Tweet
RUSSIA HOLDS KARABAKH TALKS 'TO SHOW WHO'S IN CHARGE'
news.az
Nov 3 2010
Azerbaijan
Hikmat Hajizade News.Az interviews Azerbaijan's former ambassador
to Russia, political scientist Hikmat Hajizade. How realistic is it
that the foreign ministers of Azerbaijan, Armenia and Russia will be
able to draw up an agreed version of the basic principles for talks
on a Karabakh settlement in time for the OSCE summit in Astana?
The only difficult and problematic issue in the basic principles
is the referendum on the status of Karabakh. Each of the conflict
parties does not only interpret the referendum in its favour, but also
strives to have provisions in their favour included in the adopted
documents. In other words, it's this apparently technical issue that
is the most difficult. Therefore, even if a document is prepared and
adopted at the OSCE summit in Astana, it will remain unfulfilled.
The meeting in Astrakhan was the seventh meeting of the presidents of
Azerbaijan and Armenia held at the initiative of Russian President
Dmitriy Medvedev. How do you explain Russia's increasing role in
the Karabakh conflict settlement?
Russia has the sole aim of showing the world, including Azerbaijan
and Armenia, that it is the arbiter in this region. Russia shows that
it settles issues in this region, not the OSCE Minsk Group. As someone
involved in the Karabakh conflict settlement since the 1990s, I can say
that the policy Russia has followed since the start of the conflict
is designed to show that it is in charge of the region. Russia has
always said openly to the Azerbaijani party that the Karabakh conflict
will be settled when it wants. This is how Russia shows its interest
in the Karabakh conflict, including in such apparently senseless
organized by Moscow between the presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia.
How will the humanitarian statement on an exchange of prisoners of
war and human remains influence the negotiating process on Karabakh?
Of course, this is a positive step. It is positive primarily for
those who suffered as a result of this war, in particular, soldiers
and their parents.
As for the political aspect to this, the very fact of the statement
shows a softening in the strained situation between the conflict
parties. This issue should be perceived only positively.
The Armenian side has already announced that, depending on the
resolutions on Karabakh adopted at the OSCE summit in Astana, it will
consider recognition of the independence of Karabakh. How will the
international community react to this?
If the "independence" of Karabakh is recognized, Armenia will again
be criticized by the international community. Since Kosovo gained
independence, the world has been closely watching such precedents. The
international community has already indicated that the independence
of Kosovo was a special case. However, we should admit that when the
international community says "we will never allow other formations
to recognize ourselves as independent", it should be understood that
they are being two-faced as a result of a policy of double standards.
Nevertheless, even if Armenia recognizes the "independence" of
Karabakh, all the superpowers will criticize it, reject this decision
and not recognize it. Armenia will remain on its own with its piece
of paper, recognizing Karabakh's independence.
What effective decisions may the international mediators take on
the basis of the report being drawn up on the OSCE field assessment
mission to the occupied regions of Azerbaijan?
It is impossible to take any effective steps on the basis of OSCE
solutions since the international community takes effective action
only after the relevant resolutions have been passed by the UN
Security Council. At the same time it should be taken into account
that Russia, which directly assisted Armenia in the Karabakh war,
is a member of the UN Security Council. Whenever the UN raises the
issue of a Karabakh solution and action to force the aggressor to
peace, Russia will block it. Nevertheless, the document will be
important for Azerbaijan to show to the international community what
is happening about its occupied lands. The saying that "water wears
away stone" is apposite. Submitting the Karabakh settlement to the UN
agenda should not be ignored. I think this will swing public opinion
in favour of Azerbaijan. Documents discussed and adopted at the UN
can be of use to the Azerbaijani side if war resumes.
From: A. Papazian
news.az
Nov 3 2010
Azerbaijan
Hikmat Hajizade News.Az interviews Azerbaijan's former ambassador
to Russia, political scientist Hikmat Hajizade. How realistic is it
that the foreign ministers of Azerbaijan, Armenia and Russia will be
able to draw up an agreed version of the basic principles for talks
on a Karabakh settlement in time for the OSCE summit in Astana?
The only difficult and problematic issue in the basic principles
is the referendum on the status of Karabakh. Each of the conflict
parties does not only interpret the referendum in its favour, but also
strives to have provisions in their favour included in the adopted
documents. In other words, it's this apparently technical issue that
is the most difficult. Therefore, even if a document is prepared and
adopted at the OSCE summit in Astana, it will remain unfulfilled.
The meeting in Astrakhan was the seventh meeting of the presidents of
Azerbaijan and Armenia held at the initiative of Russian President
Dmitriy Medvedev. How do you explain Russia's increasing role in
the Karabakh conflict settlement?
Russia has the sole aim of showing the world, including Azerbaijan
and Armenia, that it is the arbiter in this region. Russia shows that
it settles issues in this region, not the OSCE Minsk Group. As someone
involved in the Karabakh conflict settlement since the 1990s, I can say
that the policy Russia has followed since the start of the conflict
is designed to show that it is in charge of the region. Russia has
always said openly to the Azerbaijani party that the Karabakh conflict
will be settled when it wants. This is how Russia shows its interest
in the Karabakh conflict, including in such apparently senseless
organized by Moscow between the presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia.
How will the humanitarian statement on an exchange of prisoners of
war and human remains influence the negotiating process on Karabakh?
Of course, this is a positive step. It is positive primarily for
those who suffered as a result of this war, in particular, soldiers
and their parents.
As for the political aspect to this, the very fact of the statement
shows a softening in the strained situation between the conflict
parties. This issue should be perceived only positively.
The Armenian side has already announced that, depending on the
resolutions on Karabakh adopted at the OSCE summit in Astana, it will
consider recognition of the independence of Karabakh. How will the
international community react to this?
If the "independence" of Karabakh is recognized, Armenia will again
be criticized by the international community. Since Kosovo gained
independence, the world has been closely watching such precedents. The
international community has already indicated that the independence
of Kosovo was a special case. However, we should admit that when the
international community says "we will never allow other formations
to recognize ourselves as independent", it should be understood that
they are being two-faced as a result of a policy of double standards.
Nevertheless, even if Armenia recognizes the "independence" of
Karabakh, all the superpowers will criticize it, reject this decision
and not recognize it. Armenia will remain on its own with its piece
of paper, recognizing Karabakh's independence.
What effective decisions may the international mediators take on
the basis of the report being drawn up on the OSCE field assessment
mission to the occupied regions of Azerbaijan?
It is impossible to take any effective steps on the basis of OSCE
solutions since the international community takes effective action
only after the relevant resolutions have been passed by the UN
Security Council. At the same time it should be taken into account
that Russia, which directly assisted Armenia in the Karabakh war,
is a member of the UN Security Council. Whenever the UN raises the
issue of a Karabakh solution and action to force the aggressor to
peace, Russia will block it. Nevertheless, the document will be
important for Azerbaijan to show to the international community what
is happening about its occupied lands. The saying that "water wears
away stone" is apposite. Submitting the Karabakh settlement to the UN
agenda should not be ignored. I think this will swing public opinion
in favour of Azerbaijan. Documents discussed and adopted at the UN
can be of use to the Azerbaijani side if war resumes.
From: A. Papazian