DOES THE US GIVE OK TO A NEW ARMENIAN-AZERI WAR? NK PRESS DIGEST
Regnum, Russia
March 9 2006
The international community is disappointed
In Rambouillet Armenian and Azeri presidents Robert Kocharyan and
Ilham Aliyev failed to agree on one key principle. This, according
to ARMINFO news agency, Kocharyan says himself in an interview to
Armenian and Karabakh TV channels. He says that the post-meeting
disappointment is due to much too high pre-meeting anticipations.
“During our meetings there have always been points we agreed on and
points we could not. Naturally, you want to know the source of this
disappointment. I’m sure it comes from too high expectations,” says
Kocharyan. In their turn, these expectations came from the pre-meeting
optimism of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs and representatives of
various international organizations.
“The fact of our tete-a-tete meeting alone is important – for two years
already Aliyev and I have been meeting at international occasions
only. The French president’s invitation and personal involvement in
the talks added to the expectations. Everybody was looking forward to
some climax, some outcome – but nothing like that happened. Kocharyan
notes that big hopes for 2006 are also due to no scheduled elections
in Armenia and Azerbaijan, while 2007-2008 will be hard for Armenia,
and the Karabakh problem may fall hostage to electoral moods. “One
more serious factor was the wish to agree before the G8 2006 in
St. Petersburg: the co-chairs believed that an agreement before the
meeting would be the best guarantee of maximum international support
for its fulfillment.” And this deadline forced them to step up the
peace process. The wish was justified as long as everybody would win,
but it failed. Kocharyan says that the talks will go on, and the
meeting of the Armenian and Azeri FMs will show at what a pace. He
notes that one more reason why the co-chairs expected so much was
that there already was agreement on some principles. “Nobody expected
much from the point we have failed to agree on. That’s why in Sweden
I said that I was carefully optimistic and added ‘very carefully,'”
says Kocharyan. He approves of the work done so far. “But to solve
such a problem is such a complex process that you can agree on 15
principles or points but just one principle you fail will mean that
there is no process yet and you should either review the whole package
or go on looking for other principles,” says Kocharyan.
Speaking of the reasons of the Rambouillet failure, OSCE MG US
co-chair Steven Mann says that the sides must look for solutions –
for this is a humanitarian disaster and a serious security problem
for the region. Most important is the will of the sides – their will
to concede. This is a good chance for both Azerbaijan and Armenia.
But this requires political will by the presidents, nations and
international support.
In its press statement the EU regrets that in Rambouillet the Armenian
and Azeri presidents failed to make decisions necessary for a big
breakthrough in the Karabakh problem, reports Day.Az (Baku). At
the same time, the EU welcomes the commitment of the presidents to
continue the talks. The EU urges the sides to redouble their efforts
towards agreement that will require mutual concessions. The sides
should make their people ready for a balanced agreement and should
avoid making statements that may enhance tensions and distrust. The
EU reminds about the OSCE FMs’ Ljubljana statement that urges the
sides to go from talks to decisions. The EU is deeply convinced that
the sides must not miss the window of opportunities they have got.
The US is very much disappointed with the results of the Rambouillet
talks, US Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicolas Burns
says in an interview to Nezavisimaya Gazeta (Russia). The US thought
the meeting to be a good chance. Many attempts have been made to
settle the conflict, and the Kocharyan-Aliyev meeting in Rambouillet
was the most promising, says Burns. He notes that the US still wants
to cooperate with Moscow and Paris towards final resolution.
“The window of opportunity for 2006 appears to be closed; it is not
clear how many more there will be,” The Economist says in its recent
article about Armenian-Azeri relations. Haykakan Zhamanak daily
reports The Economist to say: “Apparently well-founded hopes for a
breakthrough in the Nagorno Karabakh conflict have faltered, following
the failure of the Rambouillet summit to produce an outline agreement
between Armenia and Azerbaijan as expected. Although in theory there
is still time this year to make progress, the prospects appear remote.
Time is not on the side of peace. Armenia and Azerbaijan are still
uncompromised. Azerbaijan remains fundamentally opposed to any solution
to the conflict that would entail giving up formal control over Nagorno
Karabakh, while Armenia rejects outright the notion that the region
would return to Azerbaijani rule.
