Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NKR: A Subjective Equivalence

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

  • NKR: A Subjective Equivalence

    A SUBJECTIVE EQUIVALENCE

    Azat Artsakh Daily
    02 March 09
    Republic of Nagorno Karabakh [NKR]

    Or Why Does Matthew Bryza Maintain a Sickly Agiotage Around The
    Negotiation Process As is well known in the function of OSCE Minsk
    Group co-chairman around Nagorno Karabakh besides especial search of
    ways for settlement of Nagorno Karabakh conflict and for obtaining a
    compromise between the three conflicting parties, the maintenance of
    intensity of the process of negotiation also enters, for in order not
    to give it to enter the state of stagnation. I dare to hope that all
    the three Minsk Group co-chairmen will realize this mission in full
    measures who continue to apply considerable efforts for approaching
    to a final peaceful decision of the problem.

    However, American OSCE Minsk Group co-chairman saw the intermediary
    problem wider in spite of his French and Russian colleagues. Namely,
    to maintain not only the negotiation process, but a sickly agiotage
    around it. It has already become an original regularity that Bryza
    periodically announced strange but contradictory announcements
    which didn't do good to the peaceful process in no way. According
    to Azerbaijani Agency, American diplomat announced, "The agreement
    of the regulation of Karabakhian problem must be balanced and just
    and answer the most important demand of Azerbaijan that is, securing
    its territorial integrity". For the sake of truth, it should be not
    ed that in the interview of "Golos America" Matthew Bryza mentioned
    also the principles of rights of self -determination and non-usage of
    forces together with "the most important demands of Azerbaijan". As
    they say, that is something at least. If we take it seriously, this is
    not the first case when the diplomat has emphatically over-stressed
    "the territorial integrity" to the prejudice of self-determination,
    which is "the most important demand" of NK. More precise, NK has
    already incarnated this right, now its demands consist only in that
    this act of desire by the way, is perfect in perfect accordance with
    the norms of international law, which has again been recognized by
    the international norms and consolidated by de-jure. In the process
    of regulation of Karabakhian conflict, an amusing situation has
    already been watched in a certain sense. All the participants of
    the process, the three conflicting parts and the mediators appeal
    to the international law; however, the conclusion is not seen. The
    reason is in that everybody treats this right in one's one way. "The
    Republic of Nagorno Karabakh cannot be the part of Azerbaijan,
    there is neither juridical nor historical presupposition for this,
    and the most important is that the nation of Artsakh has no desire",
    the president of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan said. Every inhabitant of
    independent NK may sign unde r these words, because such position bases
    on the right basis which not only Azerbaijan but also mediators have
    not managed to contest. The president of Azerbaijan understood and
    treated the international law in a very peculiar way. In the interview
    to Reuter Agency given by the president of Azerbaijan in Davos, on
    January 29, Ilham Aliyev complaining to the absence of the results
    in the process of negotiation, stated the following "The problem
    can be solved only by the basis of principles of the international
    law. The given principles of the international law are foreseen by
    the conclusion of the Armenian forces from our lands and the return
    of forced resettles to these lands". We may agree that this new word
    in the international jurisprudence, so to speak, international law
    by Azerbaijani completely rejecting not likely all Helsinki final act
    of OSCE. Here it is important to know the point of view of OSCE to the
    international principles, on basis of which the given Euro-organization
    is going to decide Karabakhian problem. "For OSCE the principle of the
    nation's right to the self-determination and the state's territorial
    integrity are equal", said Goran Lenmarker, a special co-chairman of
    Parliamentary Assembly of OSCE by NK, during his regional visit on
    last week. Probably, I cannot say more particularly, and the question
    about the priority of either one or another principle=2 0 is taken
    away. However, another one is arisen. Why does M. Bryza, presenting
    OSCE as G. Lenmarker, invariable underline the primacy of the principle
    of territorial integrity to the right of self-determination? Doesn't
    such an open Azerbaijanian position keep an oil-hidden motive? As
    is well known, Mr. Bryza promotes oil interests of Washington in
    Azerbaijan, besides especial intermediary missions in the frame of
    OSCE Minsk Group. However, his, such kind of announcement, first,
    distrust is cast upon the two Armenian parts to the intermediary
    mission. Second, they allow Azerbaijan to take an uncomplying position,
    pulling out macsimalistic and demands treated from reality. It means
    that they disturb to the regulation of the process, still more hold
    away the prospects of all-embracing, balanced and just agreement,
    as M. Bryza said. Moreover, we have to treat skeptic to the words
    of G. Lenmarker about that he has seen good opportunities for the
    regulation of Nagorno Karabakh conflict in this year.
Working...
X