Tweet
IRAN INSINCERE IN ITS PROPOSAL TO MEDIATE KARABAKH CONFLICT SETTLEMENT - MP
Nasib Nasibli
news.az
April 20 2010
Azerbaijan
Why do you think Azerbaijan agreed on Iran's proposal to mediate the
Karabakh conflict settlement?
The clearest answer to this question can be provided by the Azerbaijani
foreign ministry or a group of persons who answered positively to the
proposal of the Iranian side. Nonetheless, I suppose this proposal
can be assessed as a continuation of the rhetoric conversation that
Tehran is going to hold. Everyone knows that a mediator, in this
case, a country, must have moral advantages and influence on the
conflict parties. In other words, a country that fulfills mediation
functions must have the same values which can be a model for the
conflict countries. However, Iran cannot become a model for either
Azerbaijan or Armenia.
Naturally, Iran is a big regional country. But at the same time even
if Iran has influence on Armenia, its influence on Azerbaijan is
not so big. Meanwhile, it should be noted that this proposal of the
Iranian side has 20 years of history. And this history is sad because
a part of lands was occupied in 1992, when Iran was mediating in the
resolution of the Karabakh conflict.
Thus, Iran's proposal in 1992 about the resolution of the Karabakh
conflict has failed. As is known, the Armenian side adopted protocols
in 1992 and violated them by occupying Shusha and Lachin. Even after
this case the Iranian side continues making proposals. At the same
time, it should be noted that Armenian occupation of Azerbaijani
lands is of international concern. This issue has already stepped over
the borders of the region, turning into one of the problems of world
policy. It is not by accident that as the Minsk Group co-chairs OSCE
involves the three biggest country of the world. That is participation
of Russia, the United States and France which represents the European
Union proves that the Karabakh conflict remains one of the problems
of the world policy. Therefore, I think Azerbaijan's agreement on
the proposal of the Iranian side is most likely a diplomatic etiquette.
Anyway, can Iran play a more real role in the resolution of the
Karabakh conflict than the superpowers represented in the OSCE Minsk
Group by putting forward such initiative?
On the contrary, even if we imagine that the Iranian side is sincere
in its proposal, it cannot be successful as Tehran has not enough
power for this. Iran has not enough influence to bring the heads of
both countries, communities and peoples to agreement. I do not think
Iran's mediation mission in the resolution of the Karabakh conflict
can be successful.
Why does Armenia reject Iran's mediation in Karabakh conflict
settlement?
We should not take Armenia's rejection seriously because the Iranian
side is unable to achieve peace between Azerbaijan and Armenia.
Then why did Iran need to make a proposal to mediate between the
conflict parties in the Karabakh conflict in this very historical
moment?
As I have already stated, the Iranian side has made this proposal
20 years ago. These proposals are connected with the world embargo
regarding Iran. Therefore, in order to end isolation Iran wishes
to take part in wider negotiation sites. Considering this, such an
intention of the Iranian side must be taken for natural.
The Iranian side intends to demonstrate its strength to fulfill
a mediation mission. At the same time, Iran wants to show that it
has a positive potential in the region. In addition, Iran sends a
definite message both to Azerbaijan and Armenia that it is still
a peacekeeping force. Therefore, I think Iran's proposal is more
propagandistic that practical.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Nasib Nasibli
news.az
April 20 2010
Azerbaijan
Why do you think Azerbaijan agreed on Iran's proposal to mediate the
Karabakh conflict settlement?
The clearest answer to this question can be provided by the Azerbaijani
foreign ministry or a group of persons who answered positively to the
proposal of the Iranian side. Nonetheless, I suppose this proposal
can be assessed as a continuation of the rhetoric conversation that
Tehran is going to hold. Everyone knows that a mediator, in this
case, a country, must have moral advantages and influence on the
conflict parties. In other words, a country that fulfills mediation
functions must have the same values which can be a model for the
conflict countries. However, Iran cannot become a model for either
Azerbaijan or Armenia.
Naturally, Iran is a big regional country. But at the same time even
if Iran has influence on Armenia, its influence on Azerbaijan is
not so big. Meanwhile, it should be noted that this proposal of the
Iranian side has 20 years of history. And this history is sad because
a part of lands was occupied in 1992, when Iran was mediating in the
resolution of the Karabakh conflict.
Thus, Iran's proposal in 1992 about the resolution of the Karabakh
conflict has failed. As is known, the Armenian side adopted protocols
in 1992 and violated them by occupying Shusha and Lachin. Even after
this case the Iranian side continues making proposals. At the same
time, it should be noted that Armenian occupation of Azerbaijani
lands is of international concern. This issue has already stepped over
the borders of the region, turning into one of the problems of world
policy. It is not by accident that as the Minsk Group co-chairs OSCE
involves the three biggest country of the world. That is participation
of Russia, the United States and France which represents the European
Union proves that the Karabakh conflict remains one of the problems
of the world policy. Therefore, I think Azerbaijan's agreement on
the proposal of the Iranian side is most likely a diplomatic etiquette.
Anyway, can Iran play a more real role in the resolution of the
Karabakh conflict than the superpowers represented in the OSCE Minsk
Group by putting forward such initiative?
On the contrary, even if we imagine that the Iranian side is sincere
in its proposal, it cannot be successful as Tehran has not enough
power for this. Iran has not enough influence to bring the heads of
both countries, communities and peoples to agreement. I do not think
Iran's mediation mission in the resolution of the Karabakh conflict
can be successful.
Why does Armenia reject Iran's mediation in Karabakh conflict
settlement?
We should not take Armenia's rejection seriously because the Iranian
side is unable to achieve peace between Azerbaijan and Armenia.
Then why did Iran need to make a proposal to mediate between the
conflict parties in the Karabakh conflict in this very historical
moment?
As I have already stated, the Iranian side has made this proposal
20 years ago. These proposals are connected with the world embargo
regarding Iran. Therefore, in order to end isolation Iran wishes
to take part in wider negotiation sites. Considering this, such an
intention of the Iranian side must be taken for natural.
The Iranian side intends to demonstrate its strength to fulfill
a mediation mission. At the same time, Iran wants to show that it
has a positive potential in the region. In addition, Iran sends a
definite message both to Azerbaijan and Armenia that it is still
a peacekeeping force. Therefore, I think Iran's proposal is more
propagandistic that practical.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress