Tweet
HOW TO RETURN KARABAKH?
Azat Artsakh - Nagorno Karabakh Republic [NKR]
20 June 05
For over 17 years the Azerbaijani politicians and political scientists,
journalists, the military and defenders of rights have been racking
their brains over this question. At different times power was taken
away from five leaders of Soviet and post-Soviet Azerbaijan - Kyamran
Baghirov, Abdurrahman Vezirov, Ayaz Mutalibov, Yaghub Mamedov and
Abulfaz Elchibey - for failure in solving the Karabakh issue by Baku's
scenario. Heydar Aliev left this world and joined Kyamran Baghirov and
Abulfaz Elchibey without undoing the Karabakh knot. Now Aliev Junior
has taken up the job, promising his fellow countrymen, like his
predecessors, to return Karabakh to Azerbaijan. Each of these leaders
of Azerbaijan had their own plan of getting over the `insurgent'
people of Karabakh. Under Kyamran Baghirov they tried to scare us
through assaults of the Azerbaijani mob in Askeran, massacres were
perpetrated in Sumgait, our compatriots were forced to leave
Shushi. These did not work. Abdurrahman Vezirov, who succeeded him,
intended to assuage the Armenians (as well as the Azerbaijanis)
through political clownery until a convenient occasion occurred to
take revenge on the people of Karabakh. However, the Azerbaijanis, and
especially the Popular Front of Azerbaijan were not in the way of
joking. The Azerbaijanis would have hung Abdurahman Vezirov at the
home of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Azerbaijan if
the former USSR troops did not save him. After the famous events in
Baku in January 1990 Ayaz Mutalibov, who came to replace Vezirov,
looking quite respectable, not only did not apologize to more than 250
thousand Armenians for having displaced them through medieval methods,
but also persuaded Mikhail Gorbachov to hold the military operation
`Koltso' in the Autonomous Region of Nagorno Karabakh to force out the
Armenian population from Nagorno Karabakh. However, the quick
succession of events in Soviet Union in agony prevented the
realization of this idea Yaghub Mamedov who assumed the duties of the
leader of Azerbaijan for a short period after the dissolution of the
USSR and resignation of Ayaz Mutalibov again `failed' in the Karabakh
issue, signing armistice with the president of Armenia then Levon
Ter-Petrossian in Tehran a day before the offensive of Shushi. Abulfaz
Elchibey adopted a military method of solving the issue. He was
mistaken in his estimations as well. Then Heydar Aliev took up the
work of saving the nation through military ways. As a result
Azerbaijan lost several more regions, adjacent to Nagorno Karabakh.
The `Father of the Nation' had to alter his tactics manipulating the
factor of oil and hoping to push the third countries to put military,
political and economic pressure on Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh. Once
again failure. Finally, Ilham Aliev came to power. He seems to have
decided not to occupy with the Karabakh issue at all and leave the
whole burden of settlement with the international mediators. This
tactics has not produced sought-after results either. Meanwhile, after
the dissolution of the USSR various NGOs and human rights
organizations appeared in Azerbaijan which no more believe the
government could solve the Karabakh issue and propose their own
prescriptions. The prescriptions come to any liking, ranging from
apparently `constructive' (by Azerbaijani standards, of course) to
naive and even exotic ones. The head of the Azerbaijani National
Committee of the Helsinki Citizens Assembly, Arzu Abdulayeva has been
raving about the Aland model of resolution for many years now. The
Aland Islands where ethnic Swedish people live belong to
Finland. Aland people have a president, a parliament and a prime
minister, that is to say, also a government. They all meet under their
own flag. Besides, the Aland Islands are considered a completely
demilitarized zone, which supposes the absence of military service. If
