Tweet
GERARD-FRANCOIS DUMONT: NEGLECTING HISTORICAL FACTS MAKES SOLUTION OF KARABAKH CONFLICT EVEN HARDER
18:46 15/01/2014 " INTERVIEWS
Panorama.am presents an interview with Professor of Demography at
the University of Paris IV-Sorbonne Gerard-Francois Dumont.
Nvard Chalikyan: Prof. Dumont, in your recent article titled
Nagorno-Karabakh: the geopolitics of a conflict without end you speak
about the origins of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. How do you assess
the fact that these historical realities are completely ignored in
the current conflict resolution process?
Gerard-Francois Dumont: The ignorance of the historical facts which
are at the heart of geopolitical conflicts is unfortunately quite
common. This is clearly seen in the conflicts currently taking place
in Sudan, Central Africa and even in Europe, where there is a marked
tension between Hungary and the European Union. The main reason of
the latter is that the treaty of Trianon, signed on 04 June 1920
in the aftermath of the World War I, was unjust. The truth is that
the principle of the inviolability of frontiers currently endorsed
by the international community results in complete neglect of the
causes and history of the formation of these frontiers.
Comparisons are not always appropriate, however, it is interesting to
compare the situations in the South Caucasus and Ukraine. The USSR,
having employed the principle of "divide and rule", in 1946 attached
to Ukraine Crimea, which gave Moscow access to the Black Sea and
then to the Mediterranean. This complicated the current geopolitical
situation of Ukraine, which is vividly seen from the fact that Crimea
was the only region which voted against the independence of Ukraine
in the referendum of 1991. Ceteris paribus, the USSR drew the borders
of Azerbaijan according to that same principle, a fact which is now
largely ignored. Similarly, the pogroms of Armenians in Baku in 1988
have also been ignored. But the neglect of historical facts always
has the same result - it makes the solution of the conflict harder
and fuels it even more.
NC: Considering the fact that Azerbaijan continues to pose
an existential threat to Nagorno-Karabakh today (given current
anti-Armenian policies, military rhetoric, etc.) do you think the
proposed Madrid Principles provide tangible security guarantees to the
people of the Nagorno-Karabakh against possible Azerbaijani aggression?
Gerard-Francois Dumont: Historically the principles are like
agreements and declarations. They have exactly as much importance
as the politicians give to them. Geopolitics is a game based on
power balance. No principle, however desirable it might be, can ever
guarantee the security of a people. Whether you are for or against
the Madrid Principles, they are only principles, the interpretation
of which can vary greatly depending on the protagonists, while their
implementation can be very different depending on the balance of
power. In other words, Nagorno-Karabakh must be ready for all the
possible developments. As a matter of fact, only the peace agreement
which will include security guarantees, as well as willingness to
preserve those, can guarantee the security.
NC: From purely geopolitical perspective is there a scenario that can
bring to a final solution of the conflict and to a long-term peace
in the region?
Gerard-Francois Dumont: History teaches us that conflicts are resolved
only when the immediate parties to the conflict really want to put
an end to it. Of course, international powers can contribute to
the solution of the conflict if they refrain from igniting it and
if they offer guarantees. The Minsk Group plays a useful role by
trying to appease the conflict and facilitate the dialogue. However,
it cannot solve the conflict, as past two decades have shown. The
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict can only be completely solved if Azerbaijan,
Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh find common ground and are equally eager
to resolve it.
NC: And what would you say about the role of democracy in the
resolution of this conflict?
Gerard-Francois Dumont: One of the factors that complicates the
resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is that it depends on the
situation between the parties to the conflict. It is a lot easier to
find a solution to those conflicts where the parties are democratic,
as peoples do not like being imprisoned within closed borders and they
eventually vote for those leaders who want the borders to be used
as a means of exchange and trade. Thus we can only wish democratic
progress to these countries.
NC: From the geopolitical perspective how do you assess the decision
of the Republic of Armenia to become a member of the Customs Union?
Could Armenia have possibly taken another rout being faced with the
choice between Russia and Europe?
Gerard-Francois Dumont: Armenia, which has limited resources and
is largely isolated because of the closed borders with Turkey and
Azerbaijan, has to rely on those partners which have the capability and
the wish to effectively contribute to Armenia's security. The current
situation in the international relations is such that the United States
gives preference to Turkey at least merely due to what I call "the rule
of numbers" - Turkey has a population of 76 million, while Armenia,
together with Nagorno-Karabakh, has a population of three million.
The European Union, being an ally of the US, in 2005 started
negotiations with Turkey for Turkey's membership in the EU, or to be
more precise, for granting Turkey a status of a candidate country, with
all the financial privileges pertaining to it. But this situation is
ridiculous: Turkey does not recognize the sovereignty of one of the
EU members; neither does it guarantee the protection of the rights
of its minorities, which is a fundamental European value.
Thus, being unable to rely either on the US or on the EU, Armenia had
no other choice but to join the Russia-led Customs Union. Besides,
Moscow has paid for it by offering to provide gas to Armenia with
"friendly prices". At the same time however the Customs Union cannot
work miracles, for two reasons. First, the CU opens for Armenia a
smaller market compared to that of the EU with the population of 500
million; second, the economy of the CU member states is based more
on the exploitation of natural resources than on innovations. Having
said this, it must also be acknowledged that Russia, the country that
has founded the Customs Union, does after all provide a necessary
security umbrella for Armenia.
NC: Professor Dumont, thank you very much for the interesting
interview.
The interview was conducted by Nvard Chalikyan
http://www.panorama.am/en/interviews/2014/01/15/dumont/
18:46 15/01/2014 " INTERVIEWS
Panorama.am presents an interview with Professor of Demography at
the University of Paris IV-Sorbonne Gerard-Francois Dumont.
Nvard Chalikyan: Prof. Dumont, in your recent article titled
Nagorno-Karabakh: the geopolitics of a conflict without end you speak
about the origins of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. How do you assess
the fact that these historical realities are completely ignored in
the current conflict resolution process?
Gerard-Francois Dumont: The ignorance of the historical facts which
are at the heart of geopolitical conflicts is unfortunately quite
common. This is clearly seen in the conflicts currently taking place
in Sudan, Central Africa and even in Europe, where there is a marked
tension between Hungary and the European Union. The main reason of
the latter is that the treaty of Trianon, signed on 04 June 1920
in the aftermath of the World War I, was unjust. The truth is that
the principle of the inviolability of frontiers currently endorsed
by the international community results in complete neglect of the
causes and history of the formation of these frontiers.
Comparisons are not always appropriate, however, it is interesting to
compare the situations in the South Caucasus and Ukraine. The USSR,
having employed the principle of "divide and rule", in 1946 attached
to Ukraine Crimea, which gave Moscow access to the Black Sea and
then to the Mediterranean. This complicated the current geopolitical
situation of Ukraine, which is vividly seen from the fact that Crimea
was the only region which voted against the independence of Ukraine
in the referendum of 1991. Ceteris paribus, the USSR drew the borders
of Azerbaijan according to that same principle, a fact which is now
largely ignored. Similarly, the pogroms of Armenians in Baku in 1988
have also been ignored. But the neglect of historical facts always
has the same result - it makes the solution of the conflict harder
and fuels it even more.
NC: Considering the fact that Azerbaijan continues to pose
an existential threat to Nagorno-Karabakh today (given current
anti-Armenian policies, military rhetoric, etc.) do you think the
proposed Madrid Principles provide tangible security guarantees to the
people of the Nagorno-Karabakh against possible Azerbaijani aggression?
Gerard-Francois Dumont: Historically the principles are like
agreements and declarations. They have exactly as much importance
as the politicians give to them. Geopolitics is a game based on
power balance. No principle, however desirable it might be, can ever
guarantee the security of a people. Whether you are for or against
the Madrid Principles, they are only principles, the interpretation
of which can vary greatly depending on the protagonists, while their
implementation can be very different depending on the balance of
power. In other words, Nagorno-Karabakh must be ready for all the
possible developments. As a matter of fact, only the peace agreement
which will include security guarantees, as well as willingness to
preserve those, can guarantee the security.
NC: From purely geopolitical perspective is there a scenario that can
bring to a final solution of the conflict and to a long-term peace
in the region?
Gerard-Francois Dumont: History teaches us that conflicts are resolved
only when the immediate parties to the conflict really want to put
an end to it. Of course, international powers can contribute to
the solution of the conflict if they refrain from igniting it and
if they offer guarantees. The Minsk Group plays a useful role by
trying to appease the conflict and facilitate the dialogue. However,
it cannot solve the conflict, as past two decades have shown. The
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict can only be completely solved if Azerbaijan,
Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh find common ground and are equally eager
to resolve it.
NC: And what would you say about the role of democracy in the
resolution of this conflict?
Gerard-Francois Dumont: One of the factors that complicates the
resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is that it depends on the
situation between the parties to the conflict. It is a lot easier to
find a solution to those conflicts where the parties are democratic,
as peoples do not like being imprisoned within closed borders and they
eventually vote for those leaders who want the borders to be used
as a means of exchange and trade. Thus we can only wish democratic
progress to these countries.
NC: From the geopolitical perspective how do you assess the decision
of the Republic of Armenia to become a member of the Customs Union?
Could Armenia have possibly taken another rout being faced with the
choice between Russia and Europe?
Gerard-Francois Dumont: Armenia, which has limited resources and
is largely isolated because of the closed borders with Turkey and
Azerbaijan, has to rely on those partners which have the capability and
the wish to effectively contribute to Armenia's security. The current
situation in the international relations is such that the United States
gives preference to Turkey at least merely due to what I call "the rule
of numbers" - Turkey has a population of 76 million, while Armenia,
together with Nagorno-Karabakh, has a population of three million.
The European Union, being an ally of the US, in 2005 started
negotiations with Turkey for Turkey's membership in the EU, or to be
more precise, for granting Turkey a status of a candidate country, with
all the financial privileges pertaining to it. But this situation is
ridiculous: Turkey does not recognize the sovereignty of one of the
EU members; neither does it guarantee the protection of the rights
of its minorities, which is a fundamental European value.
Thus, being unable to rely either on the US or on the EU, Armenia had
no other choice but to join the Russia-led Customs Union. Besides,
Moscow has paid for it by offering to provide gas to Armenia with
"friendly prices". At the same time however the Customs Union cannot
work miracles, for two reasons. First, the CU opens for Armenia a
smaller market compared to that of the EU with the population of 500
million; second, the economy of the CU member states is based more
on the exploitation of natural resources than on innovations. Having
said this, it must also be acknowledged that Russia, the country that
has founded the Customs Union, does after all provide a necessary
security umbrella for Armenia.
NC: Professor Dumont, thank you very much for the interesting
interview.
The interview was conducted by Nvard Chalikyan
http://www.panorama.am/en/interviews/2014/01/15/dumont/