Tweet
news.am, Armenia
June 26 2010
Azerbaijan may unleash new war
June 26, 2010 | 13:34
Below is an interview with Richard Giragosian, Director of the
Armenian Center for National and International Studies (ACNIS).
By Artak Yeghiazaryan
Question: At present, what is the basis for negotiations for the
settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, as the Saint Petersburg
principles are being talked of?
Answer: Azerbaijan's latest provocation bereft the principles on the
table ` irrespective of whether they are Madrid principles or any
other ones ` of their importance. I think Azerbaijan is less inclined
to diplomacy now. In other words, before the provocation the OSCE
Minsk Group worked at the Madrid Principles, whereas now they are only
trying to keep Azerbaijan at the negotiating table. On the other hand,
even without that attack, the document on the table was not of
importance. The present negotiations remind me of a computer with one
side using Windows 95, the second Windows XP and the third VISTA as
documents on the table. The problem, however, is not the software, but
hardware. No matter what kind of Madrid principles or Windows we can
use, as the problem is in the computer that does not operate for the
following two reasons: first, Karabakh is absent from the computer;
second, Azerbaijan is constantly hitting the computer with a hammer.
Moreover, the computer has been divided into two halves - Armenia and
Azerbaijan ` gradually alienating from each other.
It is not important what is on the table, as the Minsk Group is now
more concerned over the possibility of Azerbaijan's not continuing the
negotiations. In this situation Armenia must say: `Stop! We want
Azerbaijan to reject a military way before we turn to the documents on
the table.' Before that, we must shift all the pressure onto
Azerbaijan and exert press the Minsk Group for putting an end to
Azerbaijan's provocations, as, diplomatically, Armenia's positions are
stronger now. The only source of threat is Azerbaijan, which means
Armenia can use its diplomatic potential and prevent U.N. or EU
resolutions.
Question: What is your opinion of the international community's
reaction, particularly of their appeals to both sides, though we are
well aware of which one is the provoker?
Answer: Indeed, the diplomatic reaction to the incident was rather
soft and lukewarm. However, the recent events have shown that the
international community realizes the following fact: Azerbaijan is the
only threat to peace and stability in the region. There is only one
aggressor, sitting on oil barrels in Baku. As to the international
community's reaction, even their soft-toned diplomatic messages show
Azerbaijan the only culprit. The international community is trying to
use a diplomatic language, but, I can assure you, public appeals and
private messages are quite different.
Question: Russian mass media recently spread information about likely
deployment of Russian peacekeepers in Nagorno-Karabakh and Turkish
ones in Nakhchivan, which was immediately followed by the incident on
the border. Do you see any linkage between these events?
Answer: Definitely there is. Russia wants to take advantage of the
situation. It is for the first time that Russia has wished to deploy
peacekeepers, but it is for the first time disadvantageous both for
Azerbaijan, Armenia and for Karabakh. I am not confident that Russia
will get what it wants. Armenian forces should ensure security of
Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia. The example of Balkan states shows that
foreign peacekeepers fail to maintain peace.
After the statements about peacekeepers' deployment in
Nagorno-Karabakh and the border incident, Iran's Ambassador stated
that Tehran will not allow presence of any foreign troops in the
conflict zone, and that the incident is a provocation organized by
external forces. What is your opinion of this?
Iran's response was in fact related to Azerbaijan and not Karabakh.
The point is Israeli press spread information that Americans and
Israelis are stationing troops in Azerbaijan, that is, taking up
positions against Iran. Naturally, under the present conditions, Iran
is more concerned over major threat that may come from Azerbaijan than
over Karabakh.
Question: Is it possible that Russia instigated the provocation on the border?
Aswer: Yes, it is logical. The provocation might help Russia to pursue
two goals. First, it is a basis for introducing troops into the
conflict zone. Russia's strength was based on two factors in Abkhazia
and South Ossetia: Russian passports were issued to the local
citizens, and Russian peacekeepers were present there. In Karabakh
Russia has neither, and, by carrying out such a policy, it is likely
to increase its influence. The second objective is as follows: Russia
has intensified its contacts with Azerbaijan for the last two years
and the Azerbaijani attack might be useful for its strategic goals. We
should understand that, in prospect, Armenia must oppose deployment of
any peacekeeping mission in the region, including Russian and NATO
ones.