I am not mistaken, in 1993 the NKR delegation visited the Aland
Islands for studying the experience of reconciliation and co-existence
of nations. It is notable that the speak er of the parliament of NKR
then Karen Baburian who headed our delegation, was asked what his
attitude toward the Aland model was. He unbuttoned his collar
jokingly: `Karabakh is absolutely for it, but on condition that it is
part of Finland and borders with friendly Sweden.' Thereby Karen
Baburian let the international organizers of the visit know that Asian
Azerbaijan infected with the militaristic germ is far from being
civilized European Finland. However, Arzu Abdulayeva, apparently, has
a different opinion. `We need to shift from abstract, non-concrete
judgements about the independence of Karabakh and the territorial
integrity of Azerbaijan to the discussion of opportunities of the
South Caucasians to leave at peace, like the Europeans, securing
economic, political and civil liberties,' she writes in one of her
newspaper articles. Therefore, Arzu khanum goes on, it is worth
considering whether the model of Aland Islands can serve as a ground
for national (i.e. Azerbaijani - A.G.) agreement. Any government
would have to take it into consideration. `Instead of judging about
some highest form of sovereignty (i.e. Azerbaijani - A.G.) the
authorities will have to recognize that our people accept this model,'
concludes Arzu Abdulayeva. Is this naive? Certainly. It is naive
because Arzu Abdulayeva presents the desirable for the real. Or she
lies consciously when she states that the frenzy of nationalism in
Azerbaijan has gone, and during the years of the cease-fire the
Armenians of Karabakh have become convinced that the traditional
standpoint `unification with Armenia or independence' is fruitless.
Whereas, it is not possible to build real peace based on a lie. The
representative of the political party `New Greens', political
scientist Oktay Sadekhzade presented an absolutely `constructive'
model of resolution for Azerbaijan last year. Fairly insisting that
further development of Azerbaijan and Armenia and the fates of the two
nations depend on the resolution of the conflict, Oktay Sadekhzade
proposes a three-stage plan of resolution of the conflict. In the
first stage the liberation of the occupied Azerbaijani territories
except Nagorno Karabakh and Lachin, the return of the displaced
persons and stationing of international peacemaking forces in the
region is proposed. The ratio of the international peacemaking forces
stationed in the conflict area must be the following: USA 25 %, France
25%, Russia 25 % and Turkey 25 %. According to the plan of the
Azerbaijani `Green', the second stage should be launched only after a
public opinion poll is conducted in Azerbaijan and Armenia. In this
stage the status of Nagorno Karabakh will be determined. Oktay
Sadekhzade provides a vertical - horizontal subordination of our
region to official Baku, which is difficult to understand. For the
Armenian population of Nagorno Karabakh he plans double citizenship of
Nagorno Karabakh and Azerbaijan. For this aim an exclusive amendment
is to be made to the Constitution of Azerbaijan. At the end of the
second stage Baku and Yerevan are to sign an intergovernmental
agreement by which the Lachin corridor will be rented by Armenia for
99 years and the Meghri corridor will be rented by Azerbaijan for 99
years. And finally, in the third stage, election to the local
governments will be held in Nagorno Karabakh, in which `both
communities' of the republic will take part. The republic will not
have a president, and NKR will be a parliamentary republic within
Azerbaijan. In other words, Oktay Sadekhzade proposes a rather long
process of returning the Karabakh Armenians to Azerbaijan and in the
future they will be free to leave the Armenian land for whatever place
they wish. Another project on resolution was presented to the
Azerbaijani public by one of the independent newspapers of Baku.
