Tweet
EurasiaNet, NY
Dec 7 2007
NAGORNO-KARABAKH: MEDIATORS STRIVE TO KEEP PEACE-TALK PARTICIPANTS
"ON THE SAME PAGE"
Jean-Christophe Peuch 12/07/07
Mediators seeking to break the deadlock surrounding the
Nagorno-Karabakh peace talks believe they have developed "just and
constructive solutions" to existing negotiating dilemmas. However,
the initial responses from Armenia and Azerbaijan indicate that a
peace deal is not imminent.
In Madrid prior to an OSCE ministerial council meeting on November
29, the foreign ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan were presented
with a set of basic principles for a Karabakh peace settlement. "The
parties to the conflict were strongly urged to bring to a close the
current stage of negotiations by endorsing the proposed basic
principles, and to quickly commence work on a comprehensive peace
agreement," the OSCE said in a statement.
The US State Department issued a similar statement.
The Minsk Group, which comprises representatives from France, Russia
and the United States, has not elaborated on the latest proposals.
Neither have Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanian and his
Azerbaijani counterpart, Eldar Mammadyarov.
Russia's Kommersant newspaper on December 1 quoted Russian Foreign
Minister Sergei Lavrov as saying that the basic principles "includes
all positive understandings reached between Baku and Yerevan over the
past few years." Following talks with his Armenian counterpart in
Moscow, the Russian foreign minister on December 4 told reporters
that he and Oskanian both viewed the presentation of the basic
principles as a "very important" step in the peace process.
"Work on this document will continue at the very beginning of next
year. We hope the efforts of the [Minsk Group] co-chairs will be
crowned with success," Lavrov added.
Not everyone shares Lavrov's apparent optimism. Talking to EurasiaNet
on condition of anonymity, a diplomat familiar with the peace talks
said that rather than any progress in the negotiation process, the
chief motivation for the Madrid presentation was the time factor.
Presidential elections in Armenia and Azerbaijan are scheduled in
February 2008 and in the following fall, respectively. Azerbaijani
President Ilham Aliyev is likely to seek re-election, but his
Armenian counterpart, Robert Kocharian, is constitutionally barred
from seeking a third term. [For background see the Eurasia Insight
archive].
"Changes in the regional political leaderships are expected next
year. Changes among the Minsk Group co-chairs are also expected. So
the idea is to try to capture the moment so that we remain on the
same page and don't lose those basic principles if the regional
leaders, or the co-chairs change," the diplomat said.
What this diplomat said was corroborated by earlier comments made by
the French and Russian co-chairs of the Minsk Group, which has been
mediating in the conflict since 1992. [For background see the Eurasia
Insight archive].
Addressing the OSCE's Permanent Council -- the organization's regular
decision-making body -- in early November, France's Bernard Fassier
and Russia's Yuri Merzlyakov said that despite the absence of
breakthrough in the negotiation process, they intended to finalize
their proposals and transmit them shortly to Armenia and Azerbaijan.
The two diplomats also said that although they believed no agreement
on the basic principles could be reached soon, they would
nevertheless continue their efforts to have both regional leaders
endorse them during the run-up to the Armenian presidential ballot.
The basic principles, which were first made public last year,
envisage the progressive liberation of the seven Azerbaijani
administrative districts bordering on Nagorno-Karabakh that Armenian
forces have been occupying since 1992-93. They also provide for the
demilitarization of the conflict zone, the deployment of an
international peacekeeping force, the repatriation of Armenian
settlers, and the return of Azerbaijani internally displaced persons.
The future status of the unrecognized republic of Nagorno-Karabakh
would be determined later. [For background see the Eurasia Insight
archive].
But, as Mammadyarov once said, "the devil is in the details" and a
number of outstanding differences remain.
Among them are the practicalities of any future referendum on
Nagorno-Karabakh's final status. The Minsk Group co-chairs have
suggested that, pending a vote, the region be given an interim status
that would be recognized by both sides.
Other sticking points include the scope and modalities of the
Armenian withdrawal from Azerbaijan's occupied Kalbacar and Lachin
districts, which are sandwiched between Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia.
Yerevan views those two districts as being of vital importance to
Karabakh's future security, and has conditioned their liberation on
stringent requirements.
What new proposals, if any, the set of basic principles that France,
Russia and the United States presented the Armenian and Azerbaijani
foreign ministers in Madrid is unclear. Azerbaijan's Foreign Ministry
spokesman Xazar Ibrahim on December 7 said the package contained
"nothing particularly new."
"There are a few nuances, but generally speaking those basic
principles are those that have been negotiated within the framework
of the Prague process," he told reporters in Baku.
In their respective speeches to the OSCE ministerial council, neither
Oskanian, nor Mammadyarov made any reference to the document they had
just received.
While noting the existence of a generally positive trend, the
Armenian foreign minister denounced what he said were Azerbaijan's
persistent threats to resort to a military solution to the conflict.
Mammadyarov, in turn, accused Armenia of "deceiving" the
international community and pursuing a policy of "fait accompli" by
sending settlers and large ammunition stockpiles to the occupied
territories.
The Madrid announcement generated relatively little interest in
Azerbaijan and Armenia -- something international mediators may view
as a frustrating circumstance. According to OSCE officials, the
co-chairs had hoped that the presentation of basic principles would
stoke public debate in both countries, thereby accelerating the
negotiation process. Such hopes, however, have not been fulfilled.
Editor's Note: Jean-Christophe Peuch is a Vienna-based freelance
correspondent, who specializes in Caucasus- and Central Asia-related
developments.
