Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Let The One Who Settles The Karabakh Issue Cast A Stone At Kocharyan

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

  • Let The One Who Settles The Karabakh Issue Cast A Stone At Kocharyan

    LET THE ONE WHO SETTLES THE KARABAKH ISSUE CAST A STONE AT KOCHARYAN AND ALIYEV
    Hakob Badalyan

    Lragir, Armenia
    Nov 30 2006

    The statisticians of the meetings of Kocharyan and Aliyev are in a
    much better state than the historians of the same meetings, if there
    are such. Every year enables the statisticians to add two more points
    to the statistics of meetings, whereas the historians can tell nothing
    to the generations about the contents of these meetings because as a
    rule it is not revealed. In this respect, it was pointless to expect
    that the meeting in Minsk on November 28 would be different. It is
    possible that we may hear the echos of this meeting, or it is possible
    that the echo of all these meetings will be the resolution of the
    Karabakh conflict for which the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan
    meet. But since nothing is reported about these meetings, and the
    conflict is simply moved from one year to another, we may conclude
    that the presidents meet for another purpose than the settlement of
    the Karabakh conflict.

    Therefore, perhaps, it is pointless to accuse them. Let the one who
    settles the Karabakh issue cast the first stone at Kocharyan and
    Aliyev. The current process of settlement of the Karabakh conflict is
    not realistic, therefore a new settlement should be considered. And
    for a new settlement it is necessary to demolish the existing process
    settlement. In other words, it is necessary to spark a new conflict
    and get down to resolving it. There seems to be no other option. And
    if the presidents meet to resolve the problem of Karabakh, currently
    their goal - the presidents are ostensibly considering this variant -
    is to turn the settlement into a conflict to reach its settlement
    afterwards. The point is that any proposal on settlement does not
    differ from the present "unsettled" state. The proposals that have
    been offered are even more disputable, considering the status quo
    and the history of its formation. The settlement should be acceptable
    for the publics. The agreement of the presidents must take the test
    of their publics too.

    Besides the fact that the offered proposals on the settlement of
    the conflict are actually as unacceptable as the current situation,
    the publics have got used to the existing situation. In Armenia, in
    Karabakh and in Azerbaijan people no longer wait for the settlement
    of the Karabakh conflict in planning their future and work out their
    programs and prospects considering the present situation. In other
    words, in order to make the agreement of the presidents acceptable for
    the societies, it should be better than the present reality, moreover,
    so good that it does not contradict to the vision of the societies for
    their future, based on the status quo. In this case, it is apparent
    that in order to make their agreement on the proposals on settlement
    acceptable for the societies the presidents and the mediators have
    to make the current situation worse than the offered proposals. And
    if the presidents meet with a sincere wish to reach a settlement,
    it means they are discussing the way of reaching settlement at the
    price of deteriorating the situation. In this sense, if the suggestion
    that the settlement does not worry the presidents, and they meet for
    quite another purpose is true, it is rather favorable. In this case,
    these meetings should be encouraged, and everything should be done for
    them to have a good time together and not remember about the confict
    over Karabakh. It is possible that this is what the mediators are
    busy doing.
Working...
X