Tweet
AZERBAIJAN THREATENS AGAIN, DOES EVERYTHING FOR KARABAKH'S INDEPENDENCE
Armen Hareyan
HULIQ.com
http://www.huliq.com/1/354-azerbaijan-threatens-again-does-everything-karabakhs-independence
June 2 2011
SC
Unresolved conflict within Nagorno Karabakh threatens global security.
Azerbaijan insists on its territorial integrity while Armenia supports
the right of self-determination of the people of Nagorno Karabakh.
Azerbaijan threatens war.
This is exactly the mentality and approach that pushes the people
living in Nagorno Karabakh, away from Azerbaijan. It is no wonder
they seek independence.
In response to the self-determination claims of the population of
Nagorno Karabakh in 1988, the authorities of Azerbaijan organized
massacres and ethnic cleansing of the Armenian population within
the entire territory of Azerbaijan, particularly in Sumgait, Baku
and Kirovabad. In response, the people of Karabakh declared the
establishment of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic (NKR) on December 10,
1991, after an international-law-compliant referendum. The referendum
was also in accordance to the laws of the Soviet Union. At the time
the Soviet Union (USSR) had not yet fallen.
Azerbaijan waged war against NKR. Armenia sided with NKR, defending
NKR's right to self-determination. The people of NKR, fighting for
their freedom, liberated the territory as well as seven adjustment
regions to neutralize the future threat from Azerbaijan and to ensure
its security by a land border with Armenia and Iran; the only two
countries it borders today except Azerbaijan.
The United States, Russia and France are mediating the conflict and
have laid out fundamental principles on which the conflict must be
resolved. Some of those principles include the unacceptability of
the threat of war, territorial integrity, return of refugees and
a referendum to decide the final status of Nagorno Karabakh. Since
referendum basically means independence for NKR, Azerbaijan opposes
it. On presidential or administrative levels, Azerbaijan has numerous
times threatened to regain control over Nagorno Karabakh through
military means if NKR does not submit to Azerbaijan. In contrast,
Azerbaijan has promised to give NKR "broad autonomy" if NKR agrees
to be a part of Azerbaijan. In other words, "we will kill you if you
are not back, but if you return we will give you autonomy."
The latest development in this conflict is the Deauville statement
by the presidents of Russia, USA and France issued on May 26.
Specifically, the statement read, "The use of force created the current
situation of confrontation and instability. Its use again would only
bring more suffering and devastation, and would be condemned by the
international community. We strongly urge the leaders of the sides
to prepare their populations for peace, not war."
One would assume the authorities in Azerbaijan would rethink their
approach and would refrain mentioning the military solution. Yet,
the announcements on the level of presidential administration in Baku
shows that their approach has not changed.
"There is no guarantee that tomorrow or the day after tomorrow a war
between Azerbaijan and Armenia won't start," Ali M. Hasanov, a senior
presidential aide, said in an interview to NY Times. "It's peaceful
coexistence that we need, not a war. We need peaceful development. But
nothing will replace territorial integrity and the sovereignty of
Azerbaijan. If necessary we are ready to give our lives for territorial
integrity." Hasanov is disappointed because he thinks mediators "do
not do what they promised." These words show that mediators don't
believe that the conflict can be solved by forcefully pushing the
people of Nagorno Karabakh back under Azeri control.
Azerbaijan does everything it can to ensure Karabakh becomes an
independent state. Otherwise, who would in his or her right mind think
that the people of Karabakh, a mountainous region with rigid life that
shapes freedom-loving independent character, would agree to return
under Azeri control, when the authorities of Azerbaijan threaten war
and the gaining of territory by military means if Karabakh is not
returned peacefully? How could this be possible after Kosov, Easter
Timor and South Sudan? After such threats, could the people of Karabakh
even think of returning the adjacent territories when Azerbaijan keeps
threatening war? These territories, especially the two regions (Lachin
and Kelbajar) are the only land connections it has with Armenia.
The mindset has not changed in Azerbaijan's political level either.
Today, one of the prominent Azerbaijani political analysts, a member of
Trend Expert Council Rasim Musabayov keeps up the bellicose rhetoric
while talking about an expected change from the upcoming meeting of
the presidents in Kazan. "But Azerbaijan will have to escalate the
military pressure to move the process from the dead point in these
conditions," he tells Trend News Agency. "I think that the co-chairmen
also understand this and therefore they strongly recommend to move
forward." Does anyone think co-chairmen believe on escalating
"military pressure" to solve the problem? In fact the Deauville
statement says the military solution will be "condemned by the
international community" and "strongly urges" the leadership of the
two countries to prepare their nations for peace and not "escalating
military pressure." Come-on, Mr. let's talk about peace and not
military pressure. The military will not solve the existing problem.
These types of statements are not helpful.
New beginning for Armenia, Azerbaijan and Nagorno Karabakh
At the end of June the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan are
expected to meet in Kazan (Russia). According to the previously
made statements it may be fair to assume that this meeting will be
different from the previous meetings, leading to a possible change
in the current status quo. More people in Armenia and Azerbaijan,
including international observers, have agreed with this view.
As the Deauville statement reads, "only a negotiated settlement can
lead to peace, stability, and reconciliation, opening opportunities
for regional development and cooperation." It is indeed high time for
the authorities of Azerbaijan to prepare the nation for peace, not to
war. The two nations are destined to live side by side in the region.
Thus, the question is how to make sure these people live free,
but not how they will gain control over their lives. One does not
have to be a rocket scientist to see how a simple referendum and the
recognition of its results by the international community will put
an end to conflicts in Kosovo, Easter Timor and South Sudan.
