Tweet
NAGORNO-KARABAKH CONFLICT FREEZE
Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
July 18 2014
18 July 2014 - 2:07pm
Yekaterina Tesemnikova, exclusively for Vestnik Kavkaza
Only a scoffer could doubt the necessity of an early settlement of
the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Reasonable people
understand that a bad peace is better than a good war. However,
sometimes we can see in the mass media that some forces benefit
from the conflict being frozen, even though it is difficult to call
the Karabakh conflict "frozen" - fire-fights continue, saboteurs or
"saboteurs" are captured, and people die.
We have many times heard that the status quo in the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict is beneficial for Moscow, which artificially reinforces
the situation in order to control the political elites of Armenia
and Azerbaijan.
However, it is more about some fixation of the political reality
till a compromise decision which would satisfy either Baku or Yerevan
appears or the balance of forces is broken and one of the sides gets
a military or diplomatic victory.
A "thaw" of the conflict would be beneficial for Moscow, if it means
a change of the settlement format. In the context of the Ukrainian
events, Moscow hints at attempts by its opponents to destabilize the
situation in the South Caucasus and the North Caucasus in the future.
This year is the 20th anniversary of the signing of the Bishkek
Protocol on a ceasefire between Azerbaijan and Armenia.
In January Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated: "The main
thing is that the sides should agree on the principles which will be
a basis for the settlement. We cannot do this work for them. Together
with America and France we encourage both sides, we are ready to
present ideas for consideration by Baku and Yerevan. But the last word
is theirs." And in June during his visit to Baku Lavrov called for
the process to be sped up: "The sooner we agree on practical steps
which would improve the situation and shift to a stable settlement,
the better it will be for Armenia, Azerbaijan, and the whole Caucasus
region."
The Karabakh issue is the reason for the postponement of signing
documents on Armenia's accession to the Eurasian Economic Union.
According to Lavrov, Nagorno-Karabakh "is a subject of international
talks which are being provided, according to principles which are
agreed on by the sides. Armenia has already stated it will participate
in the WTO within borders which are recognized by the UN, and that
it doesn't claim any other borders. The same concerns the Eurasian
Economic Union."
The position by Moscow caused a growth of anti-Russian attitudes in
Armenia; they are easily stirred up in the context of the difficult
socio-economic situation. Yerevan always expects more from Moscow, but
it is difficult for Russia, which has no common border with Armenia,
to provide Yerevan's security without serious financial expenditure.
So a settlement of the Karabakh problem would enable Moscow to spend
fewer resources on Gyumri, where the Russian military base is situated.
As for Nagorno-Karabakh itself, the status quo in the conflict is the
main obstacle for reconstruction of its infrastructure. According to
certain data, Armenia, which controls its own territory, is placed
only 115th in the world according to GDP and purchasing power parity.
A settlement of the conflict would eliminate Armenia's economic
isolation and revive its direct economic relations with Azerbaijan.
And building normal relations with the leading country of the region,
Azerbaijan, is beneficial both to Moscow and Yerevan.
Baku considers the problem categorically: "A vague settlement of the
issue can be only a stage," Ilham Aliyev says. "The Armenian people
could live in a status of high autonomy in the Azerbaijani state. We
offer this and the approach is based on the most positive experience
in the world and Europe."
http://vestnikkavkaza.net/articles/politics/57873.html
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
July 18 2014
18 July 2014 - 2:07pm
Yekaterina Tesemnikova, exclusively for Vestnik Kavkaza
Only a scoffer could doubt the necessity of an early settlement of
the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Reasonable people
understand that a bad peace is better than a good war. However,
sometimes we can see in the mass media that some forces benefit
from the conflict being frozen, even though it is difficult to call
the Karabakh conflict "frozen" - fire-fights continue, saboteurs or
"saboteurs" are captured, and people die.
We have many times heard that the status quo in the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict is beneficial for Moscow, which artificially reinforces
the situation in order to control the political elites of Armenia
and Azerbaijan.
However, it is more about some fixation of the political reality
till a compromise decision which would satisfy either Baku or Yerevan
appears or the balance of forces is broken and one of the sides gets
a military or diplomatic victory.
A "thaw" of the conflict would be beneficial for Moscow, if it means
a change of the settlement format. In the context of the Ukrainian
events, Moscow hints at attempts by its opponents to destabilize the
situation in the South Caucasus and the North Caucasus in the future.
This year is the 20th anniversary of the signing of the Bishkek
Protocol on a ceasefire between Azerbaijan and Armenia.
In January Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated: "The main
thing is that the sides should agree on the principles which will be
a basis for the settlement. We cannot do this work for them. Together
with America and France we encourage both sides, we are ready to
present ideas for consideration by Baku and Yerevan. But the last word
is theirs." And in June during his visit to Baku Lavrov called for
the process to be sped up: "The sooner we agree on practical steps
which would improve the situation and shift to a stable settlement,
the better it will be for Armenia, Azerbaijan, and the whole Caucasus
region."
The Karabakh issue is the reason for the postponement of signing
documents on Armenia's accession to the Eurasian Economic Union.
According to Lavrov, Nagorno-Karabakh "is a subject of international
talks which are being provided, according to principles which are
agreed on by the sides. Armenia has already stated it will participate
in the WTO within borders which are recognized by the UN, and that
it doesn't claim any other borders. The same concerns the Eurasian
Economic Union."
The position by Moscow caused a growth of anti-Russian attitudes in
Armenia; they are easily stirred up in the context of the difficult
socio-economic situation. Yerevan always expects more from Moscow, but
it is difficult for Russia, which has no common border with Armenia,
to provide Yerevan's security without serious financial expenditure.
So a settlement of the Karabakh problem would enable Moscow to spend
fewer resources on Gyumri, where the Russian military base is situated.
As for Nagorno-Karabakh itself, the status quo in the conflict is the
main obstacle for reconstruction of its infrastructure. According to
certain data, Armenia, which controls its own territory, is placed
only 115th in the world according to GDP and purchasing power parity.
A settlement of the conflict would eliminate Armenia's economic
isolation and revive its direct economic relations with Azerbaijan.
And building normal relations with the leading country of the region,
Azerbaijan, is beneficial both to Moscow and Yerevan.
Baku considers the problem categorically: "A vague settlement of the
issue can be only a stage," Ilham Aliyev says. "The Armenian people
could live in a status of high autonomy in the Azerbaijani state. We
offer this and the approach is based on the most positive experience
in the world and Europe."
http://vestnikkavkaza.net/articles/politics/57873.html
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress