Tweet
'REFERENDUM SHOULD DETERMINE NAGORNO KARABAKH'S FINAL STATUS'
By Tatoul Hakobian
AZG Armenian Daily #184
13/10/2005
Stepanakert Labels ICG's Second Report 'one-sided and pro-Azeri'
The International Crisis Group published its second report "Nagorno
Karabakh: A Plan for Peace" on October 11. "The two sides appear close
to agreeing on key principles of a peace deal", says Sabine Freizer,
Director of Crisis Group's Caucasus Project. "It is essential that
the governments now begin preparing their people for a compromise".
"Nagorno Karabakh's status should ultimately be determined by an
internationally sanctioned referendum with the exclusive participation
of Karabakh Armenians and Azeris", reads the report. The ICG emphasizes
that the referendum can be held only after the Azeris return to
their homes in Karabakh as well as "an international conference
will determine that NK meets the criteria of statehood". But before
the referendum the ICG offers the following major steps to take:
withdrawal of Armenia-backed Nagorno Karabakh forces from the occupied
districts of Azerbaijan surrounding the entity (from Aghdam, Fizuli,
Jebrail, Zangelan in the first stage and Kelbajar and Lachin in
the second. The Lachin corridor is supposed to remain a link between
Armenian and Karabakh); renunciation by Azerbaijan of the use of force
to reintegrate the entity and deployment of international peacekeepers
(before withdrawal of Karabakh forces from Kelbajar and Lachin); return
of displaced persons and re-opening of trade and communication links.
When will the referendum take place and what are the possible status
options? The ICG thinks that a referendum is realistic in 10 or 20
years. As a result, Karabakh can get independence, wide autonomy within
Azerbaijan, reunification with Armenia or status of confederation with
Azerbaijan. The ICG suggests leaving Nagorno Karabakh in the structure
of Azerbaijan before the referendum "though in practical terms it
would be self-governing and enjoy an internationally acknowledged
interim status".
The ICG report is under close scrutiny of authorities in
Stepanakert and comments can be expected in a few days. Yet,
in a phone conversation with daily Azg, Davit Babayan, political
analyst from Karabakh, said that "in general, the second report is
the first one's continuation. It was prepared with the same spirit
and is clearly pro-Azeri". Babayan thinks the sequence of regulation
steps unacceptable as offered by the ICG report unacceptable as it
offers first return of territories and displaced Azeris - settlement
of consequences of the conflict - only after which the sides turn
to the status - the cause of the conflict. Moreover, he thinks it
unacceptable to leave Nagorno Karabakh within Azerbaijan before the
day of the referendum.
"This shows that the authors of the report offer no option for conflict
regulation to the sides. Every report has its circles of influence
but when it considers the interests of only one side it throws back
settlement. This second report by the ICG is also one-sided and
pro-Azeris, alas," Babayan said.
The 40-page repot contains more references to Azeri or pro-Azeri
sources than Armenian and Artsakhi. The cited Armenian sources are
compromising in essence.
By Tatoul Hakobian
AZG Armenian Daily #184
13/10/2005
Stepanakert Labels ICG's Second Report 'one-sided and pro-Azeri'
The International Crisis Group published its second report "Nagorno
Karabakh: A Plan for Peace" on October 11. "The two sides appear close
to agreeing on key principles of a peace deal", says Sabine Freizer,
Director of Crisis Group's Caucasus Project. "It is essential that
the governments now begin preparing their people for a compromise".
"Nagorno Karabakh's status should ultimately be determined by an
internationally sanctioned referendum with the exclusive participation
of Karabakh Armenians and Azeris", reads the report. The ICG emphasizes
that the referendum can be held only after the Azeris return to
their homes in Karabakh as well as "an international conference
will determine that NK meets the criteria of statehood". But before
the referendum the ICG offers the following major steps to take:
withdrawal of Armenia-backed Nagorno Karabakh forces from the occupied
districts of Azerbaijan surrounding the entity (from Aghdam, Fizuli,
Jebrail, Zangelan in the first stage and Kelbajar and Lachin in
the second. The Lachin corridor is supposed to remain a link between
Armenian and Karabakh); renunciation by Azerbaijan of the use of force
to reintegrate the entity and deployment of international peacekeepers
(before withdrawal of Karabakh forces from Kelbajar and Lachin); return
of displaced persons and re-opening of trade and communication links.
When will the referendum take place and what are the possible status
options? The ICG thinks that a referendum is realistic in 10 or 20
years. As a result, Karabakh can get independence, wide autonomy within
Azerbaijan, reunification with Armenia or status of confederation with
Azerbaijan. The ICG suggests leaving Nagorno Karabakh in the structure
of Azerbaijan before the referendum "though in practical terms it
would be self-governing and enjoy an internationally acknowledged
interim status".
The ICG report is under close scrutiny of authorities in
Stepanakert and comments can be expected in a few days. Yet,
in a phone conversation with daily Azg, Davit Babayan, political
analyst from Karabakh, said that "in general, the second report is
the first one's continuation. It was prepared with the same spirit
and is clearly pro-Azeri". Babayan thinks the sequence of regulation
steps unacceptable as offered by the ICG report unacceptable as it
offers first return of territories and displaced Azeris - settlement
of consequences of the conflict - only after which the sides turn
to the status - the cause of the conflict. Moreover, he thinks it
unacceptable to leave Nagorno Karabakh within Azerbaijan before the
day of the referendum.
"This shows that the authors of the report offer no option for conflict
regulation to the sides. Every report has its circles of influence
but when it considers the interests of only one side it throws back
settlement. This second report by the ICG is also one-sided and
pro-Azeris, alas," Babayan said.
The 40-page repot contains more references to Azeri or pro-Azeri
sources than Armenian and Artsakhi. The cited Armenian sources are
compromising in essence.