Tweet
NEW SITUATION.WHAT'S NEXT?
http://artsakhtert.com/eng/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=837:-new-situationwhats-next&catid=3:all&Itemid=4
Monday, 12 November 2012 09:35
Will the mediators reconsider their previous approaches to the
conflict settlement?
As we know, a visit of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairmen to the region
is expected in November. It was arranged at the October 27 meeting of
the Foreign Ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan and the Minsk Group
co-chairs in Paris.
The information on the Paris meeting itself was quite poor. It
was only noted in the OSCE statement issued on its results that
the mediators had presented some new proposals to the parties and
the "Foreign Ministers of Azerbaijan and Armenia confirmed their
readiness to continue the work with the co-chairs on the achievement
of a peaceful settlement".
Actually, nothing more could be expected from the meeting in the French
capital. The situation created by "Safarov's case" did not absolutely
leave any room even for timid hope for the slightest progress in the
Karabakh settlement. The negotiation process was stricken a severe
blow, from which it will hardly be able to recover in a short time. In
the current conditions, we can firmly state that nothing serious can
be expected from the upcoming visit of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs
to the region.
Today, most experts believe that the negotiation process is in a
deadlock. As a result of the openly provocative actions of Azerbaijan,
the tension between the parties has greatly increased, which makes
many political analysts state the increased possibility of the military
activities' resumption. Under the existing situation, the co-chairs of
the Minsk Group consider that their goal is to prevent the conflict's
entering into a hot phase and to try to keep the negotiation process
ongoing. We can suppose that the mediators' new proposals and ideas,
which were discussed at the Paris meeting, are aimed just at the
achievement of this goal, because they should understand that it is
merely naive to date to speak about a comprehensive settlement.
But, it is important to emphasize that the issue of the conflict fair
settlement is not connected only with the position of Azerbaijan,
which is well known and which will not radically change in the nearest
future. To be true, the matter is also in the position of the OSCE
Minsk Group. To be fair, we should note that it used great efforts
to reach a final arrangement between the parties, offering them
several options of the conflict settlement. We cannot blame it for
being passive and ineffective, as Azerbaijan does it, and we accept
its statement that an agreement should be achieved, first of all, by
the conflicting parties themselves. But, we'd like to make a comment.
For its twenty-year activity, the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs should,
first of all, have got convinced that Azerbaijan is not able to conduct
civilized and responsible negotiations supposing respectful attitude
to both the opponents in the political dialogue and the agreements
reached. Second, they should admit that times have changed and,
consequently, changed is the situation in the world in general.
So, the international mediators should reconsider their approaches to
and methodology of the Karabakh issue resolution and should refuse
of the previous old schemes of settlement and take the realities
differently. The reality is that the Nagorno Karabakh Republic is
an established state, and considering the ongoing military threats
of Azerbaijan, as well as the tendencies of development of the
geopolitical processes in the world, there is no alternative to the
legal recognition of its factual independence.
I would suggest that this obvious truth is realized also by
the international mediators. While earlier any of them, though
hypothetically, admitted the possibility of coexistence between Nagorno
Karabakh and Azerbaijan under a single "roof" (let's remember, at
least, the proposal of the Minsk Group on the "common state"), after
the pardon of murderer Safarov there are hardly any illusions left on
this. This means that the Minsk Group co-chairs should build their
mediation mission in accordance with the current reality and should
convince Azerbaijan of the futility of its plans to subject Nagorno
Karabakh to its jurisdiction. First, as noted by Armenia's Foreign
Minister Edward Nalbandian, it is necessary "to force Azerbaijan to
the peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict". Since the
Baku regime, refusing to notice either the change in the position of
the international community or the started process of international
recognition of the right of the Artsakh people to self-determination,
remains committed to the military way and still states its readiness
for "any option" (i.e. military) of the issue's solution.
This political "blindness" of official Baku allows some experts
to speak about the archaic diplomatic tactics and strategy of
Azerbaijan on Karabakh and, as a consequence, about the stalemate
in the Karabakh settlement. But, let's make a small remark - while
stalemate in chess means a draw, in our case, we can only speak about
the victory of Nagorno-Karabakh as an objective reality. The reward
for this victory became the independent state status of the NKR,
which, as repeatedly stated by the authorities of the Republic,
is not subject to any discussion.
Leonid MARTIROSSIAN Editor-in-Chief of Azat Artsakh newspaper
http://artsakhtert.com/eng/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=837:-new-situationwhats-next&catid=3:all&Itemid=4
Monday, 12 November 2012 09:35
Will the mediators reconsider their previous approaches to the
conflict settlement?
As we know, a visit of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairmen to the region
is expected in November. It was arranged at the October 27 meeting of
the Foreign Ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan and the Minsk Group
co-chairs in Paris.
The information on the Paris meeting itself was quite poor. It
was only noted in the OSCE statement issued on its results that
the mediators had presented some new proposals to the parties and
the "Foreign Ministers of Azerbaijan and Armenia confirmed their
readiness to continue the work with the co-chairs on the achievement
of a peaceful settlement".
Actually, nothing more could be expected from the meeting in the French
capital. The situation created by "Safarov's case" did not absolutely
leave any room even for timid hope for the slightest progress in the
Karabakh settlement. The negotiation process was stricken a severe
blow, from which it will hardly be able to recover in a short time. In
the current conditions, we can firmly state that nothing serious can
be expected from the upcoming visit of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs
to the region.
Today, most experts believe that the negotiation process is in a
deadlock. As a result of the openly provocative actions of Azerbaijan,
the tension between the parties has greatly increased, which makes
many political analysts state the increased possibility of the military
activities' resumption. Under the existing situation, the co-chairs of
the Minsk Group consider that their goal is to prevent the conflict's
entering into a hot phase and to try to keep the negotiation process
ongoing. We can suppose that the mediators' new proposals and ideas,
which were discussed at the Paris meeting, are aimed just at the
achievement of this goal, because they should understand that it is
merely naive to date to speak about a comprehensive settlement.
But, it is important to emphasize that the issue of the conflict fair
settlement is not connected only with the position of Azerbaijan,
which is well known and which will not radically change in the nearest
future. To be true, the matter is also in the position of the OSCE
Minsk Group. To be fair, we should note that it used great efforts
to reach a final arrangement between the parties, offering them
several options of the conflict settlement. We cannot blame it for
being passive and ineffective, as Azerbaijan does it, and we accept
its statement that an agreement should be achieved, first of all, by
the conflicting parties themselves. But, we'd like to make a comment.
For its twenty-year activity, the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs should,
first of all, have got convinced that Azerbaijan is not able to conduct
civilized and responsible negotiations supposing respectful attitude
to both the opponents in the political dialogue and the agreements
reached. Second, they should admit that times have changed and,
consequently, changed is the situation in the world in general.
So, the international mediators should reconsider their approaches to
and methodology of the Karabakh issue resolution and should refuse
of the previous old schemes of settlement and take the realities
differently. The reality is that the Nagorno Karabakh Republic is
an established state, and considering the ongoing military threats
of Azerbaijan, as well as the tendencies of development of the
geopolitical processes in the world, there is no alternative to the
legal recognition of its factual independence.
I would suggest that this obvious truth is realized also by
the international mediators. While earlier any of them, though
hypothetically, admitted the possibility of coexistence between Nagorno
Karabakh and Azerbaijan under a single "roof" (let's remember, at
least, the proposal of the Minsk Group on the "common state"), after
the pardon of murderer Safarov there are hardly any illusions left on
this. This means that the Minsk Group co-chairs should build their
mediation mission in accordance with the current reality and should
convince Azerbaijan of the futility of its plans to subject Nagorno
Karabakh to its jurisdiction. First, as noted by Armenia's Foreign
Minister Edward Nalbandian, it is necessary "to force Azerbaijan to
the peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict". Since the
Baku regime, refusing to notice either the change in the position of
the international community or the started process of international
recognition of the right of the Artsakh people to self-determination,
remains committed to the military way and still states its readiness
for "any option" (i.e. military) of the issue's solution.
This political "blindness" of official Baku allows some experts
to speak about the archaic diplomatic tactics and strategy of
Azerbaijan on Karabakh and, as a consequence, about the stalemate
in the Karabakh settlement. But, let's make a small remark - while
stalemate in chess means a draw, in our case, we can only speak about
the victory of Nagorno-Karabakh as an objective reality. The reward
for this victory became the independent state status of the NKR,
which, as repeatedly stated by the authorities of the Republic,
is not subject to any discussion.
Leonid MARTIROSSIAN Editor-in-Chief of Azat Artsakh newspaper