Tweet
EU OBSERVER: NAGORNO-KARABAKH: ON THE KNIFE'S EDGE
http://times.am/?l=en&p=12494
The Euobserver.com magazine published an article about the
Nagorno-Karabakh issue and the situation in the region. Amanda Paul
and Roxana Cristescu are the authors of the article. The article
especially says:
A mere two weeks ago the name Ramil Safarov was meaningless to
most people.
Today he is the cause of a diplomatic storm between Azerbaijan,
Armenia and Hungary which has sucked in the US, Russia and the EU
and deepened regional hostility and bitterness in the South Caucasus.
Safarov, an Azerbaijani soldier, was convicted and sentenced to life
imprisonment for murdering an Armenian soldier, Gurgen Margaryan,
during a Nato Partnership for Peace training program in Budapest
in 2004.
Hungary's decision to extradite Safarov to Azerbaijan, where he was
immediately pardoned, has unleashed a widespread tirade of condemnation
on both Baku and Budapest.
Hungary says that the extradition was approved in accordance with the
terms of the 1983 European Convention of the Transfer of Sentenced
Persons, to which Azerbaijan is party. It also claims Azerbaijan
pledged to keep Safarov incarcerated for the remainder of his sentence.
Article 12 of the convention states: "Each party may grant pardon,
amnesty or commutation of the sentence in accordance with its
constitution or other laws."
Azerbaijan declared it was entitled to pardon him under Item 22 of
article 109 of the Azerbaijani constitution, meaning that while it
may have been a highly provocative decision, it was in accordance
with all international norms and rules, something which Hungary must
have been aware of.
This decision had an immediate negative effect on the Nagorno-Karabakh
peace process and inter-ethnic relations with the Armenians.
While Armenia has now cut diplomatic ties with Hungary, Azerbaijan
feels bitter about the way the international community has treated
the case.
An open statement co-signed by various representatives of Azerbaijan's
ruling and opposition parties considers last week's European Parliament
resolution regarding the Safarov case as unconstructive and a clear
reflection of the institution's policy of double standards.
Celebrated by the majority of Azerbaijanis and condemned vehemently
by Armenia, the Safarov event exposes again the significant level of
smouldering acrimony that has grown, boiling in the pressure cooker
of the unresolved Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and in a closed and
elite-driven peace process.
The loud local public reaction to this case came as no surprise
for close observers of this process and should not be treated by
international diplomacy as an episodic incident to be dismissed with
quick and short-sighted measures.
Very sadly, this turn of events will almost certainly set back
efforts to find a solution to the conflict and efforts to build up
trust between the peoples of the region.
Political debates and statements have fired up emotions which
were displayed in the public domain in a myriad of ways. During
the past weeks, regular citizens on both sides - not just radicals
and ultra-nationalists - have poured into local, international and
social media an impressive compilation of poisonous insults, hollow
statements and calls for violent action, all of which are rooted in
a dangerously racist attitude towards each other. The few moderate
and analytical articles were met with threatening tones.
This alone is sufficient to show that the 'frozen' polarisation and
isolation on all sides has done nothing during the past 20 years
but sharpen perceptions of the enemy and further alienate people
regardless of their age, education or political orientation.
At this critical level of political cleavage, trying to stimulate and
build change from within the societies affected by conflict appears
to be most badly needed yet impossible endeavour.
In the current setting of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, the
possibilities of promoting peace from the outside are limited.
International pressure and mediation have predictably and repeatedly
hit a dead end.
The official peace process has maintained a self-centered approach and
insisted for too long on a confidential and secretive structure for
the talks, ignoring the need to work with the public, to include all
the relevant actors and stimulate significant changes at the level
of local people caught up in the conflict.
The radical reactions to the Safarov case are a reflection of public
feeling which is not prepared for dialogue, let alone any compromise.
For several years now different local and international
non-governmental organizations have tried to bridge the divide where
direct cross-conflict activities were impossible to carry out. Despite
the politically stagnant environment around the official negotiation
process, efforts have continued to build trust between Armenians
and Azerbaijanis, in particular among young people - a constituency
which desires and deserves a brighter future beyond the bloody past
it has inherited.
Some of these projects were supported by the EU in line with its
declared commitment to provide support to civil society for a
peaceful resolution of the conflict. For those people who have
been painstakingly trying to improve dialogue across the divide,
the aftershocks of the Safarov event will not only challenge the
tentative results obtained so far but will also put on shaky ground
all civil society initiatives in the future.
Local NGOs and respected insiders who work at multiple levels in
society will now struggle to find their feet. The limited space they
had to promote conflict transformation, propose alternative conflict
resolution activities and broaden the options in the dominant discourse
on the official peace process risks shrinking significantly in the
wake of the Safarov case.
They will need all the support they can get from the EU and from
other organizations.
Playing the blame game is not going to help this process and will
do nothing in the long run but push the two sides into their own
corners and make any sort of interaction and dialogue difficult if
not impossible.
No one will be worse off than the people of the South Caucasus if
the region, steeped in hatred and constantly teetering on the edge of
armed escalation, is relegated to hopeless status by a disappointed
international business and diplomatic community.
http://times.am/?l=en&p=12494
The Euobserver.com magazine published an article about the
Nagorno-Karabakh issue and the situation in the region. Amanda Paul
and Roxana Cristescu are the authors of the article. The article
especially says:
A mere two weeks ago the name Ramil Safarov was meaningless to
most people.
Today he is the cause of a diplomatic storm between Azerbaijan,
Armenia and Hungary which has sucked in the US, Russia and the EU
and deepened regional hostility and bitterness in the South Caucasus.
Safarov, an Azerbaijani soldier, was convicted and sentenced to life
imprisonment for murdering an Armenian soldier, Gurgen Margaryan,
during a Nato Partnership for Peace training program in Budapest
in 2004.
Hungary's decision to extradite Safarov to Azerbaijan, where he was
immediately pardoned, has unleashed a widespread tirade of condemnation
on both Baku and Budapest.
Hungary says that the extradition was approved in accordance with the
terms of the 1983 European Convention of the Transfer of Sentenced
Persons, to which Azerbaijan is party. It also claims Azerbaijan
pledged to keep Safarov incarcerated for the remainder of his sentence.
Article 12 of the convention states: "Each party may grant pardon,
amnesty or commutation of the sentence in accordance with its
constitution or other laws."
Azerbaijan declared it was entitled to pardon him under Item 22 of
article 109 of the Azerbaijani constitution, meaning that while it
may have been a highly provocative decision, it was in accordance
with all international norms and rules, something which Hungary must
have been aware of.
This decision had an immediate negative effect on the Nagorno-Karabakh
peace process and inter-ethnic relations with the Armenians.
While Armenia has now cut diplomatic ties with Hungary, Azerbaijan
feels bitter about the way the international community has treated
the case.
An open statement co-signed by various representatives of Azerbaijan's
ruling and opposition parties considers last week's European Parliament
resolution regarding the Safarov case as unconstructive and a clear
reflection of the institution's policy of double standards.
Celebrated by the majority of Azerbaijanis and condemned vehemently
by Armenia, the Safarov event exposes again the significant level of
smouldering acrimony that has grown, boiling in the pressure cooker
of the unresolved Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and in a closed and
elite-driven peace process.
The loud local public reaction to this case came as no surprise
for close observers of this process and should not be treated by
international diplomacy as an episodic incident to be dismissed with
quick and short-sighted measures.
Very sadly, this turn of events will almost certainly set back
efforts to find a solution to the conflict and efforts to build up
trust between the peoples of the region.
Political debates and statements have fired up emotions which
were displayed in the public domain in a myriad of ways. During
the past weeks, regular citizens on both sides - not just radicals
and ultra-nationalists - have poured into local, international and
social media an impressive compilation of poisonous insults, hollow
statements and calls for violent action, all of which are rooted in
a dangerously racist attitude towards each other. The few moderate
and analytical articles were met with threatening tones.
This alone is sufficient to show that the 'frozen' polarisation and
isolation on all sides has done nothing during the past 20 years
but sharpen perceptions of the enemy and further alienate people
regardless of their age, education or political orientation.
At this critical level of political cleavage, trying to stimulate and
build change from within the societies affected by conflict appears
to be most badly needed yet impossible endeavour.
In the current setting of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, the
possibilities of promoting peace from the outside are limited.
International pressure and mediation have predictably and repeatedly
hit a dead end.
The official peace process has maintained a self-centered approach and
insisted for too long on a confidential and secretive structure for
the talks, ignoring the need to work with the public, to include all
the relevant actors and stimulate significant changes at the level
of local people caught up in the conflict.
The radical reactions to the Safarov case are a reflection of public
feeling which is not prepared for dialogue, let alone any compromise.
For several years now different local and international
non-governmental organizations have tried to bridge the divide where
direct cross-conflict activities were impossible to carry out. Despite
the politically stagnant environment around the official negotiation
process, efforts have continued to build trust between Armenians
and Azerbaijanis, in particular among young people - a constituency
which desires and deserves a brighter future beyond the bloody past
it has inherited.
Some of these projects were supported by the EU in line with its
declared commitment to provide support to civil society for a
peaceful resolution of the conflict. For those people who have
been painstakingly trying to improve dialogue across the divide,
the aftershocks of the Safarov event will not only challenge the
tentative results obtained so far but will also put on shaky ground
all civil society initiatives in the future.
Local NGOs and respected insiders who work at multiple levels in
society will now struggle to find their feet. The limited space they
had to promote conflict transformation, propose alternative conflict
resolution activities and broaden the options in the dominant discourse
on the official peace process risks shrinking significantly in the
wake of the Safarov case.
They will need all the support they can get from the EU and from
other organizations.
Playing the blame game is not going to help this process and will
do nothing in the long run but push the two sides into their own
corners and make any sort of interaction and dialogue difficult if
not impossible.
No one will be worse off than the people of the South Caucasus if
the region, steeped in hatred and constantly teetering on the edge of
armed escalation, is relegated to hopeless status by a disappointed
international business and diplomatic community.