Tweet
KAZIMIROV: YEREVAN AND BAKU POSITIONS OVER KARABAKH STATUS STILL INCOMPATIBLE
Pan Armenian News
20.05.2005 04:14
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ No matter how conflicting are the political and
economic assessments of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline, it is
another "cold shower" for those who are for the force solution of the
Karabakh conflict, head of the Russian mediation mission, Russian
President's plenipotentiary representative for Nagorno Karabakh,
participant and Co-Chair of the OSCE Minsk Group in 1992-1996,
Ambassador Vladimir Kazimirov writes in Chance for Karabakh article
in the Moskovskie Novosti (Moscow News). The publication notes,
"Investors of the project hardly count more on hostilities in the
region than on the soonest return of the investments - both financial
and political. At the celebrities May 25 speaking of the military
solution of the Karabakh problem will not be favorable, while public
speakers have been playing games with the people on it for years. And
no due efforts are made to establish peace in the region. Let us
take as an example the talks between Presidents Ilham Aliyev and
Robert Kocharian. It seemed as if it is difficult to overrate their
importance for the settlement of the conflict, however the leaders are
waiting for large international forum for that. Their fourth meeting
within the past two years was held in Warsaw May 15 on the eve of the
Council of Europe summit. In Warsaw Russian and French FMs and the
US special representative supported the efforts of OSCE MG Co-Chairs,
who have been arranging the meeting of the Presidents for a long time,
calling them to a fruitful work. After a two-hour rendezvous Aliyev
and Kocharian refrained from statements. The Co-Chairs expressed
moderate optimism, noting the Presidents have confirmed their
interest in peaceful settlement. Responses are rather contradictory:
from skepticism to breaking headlines Karabakh Has Surrendered or
Armenia Will Return All Seven Regions. However Armenians spoke of
the latter already in the course of the war, the question is which
are the concessions in return. The statements of both Presidents
have shown that their positions over the main disputable issue -
the status of Nagorno Karabakh - are still incompatible. It is not
clear yet whether the skirmish will decline, whether the parties will
return to fulfillment of their commitments in compliance with the
1995 agreement on settlement of incidents, will official Baku cut
down militant rhetoric. The CoE was not suitable for the calls to
return Karabakh "by all means:" the force atavisms were left outside
European values long before. The problem of Karabakh settlement is
itself complex. Any its component is rich with nuances, as they say
"a devil in details." Only a person happy due to lack of information
can dream of a quick solution of the Karabakh problem. The real
difficulties are being burdened with something else pretty often.
Sometimes its refusal from contacts between the parties, the dragging
of the regular talks, sometimes a chase for propagandistic infusion
at expense of the negotiations, sometimes sudden attacks against the
mediators or appealing to other international organizations and feeble
calls to gain revenge by force..."
Pan Armenian News
20.05.2005 04:14
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ No matter how conflicting are the political and
economic assessments of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline, it is
another "cold shower" for those who are for the force solution of the
Karabakh conflict, head of the Russian mediation mission, Russian
President's plenipotentiary representative for Nagorno Karabakh,
participant and Co-Chair of the OSCE Minsk Group in 1992-1996,
Ambassador Vladimir Kazimirov writes in Chance for Karabakh article
in the Moskovskie Novosti (Moscow News). The publication notes,
"Investors of the project hardly count more on hostilities in the
region than on the soonest return of the investments - both financial
and political. At the celebrities May 25 speaking of the military
solution of the Karabakh problem will not be favorable, while public
speakers have been playing games with the people on it for years. And
no due efforts are made to establish peace in the region. Let us
take as an example the talks between Presidents Ilham Aliyev and
Robert Kocharian. It seemed as if it is difficult to overrate their
importance for the settlement of the conflict, however the leaders are
waiting for large international forum for that. Their fourth meeting
within the past two years was held in Warsaw May 15 on the eve of the
Council of Europe summit. In Warsaw Russian and French FMs and the
US special representative supported the efforts of OSCE MG Co-Chairs,
who have been arranging the meeting of the Presidents for a long time,
calling them to a fruitful work. After a two-hour rendezvous Aliyev
and Kocharian refrained from statements. The Co-Chairs expressed
moderate optimism, noting the Presidents have confirmed their
interest in peaceful settlement. Responses are rather contradictory:
from skepticism to breaking headlines Karabakh Has Surrendered or
Armenia Will Return All Seven Regions. However Armenians spoke of
the latter already in the course of the war, the question is which
are the concessions in return. The statements of both Presidents
have shown that their positions over the main disputable issue -
the status of Nagorno Karabakh - are still incompatible. It is not
clear yet whether the skirmish will decline, whether the parties will
return to fulfillment of their commitments in compliance with the
1995 agreement on settlement of incidents, will official Baku cut
down militant rhetoric. The CoE was not suitable for the calls to
return Karabakh "by all means:" the force atavisms were left outside
European values long before. The problem of Karabakh settlement is
itself complex. Any its component is rich with nuances, as they say
"a devil in details." Only a person happy due to lack of information
can dream of a quick solution of the Karabakh problem. The real
difficulties are being burdened with something else pretty often.
Sometimes its refusal from contacts between the parties, the dragging
of the regular talks, sometimes a chase for propagandistic infusion
at expense of the negotiations, sometimes sudden attacks against the
mediators or appealing to other international organizations and feeble
calls to gain revenge by force..."