Regnum, Russia
April 23 2006
Is Azerbaijan getting ready to attack Armenia? Nagorno Karabakh press
digest
Is Azerbaijan getting ready to attack Armenia?
“The Azeri army will attack Armenia in a few days,” reports Media
Forum (Azerbaijan), with reference to (Turkey). The
web-site says that “this information has been provided by diplomatic
sources.” “The Azeri authorities have been seriously preparing for
liberating Karabakh and have already decided to start a war.” The
intensive contacts between the US and Azerbaijan are also due to the
forthcoming military operation in Karabakh. Referring to diplomatic
sources, says that US President George Bush will
receive Azeri representatives on April 20 and notes that Bush
approves of Azerbaijan’s plans to start a war in Karabakh. The
web-site also says that the military operation in Karabakh may impact
the world oil prices. (PanARMENIAN.Net)
“The vanguard of our army, our officers are fully prepared for war.
But we still continue training them to make them even more
professional,” says the director of the Training Center of the Azeri
Defense Ministry, Maj. Gen. Lankaran Aliyev. He says that “the
Armenian army is far behind the Azeri one in both psychological and
physical training.” “The Armenians rely on the Russian base in their
country. That’s why their army is much weaker than ours,” says
Aliyev. He notes that the Azeri youth have shown increasing interest
in military service in the last years. They come to the army
prepared. “We have a normal base for training our soldiers in line
with the NATO standards. Our officers are much better trained than
the Armenian ones. But I don’t think that this is enough. We have yet
much to do to make our officers even more efficient,” says Aliyev.
(APA)
The director of the “Peace, Democracy and Culture”
Research-Analytical Center, military and conflict expert, veteran of
the Afghani and Karabakh wars Rauf Rajabov gives an interview to
Day.Az (abridged).
“In early 2006 the Azeri Government set up the Defense Industry
Ministry and budgeted $600 mln for the army. Is the army having
plenty of problems – from bullying and corruption to lack of military
doctrine – ready to ‘digest’ such big money?
The analysis of the Azeri army’s non-combat losses of the last few
months has shown that no real reforms are being held in our defense
ministry. But this is a kind of taboo in Azerbaijan. The same is for
the use of budgetary assignments. I would like to note from the very
beginning that I am talking about ordinary military units rather than
a few elite and well trained groups.
What enemy will our army face if the war resumes?
The Armenian army has almost 61,000 servicemen (and 300,000-strong
mobilization reserve). Jan 1 2001 Yerevan declared to have 102 tanks,
204 infantry fighting vehicles, including 677 units not subject to
the TCAFE restrictions (Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe
– REGNUM), 225 122-mm and more guns, 8 planes and 12 helicopters, 32
‘Scad’ surface-to-surface ballistic missile units. As of today, the
land forces of Armenia have 4 motorized brigades, 10 infantry
regiments, 1 artillery brigade, 2 anti-aircraft brigades. The period
of deployment of the uniquely strong Russian base in Gyumri is 25
years, but can be prolonged for an indefinite time. The duty of the
Russians is to guard the borders with Turkey and Iran and to act
within the CIS United Air Defense System. Besides ordinary motorized
infantry, 90 tanks, 200 armored vehicles and 100 guns, the base has
25 MiG-29 fighters, 20 troop carriers and 4 S-300V anti-aircraft
missile systems. No other Russian division this kind of equipment.
The personnel is 3,500 people, with many of them ethnic Armenians
with Russian citizenship. The headquarters of the 102nd base are in
the Big Fortress, built by Cossacks in 1828.
And what armed forces does the so-called ‘NKR’ have?
Nagorno Karabakh is not a subject of the international law and,
consequently, is not a member of the Treaty on Conventional Armed
Forces in Europe. Hence, the territory of the Karabakh region is not
inspected by international experts. Some analysts say that Nagorno
Karabakh has 20,000 men in active troops, 60,000 men in reserve and
4,000 men in various security services. It also has 316 tanks (300
more ‘hidden’), 324 infantry fighting vehicles, 322 122-mm and more
caliber guns, 44 multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS) and modernized
S-123 and S-75 anti aircraft units. The whole 250-km contact line is
a two-echelon field work. Also there, are 30,000 Armenian servicemen.
The hardware and arms deployed in Karabakh is by no means subject to
the TCAFE. This does not mean, however, that we should tremble before
the enemy. No, we simply should know about it as much as possible and
think in real categories: facile optimism has not yet given anybody
any good…” (Day.Az)
PanARMENIAN.Net has interviewed First Vice President of the Academy
of Geopolitical Studies, Colonel General, Doctor of Historical
Sciences Leonid Ivashov.
How serious are Azerbaijan’s statements on readiness to resumption of
hostilities on the Karabakh front?
Security issues should always be treated seriously. Given the
complexity of the Nagorno Karabakh problem, security is the main task
of the state and the major responsibility of the President and the
Government. Only via military balance it’s possible to preserve
political settlement. The threat of an armed conflict and resumption
of hostilities is quite real. Keeping the situation within a
political settlement is possible only via balance of military
potentials. Domination of military force of one of the parties can
result in a new bloodshed.
Which is Russia’s policy towards settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh
conflict?
The present Russian leadership lacks a precise strategy on the South
Caucasus. In relations with Azerbaijan and Armenia, Russia tries to
keep the balance of friendly interaction. This line has helped to
maintain peace in Karabakh for many years already.
It seems lately that Russia is trying to strengthen its position in
the South Caucasus by resorting to not very popular means. Is this
true?
The reasonable part of the Russian leadership is trying to maintain
its presence and influence in the Caucasus. It’s important for Russia
to prevent destabilization in the North Caucasus, deployment of NATO
military bases and projection of military force inland. In my
opinion, Armenia is Russia’s foothold in the South Caucasus. At the
same time, it is vitally important for Armenia to have allied
relations with Russia. If Armenia relies on promises made by the
West, it will lose its state system and independence.
Won’t Georgia’s and Azerbaijan’s possible escape from Russia’s
influence leave Armenia isolated in its hope for the good will of
Russia, who may well act the same way it did in 1921 by concluding an
alliance with Ataturk?
Armenia has the right to establish relations with whoever it wants.
But if it conflicts with Russia’s interests, Moscow can transform
cooperation into the level of mutually beneficial relations without
any political or economic preferences. However, such situation will
conflict with Armenia’s national interests and will result in the
isolation of the republic and even in its collapse. A large Armenian
Diaspora lives in Russia. I think it could make a great contribution
to the development of the Russian-Armenian allied relations.”
(PanARMENIAN.Net)
If one cocks an ear to what the Kremlin has been saying recently, one
will see that new war is not the worst way for Russia: war is better
for that country than the peace proposed by the West, says 525th
Daily in response to General Ivashov’s interview. It should also be
noted that, unlike his US and French colleagues, the Russian co-chair
of the OSCE MG Yuri Merzlyakov makes no demonstrative calls for
reconciliation. “In this light, the statements of General Ivashov,
who was the chief of Russia’s general staff before 2001, may well be
taken as Moscow’s attitude to this problem. Besides, the organization
Ivashov heads now is one of the leading security studies centers in
Russia.”
The most acceptable way for Azerbaijan to solve the Karabakh problem
is war, say 83% of the visitors of the web-site of Times.az
independent daily. Apr 14 the daily summed up the results of its
one-month on-line voting. 14.7% of the visitors hope for diplomatic
solution and only 2.2% don’t care at all. (Noyan Tapan)
The mediators’ efforts
“War will be the worst scenario for the parties to the Karabakh
conflict. War is new deaths, new refugees, money spent in vain
instead of being spent on development. War will solve nothing.
However it ends, the sides will find themselves in pre-war situation
again,” De Facto reports the French co-chair of the OSCE MG Bernard
Fassier as saying in Yerevan on April 14.
“Under no circumstances can war be a solution. That’s why we
officially call on the sides to look to the future, to build peace
despite past tragedies. One can’t drive a car by constantly looking
into the backward mirror. He will certainly get into accident. You
should not keep remembering who was the first who started the war,
who was the first in history who settled down in Karabakh…,” says
Fassier. “After Rambouillet the negotiating process has not died. It
is alive.” Speaking metaphorically, the sides and the mediators came
to Rambouillet with a half-full glass and just failed to fill it a
bit more. Of course, the mediators understood that they would not be
able to fill the glass at once, but they hoped to add a bit to its
content. They failed. But the half-full glass was not overturned. And
so, the negotiating process is continued,” says Fassier. He says that
the OSCE MG US co-chair Steven Mann will visit the region after the
Easter and he too may visit Yerevan and Baku in late Apr-early May.
“All these visits are not private but are coordinated with the
capitals of the co-chair states. On April 15, I will go to Moscow to
meet not only with my Russian colleague Yuri Merzlyakov but also with
Russian Deputy Defense Minister Karasin, who deals with the Karabakh
problem,” says Fassier. Besides, in early May the OSCE MG co-chairs
will hold a consultation in Moscow, after which they will visit the
region all together. This may well be followed by new meetings. The
objective of these visits is to pave the way for a new meeting of the
Armenian and Azeri presidents. “I can’t give the date and venue of
that meeting. Nothing is clear yet. We hope that we will be able to
organize it in June-July. Everything depends on what the presidents
will agree to. The presidents of the co-chair countries believe that
– the sooner the better,” says Fassier.
“I would like to say that if we hope to organize a new meeting of the
presidents, this means that we are ready to present additional ideas
for them to enrich, enlarge and develop the principles we have
already worked on. I also mean some new ideas, but not new talks or a
new format. The format of the talks is and will be the OSCE MG,
represented by the US, France and Russia. But, at the same time, this
format is being adapted. That is, we are no longer satisfied with
joint visits and mission. We are firmly resolved to use any occasion
for resolving the conflict. For example, we used the visits of
Oskanyan and Mamedyarov (Armenian and Azeri FMs – REGNUM) to Moscow
and Washington. Some people may think that we have changed the
format. No. We have just adapted of the content of the format,” says
Fassier.
Commenting on Fassier’s speech, the expert of the Armenian Center for
National and International Studies Stepan Safaryan says to A1+ that
in this format the Karabakh peace process is doomed to failure, and
the co-chairs perfectly know that. “Simply, they want to present the
final picture of failure so the world community apply serious
measures against the presidents. The world community sees that the
presidents are not willing to resolve the conflict and are just
making empty statements, while the co-chairs are trying to give them
one more chance,” says Safaryan. He is sure that 2006 will be the
last such chance.
Radio Liberty reports the Russian and US co-chairs of the OSCE MG
Yuri Merzlyakov and Steven Mann to meet in Moscow on April 19. “He
(Mann) is going to the region firmly resolved and expecting serious
and fruitful meetings,” Merzlyakov says in an interview to RL. In
early May the OSCE MG co-chairs are visiting the region. If they
agree on a new meeting of the Armenian and Azeri presidents, will
this mean that the presidents have accepted the MG’s new proposals?
To this question Merzlyakov said: “No. Perhaps, after the meeting
part of the proposals will be accepted, and the rest left for
revision. All these issues should be discussed during the president’s
meeting.” RL reports that the MG has already told the presidents
about their new proposals. And whether they are acceptable or not
will become known after the co-chairs’ visit to the region. While the
Armenian and Azeri FMs will be in Moscow to attend the April 20
meeting of the CIS FMs, Merzlyakov will meet with Azeri FM Elmar
Mamedryarov and, probably, with Armenian FM Vardan Oskanyan. The
latter meeting is not certain as Oskanyan will stay in Moscow for a
very short time.
“It is early yet to speak about the MG’s new proposals for the
Karabakh conflict settlement. The proposals should first be grouped
and formulated so we can say something about them. We will express
our opinion only if a specific proposal is made,” the director of the
foreign relations department of the Azeri president’s staff Novruz
Mamedov says to APA. He believes that decisive are the positions of
the sides rather than of the co-chairs: “The sides should make some
changes in their positions, should take constructive stance and
serious steps for solving the problem.” Commenting on the statements
of the French co-chair Bernard Fassier that based on the last
proposals the sides can achieve 80% of what they want and of the
Russian co-chair Yuri Merzlyakov that if the sides get 50% of what
they claim, the co-chairs will be able to consider their mission
fulfilled, Mamedov says that the co-chairs’ proposals are based on
their personal views: “Even their views do not coincide. Our key task
is to liberate our occupied territories, to repatriate displaced
people and to ensure the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan in line
with the international law.”
Has Armenia changed its position on Nagorno Karabakh?
“Until recently we have said that the status of Nagorno Karabakh must
be finalized before Armenia starts discussing the elimination of the
conflict consequences: territories, refugees, security measures,”
Armenian FM Vardan Oskanyan said at the opening of the 8th meeting of
the EU-Armenia inter-parliamentary cooperation commission in Yerevan
April 18. He said that this position has changed: “If Azerbaijan
agrees that the Nagorno Karabakh people has a right to
self-determination – if not at once then, at least, in the future –
the Armenian side is ready already today to start discussing the
problems of territories, refugees and security.”
Oskanyan said that this is “a serious concession by the Armenian
side.” He said that the Azeri side has not yet reacted to this
proposal, and today it is necessary to work with the Azeris more so
“they take a step towards Armenians.” Commenting on one more serious
issue – the statements of Azerbaijan that the conflict may be
resolved by war, Oskanyan said: “If this conflict had a military
solution, it would have already been resolved. But there is no such
solution: there have already been two wars, and Armenians have won
both of them. But we do not consider themselves as victors. We have
won the battle, but the threat of war is still existent as Azerbaijan
continues making warlike declarations. We need peace.” Oskanyan urged
the Europeans to force the Azeris to stop their militarist rhetoric.
“They should be clearly told that nobody will allow them to start a
war against Armenia. This is very important, and I believe that the
European Parliament should be involved in this process. Azerbaijan
must understand that there is no other solution to the conflict than
peace.” (Azg)
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
www.hurhaber.com
www.hurhaber.com