Tweet
The show must go on - Armenian expert on Minsk Group's role in
Karabakh settlement
14:30 - 25.01.14
In an interview with Tert.am, Director of the Caucasus Institute
Alexander Iskandaryan addressed the negotiations over
Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as Azerbaijan's recent act of sabotage on
the Line of Contact. The expert said he sees a specific political goal
behind the gun attack, but in the meantime, he ruled out the
possibility of war at the current stage.
Could any expectations rom the Armenian and Azerbaijani foreign
ministers' meeting be real against the backdrop of the [incidents] on
the Karabakh-Azerbaijan Line of Contact and the Armenian-Azerbaijani
border?
It isn't right to speak of each of the meetings separately, because
they do yield a certain result, i.e. - the general process. There is
the Minsk Group, and everything else around it is a settlement
process.
For me, however, it is obvious that the Minsk Group has nothing more
to do for resolving the conflict. Such a settlement is not possible at
present, at least in terms of the political prospects. And it isn't
possible for one simple reason, that is, the Armenian and Azerbaijani
positions are too far to be compatible. We are dealing with a zero sum
game, so to say.
So why then focus on the Minsk Group? The Minsk Group, which doesn't
manage to settle the conflict instead of the parities, exists for
other purposes. Let's recall, first of all, what the Azerbaijanis say:
`We are good, tolerant and ready for mutual concessions'. No one in
Armenia is obviously ready to speak of this.
Whereas, the Armenians say, `We are actually not against letting the
matter rest, in addition to seeking an official status for that'. And
that doesn't absolutely leave the Azerbaijanis satisfied. Hence, it is
clear to all that there is no platform for negotiations here. There is
nothing to speak of? What follows from here? Why does the Minsk Group
work? It works for three reasons.
First, it esnures a certain platform for conducting the talks: the
show must go on, as the English proverb says. The process must
continue, because what we know from the international experience is
that the conflicts, which involve channels of communication between
the sides, see a smoother process than those which do not.
Second, that channel has to be internationalized; it has to have an
international format. This is a room which requires the presence of
not only an Armenian and an Azerbaijani but also a Russian, French and
an American. It helps create certain frameworks making the process
international.
And third, that's actually what who were asking; the negotiation
process is a security format, a guarantee for maintaining the status
quo. And that's what all the three co-chairs are striving for. Of
course, I am not inclined to believe in what diplomats say; for them,
words are tools set in motion through verbal manners. Both the US and
Russia are working jointly to prevent a renewed war. That's the war
isn't resumed. So now, why does Azerbaijan release gunshots?
Are the gunshots or preconditions of a war?
To wage a war, it is important to have the the necessary resources and
preparedness, the necessary quantity of armament and people, a certain
balance of forces etc. There are no preconditions for resuming the war
now. To do so, it is at least necessary have 80 percent assurances
that you will win. The Azerbaijanis have zero confidence about chances
of winning. Besides, this conflict is unique in character. We do not
have peacekeepers, and the ceasefire was signed because the sides had
reached a certain balance. And it is being maintained because [the
ceasefire] continues.
The border incidents received almost no international response. What
do you think is the reason?
The mediators deal with the reality; they never consider the truth.
They aren't supposed to tell the truth. If they do so, they will be
ousted from the process. What they are supposed to do is to consider
both the Armenians and Azerbaijanis' interests by saying something.
When saying something to Azerbaijan, the international mediators, and
the sides in general, mean Armenia; and by saying things to Armenia,
the mean Azerbaijan. And to remain involved in the process, they must
do everything possible not to leave any of the parties strongly
offended. So this is why Armenia says the mediators are
pro-Azerbaijani, and Azerbaijan says vice versa - they are
pro-Armenians. And this is what has helped revive the Minsk process
which died several times before.
http://www.tert.am/en/news/2014/01/25/aleqsandr-iskandaryan1/
From: A. Papazian
Karabakh settlement
14:30 - 25.01.14
In an interview with Tert.am, Director of the Caucasus Institute
Alexander Iskandaryan addressed the negotiations over
Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as Azerbaijan's recent act of sabotage on
the Line of Contact. The expert said he sees a specific political goal
behind the gun attack, but in the meantime, he ruled out the
possibility of war at the current stage.
Could any expectations rom the Armenian and Azerbaijani foreign
ministers' meeting be real against the backdrop of the [incidents] on
the Karabakh-Azerbaijan Line of Contact and the Armenian-Azerbaijani
border?
It isn't right to speak of each of the meetings separately, because
they do yield a certain result, i.e. - the general process. There is
the Minsk Group, and everything else around it is a settlement
process.
For me, however, it is obvious that the Minsk Group has nothing more
to do for resolving the conflict. Such a settlement is not possible at
present, at least in terms of the political prospects. And it isn't
possible for one simple reason, that is, the Armenian and Azerbaijani
positions are too far to be compatible. We are dealing with a zero sum
game, so to say.
So why then focus on the Minsk Group? The Minsk Group, which doesn't
manage to settle the conflict instead of the parities, exists for
other purposes. Let's recall, first of all, what the Azerbaijanis say:
`We are good, tolerant and ready for mutual concessions'. No one in
Armenia is obviously ready to speak of this.
Whereas, the Armenians say, `We are actually not against letting the
matter rest, in addition to seeking an official status for that'. And
that doesn't absolutely leave the Azerbaijanis satisfied. Hence, it is
clear to all that there is no platform for negotiations here. There is
nothing to speak of? What follows from here? Why does the Minsk Group
work? It works for three reasons.
First, it esnures a certain platform for conducting the talks: the
show must go on, as the English proverb says. The process must
continue, because what we know from the international experience is
that the conflicts, which involve channels of communication between
the sides, see a smoother process than those which do not.
Second, that channel has to be internationalized; it has to have an
international format. This is a room which requires the presence of
not only an Armenian and an Azerbaijani but also a Russian, French and
an American. It helps create certain frameworks making the process
international.
And third, that's actually what who were asking; the negotiation
process is a security format, a guarantee for maintaining the status
quo. And that's what all the three co-chairs are striving for. Of
course, I am not inclined to believe in what diplomats say; for them,
words are tools set in motion through verbal manners. Both the US and
Russia are working jointly to prevent a renewed war. That's the war
isn't resumed. So now, why does Azerbaijan release gunshots?
Are the gunshots or preconditions of a war?
To wage a war, it is important to have the the necessary resources and
preparedness, the necessary quantity of armament and people, a certain
balance of forces etc. There are no preconditions for resuming the war
now. To do so, it is at least necessary have 80 percent assurances
that you will win. The Azerbaijanis have zero confidence about chances
of winning. Besides, this conflict is unique in character. We do not
have peacekeepers, and the ceasefire was signed because the sides had
reached a certain balance. And it is being maintained because [the
ceasefire] continues.
The border incidents received almost no international response. What
do you think is the reason?
The mediators deal with the reality; they never consider the truth.
They aren't supposed to tell the truth. If they do so, they will be
ousted from the process. What they are supposed to do is to consider
both the Armenians and Azerbaijanis' interests by saying something.
When saying something to Azerbaijan, the international mediators, and
the sides in general, mean Armenia; and by saying things to Armenia,
the mean Azerbaijan. And to remain involved in the process, they must
do everything possible not to leave any of the parties strongly
offended. So this is why Armenia says the mediators are
pro-Azerbaijani, and Azerbaijan says vice versa - they are
pro-Armenians. And this is what has helped revive the Minsk process
which died several times before.
http://www.tert.am/en/news/2014/01/25/aleqsandr-iskandaryan1/
From: A. Papazian