Tweet
Eurasianet
http://www.eurasianet.org
EURASIA INSIGHT
AZERBAIJANI HOPES FOR PEACE DWINDLE WITH KARABAKH DISCLOSURE
Shahin Abbasov and Khadija Ismailova 7/13/06
The sudden disclosure of details from a draft peace agreement on the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict has sparked a surge in pro-war sentiments in
Azerbaijan, analysts say, amid a growing conviction that negotiations
with Armenia serve little purpose.
The tone for Azerbaijan's official reaction was set on June 22 when
President Ilham Aliyev, addressing military school graduates, termed
the so-called "Prague process" of regular talks about the disputed
enclave "ineffective." [For background see the Eurasia insight
archive]. The remarks followed a statement from the Organization for
Security and Cooperation in Europe's Minsk Group, the body charged with
mediating negotiations, and a Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty interview
with US Minsk Group co-chair Matthew Bryza that identified an Armenian
troop withdrawal from the seven occupied Azerbaijani territories and
a possible referendum on Karabakh's status as among the key points
of a proposed framework agreement. The disclosure was reportedly made
in an attempt to prompt public discussion about the plan.
In an early July interview with the Turkish newspaper Jumhirriyet,
however, Aliyev went on to stress that no agreements had ever been
reached between the two sides. "Armenia and Azerbaijan are very
far from agreement. There are some proposals from the Minsk Group
co-chairs, but their last statement disclosed only a few of these
proposals."
Bryza's assertion that an agreement now depends on Aliyev and Armenian
President Robert Kocharian alone has been interpreted as a sign that
the international community itself recognizes that mediation of the
talks has reached a stalemate.
"The style of the disclosure by the co-chairs. . . clearly demonstrated
that the issue is not resolved at all, and that the co-chairs would
be happy to escape responsibility for any future development such
as a resumption of war," Ilgar Mammadov, an independent political
analyst in Baku, commented.
(Ilgar Mammadov serves on the board of the Open Society Institute
Assistance Foundation-Azerbaijan. EurasiaNet operates under the
auspices of the Open Society Institute in New York.) Mammadov,
however, argued that the perceived failure should come as no
surprise. He suggested that the Armenian and Azerbaijani, deep down,
aren't interested in talking to each other. "In November 2005,
Mr. Kocharian had to survive a critical constitutional referendum,
and Mr. Aliyev had to do the same with his first parliamentary
elections. They both needed Western support at the polls, and,
therefore, since January 2005 they pretended that progress was being
made at the negotiations," said Mammadov. "The co-chairs understood
their motives, but still accepted the game in the hope of making use
of it. They failed."
The proposed referendum on the status of Nagorno-Karabakh, however,
has nonetheless stirred particular concern among both government
officials and the general public. Contrary to Armenia's interpretation
that such a referendum would be held in Karabakh alone, Azerbaijanis
contend that the vote on the territory's status must be held nationwide
in Azerbaijan proper as well as in the disputed enclave. The OSCE
statement itself does not specify the conditions under which any
referendum would be held.
"Everybody understands that any referendum conducted only in
Nagorno-Karabakh will result in the dismemberment of the country and
Azerbaijan cannot accept that," commented Eldar Namazov, president
of the For Azerbaijan Public Forum, a Baku-based non-governmental
organization, and a former advisor to the late President Heydar Aliyev.
In his interview with Jumhuriyet, Aliyev dismissed as misleading
Armenian discussion of the proposed referendum as a quid pro quo
for a withdrawal from the seven Azerbaijani territories that border
on Nagorno-Karabakh.
"Armenia sometimes talks about unreal things. Meanwhile, the reality is
that Azerbaijan's territorial integrity is not a topic for discussions
and Nagorno-Karabakh will never get independence," he said.
Talks between Armenia and Azerbaijan, "together with all of
Azerbaijan," about Karabakh's status, can only begin after Azerbaijani
residents return to the enclave, Aliyev continued. "The future will
show how much time is needed for such negotiations."
Local experts cotend that the co-chairs' statements on the Karabakh
talks have fanned pro-war sentiment in Azerbaijan. "The popular
argument in Baku is that if a reality created by force is acceptable,
then we should create one favorable to Azerbaijan whenever the
opportunity appears," Mammadov said.
According to Aliyev, the only way to avoid war over Karabakh is
for Armenia to withdraw from the occupied territories without
preconditions. "War must not be ruled out. There is a fragile
cease-fire regime, no security measures are provided at the
front-line. There are no countries separating us, no peacekeeping
troops. Thus, an 'unpleasant incident' can appear at any time,"
he told Jumhirriyet.
Azerbaijan's opposition, its political position considerably
diminished after the November 2005 parliamentary elections, has
also expressed readiness to take up arms for Nagorno-Karabakh. Ali
Kerimli, leader of the Popular Front Party of Azerbaijan (PFPA),
one of the country's largest opposition parties, has pledged to be
at the front line himself if war breaks out. "I will be at the front
and will call on my supporters to take part in the liberation war,"
he said. According to Kerimli, in 1997 Azerbaijan's opposition parties
signed a joint memorandum that they would cooperate with all political
parties if war occurs in Nagorno-Karabakh.