Furthermore, the fact that the authorities in both Armenia and
Azerbaijan have acquired power through fundamentally flawed elections
has weakened their legitimacy, which has in turn affected their
ability to argue the case for concessions.”
The Economist notes that “the conflict differs from that of the other
frozen conflicts in the CIS, in that it is between two sovereign
states, one of which-Armenia-has historically been closely associated
with Russia.”
Wondering how many more chances there are, the Economist says:
“2006 had been seen as a crucial window of opportunity for a peace
settlement in Nagorno Karabakh, given the absence of elections.
Azerbaijan held a parliamentary election in October 2005 and
one month later Armenia held a referendum to enact constitutional
changes. Although both were flawed processes, international criticism
was muted specifically to avoid weakening either side ahead of
the talks.
After the failure of the Rambouillet talks, the chances that the two
presidents will agree a deal are slim to non-existent. For Kocharyan
and Aliyev, to go against public opinion over such a fundamental issue
would be to invite political ruin. As things stand, the next chance
may not appear until 2009. And if that opportunity is not seized,
the risk is that the Nagorno Karabakh conflict may become ‘unfrozen’
in a much less desirable manner.”
Ambassador Steven Mann, the US special envoy for conflict settlement
in Eurasia and the US co-chair of the OSCE MG gives an interview to
Voice of America radio station:
Asked about the last talks on Nagorno Karabakh, Mann says that
the Rambouillet talks were very important and the sides should move
towards a Karabakh agreement. On the whole the talks were detailed and
amicable, but they were also very hard, and little progress was made.
Asked what was the hardest, Mann says that he would better not dwell
into details not being sure that he could specify the most complicated
point. However, the two presidents arrived in Rambouillet to discuss
the key issues; and the mediators allowed them to have a deep and
serious discussion to arrive at an agreement. It was a very intensive
discussion, on the whole
Asked why the talks failed, Mann says there was still time for
Karabakh. The sides ought to seek a resolution as it is a humanitarian
tragedy and a serious problem of regional security. “We must keep
working on it.”
But the principal point in the settlement of Karabakh conflict requires
the political will of both the parties.
“When I say a political will I mean the will to make a compromise.
There is no international negotiating process wherein one of the
parties could achieve the fulfillment of all its demands. In the given
case, I am absolutely convinced that it is a safe opportunity for
both Azerbaijan and Armenia. However, achievement of goals requires
a political will of the presidents and international support.”
Asked about further plans, Mann says that the co-chairs met after
the talks in Rambouillet and informed OSCE CIO Karel de Gucht of the
situation. They also decided to meet in Washington early in March
to fully assess the results of the negotiations in Rambouillet and
determine the future steps.
Asked when the 18-year-old Karabakh conflict will be resolved, Mann
says that not very soon, but it must be resolved. He is sure that the
conditions for the conflict’s settlement will not get better. It is a
humanitarian catastrophe. There are so many people around Karabakh who
live in uncertainty and fear. This is a valid reason for the parties
to unite and settle the situation together. Mann thinks that 2006 is
the very year for the conflict’s resolution
Statements by the presidents
525th Daily (Baku) quotes the interview of Azeri President Ilham
Aliyev to AzerTag. Aliyev says the problem can be solved only within
the country’s territorial integrity. “Nagorno Karabakh is an Azeri
land. The whole world acknowledges territorial integrity.” Aliyev is
ready to guarantee safety for the Armenians living in Nagorno Karabakh.
“But our territorial integrity cannot be subject to discussion. We
cannot agree to Karabakh’s separation from Azerbaijan. Our position
is known. We have repeatedly said that during our meetings with
the Armenian president and the OSCE MG co-chairs.” Concerning the
referendum to determine Karabakh’s status, Aliyev says that the
Azeri Constitution does not allow referendums in separate regions,
but this problem can be solved within the international law and the
Azeri Constitution.
Aliyev notes that the resolution of the conflict is a matter of
principle: “We want the conflict to be resolved as soon as possible.
