Tweet
THERE ARE NO MEDIATORS TO ARTSAKH
Hakob Badalyan, Political Commentator
Comments - 24 October 2014, 00:14
The German foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier has announced in
Baku that Germany is looking forward to the Sargsyan-Aliyev meeting
in Paris which is initiated by the French president Francois Hollande.
Is Germany looking forward to the failure or success of the meeting in
France? In addition, it should be clarified what is failure and what
is success. Perhaps, it is not realistic. However, in the conflict
over Artsakh success is not a breakthrough but maintenance of the
regional status quo.
At least, it will be success for those who are interested in
stability in the Caucasus because with review of the status quo the
new stage of instability will start in the Caucasus. If status quo in
Artsakh changes, it will mark a new stage of regional instability. In
addition, there is a worse scenario - the change may be instigated
through instability.
Consequently, "futility" may be a successful outcome of the meeting
in Paris. If Germany is interested in regional stability, it should
be looking forward to maintenance of the status quo through Hollande's
initiative.
Germany's interest is interesting because Berlin does not seem to
be an active participant of the conflict over Artsakh or other key
processes in the region. In fact, these processes have been tightly
blocked by the OSCE Minsk Group which, dealing de jure with the issue
of Artsakh, was de facto a closed club of the Caucasus.
A few months ago France questioned the members of this club. The
French ambassador to Armenia Henri Renault announced that supply of
arms to the conflict sides does not match France's principles and
visions of a conflict mediator. The ambassador's addressee was Russia,
and France was actually questioning Russia's role of mediator.
Can France come up with an initiative to change the composition of the
mediators trying to promote the idea of participation of Germany? And
will Germany look forward to seeing what the presidents of Armenia
and Azerbaijan will say to this idea?
However, the issue seems to be broader. The question is that the
mediation mission is no longer actual in the process of settlement
of the Karabakh conflict. In fact, no such mission exists. What is
to be mediated if it is clear that the conflict over Artsakh as such
does not exist, it was resolved by the Armenian victory in the first
war in Artsakh. Now the regional and geopolitical situation is in
line with the interests of some great powers and is not in line with
the interests of the other great powers. In other words, the battle,
the adversity, the competition has gone far beyond a certain object
and fits the logic of geopolitical competition.
On the other hand, it has always been the case simply in the period
of collapse of the USSR, with an unviable and disorganized USSR,
then Russia, the West, namely the North-Atlantic community resolved
the problem of Artsakh or rather did not hinder achievement of
such a solution that was in line with the security interests and
strategic prospects of the North-Atlantic community. In other words,
as the USSR, then Russia were dissolving and weakening, the issue was
getting closer to its solution, and notably the Armenian victory was
getting closer as the Soviet-Russian pole was weakening and deepening.
Afterwards, that pole started pulling itself together and making
geopolitical claims, which caused an escalation of the issue of
Artsakh and defrost of issue of revision of the status quo because
obviously it does not stem from Russia's interests. Currently this
issue is almost vital for Russia, and review of the status quo is the
only guarantee of keeping the current geopolitical front for Moscow.
This is the issue, and in reality there is no mediation process. There
is a geopolitical process, and Germany is trying to get involved.
Sooner or later Berlin will have such ambitions, considering the
growing political role of this country in Europe through economic
resources.
The problem, however, is considering the special relationship between
Berlin and Moscow, the score of the geopolitical game of the Caucasus
which 2:1 for the North-Atlantic community, i.e. the outcome of the
first war in Artsakh which can become a draw, which will certainly
favor the approach of review of the status quo.
Consequently, one should hope that the meeting in Paris will not meet
up to Germany's expectations because Germany can have a constructive
role for the stability in the Caucasus. There is no need to get
closer. It is already crowded there, and there will be a jam.
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/33133#sthash.FNtFIt14.dpuf
Hakob Badalyan, Political Commentator
Comments - 24 October 2014, 00:14
The German foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier has announced in
Baku that Germany is looking forward to the Sargsyan-Aliyev meeting
in Paris which is initiated by the French president Francois Hollande.
Is Germany looking forward to the failure or success of the meeting in
France? In addition, it should be clarified what is failure and what
is success. Perhaps, it is not realistic. However, in the conflict
over Artsakh success is not a breakthrough but maintenance of the
regional status quo.
At least, it will be success for those who are interested in
stability in the Caucasus because with review of the status quo the
new stage of instability will start in the Caucasus. If status quo in
Artsakh changes, it will mark a new stage of regional instability. In
addition, there is a worse scenario - the change may be instigated
through instability.
Consequently, "futility" may be a successful outcome of the meeting
in Paris. If Germany is interested in regional stability, it should
be looking forward to maintenance of the status quo through Hollande's
initiative.
Germany's interest is interesting because Berlin does not seem to
be an active participant of the conflict over Artsakh or other key
processes in the region. In fact, these processes have been tightly
blocked by the OSCE Minsk Group which, dealing de jure with the issue
of Artsakh, was de facto a closed club of the Caucasus.
A few months ago France questioned the members of this club. The
French ambassador to Armenia Henri Renault announced that supply of
arms to the conflict sides does not match France's principles and
visions of a conflict mediator. The ambassador's addressee was Russia,
and France was actually questioning Russia's role of mediator.
Can France come up with an initiative to change the composition of the
mediators trying to promote the idea of participation of Germany? And
will Germany look forward to seeing what the presidents of Armenia
and Azerbaijan will say to this idea?
However, the issue seems to be broader. The question is that the
mediation mission is no longer actual in the process of settlement
of the Karabakh conflict. In fact, no such mission exists. What is
to be mediated if it is clear that the conflict over Artsakh as such
does not exist, it was resolved by the Armenian victory in the first
war in Artsakh. Now the regional and geopolitical situation is in
line with the interests of some great powers and is not in line with
the interests of the other great powers. In other words, the battle,
the adversity, the competition has gone far beyond a certain object
and fits the logic of geopolitical competition.
On the other hand, it has always been the case simply in the period
of collapse of the USSR, with an unviable and disorganized USSR,
then Russia, the West, namely the North-Atlantic community resolved
the problem of Artsakh or rather did not hinder achievement of
such a solution that was in line with the security interests and
strategic prospects of the North-Atlantic community. In other words,
as the USSR, then Russia were dissolving and weakening, the issue was
getting closer to its solution, and notably the Armenian victory was
getting closer as the Soviet-Russian pole was weakening and deepening.
Afterwards, that pole started pulling itself together and making
geopolitical claims, which caused an escalation of the issue of
Artsakh and defrost of issue of revision of the status quo because
obviously it does not stem from Russia's interests. Currently this
issue is almost vital for Russia, and review of the status quo is the
only guarantee of keeping the current geopolitical front for Moscow.
This is the issue, and in reality there is no mediation process. There
is a geopolitical process, and Germany is trying to get involved.
Sooner or later Berlin will have such ambitions, considering the
growing political role of this country in Europe through economic
resources.
The problem, however, is considering the special relationship between
Berlin and Moscow, the score of the geopolitical game of the Caucasus
which 2:1 for the North-Atlantic community, i.e. the outcome of the
first war in Artsakh which can become a draw, which will certainly
favor the approach of review of the status quo.
Consequently, one should hope that the meeting in Paris will not meet
up to Germany's expectations because Germany can have a constructive
role for the stability in the Caucasus. There is no need to get
closer. It is already crowded there, and there will be a jam.
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/33133#sthash.FNtFIt14.dpuf