Tweet
WILFRIED FURMAN: "BERLIN SETS A NEW VECTOR IN SETTLEMENT OF THE KARABAKH CONFLICT"
Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
Nov 5 2014
5 November 2014 - 11:54am
Interview by Orkhan Sattarov, exclusivle to Vestnik Kavkaza
The replies of the government of Germany to requests by Die Linke
about the process of settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict have
caused serious resonance in the mass media of Azerbaijan and Armenia,
about which Vestnik Kavkaza has exclusively reported. Professor
Wilfried Furman from Potsdam shared his own, quite critical, view of
the reaction of official Berlin with our publication.
- Mr. Furman, please comment on replies of the German government
to requests by Die Linke on various aspects of the Nagorno-Karabakh
settlement?
- The replies to the request of the Die Linke faction, consisting of 41
questions, are formulated naturally and diplomatically. Despite this,
these answers only strengthen the general feeling of disappointment
about the current balance of the OSCE Minsk Group. The so-called
Minsk Group has existed as an informal agency without its own budget
and office since the moment of its foundation in 1992.
Meetings of the three equal co-chairmen of the MG of OSCE with
the heads of Armenia and Azerbaijan are closed to the public,
and the national interests of the intermediaries can affect their
intermediary mission. Germany isn't completely informed on the course
of the negotiating process, as an ordinary member of the Minsk Group,
and it doesn't represent its interests, principles and assessments.
- What was the most interesting for you in the government's replies?
- So the answer of the German government is actually equated to
the fact that Azerbaijan emphasizes the principle of territorial
integrity of states, while Armenia emphasizes the right of nations to
self-determination. But can Germany put these two principles on one
scale, while Germany constantly publicly emphasizes the priority of
the principle of territorial integrity over self-determination, and
also demands referenda in the existing constitutional framework and
without parallel use of force? Does it justify the right of return
(25 years later!) to their places of original residence and the
expulsion from their homes of about one million Azerbaijanis through
the policy of genocide which was carried out by Armenians? Is the right
to self-determination for the "winner" relevant in such conditions? In
the "Madrid Principles", on the basis of which the negotiating
process is conducted, the guarantee to self-determination makes a
reservation, but it says nothing about guarantees of preservation
of territorial integrity. In the same way, in the principles it
speaks about safety guarantees, but it's not mentioned about the
need for the withdrawal of regular troops of Armenia (8000 soldiers)
and recruits from Armenia who make up the overwhelming part of the
so-called "Karabakh self-defense forces.
- The German government states in one of points that refugees from
Armenia and occupied Azerbaijani territories face a problem of
integration to the society. What can you say about it?
- This equating seems remarkable in the context of the reply of
the German government to the 29th question, where it is said that
Azerbaijan is compelled to support, to create acceptable living
conditions and to provide social integration for about one million
displaced persons and refugees. This is a huge challenge for a
developing country. Thus, further, with reference to the UNHCR,
it is said that resettlement of the people expelled from the zone
of conflict according to their original place of residence (that is,
before exile) by Azerbaijan, prevents their further integration. But
here it is necessary to take into account that, only a decade later,
the Madrid principles can be realized providing "the return of all
displaced persons and refugees.
- How can you comment on replies concerning Armenian refugees?
- In the case of Armenia the government of Germany notes that, from
an initial 360 thousand people, at present only 1599 are registered
as refugees from Azerbaijan. Thus, about 359 thousand refugees ran
off, first of all to Russia, and were also settled in the occupied
territories. From the refugees remaining in Armenia, 952 families
live in temporary living conditions. This is indicative, as Armenia
and the Armenian diaspora cope with these refugees. All of them still
live in severe temporary conditions, while the country officially
allocates 15% of its budget towards military expenses.
Concerning settling Armenian refugees (including those from Syria) in
the occupied regions of Azerbaijan, the government of Germany claims
that it "will have no effect." But for what purpose is this settling
carried out? And how will they thus manage with the estate and private
property of the Azerbaijani owners who remained in these territories?
- The German government touched on opening of the Khodzhaly airport...
- The government of Germany, obviously, proceeds from the actual
powerlessness of Azerbaijan on this question. Official Berlin notes
the strong commitment of Azerbaijan to a peaceful way of resolving
conflict on the basis of international law.
