Tweet
THREAT TO LIBERATED TERRITORIES
Hakob Badalyan, Political Commentator
Comments - 17 February 2015, 11:21
A few hours prior to the meeting with the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs
the foreign minister of Azerbaijan Elmar Mammedyarov announced
that the co-chairs must urge the Armenian side to withdraw from the
"occupied territories" not to violate the ceasefire. Mammedyarov said
there will not be violations of the ceasefire in that case. He said
the co-chairs should work on the principles of Madrid.
On the recent days "withdrawing from the territories" has been upheld
more frequently. The Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev announced
during the Munich Security Conference that Azerbaijan will not shoot
if the Armenians withdraw from the territories. Recently it has
been announced that the Turkish Prime Minister Davutoghlu announced
that Turkey will open the border if at least one region is returned
to Azerbaijan.
The Azerbaijani military expert Uzeyir Jafarov announced that return
of three territories to Azerbaijan is possible in the nearest future.
He highlighted Baku's readiness to join the Eurasian Union instead.
These rumors were preceded by interesting developments within the
Minsk Group. The co-chairs stated for the first time that Azerbaijan
violates the ceasefire but also called the Armenian side to take
steps towards alleviating tension.
Next, Azerbaijan admitted violating the ceasefire, and stated the
reason or the condition for refraining from violation. What was it?
Was Azerbaijan forced to make this confession or was it encouraged
by one of the co-chairs of the Minsk Group? It is hard to imagine
that after the established responsibility for the violation of the
ceasefire Baku would make such brazen confession and set out the
precondition had there been unanimity of approaches of the Minsk Group.
It is worth noting that in 2015 CSTO will organize a training
of peacekeepers in Armenia. Moscow has had a strategic goal of
stationing peacekeepers in Artsakh, at the Armenian-Azerbaijani
border. However, in order to have Baku agree to this option it must
get some territories. At the same time, Turkey will be able to start
a process of opening the Armenian-Turkish border, returning to the
Armenian-Turkish protocols, which will suspend the claiming tone of
Armenia ahead of the centenary.
This mechanism might be the reason why Baku is speaking about
withdrawal from territories, not core Artsakh because, perhaps,
Azerbaijan was promised that Artsakh will not be left under the
Armenian control, and CSTO peacekeepers will be stationed there.
Prior to leaving for Baku the American co-chair James Warlick twitted
that serious negotiation with the Azerbaijani government is expected.
If the visit of three co-chairs is concerned, the question is how
coordinated they are, what diverse messages they convey to the sides
during the joint visits. In this regard, it is hard to tell whether
the co-chairs are taking new messages to Baku that are beyond the
principles of Madrid or they are going to urge Baku to observe the
ceasefire without preconditions? Once they spoke and hushed Baku but
eventually Baku's behavior became even more brazen. It means that
one of the co-chairs winks to Baku when the others are hushing it.
On February 17 the co-chairs will arrive in Armenia from Baku. They are
visiting Armenia amid a political scramble when Serzh Sargsyan's tough
step is followed by crystallization of the non-governmental force.
So far the domestic debate has focused on domestic problems. A
consensus has been reached on foreign matters. What will happen
if Armenia is made to face the issue of handing one or several
territories? How will the government and the non-governmental forces
act, will they promote the scenario of stationing CSTO peacekeepers
in Artsakh or will the domestic opposition serve the interests of
Armenia, at least once, if exposed to such risk?
In this regard, in the non-governmental pole Ter-Petrosyan's approach
is known who considers return of territories a guarantee of security,
which is in line with Azerbaijan's claim. In addition, in 2007
Vardan Oskanyan of PAP accepted the principles of Madrid as basis
for negotiations where return of territories is stated.
Apparently, Armenia will again have to rely on the West-Iran alliance,
not the government or the opposition.
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/33642#sthash.DiDLdC8V.dpuf
Hakob Badalyan, Political Commentator
Comments - 17 February 2015, 11:21
A few hours prior to the meeting with the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs
the foreign minister of Azerbaijan Elmar Mammedyarov announced
that the co-chairs must urge the Armenian side to withdraw from the
"occupied territories" not to violate the ceasefire. Mammedyarov said
there will not be violations of the ceasefire in that case. He said
the co-chairs should work on the principles of Madrid.
On the recent days "withdrawing from the territories" has been upheld
more frequently. The Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev announced
during the Munich Security Conference that Azerbaijan will not shoot
if the Armenians withdraw from the territories. Recently it has
been announced that the Turkish Prime Minister Davutoghlu announced
that Turkey will open the border if at least one region is returned
to Azerbaijan.
The Azerbaijani military expert Uzeyir Jafarov announced that return
of three territories to Azerbaijan is possible in the nearest future.
He highlighted Baku's readiness to join the Eurasian Union instead.
These rumors were preceded by interesting developments within the
Minsk Group. The co-chairs stated for the first time that Azerbaijan
violates the ceasefire but also called the Armenian side to take
steps towards alleviating tension.
Next, Azerbaijan admitted violating the ceasefire, and stated the
reason or the condition for refraining from violation. What was it?
Was Azerbaijan forced to make this confession or was it encouraged
by one of the co-chairs of the Minsk Group? It is hard to imagine
that after the established responsibility for the violation of the
ceasefire Baku would make such brazen confession and set out the
precondition had there been unanimity of approaches of the Minsk Group.
It is worth noting that in 2015 CSTO will organize a training
of peacekeepers in Armenia. Moscow has had a strategic goal of
stationing peacekeepers in Artsakh, at the Armenian-Azerbaijani
border. However, in order to have Baku agree to this option it must
get some territories. At the same time, Turkey will be able to start
a process of opening the Armenian-Turkish border, returning to the
Armenian-Turkish protocols, which will suspend the claiming tone of
Armenia ahead of the centenary.
This mechanism might be the reason why Baku is speaking about
withdrawal from territories, not core Artsakh because, perhaps,
Azerbaijan was promised that Artsakh will not be left under the
Armenian control, and CSTO peacekeepers will be stationed there.
Prior to leaving for Baku the American co-chair James Warlick twitted
that serious negotiation with the Azerbaijani government is expected.
If the visit of three co-chairs is concerned, the question is how
coordinated they are, what diverse messages they convey to the sides
during the joint visits. In this regard, it is hard to tell whether
the co-chairs are taking new messages to Baku that are beyond the
principles of Madrid or they are going to urge Baku to observe the
ceasefire without preconditions? Once they spoke and hushed Baku but
eventually Baku's behavior became even more brazen. It means that
one of the co-chairs winks to Baku when the others are hushing it.
On February 17 the co-chairs will arrive in Armenia from Baku. They are
visiting Armenia amid a political scramble when Serzh Sargsyan's tough
step is followed by crystallization of the non-governmental force.
So far the domestic debate has focused on domestic problems. A
consensus has been reached on foreign matters. What will happen
if Armenia is made to face the issue of handing one or several
territories? How will the government and the non-governmental forces
act, will they promote the scenario of stationing CSTO peacekeepers
in Artsakh or will the domestic opposition serve the interests of
Armenia, at least once, if exposed to such risk?
In this regard, in the non-governmental pole Ter-Petrosyan's approach
is known who considers return of territories a guarantee of security,
which is in line with Azerbaijan's claim. In addition, in 2007
Vardan Oskanyan of PAP accepted the principles of Madrid as basis
for negotiations where return of territories is stated.
Apparently, Armenia will again have to rely on the West-Iran alliance,
not the government or the opposition.
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/33642#sthash.DiDLdC8V.dpuf