According to their project, the territory of the former Autonomous
Region of Nagorno Karabakh should be given the status of Free Economic
Zone for 50 years. The zone should be run by the board of directors
set up from the representatives of Nagorno Karabakh, Azerbaijan,
Armenia, as well as the members of the OSCE Minsk Group. The OSCE
Minsk Group will act as guarantor of the new status of Nagorno
Karabakh. The project provides for several other `privileges' as well,
but the passports of the NKR residents will be Azerbaijani with an
appendix of `Free Economic Zone'. The official languages of the Free
Economic Zone will be Armenian and Azerbaijani. The procedure of
legalization of the new status of NK will be carried out in parallel
with `the liberation of the occupied areas of Azerbaijan'. Well, we
have a more `delicate' plan of returning Karabakh to Azerbaijan, with
all the famous consequences for the Armenians of Karabakh, i.e. you
can leave your motherland for whatever place you like. Here are the
fresh ideas about the ways of resolution of the Karabakh issue, which
fully correspond to the modern trends. One of the authors of these is
the executive director of the National Centre for Strategic Research,
Farhad Mamedov. According to him, only democratic and powerful
Azerbaijan is able to make the West return Karabakh. One has to admit
that this is already serious. This is what we the Armenians say,
seeking for the international recognition of Nagorno-Karabakh
Republic. For this aim Farhad Mamedov points out the necessity for
holding fair parliamentary election in Azerbaijan this November. We
seek for the same in Karabakh. But this is not the real essence. In
all the models of resolution of the Karabakh conflict mentioned above
and many others not mentioned here there is not a single word about
the right of the NK Armenians for self-determination. That is to say,
the Nagorno-Karabakh issue is completely denied. Then the question
occurs: `How is it possible to solve a problem without recognizing
it?' Therefore, the Azerbaijani inventors of various formulae to
return Nagorno Karabakh to the constitutional environment of
Azerbaijan and other `kind intentions' will remain kind intentions,
not more. Although, among our neighbours there are such who doubt that
the Azerbaijani government wants to return Karabakh. Among them is the
well-known political scientist from Azerbaijan, Rasim Aghaev.
According to him, Azerbaijan had quite a lot of time to Azerbaijanize
Karabakh (about 70 years of the Soviet rule). `It was the only
reliable way of eliminating the so-called Karabakh issue,' he states
in one of his articles on the Karabakh conflict. Long live Rasim-Bey!
At least you are frank. Although, on the other hand, the leadership of
Soviet Azerbaijan was guided by the principle of Rasim Aghaev for 70
years, which gave rise to the Karabakh issue as it is now. Anyway, how
could the Azerbaijanis return Karabakh¦?
ALEXANDER GRIGORIAN.
20-06-2005
Azat Artsakh - Nagorno Karabakh Republic [NKR]
20 June 05
For over 17 years the Azerbaijani politicians and political scientists,
journalists, the military and defenders of rights have been racking
their brains over this question. At different times power was taken
away from five leaders of Soviet and post-Soviet Azerbaijan - Kyamran
Baghirov, Abdurrahman Vezirov, Ayaz Mutalibov, Yaghub Mamedov and
Abulfaz Elchibey - for failure in solving the Karabakh issue by Baku's
scenario. Heydar Aliev left this world and joined Kyamran Baghirov and
Abulfaz Elchibey without undoing the Karabakh knot. Now Aliev Junior
has taken up the job, promising his fellow countrymen, like his
predecessors, to return Karabakh to Azerbaijan. Each of these leaders
of Azerbaijan had their own plan of getting over the `insurgent'
people of Karabakh. Under Kyamran Baghirov they tried to scare us
through assaults of the Azerbaijani mob in Askeran, massacres were
perpetrated in Sumgait, our compatriots were forced to leave
Shushi. These did not work. Abdurrahman Vezirov, who succeeded him,
intended to assuage the Armenians (as well as the Azerbaijanis)
through political clownery until a convenient occasion occurred to
take revenge on the people of Karabakh. However, the Azerbaijanis, and
especially the Popular Front of Azerbaijan were not in the way of
joking. The Azerbaijanis would have hung Abdurahman Vezirov at the
home of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Azerbaijan if
the former USSR troops did not save him. After the famous events in
Baku in January 1990 Ayaz Mutalibov, who came to replace Vezirov,
looking quite respectable, not only did not apologize to more than 250
thousand Armenians for having displaced them through medieval methods,
but also persuaded Mikhail Gorbachov to hold the military operation
`Koltso' in the Autonomous Region of Nagorno Karabakh to force out the
Armenian population from Nagorno Karabakh. However, the quick
succession of events in Soviet Union in agony prevented the
realization of this idea Yaghub Mamedov who assumed the duties of the
leader of Azerbaijan for a short period after the dissolution of the
USSR and resignation of Ayaz Mutalibov again `failed' in the Karabakh
issue, signing armistice with the president of Armenia then Levon
Ter-Petrossian in Tehran a day before the offensive of Shushi. Abulfaz
Elchibey adopted a military method of solving the issue. He was
mistaken in his estimations as well. Then Heydar Aliev took up the
work of saving the nation through military ways. As a result
Azerbaijan lost several more regions, adjacent to Nagorno Karabakh.
