Tweet
OPINION: WHO KNEW WHAT, AND WHEN, IN SAFAROV ORDEAL?
By John Hughes
ArmeniaNow
06.09.12 | 15:59
Anger remains the common emotion felt in Armenia as the "Ramil Safarov
Affair" approaches one week. But the need to place blame is competing
for answers, in the turmoil that has consumed government attention
and enraged society.
In special session of the Armenian National Assembly Wednesday,
parliamentarians no less outraged than their constituencies,
questioned why neither the National Security Service nor the Ministry
of Foreign Affairs alerted Parliament about the possibility of the
Azeri murderer's extradition from Hungary.
It can be argued that the Assembly should have held a special session
on August 30 or earlier, before Safarov's August 31 release made
yesterday's session a waste of time.
But from what was said in yesterday's session, it appears Parliament
was left off the information flow chart.
To borrow a phrase from Ronald Reagan's "Iran-Contra" scandal:
"Who knew what, and when did they know it?"
How could a case with potential to re-ignite regional war come as such
a surprise to the public, and apparently, to the public's lawmakers?
Because the negotiations happened during August holiday? Because
previous attempts by Azerbaijan to hoodwink the Hungarians had proved
fruitless anyway, so why bother?
We can hope that in the coming days there will be some clarity from
domestic institutions on how the process evolved. (Don't count on it
though. In the public mind, answers have still not been forthcoming
on the Government's role in the March 1, 2008 uprising, for example.)
Among those seeking answers is Vartan Oskanian, who, on his Facebook
wall posted: ". . . the Armenian foreign ministry and Security Services
failed. Everyone knew about the future extradition two weeks before
it happened . . ."
Oskanian, who used to head the foreign ministry, may not be the most
objective source concerning the National Security Service. The NSS
(formerly the KGB) appears to be engaged in destroying Oskanian ahead
of next year's presidential election, by having brought curiously-timed
charges of money laundering against him.
But as a former Minister of Foreign Affairs who was in office during
previous attempts by the Azeris to spring Safarov, Oskanian's criticism
of the MFA has weight.
It is this extract from Oskanian, however, that is - more and more -
starting to feel most on-target: "There can't be a second opinion on
the unacceptability of Hungary's step . . ."
On Sunday, when news of the extradition and pardon of Safarov reached
the Armenian public, outrage immediately aimed at Hungary.
But as Budapest went into damage control over the past three days,
it started to appear that the Hungarians were simply victims of an
Azeri lie - a condition with which the Armenians can surely identify
and sympathize.
Even President Serzh Sargsyan - who yanked Armenia's ambassador from
Budapest within hours of Safarov's release -- asked the public to
back off on its furor against Hungary.
That the Hungarians were lied to is evident in the document, released
Monday by the Hungarian side, in which Azerbaijan promised to keep
Safarov locked up.
That the Hungarians were naïve at best, foolish at least, and
duplicitous at worst may be, however, revealed in a look at the
document that appears to provide the loophole through which Safarov
flew.
As expressed in comments from the European Union High Commissioner,
Safarov's extradition was affected through the Convention of Strasbourg
on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons of 21 March 1983.
In it, are outlined the conditions by which EU countries may negotiate
prisoner releases.
It takes neither a High Commissioner, nor a former Minister of Foreign
Affairs to read it. Anyone who can tap Google, can find this: "Each
Party may grant pardon, amnesty or commutation of the sentence in
accordance with its Constitution or other laws."
What? No Google in Budapest?
Naturally, there are sub-conditions to this Article 12, as Article
12 is subject to Article 11, and Article 11 to Article 9, etc.
All of which appear liable to a variety of interpretations.
Apparently Azerbaijan interpreted it this way: "As the administrating
party, we reserve the right to laugh in the face of your silly
EU bylaws."
Were the Hungarians lied to? Yes. Should they have expected to be?
Yes. Were they warned that they would be? Yes.
Were they just stupid?
Kinga Gonzc was Minister of Foreign Affairs of Hungary during a period
when other attempts were made to extradite Safarov. In an interview
with Armenia's Mediamax news agency, Gonzc said that during her tenure,
Azerbaijan's requests were denied "because we didn't want to spark a
conflict between the two countries whose relationship has been tense
for decades because of Nagorno-Karabakh."
So what has happened between those times and this? Certainly, the
possibility of "conflict" is even greater than before. But:
Previous extradition attempts precede the current European economic
crisis which includes a share of suffering for Hungary.
As reported in the Economist, and explained in detail on the
liberal-leaning Hungarian blog, Spectrum, Hungary - having been turned
down for help by the EU and International Monetary Fund -- has been
soliciting financial relief from Asian and Middle Eastern sources.
In June, Hungary's Prime Minister Viktor Orban - on whose watch
Safarov was released - visited Baku.
None of that may have anything to do with anything.
Maybe it is naïve to even bring it up. Forgive me. But since August
31 Hungary has so lowered the bar on "naïve", it is hard to not step
over it.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
By John Hughes
ArmeniaNow
06.09.12 | 15:59
Anger remains the common emotion felt in Armenia as the "Ramil Safarov
Affair" approaches one week. But the need to place blame is competing
for answers, in the turmoil that has consumed government attention
and enraged society.
In special session of the Armenian National Assembly Wednesday,
parliamentarians no less outraged than their constituencies,
questioned why neither the National Security Service nor the Ministry
of Foreign Affairs alerted Parliament about the possibility of the
Azeri murderer's extradition from Hungary.
It can be argued that the Assembly should have held a special session
on August 30 or earlier, before Safarov's August 31 release made
yesterday's session a waste of time.
But from what was said in yesterday's session, it appears Parliament
was left off the information flow chart.
To borrow a phrase from Ronald Reagan's "Iran-Contra" scandal:
"Who knew what, and when did they know it?"
How could a case with potential to re-ignite regional war come as such
a surprise to the public, and apparently, to the public's lawmakers?
Because the negotiations happened during August holiday? Because
previous attempts by Azerbaijan to hoodwink the Hungarians had proved
fruitless anyway, so why bother?
We can hope that in the coming days there will be some clarity from
domestic institutions on how the process evolved. (Don't count on it
though. In the public mind, answers have still not been forthcoming
on the Government's role in the March 1, 2008 uprising, for example.)
Among those seeking answers is Vartan Oskanian, who, on his Facebook
wall posted: ". . . the Armenian foreign ministry and Security Services
failed. Everyone knew about the future extradition two weeks before
it happened . . ."
Oskanian, who used to head the foreign ministry, may not be the most
objective source concerning the National Security Service. The NSS
(formerly the KGB) appears to be engaged in destroying Oskanian ahead
of next year's presidential election, by having brought curiously-timed
charges of money laundering against him.
But as a former Minister of Foreign Affairs who was in office during
previous attempts by the Azeris to spring Safarov, Oskanian's criticism
of the MFA has weight.
It is this extract from Oskanian, however, that is - more and more -
starting to feel most on-target: "There can't be a second opinion on
the unacceptability of Hungary's step . . ."
On Sunday, when news of the extradition and pardon of Safarov reached
the Armenian public, outrage immediately aimed at Hungary.
But as Budapest went into damage control over the past three days,
it started to appear that the Hungarians were simply victims of an
Azeri lie - a condition with which the Armenians can surely identify
and sympathize.
Even President Serzh Sargsyan - who yanked Armenia's ambassador from
Budapest within hours of Safarov's release -- asked the public to
back off on its furor against Hungary.
That the Hungarians were lied to is evident in the document, released
Monday by the Hungarian side, in which Azerbaijan promised to keep
Safarov locked up.
That the Hungarians were naïve at best, foolish at least, and
duplicitous at worst may be, however, revealed in a look at the
document that appears to provide the loophole through which Safarov
flew.
As expressed in comments from the European Union High Commissioner,
Safarov's extradition was affected through the Convention of Strasbourg
on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons of 21 March 1983.
In it, are outlined the conditions by which EU countries may negotiate
prisoner releases.
It takes neither a High Commissioner, nor a former Minister of Foreign
Affairs to read it. Anyone who can tap Google, can find this: "Each
Party may grant pardon, amnesty or commutation of the sentence in
accordance with its Constitution or other laws."
What? No Google in Budapest?
Naturally, there are sub-conditions to this Article 12, as Article
12 is subject to Article 11, and Article 11 to Article 9, etc.
All of which appear liable to a variety of interpretations.
Apparently Azerbaijan interpreted it this way: "As the administrating
party, we reserve the right to laugh in the face of your silly
EU bylaws."
Were the Hungarians lied to? Yes. Should they have expected to be?
Yes. Were they warned that they would be? Yes.
Were they just stupid?
Kinga Gonzc was Minister of Foreign Affairs of Hungary during a period
when other attempts were made to extradite Safarov. In an interview
with Armenia's Mediamax news agency, Gonzc said that during her tenure,
Azerbaijan's requests were denied "because we didn't want to spark a
conflict between the two countries whose relationship has been tense
for decades because of Nagorno-Karabakh."
So what has happened between those times and this? Certainly, the
possibility of "conflict" is even greater than before. But:
Previous extradition attempts precede the current European economic
crisis which includes a share of suffering for Hungary.
As reported in the Economist, and explained in detail on the
liberal-leaning Hungarian blog, Spectrum, Hungary - having been turned
down for help by the EU and International Monetary Fund -- has been
soliciting financial relief from Asian and Middle Eastern sources.
In June, Hungary's Prime Minister Viktor Orban - on whose watch
Safarov was released - visited Baku.
None of that may have anything to do with anything.
Maybe it is naïve to even bring it up. Forgive me. But since August
31 Hungary has so lowered the bar on "naïve", it is hard to not step
over it.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress