Tweet
CO-CHAIRS NOT TO TOLERATE CHANGES
VARDAN GRIGORYAN
Hayoc Ashkharh
20 Sept 2007
The recent regional visit of the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs Matthew
Bryza, Yuri Merzlyakov and Bernard Fassier had an aim to maintain and
fix the results attained in the Karabakh peace process in the course
of the recent years, at the same time leaving the fundamental
principles of the "Prague process" unchanged, as those principles are
necessary for proceeding with the talks.
That's to say, by holding their meetings in Stepanakaert, Yerevan
and Baku, the representatives of the mediator countries were trying to
resolve two cardinal problems which have a fundamental importance for
them.
First: to make it clear to the parties that the OSCE Minsk Group
format and the regular stage of the negotiations conducted on its
basis, i.e. the Prague process, will not be subjected to any changes
in the near future by the unilateral imitative of any of the parties.
Second: the Presidential elections expected in the two countries in
2008 must not lead to the revision of the results already attained;
therefore, as Matthew Bryza, the American Co-Chair of the OSCE Minsk
Group emphasized in Yerevan, "The most important thing is for us to be
able to record what has taken place in the course of these years, so
as the next President will have grounds for moving forward."
Thus, for the coming year, the cardinal goal of the Co-Chairs is to
maintain the existing status quo in the Karabakh peace process, so
that after the presidential elections there will be no need to start
everything anew, either in terms of form or in terms of contents.
Therefore, any proposal (even though the most constructive) made in
Stepanakert, Yerevan or Baku with the purpose of changing the status
quo was viewed by them as a purely consultative material which can be
discussed in future when any process enters a qualitatively new stage.
It first of all concerns the issue of involving the Nagorno
Karabakh Republic in the negotiation process, and the Co-Chairs did
not display their fundamental objections with regard to the issue.
Moreover, they emphasized the fact that it will become an imperative
at some stage of the negotiations. However, at the current stage, when
the Co-Chairs have a major task to fix the existing status quo, they
diplomatically avoid to transfer the issue to a practical plane.
The reason is obvious: they follow the principle of "not changing
the horses while crossing the river"; therefore, the Co-Chairs are
concerned about ensuring the safety and integrity of the "coach".
It is natural that from the angle of those priorities adopted by
the Co-Chairs, the main obstacles that were sketched during the
regional visit were in Baku. Here, there have recently been persistent
discussions on the importance of transferring the Karabakh issue to
the UN Tribunal, and as an alternative - advance the threat of
resuming the military operations. We have once noticed that Baku makes
this kind of statements of question with the purpose of blackmailing
the international community and extorting confessions in favor of
Azerbaijan.
This observation was proven during the Co-Chairs' press-conference
held in Baku when, at the request of the journalists, Bernard Fassier,
one of the Co-Chairs had to comment upon Ilham Aliev's most recent
promises on solving the problem by use of force in case of the failure
of the "Prague process". The French Co-Chair immediately announced,
"Today, your President has highly appreciated the Co-Chair's work, and
everybody is well-aware of his words regarding the peaceful resolution
of the conflict." The Co-Chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group resolutely and
unanimously rejected Azerbaijan's intentions of transferring the
Karabakh settlement process to the UN tribunal.
It turns out that the Co-Chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group at first
sight visited the region only with the purpose of livening up the
talks and, if possible - organizing a meeting between the two
countries' Presidents in autumn. But they weren't much worried by the
risk of the failure of this short-term task. The principal issue,
however, is the task of forming a certain stable and unchangeable
status. And we believe that the Co-Chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group have
managed to accomplish the tasks of maintaining the negotiation format
and fixing the results, already attained in the course of the
negotiations.
Therefore, the GUAM countries' attempts towards transferring of the
resolution of the Karabakh conflict to the UN Tribunal will confront a
serious resistance by the Co-Chair countries of the OSCE Minsk Group.
At the same time, meetings among the representatives of the parties
will also be organized in the near future "probably not so frequently
and not at such short intervals," as noted by the French Co-Chair B.
Fassier. And those meetings aim to impart a new spirit to the to the
negotiation process, after the electoral marathon which is to end in
autumn 2008.
Actually, in view of the most recent regional visit of the OSCE
Minsk Group co-Chairs, we are dealing with a partial freezing of the
negotiation process which, however, is temporary. And such freezing
will be maintained within the course of the coming one-year period.
VARDAN GRIGORYAN
Hayoc Ashkharh
20 Sept 2007
The recent regional visit of the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs Matthew
Bryza, Yuri Merzlyakov and Bernard Fassier had an aim to maintain and
fix the results attained in the Karabakh peace process in the course
of the recent years, at the same time leaving the fundamental
principles of the "Prague process" unchanged, as those principles are
necessary for proceeding with the talks.
That's to say, by holding their meetings in Stepanakaert, Yerevan
and Baku, the representatives of the mediator countries were trying to
resolve two cardinal problems which have a fundamental importance for
them.
First: to make it clear to the parties that the OSCE Minsk Group
format and the regular stage of the negotiations conducted on its
basis, i.e. the Prague process, will not be subjected to any changes
in the near future by the unilateral imitative of any of the parties.
Second: the Presidential elections expected in the two countries in
2008 must not lead to the revision of the results already attained;
therefore, as Matthew Bryza, the American Co-Chair of the OSCE Minsk
Group emphasized in Yerevan, "The most important thing is for us to be
able to record what has taken place in the course of these years, so
as the next President will have grounds for moving forward."
Thus, for the coming year, the cardinal goal of the Co-Chairs is to
maintain the existing status quo in the Karabakh peace process, so
that after the presidential elections there will be no need to start
everything anew, either in terms of form or in terms of contents.
Therefore, any proposal (even though the most constructive) made in
Stepanakert, Yerevan or Baku with the purpose of changing the status
quo was viewed by them as a purely consultative material which can be
discussed in future when any process enters a qualitatively new stage.
It first of all concerns the issue of involving the Nagorno
Karabakh Republic in the negotiation process, and the Co-Chairs did
not display their fundamental objections with regard to the issue.
Moreover, they emphasized the fact that it will become an imperative
at some stage of the negotiations. However, at the current stage, when
the Co-Chairs have a major task to fix the existing status quo, they
diplomatically avoid to transfer the issue to a practical plane.
The reason is obvious: they follow the principle of "not changing
the horses while crossing the river"; therefore, the Co-Chairs are
concerned about ensuring the safety and integrity of the "coach".
It is natural that from the angle of those priorities adopted by
the Co-Chairs, the main obstacles that were sketched during the
regional visit were in Baku. Here, there have recently been persistent
discussions on the importance of transferring the Karabakh issue to
the UN Tribunal, and as an alternative - advance the threat of
resuming the military operations. We have once noticed that Baku makes
this kind of statements of question with the purpose of blackmailing
the international community and extorting confessions in favor of
Azerbaijan.
This observation was proven during the Co-Chairs' press-conference
held in Baku when, at the request of the journalists, Bernard Fassier,
one of the Co-Chairs had to comment upon Ilham Aliev's most recent
promises on solving the problem by use of force in case of the failure
of the "Prague process". The French Co-Chair immediately announced,
"Today, your President has highly appreciated the Co-Chair's work, and
everybody is well-aware of his words regarding the peaceful resolution
of the conflict." The Co-Chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group resolutely and
unanimously rejected Azerbaijan's intentions of transferring the
Karabakh settlement process to the UN tribunal.
It turns out that the Co-Chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group at first
sight visited the region only with the purpose of livening up the
talks and, if possible - organizing a meeting between the two
countries' Presidents in autumn. But they weren't much worried by the
risk of the failure of this short-term task. The principal issue,
however, is the task of forming a certain stable and unchangeable
status. And we believe that the Co-Chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group have
managed to accomplish the tasks of maintaining the negotiation format
and fixing the results, already attained in the course of the
negotiations.
Therefore, the GUAM countries' attempts towards transferring of the
resolution of the Karabakh conflict to the UN Tribunal will confront a
serious resistance by the Co-Chair countries of the OSCE Minsk Group.
At the same time, meetings among the representatives of the parties
will also be organized in the near future "probably not so frequently
and not at such short intervals," as noted by the French Co-Chair B.
Fassier. And those meetings aim to impart a new spirit to the to the
negotiation process, after the electoral marathon which is to end in
autumn 2008.
Actually, in view of the most recent regional visit of the OSCE
Minsk Group co-Chairs, we are dealing with a partial freezing of the
negotiation process which, however, is temporary. And such freezing
will be maintained within the course of the coming one-year period.