Tweet
ELECTIONS, GEOPOLITICS, AND TIME
http://artsakhtert.com/eng/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=770:e lections-geopolitics-and-time&catid=3:all&Itemid=4
Tuesday, 24 July 2012 05:39
So, the July 19 presidential elections in the NKR became part
of history, but, surely, certain time they will still occupy the
minds of political scientists and experts. It should be noted that
the estimates and opinions on the NKR presidential elections were
expressed both before and after the electoral process, and their
range was quite wide - from well-disposed to negative.
Although it should be recognized that no open condemnation was
expressed. Except, of course, the sharp reaction by Azerbaijan and
Turkey, which was easy to forecast, due to well-known reasons, and
therefore does not deserve serious attention.
Surely, we are, first of all, interested in the position and
assessments of international structures and observers carrying out
direct monitoring of the elections. Comparative analysis of the
estimates that were given by international structures to the earlier
election processes in the NKR and the last presidential election lets
us talk about some positive trends. Of course, neither the OSCE nor
the European Union, which was also predicted, did not approve the
presidential elections, but they didnā~@~Yt either flatly condemned
them.
Among those who claimed not to recognize the elections were Chairman
of the OSCE Permanent Council Oen O'Leary and head of the European
diplomacy, Catherine Ashton. A corresponding statement was also issued
by the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs, who, as Catherine Ashton, said the
elections should not prejudge the future status of Nagorno-Karabakh
at the negotiations on the peaceful settlement of the conflict.
In fact, from the diplomatic point of view, such a statement is quite
right, as the negotiation process within the Minsk Group is still
underway. However, the fears of international organizations on the
possible predetermination of the political status of Nagorno-Karabakh
are completely useless, since the presidential elections in the NKR do
not include such a function and have, so to say, a purely domestic
purpose, or, they are focused on the formation of governmental
structures to control the state.
In the same sense, the change in the tone of the international
mediators' statements attracts the attention. The OSCE Minsk Group
co-chairs themselves recognized the "need for the formation of de
facto authorities in Nagorno-Karabakh to ensure democracy and to
maintain the public life". That is, we can state that the mediators
fairly can no longer ignore the political processes in the NKR,
in particular, the establishment of legitimate authorities via
nationwide elections. Moreover, holding elections in the NKR in a
real competition, as it happened on July 19, should only be welcomed
by international organizations, as it clearly confirms the commitment
of both the people and authorities of the Republic to the democratic
principles of civil society. Legitimately elected state power is
predictable and acts responsibly, which is very important in the
modern civilized world.
I must say that the assessments of the international observers, who
monitored the presidential elections, advantageously differed from the
views of European officials and were much more specific. And it is not
only and not so much the estimates of the electoral process unanimously
recognized by actually all the observers as "a democratic act of free
will of the Republic's citizens corresponding to the international
standards of the electoral law". In this case, important are the
political assessments. As it was rightly noted by Director of the
Polish branch of the European Centre for Geopolitical Studies Mateusz
Piskorski, "just the democratically elected President, Parliament,
and representatives of other branches of power can negotiate on behalf
of the NKR". Members of the Russian observation mission also noted the
importance of the elections for the negotiation process in the format
of the OSCE Minsk Group. Director of the RF Institute of the Newest
States Alexey Martynov stated bluntly that "Nagorno-Karabakh is quite
an established state and from a legal point of view has every right to
be fully represented in the negotiation process". Let us note that the
conclusion of actually all the observing missions, made ā~@~Kā~@~Kup
on the presidential elections, state the compliance of the level of
democratic development in Nagorno-Karabakh with the standards of the
countries with developed democracy. This means that they can serve
a peculiar signal to the international community to appreciate the
efforts of the NKR people and authorities and to legally recognize its
independence, which, according to the observers, it quite established.
As for the fact that this signal does not yet reach the international
structures displaying, to put it mildly, political indifference
towards Nagorno-Karabakh in terms of not so much the recognition of
its independence, but, at least, its return to the negotiating table,
then this issue has quite understandable and known reasons.
Unfortunately, Nagorno-Karabakh became a hostage of the geopolitical
struggle of the superpowers, which cannot determine their own interests
in our region. Then, is not the trust to them as bearers and apologists
of democratic values lost? And the trust towards the mediators in the
process of the Karabakh conflict settlement, which, by definition, are
considered to be impartial? And what will help to restore this trust?
But, these are the questions that can be answered only by time. The
time when the critical mass of positive assessments of independent
international observers will completely outweigh the principle of
political or conjuncture expediency, by which the international
organizations are guided, dependent on the interests of the major
extra-regional forces. In the words of the observers, we'd like to
be sure that the time will certainly come.
Leonid MARTIROSSIAN
Editor-in-Chief of Azat Artsakh newspaper
http://artsakhtert.com/eng/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=770:e lections-geopolitics-and-time&catid=3:all&Itemid=4
Tuesday, 24 July 2012 05:39
So, the July 19 presidential elections in the NKR became part
of history, but, surely, certain time they will still occupy the
minds of political scientists and experts. It should be noted that
the estimates and opinions on the NKR presidential elections were
expressed both before and after the electoral process, and their
range was quite wide - from well-disposed to negative.
Although it should be recognized that no open condemnation was
expressed. Except, of course, the sharp reaction by Azerbaijan and
Turkey, which was easy to forecast, due to well-known reasons, and
therefore does not deserve serious attention.
Surely, we are, first of all, interested in the position and
assessments of international structures and observers carrying out
direct monitoring of the elections. Comparative analysis of the
estimates that were given by international structures to the earlier
election processes in the NKR and the last presidential election lets
us talk about some positive trends. Of course, neither the OSCE nor
the European Union, which was also predicted, did not approve the
presidential elections, but they didnā~@~Yt either flatly condemned
them.
Among those who claimed not to recognize the elections were Chairman
of the OSCE Permanent Council Oen O'Leary and head of the European
diplomacy, Catherine Ashton. A corresponding statement was also issued
by the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs, who, as Catherine Ashton, said the
elections should not prejudge the future status of Nagorno-Karabakh
at the negotiations on the peaceful settlement of the conflict.
In fact, from the diplomatic point of view, such a statement is quite
right, as the negotiation process within the Minsk Group is still
underway. However, the fears of international organizations on the
possible predetermination of the political status of Nagorno-Karabakh
are completely useless, since the presidential elections in the NKR do
not include such a function and have, so to say, a purely domestic
purpose, or, they are focused on the formation of governmental
structures to control the state.
In the same sense, the change in the tone of the international
mediators' statements attracts the attention. The OSCE Minsk Group
co-chairs themselves recognized the "need for the formation of de
facto authorities in Nagorno-Karabakh to ensure democracy and to
maintain the public life". That is, we can state that the mediators
fairly can no longer ignore the political processes in the NKR,
in particular, the establishment of legitimate authorities via
nationwide elections. Moreover, holding elections in the NKR in a
real competition, as it happened on July 19, should only be welcomed
by international organizations, as it clearly confirms the commitment
of both the people and authorities of the Republic to the democratic
principles of civil society. Legitimately elected state power is
predictable and acts responsibly, which is very important in the
modern civilized world.
I must say that the assessments of the international observers, who
monitored the presidential elections, advantageously differed from the
views of European officials and were much more specific. And it is not
only and not so much the estimates of the electoral process unanimously
recognized by actually all the observers as "a democratic act of free
will of the Republic's citizens corresponding to the international
standards of the electoral law". In this case, important are the
political assessments. As it was rightly noted by Director of the
Polish branch of the European Centre for Geopolitical Studies Mateusz
Piskorski, "just the democratically elected President, Parliament,
and representatives of other branches of power can negotiate on behalf
of the NKR". Members of the Russian observation mission also noted the
importance of the elections for the negotiation process in the format
of the OSCE Minsk Group. Director of the RF Institute of the Newest
States Alexey Martynov stated bluntly that "Nagorno-Karabakh is quite
an established state and from a legal point of view has every right to
be fully represented in the negotiation process". Let us note that the
conclusion of actually all the observing missions, made ā~@~Kā~@~Kup
on the presidential elections, state the compliance of the level of
democratic development in Nagorno-Karabakh with the standards of the
countries with developed democracy. This means that they can serve
a peculiar signal to the international community to appreciate the
efforts of the NKR people and authorities and to legally recognize its
independence, which, according to the observers, it quite established.
As for the fact that this signal does not yet reach the international
structures displaying, to put it mildly, political indifference
towards Nagorno-Karabakh in terms of not so much the recognition of
its independence, but, at least, its return to the negotiating table,
then this issue has quite understandable and known reasons.
Unfortunately, Nagorno-Karabakh became a hostage of the geopolitical
struggle of the superpowers, which cannot determine their own interests
in our region. Then, is not the trust to them as bearers and apologists
of democratic values lost? And the trust towards the mediators in the
process of the Karabakh conflict settlement, which, by definition, are
considered to be impartial? And what will help to restore this trust?
But, these are the questions that can be answered only by time. The
time when the critical mass of positive assessments of independent
international observers will completely outweigh the principle of
political or conjuncture expediency, by which the international
organizations are guided, dependent on the interests of the major
extra-regional forces. In the words of the observers, we'd like to
be sure that the time will certainly come.
Leonid MARTIROSSIAN
Editor-in-Chief of Azat Artsakh newspaper