Armenian agency warns foreign states not to indulge Azeri president
Mediamax news agency, Yerevan
6 Nov 04
An Armenian news agency has warned foreign powers not to indulge the
Azerbaijani president whom it accused of shutting “the half-open
window of possibilities in the process of a Karabakh settlement”. In
its weekly analysis, Mediamax said that the talks were in “a state of
full uncertainty” as Ilham Aliyev “interprets an indulgent attitude
to himself on the part of foreign powers purely as a good opportunity
to delay the beginning of a real dialogue”. The agency called on the
mediating states to “change their tactics and treat each party to the
conflict equally”. The following is an excerpt from report in English
by Armenian news agency Mediamax; subheadings have been inserted
editorially:
The recent developments around the Nagornyy Karabakh peace process
testify to the fact that despite great expectations the Armenian and
Azerbaijani presidents’ meeting in Astana on 15 September has not
become a “breakthrough” in the peace process.
According to statements from the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairmen, after
the talks in the capital of Kazakhstan the presidents took a
“time-out”, which as the mediators hoped, would finish in early
November. However, today we, vice versa, witness the sides’ return to
the situation, which has been observed since Heydar Aliyev’s death
till this spring – the absence of negotiating process accompanied by
the sides’ mutual accusations.
The optimistic picture formed after President Robert Kocharyan and
President Ilham Aliyev’s meeting in Astana, began going bad already in
early October, when the Azerbaijani president gave an interview to
Reuters, where he, in particular, called Armenia an “aggressor
country”. In fact, Ilham Aliyev did not say anything new – Azerbaijani
leaders have been using this cliche over the last 10 years. However,
the reaction of official Yerevan, which until now has expressed
restrained optimism in relation to the situation in the negotiating
process formed after several round of talks between the Armenian and
Azerbaijani foreign ministers and the meeting in Astana, turned out to
be rather harsh.
“Azerbaijan reaps the fruits of the military aggression unleashed by
it and is the hostage of the colonial policy pursued in relation to
Nagornyy Karabakh,” the Armenian Foreign Ministry’s spokesman, Gamlet
Gasparyan, said on 8 October.
Some days later, Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan also
commented on Ilham Aliyev’s statement, saying that “Azerbaijani
President Ilham Aliyev has chosen a wrong direction and wrong theme.”
Oskanyan noted that such harsh-worded statements can put Ilham Aliyev
in a difficult situation and complicate his ability to make
compromises without which the settlement of the Karabakh problem is
impossible. The Armenian foreign minister said that commenting on the
negotiating process, Yerevan’s representatives unambiguously state the
impossibility of Nagornyy Karabakh’s existence within Azerbaijan. “In
all other issues we behave quite carefully and do not enter into
polemics,” Oskanyan stressed.
Passage omitted: more recap of mutual accusations
Baku shuts “window of possibilities”, paper says
>From this moment it became obvious that the hopes aroused by the
Astana meeting will remain unrealized, at least, in the short-term
perspective. The Armenian leaders have repeatedly stated that they
refused the plan of land swap, which had been for some time discussed
at talks with Heydar Aliyev. The fact that official Baku decided to
return to this theme just on the eve of the 5th anniversary of the
terrorist act in the Armenian parliament testifies to the fact that
Azerbaijan has made up its mind to shut the half-open “window of
possibilities” in the process of the Karabakh settlement. And the
statement made by Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov on 26
October only proved this.
Elmar Mammadyarov said that “Baku is waiting for an answer from
Yerevan regarding the continuation of the process on a settlement of
the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict”. “We would like the talks, the
exchange of opinion and the conclusions that were reached in certain
spheres to be continued,” the Azerbaijani foreign minister said and
stressed that all the talks are aimed at Armenia’s liberating the
seven occupied regions around Nagornyy Karabakh.
“We have got no answer concerning this either from Yerevan or from the
OSCE Minsk Group co-chairmen, who, as the Azerbaijani side thinks,
should work more actively,” Elmar Mammadyarov said.
In reply, the Armenian Foreign Ministry’s spokesman, Gamlet Gasparyan,
said that “we have repeatedly said, and we will say so again, that
despite Azerbaijan’s wishes or statements, Armenia’s focus during
negotiations is on the issue of the status of Nagornyy Karabakh”.
“All other issues are tangential to the status issue and Armenia views
them only in the context of the future status of NKR,” the Armenian
Foreign Ministry’s official representative said. Commenting on another
statement by the Azerbaijani foreign minister that the Armenian
president took a time-out in Astana “to analyse the results of the
meetings held”, Gamlet Gasparyan said that both presidents agreed to
take time to consider the issues which were raised. “On the matters
which are of interest to Armenia, we have not yet received a response
from Azerbaijan,” the Armenian Foreign Ministry’s spokesman said.
Passage omitted: recaps talks under former president Levon
Ter-Petrosyan
UN General Assembly
The Azerbaijani leadership’s further steps demonstrated that Baku, as
before, decided to get involved in a propaganda campaign and not a
real settlement. In late October, the UN General Assembly committee
decided to recommend the inclusion of three additional items in the
assembly’s current agenda, including the proposal to consider the
situation in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan. The request was
contained in a letter from the permanent representative of
Azerbaijan. The French representative, speaking on behalf of the
co-chairmanship of the Minsk Group spoke against the discussion of the
issue suggested by Azerbaijan by the UN General Assembly. According to
him, the request for the introduction of a new item could have
negative consequences and harm efforts to bring about a just and
lasting settlement.
After the Azerbaijani initiative had been officially included in the
UN General Assembly’s agenda, the Russian Foreign Ministry said that
it “can hardly have a favourable influence on the negotiating
process”. “Russia abstained from voting like the other co-chairman of
the OSCE Minsk Group. We think that the initiative in parallel with
the OSCE consideration of this issue at the UN General Assembly can
hardly have a favourable influence on the negotiating process. The
results of the voting testify to the fact that most members of the
international community adhere to a similar position,” the Russian
Foreign Ministry noted.
The Russian cochairman of the OSCE Minsk Group Yuriy Merzliakov was
more open. In an interview with Baku’s ATV TV company he said: “The
discussion of the situation in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan
at the UN will seriously harm the peace process.”
“Full uncertainty” at Karabakh talks
Today we decided to repeat an excerpt from our analytical review of
January 31 2004, since as we have already mentioned at the beginning
of this article, the situation, unfortunately, returns to a state of
full uncertainty. Here is the excerpt, which, in our opinion, has not
only lost but, vice versa, has acquired additional actuality: “We
think that the representatives of the international community and
mediator-states, speaking about the need for ‘giving more time to
Ilham Aliyev’ make an essential mistake calling on to wait for the
moment when the new Azerbaijani leader ‘will get firmly established’
in his post. A question arises – will Ilham Aliyev be firmly
established in three months or half a year? Why not take into account
the fact that Aliyev’s position may vice versa become weaker because
of some reasons thus making the Karabakh settlement more unreal?”
If the mediator-states are really interested in settling the conflict,
they should change their tactics and treat each party to the conflict
equally. Otherwise, the solution will be dragged on as Ilham Aliyev,
to all appearances, interprets an indulgent attitude to himself on the
part of foreign powers purely as a good opportunity to delay the
beginning of a real dialogue.
Passage omitted: recaps the 2002 US ambassador to the OSCE appeal to
both presidents to continue talks
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress