CSTO SUMMIT: MILITARY BLOC NOT YET CEMENTED
By Vladimir Socor
Eurasia Daily Monitor, DC
June 28 2006
Presidents Vladimir Putin of Russia, Alexander Lukashenka of Belarus,
Robert Kocharian of Armenia, Nursultan Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan,
Kurmanbek Bakiyev of Kyrgyzstan, Imomali Rahmonov of Tajikistan,
and Islam Karimov of Uzbekistan met on June 23 in Minsk for a dual
summit of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) and the
Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEc). The two groups’ membership
rosters are identical except in the case of Armenia, a member of the
CSTO but not of EurAsEc.
Speaking to journalists during a break between the two meetings,
Putin asserted, “Developing closer cooperation between EurAsEc and
the CSTO is one of the most topical tasks, which will make it possible
to protect integration processes from various threats” (NTV Mir, June
23). “Integration processes” being the classic code word for Russian
policies, Putin’s statement confers a distinctly military dimension to
such processes. Combining the CSTO and EurAsEc summits into a single
event in Minsk underscored that idea. Trading chairs at this summit,
Putin handed over the CSTO’s rotating chairmanship to Lukashenka
while the latter turned the EurAsEc chairmanship over to Putin.
The CSTO summit decided to place the Collective Rapid Deployment
Force under the command of a single headquarters that would operate
on a permanent basis. Until now, a standing operational group
based in Bishkek has been in charge of that Force under Russia’s
Major-General Sergei Chernomordin, who is also deputy chief of staff of
the Volga-Urals Military District. The 4,000-strong Rapid Deployment
Force, earmarked for possible operations in Central Asia, presently
consists — at least on paper — of 10 battalions of varying readiness
levels, including: three battalions from Russia, three from Tajikistan
(two of these apparently from the Russian division stationed in that
country and one from Tajikistan itself), two from Kazakhstan, and two
from Kyrgyzstan (the latter country has pleaded poverty asking to be
excused from contributing a second battalion). These units are based
in the respective countries under national control and hold joint
exercises, usually at annual intervals, under joint command. Russia’s
air base at Kant in Kyrgyzstan, with some 10 tactical combat aircraft
and about a dozen helicopters, is designated a CSTO base and assigned
to the Collective Rapid Deployment Force.
According to some Russian media reports, participants in the Minsk
summit approved a decision whereby any CSTO member country wishing to
accept a deployment of non-CSTO troops on its territory must first
obtain the agreement of all the other CSTO countries (RTR Russia
Television, June 23). If so, this implies that military exercises
involving U.S. or NATO countries’ troops, their transit passage,
or their use of military installations in any CSTO member country,
for example on anti-terrorism missions, would necessitate Russian
approval. Thus, Washington or NATO allies would have to negotiate
the approval not just with possible host countries, but with Moscow,
which could either withhold the approval, maneuver one or several
CSTO countries into withholding it, or try to trade its approval for
some geopolitical quid-pro-quo elsewhere.
Thus, if this summit decision is final, Moscow would insert itself
between the Western alliance system and CSTO member countries,
trying to force the latter to deal with the West through Russia,
not directly. In Central Asia, such a situation would reverse the
Pentagon’s historic diplomatic achievements of 2001-2002, when it
negotiated basing agreements directly with Central Asian presidents,
who felt encouraged to resist Moscow’s pressures at that time.
The decision in Minsk may also aim to nudge NATO into
alliance-to-alliance contacts and common activities with the CSTO,
thus granting the latter a form of political recognition. However,
CSTO member countries are generally interested in cooperating with
NATO in a national capacity, and NATO has always related to them
directly, consistently avoiding the pitfall of dealing with the
CSTO collectively.
At present, NATO prepares to expand its operations in Afghanistan and
may request logistical support from certain Central Asian countries.
Moscow apparently calculates that it could in that case arrange to
refer the request formally to the CSTO for consideration, so as to
press NATO into dealing with this Russia-led structure. One item in
the Minsk summit declaration (such documents are Moscow-drafted as
a rule) says that alliance obligations among CSTO member countries
take precedence over other obligations.
Participants in the Minsk summit approved measures designed to turn
the CSTO into a multifunctional organization. At Putin and Russian
Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov’s initiative and Lukashenka’s proposal,
the summit resolved to develop joint structures of the member
countries’ intelligence and law-enforcement agencies and Internal
Affairs ministries, as well as strengthen the Defense Ministries’
joint structures. Beyond its military and political-military remit,
the CSTO would create joint capabilities to deal with natural and
technological disasters, illegal migration, and the narcotics traffic.
Contrary to some expectations, the summit did not officially announce
an intent to create CSTO peacekeeping troops or a legal mechanism for
rendering emergency military assistance to member countries in the
event of aggression against them from outside the CSTO. Kocharian
in particular expressed regret over the failure to advance on the
assistance issue (Arminfo, Itar-Tass, June 23). For its part, Moscow
has developed a full-fledged concept for CSTO “peacekeeping” operations
within the CSTO area and collective participation in international
operations beyond that area. Moscow will almost certainly call in the
months ahead for adoption of this concept and a political decision
on creating CSTO peacekeeping troops.
The dual summit was timed to coincide with the final phase of a
Russia-Belarus military exercise, the largest-ever held in the CSTO’s
framework. Forces from Russia and Belarus comprise the CSTO’s “regional
group of forces” in the West, along with the Russian-Armenian group
and the Russian-led Central Asian group in the respective theaters.
(Interfax, Belarus Television Channel One, June 23, 24)

OVER 140 YOUTH EXTREMIST GROUPS OPERATE IN RUSSIA – INTERIOR MINISTER
MosNews, Russia
June 28 2006
Russia has more than 140 youth extremist groups with overall membership
reaching 6,000, the country’s interior minister said Wednesday,
RIA Novosti news agency reports.
“Youth groups have become more aggressive and better organized, and
some of them are under the influence of criminal organizations,” said
Rashid Nurgaliyev. He spoke to reporters in the Armenian capital,
Yerevan, where he is attending a joint board session of Russia’s
interior ministry and Armenia’s police force.
Nurgaliev expressed concern over extremist organizations’ promotion
of violence among the younger generation. “It is worrying that some of
the extremist organizations use violent forms and methods of protest,
promoting them among young people,” he said.
The minister said law-enforcement agencies had launched anti-extremism
raids in 38 of Russia’s 89 regions so far this year, tracking
down groups believed to be behind serious crimes, including in
St. Petersburg and in the southwestern region of Voronezh, both of
which have acquired reputations as sites of Russia’s most violent
race-hate crimes.
Voronezh has seen at least seven apparently racially motivated killings
of non-white foreigners over the past six years, including the murder
of a Peruvian student last October.
St. Petersburg has been suffering from negative publicity over alleged
neo-Nazi attacks and killings, including the killing of a student
from Senegal in April and the stabbing of a nine-year-old girl of
mixed Russian-African origin in early 2006.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

TURKISH PREMIER RECEP TAYYIP ERDOGAN ADDRESSES PACE SESSION TODAY
Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
June 28 2006
A debate on freedom of expression and respect for religious belief
was held at today’s meeting of the Council of Europe Parliamentary
Assembly (PACE).
APA’s Europe bureau reports from the session that Finish
parliamentarian Snikka Hurskaine presented a report on the basis of
the report of the PACE Education, Science and Culture Commission.
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan addressing the Assembly
talked about the religious situation, religious tolerance and freedom
of expression in Turkey. The Premier responded to the questions of
parliamentarians. Danish parliamentarian Rune Lund stood against
Turkey accusing it of committing genocide of Armenians, occupying
Cyprus and using torture on Kurds. Erdogan in his response called him
“helpless who cannot base on historical facts”.
The Prime Minister advocated investigation of the issue on genocide
by historians and said they invite Armenian historians to participate
in this process. Responding to the question “Why did God let the
genocide occur?”, Erdogan said there is no genocide in Islam adding
that Islamic community loves all creatures created by God like they
love the Creator.
Armenian parliamentarian Gegamyan accused Turkey of Armenian genocide
and imposing a blockade on Armenia. Gegamyan called on the Turkish
government to recognize the Armenian genocide.
Azerbaijani parliamentarian Elmira Akhundova said populist and
groundless speeches like that of Armenian parliamentarian are
unacceptable in the Assembly. As a response to Gegamyan’s groundless
claims on destruction of Armenian monuments, the Azerbaijani
parliamentarian mentioned the facts on Armenian aggressors destroying
Azerbaijani monuments. She stated that disputed historical issues can
be solved progressively only through inter-religion and intercultural
dialogue.

ARMENIA NOT TO MEDDLE IN PROBLEMS OF SAMTSKHE-JAVAKHETI REGION
Daily Georgian Times, Georgia
June 28 2006
Minister of Foreign Affairs of Armenia Vardan Oskanyan, being on an
official visit to Georgia, says Armenia won’t interfere in resolution
of Samtskhe-Javakheti region problem, Parliamentary Speaker of Georgia
Nino Burjanadze stated shortly after the closed-door meeting with
the Armenian high-ranking official.
As per Burjanadze, Vardan Oskanyan reiterated the stance of Armenia
with regard to Samtskhe-Javakheti region, that present situation in
the region is domestic affair of Georgia and hence, Armenia won’t
meddle in this matter.
Nino Burjanadze stressed that the parties focused on deepening
Georgian-Armenian economic relations and Parliamentary ties. She
also said that according to Oskanyan, Armenia recognizes Georgia’s
territorial integrity and supports peaceful settlement of conflicts,
as well as resumption of a political dialogue.
As to construction of Kars-Akhalkalaki trunk railway, the sides have
not highlighted the mentioned issue, Burjanadze said.

GEORGIA AND ARMENIA DISCUSS POSSIBLE FULL-FLEDGED OPERATION OF TRANSPORT ROUTES IN REGIONS
Daily Georgian Times, Georgia
June 28 2006
The Georgian and Armenian foreign minister discussed the outlooks
for full-fledged operation of transport routes of the region at the
meeting in Tbilisi on Wednesday.
Vardan Oskanian, Armenian Foreign Minister said that a set of economic
issues have certain political implication and need to be addressed
in particular way.
According to him, start of operation of the Karsi-Gyumr-Tbilisi railway
route will contribute to increasing of bilateral cargo turnover and
enable all South Caucasian countries to use regional transit capacity
at its best.
Gela Bezhuashvili, Georgian Foreign Minister said that the Georgian
party is fully aware of its role of regional junction and will continue
work for elaboration of more advantageous transit routes.
“Georgia is interesting in diversification of transport routes that
will facilitate development of all countries in the region in the
future”, he added.

TURKISH P.M. ERDOGAN REACTS TO CLAIMS OF DANISH PARLIAMENTARIAN
Anatolian Times, Turkey
June 28 2006
STRASBOURG – “You shouldn’t confuse the concepts of insult and freedom
of criticism,” said Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan after
claims of Danish radical left parliamentarian Rune Lund following
the meeting of the Parliamentary Assembly of Council of Europe (PACE)
in Strasbourg.
Lund claimed that under the freedom of expression he must have the
right to say that “Turks committed genocide on Armenians, occupied
Cyprus and outraged Kurds”.
Erdogan, in return, reacted strongly and said, “you should not
fail to distinguish between the concepts of insult and freedom of
criticism. Danish parliamentarian claims that there is so-called
Armenian genocide, but his statements must be based on scientific
data.”
Erdogan stressed that Turkey proposed historians to research so-called
Armenian genocide in a scientific way, but has not received a
response yet.

ARAM SARGSYAN STATED STATUS QUO SHOULD BE MAINTAINED IN NK SETTLEMEN’S PRESENT PHASE
DeFacto Agency, Armenia
June 28 2006
The Armenian party is in pitiful position in the Karabakh conflict
settlement process, RA Democratic Party leader, RA NA deputy Aram G.
Sargsyan stated in the course of a press conference held today.
While commenting on the OSCE Minsk group U.S. Co-Chair Matthew Bryza’s
interview and RA MFA statement following it, Aram G. Sargsyan stated
the U. S. Co-Chair had again reaffirmed what had been repeatedly
said. According to the politician, RA leadership has actually agreed to
a treacherous, in the deputy’s opinion, conflict settlement option. In
part, in the deputy’s words, the matter obviously concerns surrender
of five and a half regions (five regions + Kelbajar) forming the NKR
security belt and peacemaking forces’ dislocation in the conflict
zone. We are offered to hold a nation-wide referendum in Karabakh
to determine the region’s status instead. However, according to Aram
G. Sargsyan, to surrender the territories in exchange for the conduct
of the referendum in uncertain future is inadmissible.
In the Armenian politician’s opinion, Matthew Bryza’s statement can be
explained by the US’s desire to settle the issue of NATO’s involvement
in the South Caucasus region and resolve the Iranian issue as soon as
possible. According to the politician, a map with signs of the sites
of the peacemakers’ dislocation has already been drawn up. However, in
case we agree to the peacemaking forces’ dislocation in the conflict
zone, which, in the politician’s words, will be the NATO forces,
Armenia will become Iran’s enemy number one.
Answering the question why the Azeri party does not assent to such
a profitable option, Aram Sargsyan answered: “Appetite comes with
eating. Seeing Armenia’s compromise stand, Azerbaijan sets up more
claims”.
According to Aram G. Sargsyan, the NKR authorities will never
consent to this settlement option. In this connection he expressed
perplexity over lack of the NKR leadership’s response to RA MFA
statement. In its turn, RA leadership’s agreement can result in
the aggravation of internal political situation and repetition of
events of 1998. In the opposition politician’s opinion, in such a
situation RA President will soon face the choice: either to resign
or go to unprecedented repressions. According to the politician, the
only settlement option favorable for the Armenian party at present is
maintenance of status quo, which will enable to gain time and attempt
to change the negotiation process in our favor.
Aram G. Sargsyan stated all the options being discussed in the course
of the Karabakh talks should be declassified. Moreover, the politician
requested that the public should be enlisted to the discussion of the
present option of the settlement’s basic principles. He is convinced
that the RA public should respond to the present situation in the
Karabakh talks.

RUSSIA HAS 140-PLUS YOUTH EXTREMIST GROUPS – MINISTER
RIA Novosti, Russia
June 28 2006
YEREVAN, June 28 (RIA Novosti) – Russia has more than 140 youth
extremist groups with overall membership reaching 6,000, the country’s
interior minister said Wednesday.
“Youth groups have become more aggressive and better organized, and
some of them are under the influence of criminal organizations,” said
Rashid Nurgaliyev. He spoke to reporters in the Armenian capital,
Yerevan, where he is attending a joint board session of Russia’s
interior ministry and Armenia’s police force.
Nurgaliev expressed concern over extremist organizations’ promotion
of violence among the younger generation.
“It is worrying that some of the extremist organizations use violent
forms and methods of protest, promoting them among young people,”
he said.
The minister said law-enforcement agencies had launched anti-extremism
raids in 38 of Russia’s 89 regions so far this year, tracking
down groups believed to be behind serious crimes, including in
St. Petersburg and in the southwestern region of Voronezh, both of
which have acquired reputations as sites of Russia’s most violent
race-hate crimes.
Voronezh has seen at least seven apparently racially motivated killings
of non-white foreigners over the past six years, including the murder
of a Peruvian student last October.
St. Petersburg has been suffering from negative publicity over alleged
neo-Nazi attacks and killings, including the killing of a student
from Senegal in April and the stabbing of a nine-year-old girl of
mixed Russian-African origin in early 2006.

ARMENIAN COMPANY TO BUILD GEORGIA-ARMENIA 330-MW POWER LINE
Daily Georgian Times, Georgia
June 28 2006
Armenia’s company is to carry out construction of 330-megawatt power
transmission line between Georgia and Armenia.
Energy Minister Nika Gilauri says Armenian company has won the tender
of Georgian Energy Ministry and the company is now negotiated around
the details.
The Armenian company will start construction of the transmission
line in the near future and allegedly, it will be over at the end of
this year.
330-megwatt-power transmission line will be stretched out 100
kilometers and it will cost GEL 20-24 million.

SERGEY SHAKARYANTS: RECOGNITION OF UNRECOGNIZED STATES
Regnum, Russia
June 28 2006
In the last few days the new US co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group
Mathew Bryza (who is also US Assistant Deputy Secretary of State
for Europe and Eurasia and, apparently, the new State Department
“coordinator” for all the post-Soviet conflicts) has given start to
quite unambiguous processes: through Bryza Washington is obviously
beginning to actively take the side of one of the conflicting states
(nations) though continuing to say that it is just an unbiased
mediator. However, almost all the conflicting sides (obviously,
except Georgia) have a great deal of questions to Bryza.
No sooner had Bryza taken over “the business” from Steven Mann than
he began (roughly, starting from June 9-10, though earlier too, when
visiting the South Caucasus, he acted quite inadequately and was, in
fact, engaged in peremptory dictation) taking measures, seemingly,
to quickly finish the talks between the conflicting sides and, in
fact, to stop the peace-making process as such: to take the side
of the Moldavian and Georgian authorities and to openly ignore the
counter-arguments of the authorities of Transdnestr, Abkhazia and
South Ossetia, to tear out of the general context and to make public
part of the elements of the Karabakh-Azeri conflict settlement…
That’s hardly the whole list of Bryza’s “initiatives.” It is noteworthy
that supporting Bryza in the Moldavia-Transdnestr case is a person
people in Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh know well: acting Charge
d’Affaires of the US Embassy in Moldova Rudolf Perina.
On June 14, on the day of the St. Petersburg meeting of Russian
President Vladimir Putin and Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili,
the presidents of three of the four de facto independent but yet
internationally unrecognized post-Soviet states, Abkhazia (Sergey
Bagapsh), South Ossetia (Eduard Kokoity) and Transdnestr-Moldavian
Republic (TMR) (Igor Smirnov), as if having a foreboding (or, more
likely, just being well informed) that the US would toughen its
position on the post-Soviet conflicts, also decided to meet and to
discuss their urgent problems in Sukhumi. The result of their meeting
was more than eloquent: almost everybody noticed that Bagapsh, Kokoity
and Smirnov reached agreement on who and how their states will have to
confront in the coming years. The formation of a specific integration
structure – Association For Democracy and the Rights of Nations (ADRN)
– was their adequate response to the Americans’ previous initiatives
in the four conflict zones.
At a briefing in Tiraspol on June 24, Smirnov told journalists about
the results of the trilateral meeting in Sukhumi.
At first, he said that during their two-day meeting the three
presidents tried to strictly fulfill the will of their peoples so as
to safeguard the key components of each human life. “The fact is that
nations having big economic, political and military potential use the
basic principles of democracy to deprive other nations of this right.
I think that the signing of an agreement to form an Association
for Democracy and the Rights of Nations is exactly a display of true
democracy. In this light, we will do our best to observe all the rights
and freedoms of Transdnestr, Abkhazian and South Ossetian citizens,”
Smirnov said. He also said that one of the key questions today is
how the three unrecognized republics will develop strategically:
“The documents signed show that we will coordinate our efforts in all
spheres of life, particularly, in security. That was exactly our goal
and we have achieved it. I point out security because the Abkhazian
and South Ossetian presidents were mostly interested in forming joint
peacekeeping forces. I am sure that the development of our association
will give us big opportunities for joint efforts in the political,
economic and social spheres.”
Smirnov also noted that the formation of the ADRN is a big chance
for all the three states to exercise the right of their nations to
self-determination. “We can ask ourselves why we didn’t do that before
but we can as well answer this question. The geo-political development
of our countries depends not only on our internal development but also
on the developments around the world. The Association for Democracy
and the Rights of Nations will allow us to coordinate our efforts to
resist any attempts to force us to change our lives in one or another
way. I thing this association has a big future. Our association is a
million of former USSR citizens who are eligible to self-determination
both democratically and historically.
In particular, TMR who has been formed in compliance with the people’s
will and in conformity with all the international laws and human
rights principles has the right to international recognition.
This document is effective also because it clearly defines the
decisions we should make to conduct a referendum to decide whether
to develop in unipolar or in multipolar world. To decide who we will
further develop with, who we will further build our economy, education,
and defense with. We should also coordinate our efforts in legislation
and the activities of our parliaments. I think that we will shortly
start active inter-parliamentary cooperation and then we will jointly
get into cooperation with the parliamentary organizations of Russia,
Belarus, Ukraine and other states,” Smirnov said.
In our opinion, the key focus should be exactly on what the Transdnestr
authorities say because, strange as this might seem, it is exactly TMR
who has all the necessary attributes of an independent state and will,
sooner or later, be recognized by the world community as an absolutely
sovereign territory.
A scholarly paper on the state sovereignty of the Transdnestr Moldavian
Republic (TMR) within the framework of the international law has been
presented in Washington. The authors are Stefan Talmon, Christofer
Goebel, Nancy Furman, Paul Williams, Stephen Krasner, Andrew Lorenz,
Michael Scharf, and William Wood, the international scholars from
Oxford, Stanford, Harvard, and Cambridge universities who contributed
to the elaboration of the Dayton agreements on the division of former
Yugoslavia. The experts conclude that historically, Transdnestr has
never been part of Moldova. While Transdnestr originated from the
collapse of the USSR, its people and territory have roots that go far
into history. The foundation and the existence of the modern Republic
of Moldova are based on a unilateral declaration of independence that
formalized the forced unification of Moldova and Transdnestr effected
by Stalin at the onset of WWII. It lacked any “actual legal basis,”
i.e., was instituted illegally.
Legal and factual analyses reveal that during the collapse of the USSR,
the Moldavian SSR broke up into two successor states: Moldova and
Transdnestr whose today’s border fully correspond to the traditional
historical border that divided them since the early Middle Ages. At
the moment of Moldavia’s secession from the USSR, Transdnestr had
already seceded and governed its territory on its own.
The report says that many years of international practice compiled
into charters allow listing the criteria used to define state
sovereignty. These are permanent population, definite territory,
government capable of establishing relations with other nations.
Today Transdnestr meets all the criteria. It has its own democratically
elected President and a legislative body currently controlled by an
opposition party. Its government controls armed forces and enters into
discussions with foreign states. TMR has proved the viability of its
statehood and the legitimacy of the process of state building. More
than a half million people live in Transdnestr over a territory
of 4,163 sq. km. They successfully meet all the criteria of state
sovereignty in conformity with the international law. Transdnestr
has an effectively functioning government that has its own agencies,
the Constitution, currency, tax system, legal system, and population
exceeding in its numbers that of many UN member states.
Now it is clear why Smirnov does not doubt that TMR will be recognized
as an independent state and will be respected by all the other UN
member-states and the European integration structures. Let’s admit
that TMR, Abkhazia and South Ossetia have small populations and none
of them forms an annual budget of no less than $2bn! Nor do they have
bi- or multi-lateral industrial and agricultural agreements “tying”
them with partners from other states. Obviously, in preparing their
report on TMR the Western experts considered the economic factor,
too. As regards the level of democracy… During the last parliamentary
elections the observers from the OSCE and the EU, including strongly
anti-Russian Poles, could not but admit that the elections in TMR
were fully compliant with the European criteria and standards and
that there is much more democracy in TMR than there is in Moldova.
This very complex of quite different but inter-related problems
that concern the international community inasmuch as some people are
calling for recognizing a new independent state in Europe contains
the answer to the question: which of the yet unrecognized post-Soviet
states has the best chances to be officially recognized the first. On
the other hand, there is one more very important factor: quite a
big percentage of the TMR population – a total of 100,000 people –
is Russian and Ukrainian citizens, though over 90% of the population
are TMR citizens. And even though today the Ukrainian authorities
are openly betraying their citizens permanently residing in TMR and
Ukrainians having TMR citizenship by continuing to keep Transdnestr in
blockade, they may still give up at some point their baneful policy
of support for the thesis about “the territorial integrity of the
Republic of Moldova.”
In all other respects, the grounds on which the Western experts,
in fact, deny Moldova’s right to insists on the “return” of TMR
under its jurisdiction fully correspond to the conditions under
which Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (NKR), Abkhazia and South Ossetia
seceded from the USSR, in general, and from the Soviet Azerbaijan
and Georgia, in particular. This means that their people may also
hope that they in Washington will, at least, issue similar expert
reports on their “cases” too. In Abkhazia and South Ossetia the de
facto dual citizenship of the overwhelming majority of local residents
may also be a big trump. As you may know, along with Abkhazian and
South Ossetian citizenships, no less than 90% of Abkhazians and South
Ossetians have legally got Russian one.
Thus, Abkhazia, South Ossetia and TMR have formed an Association
“For Democracy and the Rights of Nations,” a structure many CIS
media, half jokingly-half seriously, termed as CIS-2 – Commonwealth
of Unrecognized States. ADNP says it is going to form its collective
armed “peacekeeping” forces. However, you should not be misled by
the word “peacekeeping” – if they in ADRN antipode, the Organization
for Democracy and Economic Development (ODED)-GUAM, are considering
forming collective “peacekeeping” forces (a project suggested by
Ukraine and Azerbaijan and supported by Georgia and Moldavia) (i.e.
to form a special punitive quadrilateral force to be used against the
peoples of Nagorno-Karabakh, Transdnestr, Abkhazia and South Ossetia –
in the case of the last three, after forcing out Russian peacekeepers),
they in ADNP too can talk only about “peacekeepers” who will replace
their Russian counterparts and will try to prevent OEDE-GUAM forces
or “international policemen” from entering the conflict zones –
a project suggested by Bryza to Georgia who continues insultingly
pushing the Russians out. That’s why the US Embassy in Georgia was so
seriously concerned on June 23 for Bagapsh’s statement that if Georgia
continues driving the Russian peacekeepers outside the conflict zone,
Abkhazia will stop negotiations, will bring in its troops to replace
the Russians and will mine Abkhazia’s administrative border with the
other regions of Georgia.
A day before the embassy nervously “laughed” at the statement of
the South Ossetian leadership that American military structures take
part in the provocations organized by Georgian law enforcers in the
Georgian-Ossetian conflict zone.
Thus, all the concerned parties more or less involved in all the four
conflicts perfectly understand that very shortly extra-regional forces
will be ready to push the Moldavian, Georgian and Azeri authorities
into re-using force “methods” for resolving the conflicts. Of course,
the calls for peace and continuation of talks will be continued,
but they can hardly deceive anybody in a situation when, for example,
Georgia continues leading in the CIS in the extent and the speed of
its arms growth. The same is true for Azerbaijan.
These countries are arming with the help of the US and Turkey as well
as Ukraine and the Baltic states.
So it is becoming more or less clear for TMR, Abkhazia and South
Ossetia what they will have to do in the near future: they will first
of all have to raise their preparedness for beating off any external
aggression, whoever undertakes and whoever supports it.
The problem of Nagorno-Karabakh … has become kind of isolated:
recently increasingly often people forget to mention NKR when talking
about unrecognized republics. We certainly can be super-optimistic
and say that NIR is “already recognized” as an independent South
Caucasian state, but things are a bit different. In 1996-1997,
obviously “advised” by Armenia, the NKR authorities stopped to take
part in the “CIS-2” summits even though they were quite active in
four-sided presidential meetings in the early 1990s (this format was
even five-sided once!). As we see from media reports, until quite
recently NKR FM officials and experts have still been meeting with
their colleagues from the other three unrecognized republics.
Who are we trying to please when refusing to take part in the actions
of the Abkhazian, South Ossetian and Transdnestr presidents?!
Moldova, Georgia, the US with Turkey? Probably, Azerbaijan?!
Obviously, it is the Nagorno-Karabakh or even the Armenian authorities
who should ask this question. If they do not want to “annoy” Georgia,
they have obviously failed to get Georgia to refuse to support
Azerbaijan in the Karabakh problem and to be more constructive when
our compatriots from the Georgian provinces of Samtskhe-Javakheti and
Kvemo-Kartli report violations of their civil and other rights and
freedoms. Consequently, by showing an “ostrich” attitude to whatever
happening around NKR, TMR, Abkhazia and South Ossetia, the NKR and
Armenian foreign ministries are making a very big mistake. In our case,
if something happens and if the peace talks are stopped, the factor of
dual or Russian citizenship will not work as explosively as it will in
case if external forces push Georgia and Moldova into applying force
against Abkhazia-South Ossetia and TMR, respectively. In our case, the
Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenian peoples will be left face to face with
Azerbaijan and its secret and open political and military allies, like
they were at the very beginning of NKR’s independence war. “Want peace
– make ready for war.” We regret to say that this Roman proverb is
becoming increasingly relevant for all the four post-Soviet conflicts.
In conclusion, let’s note that Bryza’s unrestrained statements have
already received critical reaction from the Armenian pro-government
and opposition forces who have seen nonsense in the words of the US
State Department official preparing to become a diplomat on conflicts.
Let’s not quote all the statements made in Yerevan on June 26,
the reply of the presidential spokesman Viktor Sogomonyan would be
enough: “The points of the framework agreement publicized by the new
US co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group Mathew Bryza are just certain
elements of this agreement which do not reflect the whole content
of the document.” “If the media continue making such revelations
in the future, the Armenian side will promulgate all the documents
negotiated in the last 7-8 years: the draft agreement on “common
state,” the document discussed in Key-West and the project considered
quite recently in Bucharest. I am sure that this will make everything
absolutely clear. “By the way, all the three documents were rejected
by the Azeri side,” Sogomonyan said.
As a matter of principle, they in Yerevan have begun to understand
what a baneful policy they have been carrying on in the last years –
by keeping top confidentiality about the talks in order to please the
OSCE MG co-chairs (or just one of them). Sogomonyan’s words can be
also interpreted as a warning to the US that everything has its limits
and the patience of the Armenian side, in particular. The question
is why the NKR authorities are silent and are failing to show high
activity. It is time for them to bravely show their initiatives and
to remind the world community about the will of their people to fight
for the comprehensive and unconditional recognition of the right to
national-liberation struggle.
Especially as they in Baku have turned out to be quite inclined
to admit that in some cases, in some countries, there can be
national-liberation struggle – for example, for stopping the “divided
people” situation. True, Azerbaijan admits this only with respect
to the so-called “Southern Azerbaijan” and urges the US, Turkey,
and the EU to “help” Azeris reunify.
>>From our point of view, NKR has all the chances to “outrun” our
Azeri neighbors in all respects, but, first of all, in presenting
proofs of national-liberation struggle, struggle for restoring
infringed legal rights (including merely civil) and the interests of
the Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians. NKR’s advantage is that it has much
higher statehood and democracy development level than Azerbaijan or
even Armenia have.