From: Baghdasarian
Armen Hareyan
HULIQ.com
http://www.huliq.com/1/354-azerbaijan-threatens-again-does-everything-karabakhs-independence
June 2 2011
SC
Unresolved conflict within Nagorno Karabakh threatens global security.
Azerbaijan insists on its territorial integrity while Armenia supports
the right of self-determination of the people of Nagorno Karabakh.
Azerbaijan threatens war.
This is exactly the mentality and approach that pushes the people
living in Nagorno Karabakh, away from Azerbaijan. It is no wonder
they seek independence.
In response to the self-determination claims of the population of
Nagorno Karabakh in 1988, the authorities of Azerbaijan organized
massacres and ethnic cleansing of the Armenian population within
the entire territory of Azerbaijan, particularly in Sumgait, Baku
and Kirovabad. In response, the people of Karabakh declared the
establishment of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic (NKR) on December 10,
1991, after an international-law-compliant referendum. The referendum
was also in accordance to the laws of the Soviet Union. At the time
the Soviet Union (USSR) had not yet fallen.
Azerbaijan waged war against NKR. Armenia sided with NKR, defending
NKR's right to self-determination. The people of NKR, fighting for
their freedom, liberated the territory as well as seven adjustment
regions to neutralize the future threat from Azerbaijan and to ensure
its security by a land border with Armenia and Iran; the only two
countries it borders today except Azerbaijan.
The United States, Russia and France are mediating the conflict and
have laid out fundamental principles on which the conflict must be
resolved. Some of those principles include the unacceptability of
the threat of war, territorial integrity, return of refugees and
a referendum to decide the final status of Nagorno Karabakh. Since
referendum basically means independence for NKR, Azerbaijan opposes
it. On presidential or administrative levels, Azerbaijan has numerous
times threatened to regain control over Nagorno Karabakh through
military means if NKR does not submit to Azerbaijan. In contrast,
Azerbaijan has promised to give NKR "broad autonomy" if NKR agrees
to be a part of Azerbaijan. In other words, "we will kill you if you
are not back, but if you return we will give you autonomy."
The latest development in this conflict is the Deauville statement
by the presidents of Russia, USA and France issued on May 26.
Specifically, the statement read, "The use of force created the current
situation of confrontation and instability. Its use again would only
bring more suffering and devastation, and would be condemned by the
international community. We strongly urge the leaders of the sides
to prepare their populations for peace, not war."
One would assume the authorities in Azerbaijan would rethink their
approach and would refrain mentioning the military solution. Yet,
the announcements on the level of presidential administration in Baku
shows that their approach has not changed.
"There is no guarantee that tomorrow or the day after tomorrow a war
between Azerbaijan and Armenia won't start," Ali M. Hasanov, a senior
presidential aide, said in an interview to NY Times. "It's peaceful
coexistence that we need, not a war. We need peaceful development. But
nothing will replace territorial integrity and the sovereignty of
Azerbaijan. If necessary we are ready to give our lives for territorial
integrity." Hasanov is disappointed because he thinks mediators "do
not do what they promised." These words show that mediators don't
believe that the conflict can be solved by forcefully pushing the
people of Nagorno Karabakh back under Azeri control.
Azerbaijan does everything it can to ensure Karabakh becomes an
independent state. Otherwise, who would in his or her right mind think
that the people of Karabakh, a mountainous region with rigid life that
shapes freedom-loving independent character, would agree to return
under Azeri control, when the authorities of Azerbaijan threaten war
and the gaining of territory by military means if Karabakh is not
returned peacefully? How could this be possible after Kosov, Easter
Timor and South Sudan? After such threats, could the people of Karabakh
even think of returning the adjacent territories when Azerbaijan keeps
threatening war? These territories, especially the two regions (Lachin
and Kelbajar) are the only land connections it has with Armenia.
The mindset has not changed in Azerbaijan's political level either.
Today, one of the prominent Azerbaijani political analysts, a member of
Trend Expert Council Rasim Musabayov keeps up the bellicose rhetoric
while talking about an expected change from the upcoming meeting of
the presidents in Kazan. "But Azerbaijan will have to escalate the
military pressure to move the process from the dead point in these
conditions," he tells Trend News Agency. "I think that the co-chairmen
also understand this and therefore they strongly recommend to move
forward." Does anyone think co-chairmen believe on escalating
"military pressure" to solve the problem? In fact the Deauville
statement says the military solution will be "condemned by the
international community" and "strongly urges" the leadership of the
two countries to prepare their nations for peace and not "escalating
military pressure." Come-on, Mr. let's talk about peace and not
military pressure. The military will not solve the existing problem.
These types of statements are not helpful.
New beginning for Armenia, Azerbaijan and Nagorno Karabakh
At the end of June the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan are
expected to meet in Kazan (Russia). According to the previously
made statements it may be fair to assume that this meeting will be
different from the previous meetings, leading to a possible change
in the current status quo. More people in Armenia and Azerbaijan,
including international observers, have agreed with this view.
As the Deauville statement reads, "only a negotiated settlement can
lead to peace, stability, and reconciliation, opening opportunities
for regional development and cooperation." It is indeed high time for
the authorities of Azerbaijan to prepare the nation for peace, not to
war. The two nations are destined to live side by side in the region.
Thus, the question is how to make sure these people live free,
but not how they will gain control over their lives. One does not
have to be a rocket scientist to see how a simple referendum and the
recognition of its results by the international community will put
an end to conflicts in Kosovo, Easter Timor and South Sudan.
From: Baghdasarian