But not in any way. We have to choose: to make a hasty decision to sign
some agreement or to wait for the right moment to get big results. I
choose the latter.” Aliyev believes that time is on Azerbaijan’s side:
“Some people say that the loss of time is always bad. I cannot agree
with them. Look how much things have changed in Azerbaijan and Armenia
in the last two years. Two years ago there was no big difference
between our budgets. Now Azerbaijan has a 4-time and next year will
have 6-time bigger budget than Armenia.”
Aliyev is sure that Azerbaijan will get fair solution to the Karabakh
conflict. Azerbaijan is stronger than Armenia in all parameters
and is getting even stronger: “Armenia is not economic or military
rival to Azerbaijan. At the same time, all the current processes
in the region, all energy projects that bring together Azerbaijan,
Georgia and Turkey bypass Armenia. Why so? Because we cannot allow
that. We cannot allow cooperation with an occupant-country. There can
be regional cooperation without Armenia, but without Azerbaijan – no.
So, we must do our best to get our goal, and this is my policy.”
Despite failure in Rambouillet, there are still chances to succeed
by talks, Yerkir daily reports Armenian President Robert Kocharyan
as saying in a Mar 3 interview to central Armenian and Karabakh TV
channels. But if Azerbaijan happens to say that no success is possible
and tries to solve the problem by war, Armenia will do the following
things: recognize de jure the Nagorno Karabakh Republic; legally
formulate its responsibility for ensuring Nagorno Karabakh’s security
– by saying that any encroachment on NKR will mean encroachment on
Armenia; reinforce the security zone around Karabakh by “radically
new, complex approaches” (not specified by Kocharyan); more actively
integrate with NK in security; carry out deeper economic reforms for
making Armenia more competitive in the region.
The last goal is “the most important.” Kocharyan says that the right
format of the Karabakh peace talks is “Azerbaijan-Nagorno Karabakh,
with Armenia as active participant.” Armenia continues the format of
bilateral talks with Azerbaijan despite its deficiency: Azerbaijan
uses this factor to present Armenia as an aggressor. “In reality,
nobody cares for these arguments. Everybody knows what the conflict
is about and understands that Azerbaijan’s refusal to negotiate with
Karabakh is due to its post-war complex.” Kocharyan says that even
though Karabakh does not take part in all meetings, it takes part in
the negotiating process as a whole as long as the Armenian president
and the international mediators consult with the NK leadership before
the meetings.
Ax of war
525th Daily reports US Ambassador to Azerbaijan Reno Harnish to say
at a news conference that unless the Karabakh conflict is resolved
this year, there can be other scenarios – and war is one of them. He
says that a new war would be a real tragedy for the Caucasus. And so,
the US urges politicians, FMs and presidents to use the chance to
find the way out.
Such words by a US ambassador can be taken as the US’s “OK” to new
war, says Haykakan Zhamanak. “There is no need mentioning that no
US ambassador has said such things before. On the contrary, whatever
said about the possibility of war ruled out such a possibility.”
That is, Harnish’s statement means that the general belief that
the international community, the West or the US itself will never
allow the Armenian-Azeri war to resume is no longer true – which,
in its turn, means that the Armenian-Azeri war now depends on what
the Armenian and Azeri presidents will do.
Armenia’s statements that it may recognize Nagorno Karabakh have just
added to the tensions, says US Ambassador to Azerbaijan Reno Harnish.
Day.Az reports him as saying that the US’ mediator task is to encourage
the presidents for talks. The US believes that agreement is possible
and hopes for progress in Washington, where the co-chairs are to
outline further steps.
“Azerbaijan must revise its policy on Karabakh – because Armenia’s
position gives no chances for peace agreement. The last talks have
shown that Armenia doesn’t want this. We advocate diplomatic solution
but we must be ready for other scenarios too. We will never agree to
lose our lands. My firm stance is that the Karabakh conflict must be
resolved exclusively within the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan.
