepancies regarding the expression
of separate articles. Of course, there can be no unity between
Azerbaijan and Armenia in such matters, because we perceive
territorial integrity and the right of peoples to self-determination
differently. In other words, we do not believe that the right of
peoples to self-determination contradicts principles of territorial
integrity.
Therefore, the Armenian delegation was behaving aggressively.
Moreover, it even announced a boycott and even threatened to use a
veto right. This is, so to speak, internal political kitchen, which
was unlikely to contribute to pro-Armenian resolution.
Of course, the countries that participated in the session, and in
particular Ukraine, suggested to make some compromise provisions to
the document. Here, the Armenian delegation acted in its own way and
began to demand the right of peoples to self-determination. That is,
it resorted to its old, worn-out approach which is absolutely devoid
of reason as it contradicts all basic norms and principles of
international law.
Of course, members of our delegation participated in these debates
rather tense and actively, and, as far I understood, the Azerbaijani
side has achieved a result.
What do you mean?
The result is the decision to hold the next session of this quite
influential organization in Baku, the capital of an Eastern
Partnership member state which is not an EU member. In general, this
is a major achievement of Azerbaijani diplomacy.
The fact that such a decision was adopted after tense debates shows
that the countries that voted for this decision quite constructively
assess the situation, have a real approach to the situation and
realize that territorial integrity of a country, part of whose
territory is occupied by another state, is a top priority.
In this situation, it is clear that Armenia continues to create
setbacks for Azerbaijan's cooperation with the civilized world. Does
our country have to forget about European integration that promises
big prospects just because of Armenia?
I do not think so. It is hard to believe. What is obvious is that the
Armenian delegation was the loser. In any case, we cooperate within
international organizations, such as Euronest and several other
projects of not bilateral, but regional and interstate cooperation,
because we are obliged to do this. There is a program of Eastern
Partnership, a framework of the Council of Europe, PACE, OSCE, and so
on.
Of course, we have to do this. But this does not mean that we can
sacrifice our principles, and above all, the principles of sovereignty
and surrender to Azerbaijan delegation which demands to include some
mythical articles to a provision on Euronest resolution. Therefore,
Armenia showed its non-constructive position in all its glory in this
case.
So, maybe it's not very big, but still a victory of Azerbaijan, as we
could persuade delegations of the member states participating in this
session to vote for Azerbaijan so that next session of this powerful
structure will take place in Baku. This is a significant
accomplishment for Azerbaijan.
F.H.
News.Az
Sept 17 2011
Armenia hinders EU admission of former Soviet states
Sat 17 September 2011 06:44 GMT | 2:44 Local Time
News.Az interviews political scientist Fikrat Sadikhov.
Euronest Parliamentary Assembly, the first meeting of which was held
in Strasbourg on 14-15 September, failed to adopt a resolution with
recommendations for the forthcoming summit of the Eastern Partnership
due to positions of delegations from Armenia and Azerbaijan, sources
in the European Parliament said.
Moreover, the draft resolution including recommendations for the
Eastern Partnership summit to be held in Warsaw, among other things,
contained a proposal to provide a perspective of EU membership to
Eastern Partnership member countries. What are your comments in this
regard?
Indeed, the debates in Strasbourg were quite dramatic, and it is quite
natural, since we are talking about the conflicting parties who are
participants of this union, or rather, not parties, but a country
which has occupied territory of another state.
Of course, Azerbaijan, as a country that suffers occupation and could
not restore its territorial integrity to this day because of Armenia's
position, took a rather harsh attitude towards Armenia and it is quite
natural and based on real situation.
As far as I know, the question of principles of sovereignty,
territorial integrity, inviolability of borders was raised in
Strasbourg. And pro-Armenian MPs even suggested to remove this
provision completely. Of course, our delegation could not accept such
a proposal and demanded to keep the text in its previous version. In
fact, after the vote, we could get the version we insisted upon
preserved.
There were, for example, some discrepancies regarding the expression
of separate articles. Of course, there can be no unity between
Azerbaijan and Armenia in such matters, because we perceive
territorial integrity and the right of peoples to self-determination
differently. In other words, we do not believe that the right of
peoples to self-determination contradicts principles of territorial
integrity.
Therefore, the Armenian delegation was behaving aggressively.
Moreover, it even announced a boycott and even threatened to use a
veto right. This is, so to speak, internal political kitchen, which
was unlikely to contribute to pro-Armenian resolution.
Of course, the countries that participated in the session, and in
particular Ukraine, suggested to make some compromise provisions to
the document. Here, the Armenian delegation acted in its own way and
began to demand the right of peoples to self-determination. That is,
it resorted to its old, worn-out approach which is absolutely devoid
of reason as it contradicts all basic norms and principles of
international law.
Of course, members of our delegation participated in these debates
rather tense and actively, and, as far I understood, the Azerbaijani
side has achieved a result.
What do you mean?
The result is the decision to hold the next session of this quite
influential organization in Baku, the capital of an Eastern
Partnership member state which is not an EU member. In general, this
is a major achievement of Azerbaijani diplomacy.
The fact that such a decision was adopted after tense debates shows
that the countries that voted for this decision quite constructively
assess the situation, have a real approach to the situation and
realize that territorial integrity of a country, part of whose
territory is occupied by another state, is a top priority.
In this situation, it is clear that Armenia continues to create
setbacks for Azerbaijan's cooperation with the civilized world. Does
our country have to forget about European integration that promises
big prospects just because of Armenia?
I do not think so. It is hard to believe. What is obvious is that the
Armenian delegation was the loser. In any case, we cooperate within
international organizations, such as Euronest and several other
projects of not bilateral, but regional and interstate cooperation,
because we are obliged to do this. There is a program of Eastern
Partnership, a framework of the Council of Europe, PACE, OSCE, and so
on.
Of course, we have to do this. But this does not mean that we can
sacrifice our principles, and above all, the principles of sovereignty
and surrender to Azerbaijan delegation which demands to include some
mythical articles to a provision on Euronest resolution. Therefore,
Armenia showed its non-constructive position in all its glory in this
case.
So, maybe it's not very big, but still a victory of Azerbaijan, as we
could persuade delegations of the member states participating in this
session to vote for Azerbaijan so that next session of this powerful
structure will take place in Baku. This is a significant
accomplishment for Azerbaijan.
F.H.
News.Az