Question: Azerbaijan already discusses how many days it will take them
to occupy Karabakh. How realistic is such a prospect?
Answer: From the military point of view it is quite dangerous for
Azerbaijan to think in this direction, as the losses Azerbaijan will
incur in a war will be very great. However, Azerbaijan is not rational
and there is a danger Aliyev will launch a war without hesitation,
following Saakashvili's example. Azerbaijan may begin battle, but not
a war, though I fear a battle may result in a war and the situation
will go beyond control. One thing is for sure, this summer will be
more complicated and precarious.
Question: What response will the international community give to
Azerbaijan's blackmail? Will it surrender to intimidation and make
concessions or toughen its position on Azerbaijan?
Answer: Everybody understands the Azerbaijani threats are empty and if
it starts a war, it will be defeated. After constant threats over the
years Azerbaijan is trying to show these threats are not empty, but
this country, being a dangerous one, is acting idiotically, as
launching a war will be tantamount to a suicide for it. Azerbaijan
tells the whole world: `We are children, if you do not give us
candies, we will become naughty and start fighting.' The
international community will show varied responses to this. Some
countries, particularly those who depend on oil, would like to give
Azerbaijan this candy, as this child is sitting on the pipeline.
Others will say, `Who is this idiot?' Azerbaijan will lose respect for
itself, will have failures in diplomacy and place Armenia in a more
advantageous position. One more remark: I was surprised Azerbaijan
chose this time for such a provocation. I mean it was organized in
advance of the U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's visit to the
region. Usually, when somebody is waiting for guests, he dresses
beautifully, shaves and tidies the house, whereas Aliyev, figuratively
speaking, stripped off his clothes, threw on the floor and peed on
them.
From: A. Papazian
June 26 2010
Azerbaijan may unleash new war
June 26, 2010 | 13:34
Below is an interview with Richard Giragosian, Director of the
Armenian Center for National and International Studies (ACNIS).
By Artak Yeghiazaryan
Question: At present, what is the basis for negotiations for the
settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, as the Saint Petersburg
principles are being talked of?
Answer: Azerbaijan's latest provocation bereft the principles on the
table ` irrespective of whether they are Madrid principles or any
other ones ` of their importance. I think Azerbaijan is less inclined
to diplomacy now. In other words, before the provocation the OSCE
Minsk Group worked at the Madrid Principles, whereas now they are only
trying to keep Azerbaijan at the negotiating table. On the other hand,
even without that attack, the document on the table was not of
importance. The present negotiations remind me of a computer with one
side using Windows 95, the second Windows XP and the third VISTA as
documents on the table. The problem, however, is not the software, but
hardware. No matter what kind of Madrid principles or Windows we can
use, as the problem is in the computer that does not operate for the
following two reasons: first, Karabakh is absent from the computer;
second, Azerbaijan is constantly hitting the computer with a hammer.
Moreover, the computer has been divided into two halves - Armenia and
Azerbaijan ` gradually alienating from each other.
It is not important what is on the table, as the Minsk Group is now
more concerned over the possibility of Azerbaijan's not continuing the
negotiations. In this situation Armenia must say: `Stop! We want
Azerbaijan to reject a military way before we turn to the documents on
the table.' Before that, we must shift all the pressure onto
Azerbaijan and exert press the Minsk Group for putting an end to
Azerbaijan's provocations, as, diplomatically, Armenia's positions are
stronger now. The only source of threat is Azerbaijan, which means
Armenia can use its diplomatic potential and prevent U.N. or EU
resolutions.
Question: What is your opinion of the international community's
reaction, particularly of their appeals to both sides, though we are
well aware of which one is the provoker?
