ARMENIA WILL BE FORCED TO INVOLVE NAGORNY KARABAKH IN THE PEACE PROCESS
David Stepanyan
ArmInfo
2010-04-13 13:35:00
Mr. Zurabyan, within the frames of the Nuclear Security Summit to be
held in Washington on April 12-13, the Armenian president will meet
his US counterpart and the Turkish prime minister. What do you expect
from these meetings?
Naturally, any of the parties mentioned by you pursues its own
interests expecting dividends from these meetings. On the threshold
of April 24, the USA again faces the necessity of recognizing the
Armenian Genocide or at least using this term in Obama’s speech.
Therefore, Washington, in the person of the president, needs progress
in the Armenian-Turkish process in order to find a reason to avoid
the term "Genocide" again. I think he will manage to do this. In this
context, the interests of the US Administration and Erdogan coincide
as Turks also strive to prevent any mentioning of the word "Genocide"
in Obama’s speech on April 24. Armenia will be present at those
meetings just as a participant and will have no practical benefits.
Naturally, opening of the border and establishment of diplomatic
relations between Armenia and Turkey will be discussed as well. And
Erdogan will surely try to link these issues with the Karabakh
conflict again. The Armenian party will try once again to persuade
its own public that these problems cannot be linked. I think that
in Washington Armenia will feel certain pressure and the meetings in
Washington will give answers to numerous questions.
Does it mean that one shouldn’t wait for ratification of the Protocols
in the near future?
The world community will continue exerting efforts to gain ratification
of the Protocols; however, Turkey has already achieved its key goal
in the Armenian-Turkish process, having become one of the most active
and constructive participants in the Karabakh peace process. This fact
is already quite actively used by Turkey in the relations with the
international community. At the same time, Armenia’s stance in the
process is not clear to me as, figuratively saying, having already
entered the river, we could be afraid of being sopped in the rain,
and ratify the Protocols unilaterally. Thereby, Turkey would be a
non-constructive party to the negotiation process, and Armenia would
find itself in an advantageous situation.
Unfortunately, this opportunity was missed.
Why doesn’t Armenia ratify the Protocols? This seems to be required
by the logic of the events, doesn’t it?
It is a lowly employment to look for the logic explanation for the
Armenian authorities’ actions in this process. All the steps of Armenia
in this process should seemingly have led to ratification of the
Protocols, needless to say about the Armenian Genocide recognition
process. I think that Armenia has not benefited from making the
issue of the Armenian Genocide a part of the negotiation process;
on the contrary, it has found itself at disadvantage as the issue
of the Genocide is very delicate and may cause serious indignation
in both Armenia and Turkey. Consequently, this indignation may harm
implementation of the rest of the items of the Protocols, which does
not at all meet Armenia’s interests.
Is the president of Armenia trying to settle local problems via
conducting of an initiative foreign policy?
Serzh Sargsyan is trying to use the external problems so that to
enhance his doubtful legitimacy in Armenia in a certain sense. Just
this wish was in the basis of his initiative foreign policy. I think
that at a certain moment the authorities decided that they managed to
do it, and certain passiveness in this initiative policy is evidence of
that. That is to say, the bigger the level of the seeming legitimacy
of the authorities, the less initiative the foreign policy will
be. This may be used like an instrument for a month or two. But it
is impossible to use it forever. Consequently, Sargsyan has either to
continue the started course or to refuse it at all. But in both cases
the main geo-political players will draw their conclusions with all
the stemming consequences.
The president’s course is more or less clear. What variant of the
Karabakh conflict settlement does the APNM prefer?
The most preferential variant for me, like for any other Armenian,
would be ceding nothing and getting a status for Karabakh. At the
same time, one should take into account that unlike previous years,
today the Azeri economy is actively growing, which is not the case with
the Armenian economy. So, at some point, we may lose our positions in
the Nagorny Karabakh process and face a new war – something that may
have serious consequences for Armenia even if we win. I think that we
should try to cede as little as possible and get as much as we can in
the negotiating process. Today, it will be much harder to do it than it
was in 1998 as today the Azeris are claiming all with almost nothing
to offer instead. Therefore, Armenia should insist on recognition of
Nagorny Karabakh’s independence as a response to Azerbaijan’s breaking
the current balance and forcing Armenia to take response measures to
preserve it. However, the illegitimate status of the current Armenian
authorities is a serious obstacle to this as the world community is
using this factor for pressuring Armenia in the Karabakh peace process.
In addition, irreversible processes have already taken place in the
Karabakh peace process. The trouble is that supposing that Azerbaijan
will constantly reject all the proposals of the OSCE Minsk Group, the
Armenian party has already given its consent to a number of variants
of the settlement. An unexpected thing has occurred today – the Azeri
party has given its consent to the settlement according to "the Madrid
scenario", and we have no response to that. Therefore, only returning
of Nagorny Karabakh to the negotiation table will allow Armenia
to avoid failure in the process. Today when President Sargsyan has
realized this, he is trying to correct Robert Kocharyan’s mistake. In
response to this, the international community suggests doing this only
after achieving the first items of the peace process. This is why
Armenia’s stance in the process is unenviable now, however, despite
everything, this stance should proceed from the fact that Armenians
lived, live and will live in Karabakh, and the NKR is an Armenian
land. I hope the deficiencies of our authorities will cause no change
in these realities. Moreover, I am convinced that if at least 300
thsd people lived in the NKR, the Armenian authorities would have an
opportunity to recognize the independence of Karabakh. This failed to
happen due to the policy of our authorities, which did everything in
the opposite direction. We, the Armenian Pan-National Movement and the
Armenian National Congress, are trying to do our best not to hinder
the authorities’ efforts in the Karabakh conflict settlement. These
are the minimal efforts that we, citizens of Armenia, should exert
for favorable settlement of the Karabakh conflict.
The social atmosphere in Armenia has recently worsened much, and
not only because of the global crisis. Do you expect a splash of
people’s discontent or at least replenishment of the opposition in
this connection?
Naturally, such a process is underway, life in Armenia is getting
harder and more expensive. I think the protesting electorate
has already grown and will keep on growing. However, the social
discontent has never been a basis for our policy. At the same, the
Armenian authorities are not taking a single serious step to change
the current difficult situation, monopolies are still operating in
Armenia, the shadow sector of economy has reached threatening sizes,
and injustice remains the priority in public life of the country,
including the judicial, customs and tax spheres. In addition, having
graduated from a university, a young man cannot find a job and ensure
worthy future for himself. So, many people have a quite grounded desire
to leave Armenia, which is the problem number one for us. The trouble
is that the hard economic situation is not explained only by the
global crisis consequences. Our people could just once again overcome
this, hoping for the better future and opportunities. Unfortunately,
even if the concept of the economic crisis disappears from the Earth,
it will all the same remain in Armenia as the "Armenian" crisis is
based on a failure economic policy, which is still being conducted
by the ruling regime.
The Armenian Pan-National Movement has recently become a full member
of the European Liberal Democrat and Reform Party. What are your
goals in it?
Represented at PACE and at the governments of a number of countries,
the European Liberal Democrat and Reform Party is a very influential
political force. A new neighborhood program was approved in Europe,
and Armenia as a member of the Council of Europe and located not so
far from Europe is perceived there quite adequately. We believe that
Armenia must pass the way that will finally bring it to Europe. This
is where we see the future of our country. As part of the European
Liberal Democrat and Reform Party, we will do our best to contribute
to this process. In addition, this membership allows the APNM to
raise a number of domestic problems that still exist in Armenia at a
new political level. This will contribute to expansion of democratic
and liberal views in our republic.