Armenia has broken all international norms, and Azerbaijan is an
aggrieved party, with 20% of our territory under Armenian occupation,”
Azeri President Ilham Aliyev says during a visit to the Karabakh region
of Azerbaijan. Echo daily reports him as saying: “I have visited
our soldiers in Agder and has proved to them once more that Nagorno
Karabakh is an Azeri land and we must liberate it by any means,” says
Aliyev. He says that, together with the soldiers, he has inspected
the front line and has checked the level of training and the state
of hardware in the unit.
Every time after a failure in the Karabakh peace talks Armenia
and Azerbaijan are beginning to show their muscles and obduracy to
concede. Now they are again “at peace or war.” But this time they seem
to be going too far – to a looming possibility of war, says Zerkalo
daily (Baku): “The Armenian opposition is already beginning to talk
about recognizing Nagorno Karabakh.”
Zerkalo reports the leader of the National Democratic Party of Armenia,
opposition MP Shavarsh Kocharyan to say that the first mistake of
Armenia is that it has not recognized Nagorno Karabakh and the second
one – that it has taken the place NK in the negotiating process and
to call quite appropriate the recent statement by NK President Arkady
Gukasyan that Armenia “must give place to NK in the talks.” The daily
says: “If Armenia does this, the talks will set back to what we have
already passed – something that will give us nothing good.” “Armenia
is paving the way for “arms race”: Armenian Deputy Defense Minister
Artur Aganbekyan says: “If Azerbaijan continues its militarist rhetoric
about big military budget, Armenia may revise this percentage.”
Weighing up the possible consequences of the war, the daily says
that “Azerbaijan is being strongly pressured by the international
community, for whom the war means losing the South Caucasus for several
years.” “Armenia risks coming up against Azerbaijan’s war machine,
which is much different form what it was in 1991-1994. It will be
hard for economically weak Armenia to stand this blow and the burden
of the preceding ‘arms race.’ While Azerbaijan risks losing the West’
support and facing the temporary stop of big regional projects.” In
other words, the conflicting parties have things to lose – that’s
why they are not starting war despite mutual threats.
At the same time, Zerkalo warns Armenia “not to wave a burning match
over a barrel of powder, especially as Azerbaijan is already a whole
arsenal.”
In an interview to Day.Az the member of the Armenian Pan-National
Movement party, the former national security minister and the first
Armenian president’s personal representative on the Karabakh conflict
settlement David Shahnazaryan says that the Karabakh conflict cannot
be settled without involvement by international peacekeepers. The
international community hopes in vain that 2006 will be decisive for
the Karabakh or other conflicts in the South Caucasus.
“I believe that this hope is absolutely vain as neither Armenian
nor Azeri leaders want to start the Karabakh peace process. They
will stay in power for as long as the conflict is existent. They
want to keep it frozen, but our people don’t. What we see today is
just simulated talks. The whole fight of our presidents is about who
will say no. So, I don’t think that any of them will start actually
resolving the conflict. In my opinion, the conflict cannot stay frozen
for ever. There are two ways out: either new war – unfortunately
possible – or pressure on our leaders by the US and Russia.
There are no such prospects today. Today the Kremlin and the White
House have opposite interests. Naturally, Armenia has no reason to
start war. This may be done by Azerbaijan – under certain internal
political conditions. Given state-level xenophobia in both Armenia
and Azerbaijan, one can expect spontaneous war with no preliminary
political decision. For example, last year there were very long
skirmishes, and it was happy providence that no artillery joined in.
So, one should not rule out the possibility of war.”
Nagorno Karabakh must be involved in the Karabakh peace process; or,
in case of agreement, the talks with NK will have to be started from
the very beginning, says Nagorno Karabakh Defense Minister, Lieut.
Gen. Seyran Ohanyan. REGNUM reports him as saying that if Azerbaijan
wants to solve the problem by war, NK can defend itself and
counter-attack. Still NK is for peace. “De facto Nagorno Karabakh
has solved its problem, but this should be formalized during the
negotiating process,” says Ohanyan. He notes that the Karabakh movement
rising 18 years ago and the following national-liberation war of the
people of Artsakh (the Armenian name of Nagorno Karabakh – REGNUM)
has resulted in the formation of independent Nagorno Karabakh Republic.