Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

[Comment] A Chance To Resolve Karabakh

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • [Comment] A Chance To Resolve Karabakh

    [COMMENT] A CHANCE TO RESOLVE KARABAKH
    By Alexandros Petersen

    EUobserver.com
    http://euobserver.com/9/2 5894
    April 1 2008
    Belgium

    EUOBSERVER / COMMENT - In the 'Writers' Guidelines' section of
    Foreign Policy magazine's website, the editors offer a bit of advice
    to the would be wonk writing for the journal: 'Unless your piece on
    Nagorno-Karabakh is going to be relevant or worth reading by someone
    in, say, Antananarivo, don't bother sending it'.

    Such a view of the now 20-year-old conflict in the Caucasus is not
    uncommon outside of the region. Karabakh has become synonymous with
    'confusing ethnic conflict in an unfamiliar part of the world in which
    the EU probably shouldn't get involved'. Yet despite media focus on
    Russia's elections and China's crackdown in Tibet, Karabakh received a
    mention in European media recently due to one of the largest clashes
    across the ceasefire line since the end of large-scale fighting
    in 1994.

    The incident's significance is heightened by the violent aftermath of
    Armenia's 19 February presidential elections, in which the incumbent
    prime minister, Serzh Sarkisian, claimed 52% of the vote, in polls
    considered questionable by international observers and fraudulent by
    the opposition.

    In scenes reminiscent of the colour revolutions in Georgia and
    Ukraine, tens of thousands of protestors backing former president,
    Levon Ter-Petrosian, the main opposition challenger, as well as
    other contenders, gathered in Yerevan's Liberty square to demand
    a re-examination of poll results. On March 1, government security
    forces swept in and forcibly dispersed the crowd with truncheons,
    cattle-prods and tear gas. Several opposition leaders were detained
    and Ter-Petrosian escorted home by a security detail.

    Despite several wounded, protesters regrouped in front of Yerevan's
    municipal authority with renewed and openly exhibited defiance. As
    the growing crowd made barricades out of buses, and swelled to about
    15,000, beefed-up security forces surrounded the group, and clashes
    ensued. Security personnel fired tracer bullets above the heads of
    the crowd, and tear gas canisters into it, as protesters responded
    with molotov cocktails and any projectiles they could find. The end
    result was eight deaths and a 20-day state of emergency imposed on
    the country by outgoing president, Robert Kocharian.

    Three days later, as tanks and armoured vehicles enforced calm
    in central Yerevan, uncommonly intense violence erupted in the
    Nagorno-Karabakh conflict zone, with reports of larger-calibre gunfire
    than that normally crossing the frozen lines of battle.

    Azerbaijan's defence ministry said that three of its soldiers were
    killed as they were attacked, but that 12 Armenian soldiers perished
    in response. The ethnic-Armenian self-declared Nagorno-Karabakh forces
    claimed only two of their comrades, but eight Azerbaijanis had died
    during an attack and counterattack initiated by Azerbaijan.

    We may never know whether the new Armenian leadership launched
    a strike in Karabakh to divert attention from events in Yerevan,
    or whether Azerbaijan's military took the opportunity of political
    instability to test the Armenians. But violence in the conflict zone
    and on the streets of Yerevan signals that it is time for both sides,
    as well as international mediators, to get serious about resolution
    of Nagorno-Karabakh.

    Azerbaijan's president, Ilham Aliyev, has made it clear that Karabakh
    must be back in Azerbaijani hands by 2013, and only a day before
    the clashes, underscored his determination to consider armed force
    as an option in doing so. His statements are backed by $1 billion
    in defence spending, fuelled by his country's Caspian oil boom,
    and an Azerbaijani-backed UN General Assembly decision hurriedly
    approved on 14 March. The urgency with which Azerbaijani officials
    speak of resolution, in one way or another, was lately increased by
    Kosovo's declaration of independence, and the view that it might set
    a precedent for the self-styled Nagorno-Karabakh Republic.

    But, the onus is on Yerevan to change the current situation. The
    international community has made it clear that Karabakh and the seven
    territories under occupation surrounding it are only be recognised as
    part of Azerbaijan. So far, Baku has stressed territorial integrity -
    with 20 percent of its territory under Armenian control - while Yerevan
    has highlighted concerns for the rights of the ethnic-Armenian minority
    within Azerbaijan.

    Within the Minsk Group, the OSCE-sponsored mediation mechanism
    co-chaired by Russia, France and the U.S., Baku has pledged autonomy
    for Karabakh, but Armenia insists on a referendum being held in the
    territory - bereft of hundreds of thousands of ethnic Azeri natives
    that fled the war.

    As a native of the region, and in response to Ter-Petrosian's unpopular
    attempts at reconciliation, Sarkisian dragged his feet on Karabakh
    while prime minister. But violent protests in support of Ter-Petrosian
    and clashes in the conflict zone mean he now has the impetus to
    move toward peace. His decision to bring the third-party self-styled
    pro-Western reformer, Artur Bagdasarian, into his coalition government
    may signal a step in that direction. This opportunity, however,
    raises the responsibility of Brussels and European governments,
    regional powers, as well influential members of the Armenian diaspora,
    to push for a resolution as soon as possible.

    The dividends of peace would be substantial. After close to two
    decades of independence, Armenia could finally have its borders to
    Azerbaijan and Turkey open to trade. The potential would emerge for
    Armenia to diversify its economy away from foreign remittances, as it
    would suddenly find itself part of the burgeoning East-West energy
    and transport corridor linking Asia with Europe. Resolution of the
    conflict would also mean less reliance on Russia for military aid,
    and Iran for natural resources.

    However, the region's powers would also benefit from decreased
    potential for full-scale conflict and the disappearance of frozen
    instability close to Russia's restive North Caucasus, Turkey's
    neighbouring Nakhchivan, and Iran's majority ethnic-Azeri north.

    Europe and the U.S. would benefit from a new partner in the region,
    new options for the transit of Caspian energy, and the neutralisation
    of a potential hot-spot within increasingly tense relations with
    Russia - a prospect which even the denizens of Antananarivo might
    find significant.

    The author is Adjunct Fellow with the Russia and Eurasia Programme
    at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies.
Working...
X