Dec 7 2007
NAGORNO-KARABAKH: MEDIATORS STRIVE TO KEEP PEACE-TALK PARTICIPANTS
"ON THE SAME PAGE"
Jean-Christophe Peuch 12/07/07
Mediators seeking to break the deadlock surrounding the
Nagorno-Karabakh peace talks believe they have developed "just and
constructive solutions" to existing negotiating dilemmas. However,
the initial responses from Armenia and Azerbaijan indicate that a
peace deal is not imminent.
In Madrid prior to an OSCE ministerial council meeting on November
29, the foreign ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan were presented
with a set of basic principles for a Karabakh peace settlement. "The
parties to the conflict were strongly urged to bring to a close the
current stage of negotiations by endorsing the proposed basic
principles, and to quickly commence work on a comprehensive peace
agreement," the OSCE said in a statement.
The US State Department issued a similar statement.
The Minsk Group, which comprises representatives from France, Russia
and the United States, has not elaborated on the latest proposals.
Neither have Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanian and his
Azerbaijani counterpart, Eldar Mammadyarov.
Russia's Kommersant newspaper on December 1 quoted Russian Foreign
Minister Sergei Lavrov as saying that the basic principles "includes
all positive understandings reached between Baku and Yerevan over the
past few years." Following talks with his Armenian counterpart in
Moscow, the Russian foreign minister on December 4 told reporters
that he and Oskanian both viewed the presentation of the basic
principles as a "very important" step in the peace process.
"Work on this document will continue at the very beginning of next
year. We hope the efforts of the [Minsk Group] co-chairs will be
crowned with success," Lavrov added.
Not everyone shares Lavrov's apparent optimism. Talking to EurasiaNet
on condition of anonymity, a diplomat familiar with the peace talks
said that rather than any progress in the negotiation process, the
chief motivation for the Madrid presentation was the time factor.
Presidential elections in Armenia and Azerbaijan are scheduled in
February 2008 and in the following fall, respectively. Azerbaijani
President Ilham Aliyev is likely to seek re-election, but his
Armenian counterpart, Robert Kocharian, is constitutionally barred
from seeking a third term. [For background see the Eurasia Insight
archive].
"Changes in the regional political leaderships are expected next
year. Changes among the Minsk Group co-chairs are also expected. So
the idea is to try to capture the moment so that we remain on the
same page and don't lose those basic principles if the regional
leaders, or the co-chairs change," the diplomat said.
What this diplomat said was corroborated by earlier comments made by
the French and Russian co-chairs of the Minsk Group, which has been
mediating in the conflict since 1992. [For background see the Eurasia
Insight archive].
Addressing the OSCE's Permanent Council -- the organization's regular
decision-making body -- in early November, France's Bernard Fassier
and Russia's Yuri Merzlyakov said that despite the absence of
breakthrough in the negotiation process, they intended to finalize
their proposals and transmit them shortly to Armenia and Azerbaijan.
The two diplomats also said that although they believed no agreement
on the basic principles could be reached soon, they would
nevertheless continue their efforts to have both regional leaders
endorse them during the run-up to the Armenian presidential ballot.
The basic principles, which were first made public last year,
envisage the progressive liberation of the seven Azerbaijani
administrative districts bordering on Nagorno-Karabakh that Armenian
forces have been occupying since 1992-93. They also provide for the
demilitarization of the conflict zone, the deployment of an
international peacekeeping force, the repatriation of Armenian
settlers, and the return of Azerbaijani internally displaced persons.
The future status of the unrecognized republic of Nagorno-Karabakh
would be determined later. [For background see the Eurasia Insight
archive].
But, as Mammadyarov once said, "the devil is in the details" and a
number of outstanding differences remain.
Among them are the practicalities of any future referendum on
Nagorno-Karabakh's final status. The Minsk Group co-chairs have
suggested that, pending a vote, the region be given an interim status
that would be recognized by both sides.
Other sticking points include the scope and modalities of the
Armenian withdrawal from Azerbaijan's occupied Kalbacar and Lachin
districts, which are sandwiched between Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia.
Yerevan views those two districts as being of vital importance to
Karabakh's future security, and has conditioned their liberation on
stringent requirements.
What new proposals, if any, the set of basic principles that France,
Russia and the United States presented the Armenian and Azerbaijani
foreign ministers in Madrid is unclear. Azerbaijan's Foreign Ministry
spokesman Xazar Ibrahim on December 7 said the package contained
"nothing particularly new."
"There are a few nuances, but generally speaking those basic
principles are those that have been negotiated within the framework
of the Prague process," he told reporters in Baku.
In their respective speeches to the OSCE ministerial council, neither
Oskanian, nor Mammadyarov made any reference to the document they had
just received.
While noting the existence of a generally positive trend, the
Armenian foreign minister denounced what he said were Azerbaijan's
persistent threats to resort to a military solution to the conflict.
Mammadyarov, in turn, accused Armenia of "deceiving" the
international community and pursuing a policy of "fait accompli" by
sending settlers and large ammunition stockpiles to the occupied
territories.
The Madrid announcement generated relatively little interest in
Azerbaijan and Armenia -- something international mediators may view
as a frustrating circumstance. According to OSCE officials, the
co-chairs had hoped that the presentation of basic principles would
stoke public debate in both countries, thereby accelerating the
negotiation process. Such hopes, however, have not been fulfilled.
Editor's Note: Jean-Christophe Peuch is a Vienna-based freelance
correspondent, who specializes in Caucasus- and Central Asia-related
developments.