Answer: Indeed, the diplomatic reaction to the incident was rather
soft and lukewarm. However, the recent events have shown that the
international community realizes the following fact: Azerbaijan is the
only threat to peace and stability in the region. There is only one
aggressor, sitting on oil barrels in Baku. As to the international
community's reaction, even their soft-toned diplomatic messages show
Azerbaijan the only culprit. The international community is trying to
use a diplomatic language, but, I can assure you, public appeals and
private messages are quite different.
Question: Russian mass media recently spread information about likely
deployment of Russian peacekeepers in Nagorno-Karabakh and Turkish
ones in Nakhchivan, which was immediately followed by the incident on
the border. Do you see any linkage between these events?
Answer: Definitely there is. Russia wants to take advantage of the
situation. It is for the first time that Russia has wished to deploy
peacekeepers, but it is for the first time disadvantageous both for
Azerbaijan, Armenia and for Karabakh. I am not confident that Russia
will get what it wants. Armenian forces should ensure security of
Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia. The example of Balkan states shows that
foreign peacekeepers fail to maintain peace.
After the statements about peacekeepers' deployment in
Nagorno-Karabakh and the border incident, Iran's Ambassador stated
that Tehran will not allow presence of any foreign troops in the
conflict zone, and that the incident is a provocation organized by
external forces. What is your opinion of this?
Iran's response was in fact related to Azerbaijan and not Karabakh.
The point is Israeli press spread information that Americans and
Israelis are stationing troops in Azerbaijan, that is, taking up
positions against Iran. Naturally, under the present conditions, Iran
is more concerned over major threat that may come from Azerbaijan than
over Karabakh.
Question: Is it possible that Russia instigated the provocation on the border?
Aswer: Yes, it is logical. The provocation might help Russia to pursue
two goals. First, it is a basis for introducing troops into the
conflict zone. Russia's strength was based on two factors in Abkhazia
and South Ossetia: Russian passports were issued to the local
citizens, and Russian peacekeepers were present there. In Karabakh
Russia has neither, and, by carrying out such a policy, it is likely
to increase its influence. The second objective is as follows: Russia
has intensified its contacts with Azerbaijan for the last two years
and the Azerbaijani attack might be useful for its strategic goals. We
should understand that, in prospect, Armenia must oppose deployment of
any peacekeeping mission in the region, including Russian and NATO
ones.
Question: Azerbaijan already discusses how many days it will take them
to occupy Karabakh. How realistic is such a prospect?
Answer: From the military point of view it is quite dangerous for
Azerbaijan to think in this direction, as the losses Azerbaijan will
incur in a war will be very great. However, Azerbaijan is not rational
and there is a danger Aliyev will launch a war without hesitation,
following Saakashvili's example. Azerbaijan may begin battle, but not
a war, though I fear a battle may result in a war and the situation
will go beyond control. One thing is for sure, this summer will be
more complicated and precarious.
Question: What response will the international community give to
Azerbaijan's blackmail? Will it surrender to intimidation and make
concessions or toughen its position on Azerbaijan?
Answer: Everybody understands the Azerbaijani threats are empty and if
it starts a war, it will be defeated. After constant threats over the
years Azerbaijan is trying to show these threats are not empty, but
this country, being a dangerous one, is acting idiotically, as
launching a war will be tantamount to a suicide for it. Azerbaijan
tells the whole world: `We are children, if you do not give us
candies, we will become naughty and start fighting.' The
international community will show varied responses to this. Some
countries, particularly those who depend on oil, would like to give
Azerbaijan this candy, as this child is sitting on the pipeline.
Others will say, `Who is this idiot?' Azerbaijan will lose respect for
itself, will have failures in diplomacy and place Armenia in a more
advantageous position. One more remark: I was surprised Azerbaijan
chose this time for such a provocation. I mean it was organized in
advance of the U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's visit to the
region. Usually, when somebody is waiting for guests, he dresses
beautifully, shaves and tidies the house, whereas Aliyev, figuratively
speaking, stripped off his clothes, threw on the floor and peed on
them.
From: A. Papazian