Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Karabakh Said Its Word Yerevan's Turn Came

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

  • Karabakh Said Its Word Yerevan's Turn Came

    KARABAKH SAID ITS WORD YEREVAN'S TURN CAME
    Lilit Poghosyan

    Hayots Ashkhar Daily
    21 Nov 08
    Armenia

    They Shouldn't Pull The Wool Over The People's Eyes

    Political Scientist Sergey Shakaryants expresses his viewpoint
    regarding the last visit of the Co-Chairmen to the region.

    "I'm confident and the last visit of the Co-Chairmen to the region also
    showed that Karabakh issue won't be settled in the coming one year.

    The settlement of the conflict is not only and not as much conditioned
    by the desire of the conflicting parties, it is rather conditioned
    by big geopolitical maneuvers, that the superpowers realize in our
    region for the last 16 years.

    >From the first years of Armenia's getting independent, various
    mechanisms have been practiced in that political maneuver, beginning
    from energy projects and communications, to interethnic clashes. At
    the moment they practice the religious-political-educational factor,
    the levers to "control" the region have become so various that the
    countries like Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia are unfortunately
    unable to overcome, on their own, the trilateral or quadrilateral
    attack of the interested states.

    The problem is as follows: who will rule the region, on the one hand
    to turn South Caucasus into a military fulcrum and on the other hand,
    not to allow South Caucasus to turn into a military fulcrum against
    someone.=2 0It is quite understandable that Russia and Iran are the
    supporters of the second factor, with which Armenia is in very good
    relations. NATO member states are the champions of the first factor,
    and Armenia is in good relations with some of these countries as well
    and with some we don't have even diplomatic relations.

    This rivalry, and the contradictions between the super-powers which
    have their own interests in the region, at least at this stage make
    the settlement of Karabakh issue unsolvable. But it is difficult to
    say what can happen after one year, if certain circles start military
    actions against Iran."

    "From what you said we can draw a single conclusion, that nothing
    depends on us and no one asks the opinion of the conflicting parties
    especially Karabakh?"

    "I wouldn't say that. In case of being consistent Karabakh can become
    a factor in regional processes and from now on it must try to take
    actions in that direction.

    Moreover it has already started. The President, the MPs, the
    representatives of the executive body and the high-ranking officials
    of the armed forces have already expressed their stance. And by the
    way very harsh stance, saying that until Karabakh participates in
    the negotiations as a competent unit, no one should hope that any
    solution dictated from this or that capital city, can be brought to
    life. Karabakh has in essence said its word now Yere van's turn came.

    By inviting the leaders of the parties for a consultation President
    Serge Sargsyan was most probably trying to solve that issue. That
    is to say to hear the standpoints of all the political forces and to
    formulate a joint opinion: "How does society view the settlement of
    the conflict.

    Unfortunately we don't have similar practice, because Karabakh issue
    is the vital problem, which can unite us around one idea and far not
    a person.

    Either our society will unite like we did in 1988; by adopting a united
    stance in this issue or they will remain split among two or more poles.

    Anyhow the massage of the President, from Karabakh in this regard
    gives hope."

    "The activists of the Armenian Pan National Movement swear everything
    was ok before 1998, Karabakh was involved in the negotiation process
    as a full party, but the moment Robert Kocharyan came Karabakh was
    withdrawn from the negotiations. Do you agree to these assessments?"

    "I'm sorry but they shouldn't pull the wool over the people's
    eyes. Karabakh was withdrawn from the negotiation format 11 years back,
    after the Lisbon Summit in December 1996. Let those who were in power
    during those years explain, whether it was a secret agreement or an
    instruction imposed on Armenia by means of blackmail. Those who brought
    Robert Kocharyan to Armenia from Stepanakert and appointed him a Prime
    Minister and said that from that day on Armenia was to represent the
    interests of Nagorno Karabakh in the negotiation process. In my view
    everyone understand that the conversation is about the first President
    "re-elected" by falsifications in 1996 and his team.

    After 1998 Robert Kocharyan tried to review that agreement several
    times and it is recorded in the press, you can have a look at
    it. But because they had the signature of the previous President,
    the Co-Chairmen and Azerbaijan refused it. In such circumstances,
    to insist on Karabakh's participation would have meant to torpedo
    Minsk process. So they chose the least of the two evils, long-term,
    even if fruitless meetings, and negotiations by bilateral format. Every
    bullet has its billet.
Working...
X