And here Azerbaijan's hands are really tied. The principles of
non-use of force and a diplomatic settlement of the conflict, which
are constantly emphasized by the federal government in principle,
actually forbid any honest intermediary from rendering any indulgences
and compromises for Armenia as part of the intermediary mission. But
the responsible approach of Azerbaijan of non-use of military force
(while Nagorno-Karabakh isn't under the military protection of
Russia), is assessed as a manifestation of powerlessness and used
by the intermediaries as an actual concession by Azerbaijan. The
use of the military option by Azerbaijan would be interpreted as a
violation of its own obligations and an unjustified use of force that
would lead to the loss of its international reputation and support
for the Armenian position. Eventually Azerbaijan would appear in
an unprofitable and difficult situation. But the opening of the
airport in Khojaly "will have an effect," according to the German
government. Azerbaijan considers this to be inadmissible. But the
co-chairmen of the MG of the OSCE only declare that the opening of the
airport can't influence the change of the status of Nagorno-Karabakh
and actually support the unrecognized "NKR" in this way (we will note
that the co-chairmen also urged the parties to reject steps which could
threaten the peace process. The opening of the airport in Khojaly
is considered in this context - editor). The government of Germany,
in turn, adds that this airport is used for supply and evacuation and
for several years Azerbaijan hasn't interfered. But such a statement
is actually encouraging for Armenia! Armenians from abroad already
put considerable investments into Shusha and Stepanakert, which have
to be connected by an aircraft service.
There is a question: if, according to the government of Germany,
supply and evacuation through Khojaly airport are silently allowed by
Azerbaijan, why doesn't Armenia also silently allow work on care for
Azerbaijani cemeteries, monuments of cultural heritage and national
identification? Where from here does realization of "measures for
restoration of trust" between the parties of the conflict begin, which
the federal government speaks about when answering the 4th question?
- What a key signal could do see in the replies by the German
government on the Karabakh issue?
- The government of Germany considers that a similar measure for
restoration of trust is the return under control of Azerbaijan,
at least, of part of the Azerbaijani lands whose occupation by
Armenia unambiguously contradicts the norms of international law. And
without the return of these territories there is no realization of
the Madrid principles, the stage-by-stage plan, the further peace
agreement. This statement by official Berlin is extremely remarkable,
as it establishes, maybe carefully, a correct vector in the search
for a solution to the conflict.
Could this be one more hope in the settlement of the conflict, along
with the recent initiative by Russian president Putin in Sochi?
Unfortunately, serious statements from Armenia testifying to its
readiness to release the Azerbaijani territories and for any other
step are still unknown. Including to the federal government of Germany.
http://vestnikkavkaza.net/interviews/politics/61771.html
Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
Nov 5 2014
5 November 2014 - 11:54am
Interview by Orkhan Sattarov, exclusivle to Vestnik Kavkaza
The replies of the government of Germany to requests by Die Linke
about the process of settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict have
caused serious resonance in the mass media of Azerbaijan and Armenia,
about which Vestnik Kavkaza has exclusively reported. Professor
Wilfried Furman from Potsdam shared his own, quite critical, view of
the reaction of official Berlin with our publication.
- Mr. Furman, please comment on replies of the German government
to requests by Die Linke on various aspects of the Nagorno-Karabakh
settlement?
- The replies to the request of the Die Linke faction, consisting of 41
questions, are formulated naturally and diplomatically. Despite this,
these answers only strengthen the general feeling of disappointment
about the current balance of the OSCE Minsk Group. The so-called
Minsk Group has existed as an informal agency without its own budget
and office since the moment of its foundation in 1992.
Meetings of the three equal co-chairmen of the MG of OSCE with
the heads of Armenia and Azerbaijan are closed to the public,
and the national interests of the intermediaries can affect their
intermediary mission. Germany isn't completely informed on the course
of the negotiating process, as an ordinary member of the Minsk Group,
and it doesn't represent its interests, principles and assessments.
- What was the most interesting for you in the government's replies?
- So the answer of the German government is actually equated to
the fact that Azerbaijan emphasizes the principle of territorial
integrity of states, while Armenia emphasizes the right of nations to
self-determination. But can Germany put these two principles on one
scale, while Germany constantly publicly emphasizes the priority of
the principle of territorial integrity over self-determination, and
also demands referenda in the existing constitutional framework and
without parallel use of force? Does it justify the right of return
(25 years later!) to their places of original residence and the
expulsion from their homes of about one million Azerbaijanis through
the policy of genocide which was carried out by Armenians? Is the right
to self-determination for the "winner" relevant in such conditions? In
the "Madrid Principles", on the basis of which the negotiating
process is conducted, the guarantee to self-determination makes a
reservation, but it says nothing about guarantees of preservation
of territorial integrity. In the same way, in the principles it
speaks about safety guarantees, but it's not mentioned about the
need for the withdrawal of regular troops of Armenia (8000 soldiers)
and recruits from Armenia who make up the overwhelming part of the
so-called "Karabakh self-defense forces.
- The German government states in one of points that refugees from
Armenia and occupied Azerbaijani territories face a problem of
integration to the society. What can you say about it?
- This equating seems remarkable in the context of the reply of
the German government to the 29th question, where it is said that
Azerbaijan is compelled to support, to create acceptable living
conditions and to provide social integration for about one million
displaced persons and refugees. This is a huge challenge for a
developing country. Thus, further, with reference to the UNHCR,
it is said that resettlement of the people expelled from the zone
of conflict according to their original place of residence (that is,
before exile) by Azerbaijan, prevents their further integration. But
here it is necessary to take into account that, only a decade later,
the Madrid principles can be realized providing "the return of all
displaced persons and refugees.
- How can you comment on replies concerning Armenian refugees?
- In the case of Armenia the government of Germany notes that, from
an initial 360 thousand people, at present only 1599 are registered
as refugees from Azerbaijan. Thus, about 359 thousand refugees ran
off, first of all to Russia, and were also settled in the occupied
territories. From the refugees remaining in Armenia, 952 families
live in temporary living conditions. This is indicative, as Armenia
and the Armenian diaspora cope with these refugees. All of them still
live in severe temporary conditions, while the country officially
allocates 15% of its budget towards military expenses.
Concerning settling Armenian refugees (including those from Syria) in
the occupied regions of Azerbaijan, the government of Germany claims
that it "will have no effect." But for what purpose is this settling
carried out? And how will they thus manage with the estate and private
property of the Azerbaijani owners who remained in these territories?
- The German government touched on opening of the Khodzhaly airport...
- The government of Germany, obviously, proceeds from the actual
powerlessness of Azerbaijan on this question. Official Berlin notes
the strong commitment of Azerbaijan to a peaceful way of resolving
conflict on the basis of international law.
And here Azerbaijan's hands are really tied. The principles of
non-use of force and a diplomatic settlement of the conflict, which
are constantly emphasized by the federal government in principle,
actually forbid any honest intermediary from rendering any indulgences
and compromises for Armenia as part of the intermediary mission. But
the responsible approach of Azerbaijan of non-use of military force
(while Nagorno-Karabakh isn't under the military protection of
Russia), is assessed as a manifestation of powerlessness and used
by the intermediaries as an actual concession by Azerbaijan. The
use of the military option by Azerbaijan would be interpreted as a
violation of its own obligations and an unjustified use of force that
would lead to the loss of its international reputation and support
for the Armenian position. Eventually Azerbaijan would appear in
an unprofitable and difficult situation. But the opening of the
airport in Khojaly "will have an effect," according to the German
government. Azerbaijan considers this to be inadmissible. But the
co-chairmen of the MG of the OSCE only declare that the opening of the
airport can't influence the change of the status of Nagorno-Karabakh
and actually support the unrecognized "NKR" in this way (we will note
that the co-chairmen also urged the parties to reject steps which could
threaten the peace process. The opening of the airport in Khojaly
is considered in this context - editor). The government of Germany,
in turn, adds that this airport is used for supply and evacuation and
for several years Azerbaijan hasn't interfered. But such a statement
is actually encouraging for Armenia! Armenians from abroad already
put considerable investments into Shusha and Stepanakert, which have
to be connected by an aircraft service.
There is a question: if, according to the government of Germany,
supply and evacuation through Khojaly airport are silently allowed by
Azerbaijan, why doesn't Armenia also silently allow work on care for
Azerbaijani cemeteries, monuments of cultural heritage and national
identification? Where from here does realization of "measures for
restoration of trust" between the parties of the conflict begin, which
the federal government speaks about when answering the 4th question?
- What a key signal could do see in the replies by the German
government on the Karabakh issue?
- The government of Germany considers that a similar measure for
restoration of trust is the return under control of Azerbaijan,
at least, of part of the Azerbaijani lands whose occupation by
Armenia unambiguously contradicts the norms of international law. And
without the return of these territories there is no realization of
the Madrid principles, the stage-by-stage plan, the further peace
agreement. This statement by official Berlin is extremely remarkable,
as it establishes, maybe carefully, a correct vector in the search
for a solution to the conflict.
Could this be one more hope in the settlement of the conflict, along
with the recent initiative by Russian president Putin in Sochi?
Unfortunately, serious statements from Armenia testifying to its
readiness to release the Azerbaijani territories and for any other
step are still unknown. Including to the federal government of Germany.
http://vestnikkavkaza.net/interviews/politics/61771.html