Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"The US And Russia Rivaling For The Laurels Of Peacemaker In The Kar

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • "The US And Russia Rivaling For The Laurels Of Peacemaker In The Kar

    "THE US AND RUSSIA RIVALING FOR THE LAURELS OF PEACEMAKER IN THE KARABAKH CONFLICT": NAGORNO-KARABAKH PRESS DIGEST

    Regnum, Russia
    May 10 2006

    Consultations of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs

    PanARMENIAN.Net reports the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs Yuri Merzlyakov
    (Russia), Steven Mann (US) and Bernard Fassier (France) to hold
    consultations in Moscow on May 2-3. Russian Deputy FM Grigory Karasin
    met with the co-chairs and the personal representative of the OSCE
    chairman-in-office Andrzej Kasprzyk May 2. The sides discussed the
    current issues for the Karabakh conflict settlement, reports the
    press service of the Russian Foreign Ministry.

    OSCE MG Russian Co-Chair Yuri Merzlyakov says that it is the first
    time the co-chairs are consulting behind closed doors. He says
    that they will consider how to settle the conflict and how to bring
    the sides closer to agreement. The co-chairs will also discuss new
    proposals, will try to reach a consensus over the moot points and will
    present this formula to the sides during their upcoming visit to the
    region. 525th Daily (Baku) says that the failure of the Rambouillet
    meeting and the following inaction in the peace process show that
    the sides are not willing to concede. This is also proved by the last
    statements of the co-chairs. What they are saying implies that they
    have no more new proposals to keep the process moving. The daily
    reports that during the Azeri president's Washington meeting last
    week US Co-Chair Steven Mann said that they were beginning to see some
    effective basis for compromise. He did not specify what basis he was
    talking about but just said that they were planning not full and final
    resolution, but stage-by-stage settlement of some moot points. The
    daily says that, in principle, this is in line with Azerbaijan's
    stage-by-stage scenario, but, with the present differences between
    the sides, it is not clear how much practicable this "stage-by-stage
    resolution" is.

    APA news agency (Baku) reports that on May 3, after the OSCE MG
    co-chairs' Moscow consultations with the personal representative of
    the OSCE chairman-in-office Andrzej Kasprzyk, French Co-Chair Bernard
    Fassier went to Yerevan and then to Baku. APA says that in Moscow
    the mediators specified some details, which they have to formulate
    and present to the conflicting sides.

    Asked "what proposals has OSCE MG French Co-Chair Bernard Fassier
    brought to Yerevan and how good will they be for the Karabakh peace
    process?" Armenian FM Vardan Oskanyan says: "Very much will depend on
    the political will of Azerbaijan. I don't want to link this all with
    Azerbaijan, but Armenia has already taken definite steps, and, if we
    want success in the matter, Azerbaijan should take them too." A1+
    reports Oskanyan to say that after their individual visits to the
    region the OSCE MG co-chairs have come to a conclusion that the
    presidents should meet once again, but they have not yet decided
    where and when.

    Commenting on Bernard Fassier's "one more tour of the region" 525th
    Daily says that the fact that he came alone proves that the MG have
    not yet found a new optimal formula of how to resume the peace process
    and need some more consultations with the sides. The daily says that
    after Fassier's visit to the region the MG will meet again - in either
    Washington or Paris - to finalize the formula and to present it to
    the sides. For this purpose, they will organize a new meeting of the
    Azeri and Armenian presidents in June-July.

    Fassier's consultations with the Azeri leadership will mostly probably
    held Mar 5 or May 6, says Zerkalo daily (Baku). The co-chairs have,
    in fact, stopped visiting the region together. Even though they
    all said quite recently that after the Moscow consultations they
    will jointly visit Baku and Yerevan, what we see now is, in fact,
    a shuttle diplomacy by two ally-co-chairs - the US and France. After
    their individual visits to the region, the US and French co-chairs -
    who seem to have formed a perfect tandem - just inform their Russian
    colleague about the results. It seems that the Russian co-chair has -
    at least temporarily - moved away - or has been removed from the peace
    talks, says the daily. The latter is quite possible - for, as far
    as the daily knows, the decision to stop joint visits to the region
    was made not in Moscow by the co-chairs themselves but in Washington
    by the Department of States. The daily says that before the Moscow
    consultations the US DS bureau representative for Europe and Eurasia
    Terry Davidson said that there would be no joint visit right after the
    consultations, while just a day before Russian Co-Chair Yuri Merzlyakov
    stressed that he was not planning to visit the region alone without
    his colleagues. The daily also reminds that before the Rambouillet
    meeting it was Merzyakov who was the most talkative of the three.

    The US, together with the other two co-chairs of the OSCE MG,
    continues its efforts to resolve the Karabakh conflict. It gives
    high importance to its cooperation with Russia and hopes that that
    country will play a positive role in the matter, 525th Daily reports
    US Assistant Secretary of State for Europe and Eurasia Daniel Fried
    as saying during debates at the Brookings Institution (Washington). He
    said that the establishment of peace and stability and the resolution
    of conflicts in the South Caucasus is the priority of the US' regional
    policy, and Russia is also interested in this. Fried said that in
    this sphere the US and Russia cooperate mostly in the Karabakh peace
    process, and, despite pessimism by some analysts and media, there is
    no reason for US-Russian tensions in this region.

    Still, the US and Russia are taking no practical steps to resolve
    the conflict, says the daily. Both stress that the sides must resolve
    their conflict themselves and expect relevant initiatives from them.

    On the other hand, however ardently they may deny this, the two
    super powers are actually rivaling for the laurels of peacemaker in
    the conflict, which makes the possibility of their joint mediation
    rather disputable.

    The failure in Rambouillet was natural. The same failure awaits any
    new attempt to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict according to
    the scheme "territories/security zone in exchange for NK status,"
    the political reviewer of the Noyan Tapan information-analytical
    center David Petrossyan said at the Apr 28 Caucasus 2005 international
    conference. This scheme - saying that the Armenian side should withdraw
    its troops from the security zone around Nagorno-Karabakh and then
    Azerbaijan should agree to hold a referendum on NK's status - is
    unacceptable for either side. This scheme was most appropriate in 1994,
    after the conclusion of the cease fire agreement - when after their
    military collapse the Azeris were ready to agree that Karabakh was lost
    for them for ever, and Armenia did not yet have a doctrine that the
    territories controlled by the Armenians or the "zone of security" must
    in no way be given back to the Azeris. But in the next two post-war
    years, while Russia and the OSCE were sorting out their relations,
    the two societies had developed two quite opposite doctrines: in Baku
    - the doctrine of "postponed revenge," in Yerevan - the doctrine of
    "security zone," says Petrossyan. He says that the present Armenian
    and Azeri leaders will not agree to the "territories/security zone
    against status" scheme as this agreement runs contrary to the above
    two doctrines and may lose Kocharyan and Aliyev their offices. The
    idea of international peacekeeping is not popular either. So, today
    the mediators have no alternative to the above doctrines. There is a
    serious crisis of ideas in the negotiating process, and there is an
    urgent need for new ones.

    Azg daily publishes the principles of the Republican Party of Armenia
    (RPA), proclaimed by its leader, Armenian Prime Minister Andranik
    Margaryan. He says: "The Rambouillet talks did not fail - simply, the
    sides failed to reach agreement on some key issues. Nagorno-Karabakh
    Republic must not be part of Azerbaijan, the NKR population must be
    given security guarantees, NKR and Armenia must have common border,
    the NKR problem must not be solved at the expense of Armenia's
    borders and NKR must be a party to the negotiating process. That's
    RPA's position on the Karabakh conflict settlement."

    Zerkalo daily calls "a sensation" the statement of OSCE MG US
    Co-Chair Steven Mann that an effective basis for compromise has
    been found. One important principle is that the MG has given up
    its attempts to resolve all the problems once and for all. Now the
    approach is opposite: moving forward step by step and leaving some
    complex issues for the future. In fact, Mann has made public the MG's
    mechanism of the Karabakh conflict settlement. The daily links Mann's
    words with the "new settlement proposals" mentioned by Azeri FM Elmar
    Mamedyarov for the first time after his meeting with US Secretary
    of State Condoleezza Rice, and with the fact that the selfsame "new
    proposals" were presented by Rice to Armenian FM Vardan Oskanyan in
    Washington. The daily reports both sides to approve of them.

    The daily's reviewer Rauf Mirkadyrov concludes that the question is
    about the proposal made by the co-chairs of the Dartmouth Conference
    workgroup on regional conflicts Harold Saunders (ex deputy of
    Henry Kissinger) and Vitaly Naumkin (well-known Russian diplomat,
    orientalist) during their recent visit to the region. That is, the
    question is about "a framework agreement" on peaceful settlement
    of the Armenian-Azeri conflict - a framework that will include a
    whole series of "intermediate agreements" on withdrawal of troops,
    return of refugees, provision of security. Nagorno-Karabakh is given
    "an intermediate status" to be finalized at the concluding stage of
    the conflict settlement. The whole point is in Nagorno-Karabakh's
    "intermediate status," which, though not internationally legalized,
    makes the NK Armenians a party to the negotiating process and no longer
    isolated and allows foreign states and international organizations
    to establish "legal" relations with them. "The sheep is safe, the
    wolves satisfied" - at least, for some time: Baku can parade its no
    responsibility for NK's future status, Yerevan can calm down its
    public that the "intermediate status" makes Arkady Gukasyan "the
    recognized leader of an unrecognized state." But let's not forget
    that there is nothing more permanent than something temporary.

    Besides, we have already witnessed something of the kind in Kosovo.

    There too "unrecognized authorities" have been given "an intermediate
    status." And what has come of it - we all know.

    The director of the Caucasian Institute of Mass Media, political
    scientist Alexander Iskandaryan says than in the Karabakh peace
    process the conflicting sides continue their efforts to freeze the
    conflict. Karabakh is just something to talk about. Everybody says
    that when a political decision is made, the process will get more
    specific. But all the parties concerned perfectly know that no
    political decision will be made, says Iskandaryan.

    The research worker of the Institute of World Economy and International
    Relations of the Academy of Sciences of Russia Alexander Krylov says
    that the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is like the Israeli-Palestinian
    or Taiwan conflicts, which have stayed unresolved for many decades
    already. "I would call them slack conflicts, conflicts that will not be
    resolved in the near future. The talks are underway, then they stop,
    then everything takes its normal course," says Krylov. He does not
    think that the US-Azeri relations over Iran will have an impact on
    the Karabakh peace process.

    There are more common than different points between the
    Israeli-Palestinian and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflicts, the director of
    the Tel Aviv Institute of Eastern Europe and the CIS, Knesset member
    Alexander Tsinker says to PanARMENIAN.Net. "Geographically, Israel
    and Nagorno-Karabakh cannot 'go away' from Arabs and Azerbaijan,
    respectively. Besides, this is a conflict of civilizations: Israel
    conflicts with Arabs, Christians with Islam."

    At that Tsinker notes that Israel is already trying to resolve its
    problem by demarcating its border. "In due time the international
    community will recognize this border. The same thing may expect
    Karabakh."

    Azeri political expert Oktay Atakhan says that all this activity in
    the Karabakh problem comes from the interests of the US who wants
    to deal a strike on Iran. "And today as never before the US wants
    Armenia and Azerbaijan to reach whatever agreement so it can use
    their territories as outposts for its strikes on Iran. The objective
    of this new political game is to bring Armenia and Azerbaijan to
    agreement and to return five districts. For example, they will start
    from Fizuli, then Jebrail, then Agdam. The co-chair-states want to do
    this stage by stage, with each stage taking one month. For example:
    in a month one district, say, Fizuli, is liberated and protected by
    international peacekeepers. But the key point is that the US will
    use this one month for arranging its outposts in that district and
    in 1-2 months to do what it wants to do against Iran." (Echo)

    Citing RFE/RL, Haykakan Zhamanak daily reports NATO Parliamentary
    Assembly President Pierre Lellouche to invite the Armenian and Azeri
    presidents to take part in the PA meeting in Paris in late May. "I
    have been myself, just before I was president of the Assembly, to see
    Armenian President Robert Kocharyan and Azeri President Ilham Aliyev.

    We are trying to help in finding a solution. The Caucasus needs
    stability. Both Azerbaijan and Armenia need to do something else other
    than just building weapons and being in this state of cold war,"
    Lellouche said in a talk with RFE/RL Azeri correspondent. "I have
    been in the trenches in Nagorno-Karabakh and I know how difficult
    it is for the two nations. So, I have invited Kocharyan and Aliyev
    to Paris because I'm hoping that the two presidents will work it out
    through negotiations and the war is not a solution."

    Aliyev's visit to the US

    Commenting on the results of his talks with US President George Bush,
    Azeri President Ilham Aliyev says that he has told Bush that the
    Nagorno-Karabakh conflict can be resolved exclusively in line with
    the international law. "Azerbaijan's occupied lands must be given
    back, the refugees must be allowed to go back to their homes and
    security guarantees must be provided. There are no changes in our
    positions. And President Bush said that the US wants the problem to
    be solved peacefully," says Aliyev. (Day.Az)

    Azeri FM Elmar Mamedyarov calls Aliyev's Washington talks "very
    useful." He says that the sides have discussed "global and regional
    problems." Special attention was given to the Karabakh conflict and
    the situation over Iran. Azerbaijan advocates peaceful stage-by-stage
    resolution of the conflict in the framework of the "Prague Process."

    This means that the Armenian troops must be withdrawn from
    Nagorno-Karabakh and nearby districts, the territory demined,
    refugees taken back to their homes and only then the status of NK
    be determined. Mamedyarov says that NK's status must be considered
    jointly with the region's Armenian and Azeri communities, i.e. with
    the Azeris who lived in the region before the conflict. (525th Daily)

    US Congressmen Joe Knollenberg, Frank Pallone, George Radanovich and
    Adam Shiff have urged US President George Bush to condemn Azerbaijan's
    actions against Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh. They say that Azerbaijan
    is waging a "cold war" against Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh. The Azeri
    authorities are threatening with war and cultivating anti-Armenian
    moods. Azerbaijan's actions are breaking stability in the South
    Caucasus. In defiance of international criticism, Azeri President
    Ilham Aliyev is reiterating that Azerbaijan may start a new military
    attack on Karabakh. The congressmen also remind Bush that in Dec
    2005 Azeri soldiers destroyed Armenian cultural monuments in Old Juga
    (Nakhichevan, Azerbaijan) (ARKA)

    Haykakan Zhamanak daily calls "a sensation" the statement of Azeri
    President Ilham Aliyev before his meeting with US President George
    Bush that Azerbaijan will not support the US if it starts hostilities
    against Iran. This statement was contrary to the general unanimity that
    Aliyev was invited to the US exactly and exclusively for discussing
    Azerbaijan's involvement in the anti-Iranian program.

    Thereby, Aliyev has spoiled the US' plans. Commenting on Aliyev's
    statement, political expert Agasi Arshakyan says that the US wants
    to deploy its troops all along the Azeri-Iranian border so that the
    Iranian opposition be sure that Iran's territorial integrity will
    not be broken. That is, America needs this to prevent the possible
    attempts by the Northern Iranian Azeris to reunify with their
    "mother-Azerbaijan." This is certainly not what Azerbaijan and,
    possibly, Turkey want, says Arshakyan.

    Azeri independent analyst Ilgar Mamedov says that for the first time
    Azerbaijan has got a chance to speak about Karabakh in the context
    of the Iranian problem, and this may open up new prospects in the
    Karabakh conflict settlement. (RL)

    Aravot daily gives several remarkable statements on Karabakh from
    Azeri President Ilham Aliyev's speech in the Carnegie Fund Foreign
    Affairs Council. "We hope that, as a super power and OSCE MG co-chair,
    the US will help to resolve the Karabakh conflict and to finally
    establish peace in the region." "Today the Karabakh problem is
    the key obstacle to Azerbaijan's development. In everything else
    we are doing brilliantly: our budget is growing, energy programs
    are enlarging." Asked what concessions the winner Armenia can make,
    Aliyev says: "First of all, in my opinion, Armenia has not won the
    war. Everybody knows that without Russians Armenians would never be
    able to occupy our territories. Besides, the war is not over yet. I
    think it's time for the Armenian authorities to make a decision and
    to try to imagine what will become of Armenia in 10-15 years if the
    problem stays unresolved." "Azerbaijan's future is easy to predict:
    it will become a strong, prospering country with strong economy
    and society, a country one better be a neighbor with." Aliyev says
    that peace is good for all the sides. In exchange for concessions,
    Armenia will get communications, links with Russia, which "is very
    important for it," access to regional programs. The Nagorno-Karabakh
    people will be allowed to live in peace. "Our firm position is that
    the problem must be solved in the context of Azerbaijan's territorial
    integrity," says Aliyev and suggests his settlement scenario: "The
    Karabakh Armenians will be given high autonomy in the framework of
    Azerbaijan's territorial integrity in analogy with many European
    countries. They must be given strong political guarantees that peace
    in region will be irreversible." Aliyev made these statements in
    Washington on the eve of his meeting with Bush. So Aravot assumes
    that he might have been encouraged for this.

    Azeri political expert Rasim Musabekov gives an interview to Day.Az
    (abridged - REGNUM):

    "What an effect will Ilham Aliyev's visit to the US have on the
    Karabakh conflict settlement?"

    Obviously, it is exactly the US who is trying to give the Karabakh
    peace process a new impulse in the context of the so-called Prague
    process. And, if not Bush personally, then the deputy secretary of
    state and the US co-chair of the OSCE MG, have expressed optimism in
    the matter. They say that the positive result is very much possible.

    The co-sponsorship of a strong power like the US may prove decisive
    for the process. Furthermore, the US is acting in close constructive
    cooperation with the EU and Russia. Aliyev says that he has told
    Bush about our concerns and that we can't concede beyond the limits
    of the international law. I think that this time our arguments and
    expectations might well be given more understanding.

    When will Armenian President Robert Kocharyan visit the US and what
    an effect will his visit have?

    I can't say anything specific, but, according to the Armenian media,
    Kocharyan is getting ready and will visit the US soon. In economy
    and energy, Armenia is of no interest for the US. As Moscow's loyal
    ally, Yerevan can't be helpful in the regional problems either. So,
    the only reason why the US has invited Kocharyan is to push through
    its settlement proposals and to show balance in its relations with
    the conflicting sides.

    Armenian FM Vardan Oskanyan says that all the three OSCE MG co-chairs
    will visit the region in May and that the Armenian and Azeri presidents
    may meet in June. Is there any sense in the presidents' meeting if
    the sides are not ready for concessions?

    If we take the package resolution, no progress is possible because of
    incompatibility of positions, but in the context of the stage-by-stage
    resolution (exactly what the co-chairs are proposing), there seemingly
    are some formulas that can set the process afoot. And dodgy and
    stubborn as they are, the Armenians will hardly succeed this time in
    the face of the joint will of the US, Russia and the EU.

    PACE President Rene van der Linden says that the Nagorno-Karabakh
    conflict must be resolved, first of all, for the sake of the younger
    generation. Whole generations of Armenians and Azeri have already
    grown up without seeing each other. How can one hope that the Karabakh
    problem can be solved on this basis?

    This factor is certainly present. But more important is the
    understanding that Azerbaijan's growing economic power with the
    continuing occupation of its lands will inevitably lead to a new war.

    None of the great and regional powers wants this. That's why they are
    trying to help the process out of deadlock. Indeed, there still are
    people in Azerbaijan and Armenia who have the experience of peaceful
    co-existence, and until it is too late we must use this potential
    for building and restoring bridges of confidence.

    From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Working...
X