The `Father of the Nation' had to alter his tactics manipulating the
factor of oil and hoping to push the third countries to put military,
political and economic pressure on Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh. Once
again failure. Finally, Ilham Aliev came to power. He seems to have
decided not to occupy with the Karabakh issue at all and leave the
whole burden of settlement with the international mediators. This
tactics has not produced sought-after results either. Meanwhile, after
the dissolution of the USSR various NGOs and human rights
organizations appeared in Azerbaijan which no more believe the
government could solve the Karabakh issue and propose their own
prescriptions. The prescriptions come to any liking, ranging from
apparently `constructive' (by Azerbaijani standards, of course) to
naive and even exotic ones. The head of the Azerbaijani National
Committee of the Helsinki Citizens Assembly, Arzu Abdulayeva has been
raving about the Aland model of resolution for many years now. The
Aland Islands where ethnic Swedish people live belong to
Finland. Aland people have a president, a parliament and a prime
minister, that is to say, also a government. They all meet under their
own flag. Besides, the Aland Islands are considered a completely
demilitarized zone, which supposes the absence of military service. If
I am not mistaken, in 1993 the NKR delegation visited the Aland
Islands for studying the experience of reconciliation and co-existence
of nations. It is notable that the speak er of the parliament of NKR
then Karen Baburian who headed our delegation, was asked what his
attitude toward the Aland model was. He unbuttoned his collar
jokingly: `Karabakh is absolutely for it, but on condition that it is
part of Finland and borders with friendly Sweden.' Thereby Karen
Baburian let the international organizers of the visit know that Asian
Azerbaijan infected with the militaristic germ is far from being
civilized European Finland. However, Arzu Abdulayeva, apparently, has
a different opinion. `We need to shift from abstract, non-concrete
judgements about the independence of Karabakh and the territorial
integrity of Azerbaijan to the discussion of opportunities of the
South Caucasians to leave at peace, like the Europeans, securing
economic, political and civil liberties,' she writes in one of her
newspaper articles. Therefore, Arzu khanum goes on, it is worth
considering whether the model of Aland Islands can serve as a ground
for national (i.e. Azerbaijani - A.G.) agreement. Any government
would have to take it into consideration. `Instead of judging about
some highest form of sovereignty (i.e. Azerbaijani - A.G.) the
authorities will have to recognize that our people accept this model,'
concludes Arzu Abdulayeva. Is this naive? Certainly. It is naive
because Arzu Abdulayeva presents the desirable for the real. Or she
lies consciously when she states that the frenzy of nationalism in
Azerbaijan has gone, and during the years of the cease-fire the
Armenians of Karabakh have become convinced that the traditional
standpoint `unification with Armenia or independence' is fruitless.
Whereas, it is not possible to build real peace based on a lie. The
representative of the political party `New Greens', political
scientist Oktay Sadekhzade presented an absolutely `constructive'
model of resolution for Azerbaijan last year. Fairly insisting that
further development of Azerbaijan and Armenia and the fates of the two
nations depend on the resolution of the conflict, Oktay Sadekhzade
proposes a three-stage plan of resolution of the conflict. In the
first stage the liberation of the occupied Azerbaijani territories
except Nagorno Karabakh and Lachin, the return of the displaced
persons and stationing of international peacemaking forces in the
region is proposed. The ratio of the international peacemaking forces
stationed in the conflict area must be the following: USA 25 %, France
25%, Russia 25 % and Turkey 25 %. According to the plan of the
Azerbaijani `Green', the second stage should be launched only after a
public opinion poll is conducted in Azerbaijan and Armenia. In this
stage the status of Nagorno Karabakh will be determined. Oktay
Sadekhzade provides a vertical - horizontal subordination of our
region to official Baku, which is difficult to understand. For the
Armenian population of Nagorno Karabakh he plans double citizenship of
Nagorno Karabakh and Azerbaijan. For this aim an exclusive amendment
is to be made to the Constitution of Azerbaijan. At the end of the
second stage Baku and Yerevan are to sign an intergovernmental
agreement by which the Lachin corridor will be rented by Armenia for
99 years and the Meghri corridor will be rented by Azerbaijan for 99
years. And finally, in the third stage, election to the local
governments will be held in Nagorno Karabakh, in which `both
communities' of the republic will take part. The republic will not
have a president, and NKR will be a parliamentary republic within
Azerbaijan. In other words, Oktay Sadekhzade proposes a rather long
process of returning the Karabakh Armenians to Azerbaijan and in the
future they will be free to leave the Armenian land for whatever place
they wish. Another project on resolution was presented to the
Azerbaijani public by one of the independent newspapers of Baku.
According to their project, the territory of the former Autonomous
Region of Nagorno Karabakh should be given the status of Free Economic
Zone for 50 years. The zone should be run by the board of directors
set up from the representatives of Nagorno Karabakh, Azerbaijan,
Armenia, as well as the members of the OSCE Minsk Group. The OSCE
Minsk Group will act as guarantor of the new status of Nagorno
Karabakh. The project provides for several other `privileges' as well,
but the passports of the NKR residents will be Azerbaijani with an
appendix of `Free Economic Zone'. The official languages of the Free
Economic Zone will be Armenian and Azerbaijani. The procedure of
legalization of the new status of NK will be carried out in parallel
with `the liberation of the occupied areas of Azerbaijan'. Well, we
have a more `delicate' plan of returning Karabakh to Azerbaijan, with
all the famous consequences for the Armenians of Karabakh, i.e. you
can leave your motherland for whatever place you like. Here are the
fresh ideas about the ways of resolution of the Karabakh issue, which
fully correspond to the modern trends. One of the authors of these is
the executive director of the National Centre for Strategic Research,
Farhad Mamedov. According to him, only democratic and powerful
Azerbaijan is able to make the West return Karabakh. One has to admit
that this is already serious. This is what we the Armenians say,
seeking for the international recognition of Nagorno-Karabakh
Republic. For this aim Farhad Mamedov points out the necessity for
holding fair parliamentary election in Azerbaijan this November. We
seek for the same in Karabakh. But this is not the real essence. In
all the models of resolution of the Karabakh conflict mentioned above
and many others not mentioned here there is not a single word about
the right of the NK Armenians for self-determination. That is to say,
the Nagorno-Karabakh issue is completely denied. Then the question
occurs: `How is it possible to solve a problem without recognizing
it?' Therefore, the Azerbaijani inventors of various formulae to
return Nagorno Karabakh to the constitutional environment of
Azerbaijan and other `kind intentions' will remain kind intentions,
not more. Although, among our neighbours there are such who doubt that
the Azerbaijani government wants to return Karabakh. Among them is the
well-known political scientist from Azerbaijan, Rasim Aghaev.
According to him, Azerbaijan had quite a lot of time to Azerbaijanize
Karabakh (about 70 years of the Soviet rule). `It was the only
reliable way of eliminating the so-called Karabakh issue,' he states
in one of his articles on the Karabakh conflict. Long live Rasim-Bey!
At least you are frank. Although, on the other hand, the leadership of
Soviet Azerbaijan was guided by the principle of Rasim Aghaev for 70
years, which gave rise to the Karabakh issue as it is now. Anyway, how
could the Azerbaijanis return Karabakh¦?
ALEXANDER GRIGORIAN.
20-06-2005