Tweet
IS RUSSIA FOR RETURN OF TERRITORIES?
Naira Hayrumyan
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/politics25679.html
Published: 14:35:10 - 03/04/2012
Russia insists on following the principles of Madrid. In fact,
the Russian minister of foreign affairs Sergey Lavrov thinks that
Armenia must return the territories and afterwards consider the status
of Karabakh.
Lavrov stated in Yerevan that the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs, at
the level of the presidents of Russia, the United States and France,
adopted at least three documents in the past three years which urged
to settle the Karabakh issue on the basis of the principles of the
U.N. Charter, the OSCE, by way of negotiations in the result of which
in the final destination of the settlement, after having reached
agreements on liberating certain territories, ensuring a corridor,
the people of Karabakh will decide their destiny.
In fact, he admitted that the sides cannot agree on this issue
without specifying who is against. It is hardly Azerbaijan because the
return of territories is what Baku needs, while Baku only appoints
an uncertain referendum of independence when half of Karabakh will
already be under its control.
But does Armenia agree? Azerbaijan has recently rejected agreements
at least four times, the Armenian foreign minister Eduard Nalbandyan
announced.
He said the Azerbaijanis interpret the change of the status quo
only as return of territories surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh. In this
connection the co-chairs stated through their foreign ministers that
all the principles and issues to form a framework for the settlement
have been worked out as whole and none of them can be separated,
Eduard Nalbandyan said.
Interestingly, on the same day the U.S. Ambassador John Heffern made
a statement without uttering a word on the principles of settlement,
territories or status. Heffern spoke about peace, that is preservation
of the status quo.
We will continue to seek for the right formula, work on the mechanisms
for the prevention of violations of the ceasefire, keep the sides at
the table of negotiations, ensure lasting peace, he said.
He noted that the presidents of the co-chair states of the Minsk Group
have published the idea of balancing military expenditure, moderating
the race of armament, prepare the peoples for a realistic settlement.
The U.S. ambassador said they do everything they can to enable the
sides to reach a settlement, adding that they are now working together
with the sides on the so-called main principles. It seemed that we
are close but we haven't reached the goal, he said.
The Azerbaijani foreign minister Elmar Mammedyarov said the status quo
is dangerous for Azerbaijan. He noted that the upcoming elections
in Armenia and co-chair countries will protract the process of
settlement. However, it does not mean that the process has come to
a halt, he said.
Apparently, the European Union does not make sufficient efforts
to boost its role in the settlement of the Karabakh issue. It may
be related to the elections but most probably the EU considers
preservation of peace a priority to the settlement itself.
Naira Hayrumyan
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/politics25679.html
Published: 14:35:10 - 03/04/2012
Russia insists on following the principles of Madrid. In fact,
the Russian minister of foreign affairs Sergey Lavrov thinks that
Armenia must return the territories and afterwards consider the status
of Karabakh.
Lavrov stated in Yerevan that the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs, at
the level of the presidents of Russia, the United States and France,
adopted at least three documents in the past three years which urged
to settle the Karabakh issue on the basis of the principles of the
U.N. Charter, the OSCE, by way of negotiations in the result of which
in the final destination of the settlement, after having reached
agreements on liberating certain territories, ensuring a corridor,
the people of Karabakh will decide their destiny.
In fact, he admitted that the sides cannot agree on this issue
without specifying who is against. It is hardly Azerbaijan because the
return of territories is what Baku needs, while Baku only appoints
an uncertain referendum of independence when half of Karabakh will
already be under its control.
But does Armenia agree? Azerbaijan has recently rejected agreements
at least four times, the Armenian foreign minister Eduard Nalbandyan
announced.
He said the Azerbaijanis interpret the change of the status quo
only as return of territories surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh. In this
connection the co-chairs stated through their foreign ministers that
all the principles and issues to form a framework for the settlement
have been worked out as whole and none of them can be separated,
Eduard Nalbandyan said.
Interestingly, on the same day the U.S. Ambassador John Heffern made
a statement without uttering a word on the principles of settlement,
territories or status. Heffern spoke about peace, that is preservation
of the status quo.
We will continue to seek for the right formula, work on the mechanisms
for the prevention of violations of the ceasefire, keep the sides at
the table of negotiations, ensure lasting peace, he said.
He noted that the presidents of the co-chair states of the Minsk Group
have published the idea of balancing military expenditure, moderating
the race of armament, prepare the peoples for a realistic settlement.
The U.S. ambassador said they do everything they can to enable the
sides to reach a settlement, adding that they are now working together
with the sides on the so-called main principles. It seemed that we
are close but we haven't reached the goal, he said.
The Azerbaijani foreign minister Elmar Mammedyarov said the status quo
is dangerous for Azerbaijan. He noted that the upcoming elections
in Armenia and co-chair countries will protract the process of
settlement. However, it does not mean that the process has come to
a halt, he said.
Apparently, the European Union does not make sufficient efforts
to boost its role in the settlement of the Karabakh issue. It may
be related to the elections but most probably the EU considers
preservation of peace a priority to the settlement itself.