In keeping with that approach, the PFPA, in a rare show of solidarity
with the government, also supports Aliyev's refusal to compromise
on Karabakh.
"The international community will put pressure on the Azerbaijani
leadership, demanding that it accept these principles [in the draft
framework agreement]. But the Azerbaijani opposition, even though the
government always saw us as enemies. . .must support the authorities
to stand up to this pressure," Kerimli told the news site Day.az on
July 10.
Meanwhile, a series of mysterious fires in the occupied territories,
which first broke out in early June, has further fueled a sense of
building conflict. Armenian officials have denied that the fires were
deliberately set, while the Azerbaijani foreign ministry has published
photos taken from space that it alleges show entire villages burning.
Some Azerbaijanis, especially in the region of Agdam, close to the
frontline, interpret the blazes as a sign that Armenian troops will
soon withdraw. "They do it because they want us to find only burned
villages when we go back to our homes," commented Alesger Mammadli,
a Baku-based lawyer originally from Agdam region.
Editor's Note: Shain Abbasov is a freelance journalist in Baku. Khadija
Ismayilova is an analyst based in Washington, DC.
http://www.eurasianet.org
EURASIA INSIGHT
AZERBAIJANI HOPES FOR PEACE DWINDLE WITH KARABAKH DISCLOSURE
Shahin Abbasov and Khadija Ismailova 7/13/06
The sudden disclosure of details from a draft peace agreement on the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict has sparked a surge in pro-war sentiments in
Azerbaijan, analysts say, amid a growing conviction that negotiations
with Armenia serve little purpose.
The tone for Azerbaijan's official reaction was set on June 22 when
President Ilham Aliyev, addressing military school graduates, termed
the so-called "Prague process" of regular talks about the disputed
enclave "ineffective." [For background see the Eurasia insight
archive]. The remarks followed a statement from the Organization for
Security and Cooperation in Europe's Minsk Group, the body charged with
mediating negotiations, and a Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty interview
with US Minsk Group co-chair Matthew Bryza that identified an Armenian
troop withdrawal from the seven occupied Azerbaijani territories and
a possible referendum on Karabakh's status as among the key points
of a proposed framework agreement. The disclosure was reportedly made
in an attempt to prompt public discussion about the plan.
In an early July interview with the Turkish newspaper Jumhirriyet,
however, Aliyev went on to stress that no agreements had ever been
reached between the two sides. "Armenia and Azerbaijan are very
far from agreement. There are some proposals from the Minsk Group
co-chairs, but their last statement disclosed only a few of these
proposals."
Bryza's assertion that an agreement now depends on Aliyev and Armenian
President Robert Kocharian alone has been interpreted as a sign that
the international community itself recognizes that mediation of the
talks has reached a stalemate.
"The style of the disclosure by the co-chairs. . . clearly demonstrated
that the issue is not resolved at all, and that the co-chairs would
be happy to escape responsibility for any future development such
as a resumption of war," Ilgar Mammadov, an independent political
analyst in Baku, commented.
(Ilgar Mammadov serves on the board of the Open Society Institute
Assistance Foundation-Azerbaijan. EurasiaNet operates under the
auspices of the Open Society Institute in New York.) Mammadov,
however, argued that the perceived failure should come as no
surprise. He suggested that the Armenian and Azerbaijani, deep down,
aren't interested in talking to each other. "In November 2005,
Mr. Kocharian had to survive a critical constitutional referendum,
and Mr. Aliyev had to do the same with his first parliamentary
elections. They both needed Western support at the polls, and,
therefore, since January 2005 they pretended that progress was being
made at the negotiations," said Mammadov. "The co-chairs understood
their motives, but still accepted the game in the hope of making use
of it. They failed."
The proposed referendum on the status of Nagorno-Karabakh, however,
has nonetheless stirred particular concern among both government
officials and the general public. Contrary to Armenia's interpretation
that such a referendum would be held in Karabakh alone, Azerbaijanis
contend that the vote on the territory's status must be held nationwide
in Azerbaijan proper as well as in the disputed enclave. The OSCE
statement itself does not specify the conditions under which any
referendum would be held.
"Everybody understands that any referendum conducted only in
Nagorno-Karabakh will result in the dismemberment of the country and
Azerbaijan cannot accept that," commented Eldar Namazov, president
of the For Azerbaijan Public Forum, a Baku-based non-governmental
organization, and a former advisor to the late President Heydar Aliyev.
In his interview with Jumhuriyet, Aliyev dismissed as misleading
Armenian discussion of the proposed referendum as a quid pro quo
for a withdrawal from the seven Azerbaijani territories that border
on Nagorno-Karabakh.
"Armenia sometimes talks about unreal things. Meanwhile, the reality is
that Azerbaijan's territorial integrity is not a topic for discussions
and Nagorno-Karabakh will never get independence," he said.
Talks between Armenia and Azerbaijan, "together with all of
Azerbaijan," about Karabakh's status, can only begin after Azerbaijani
residents return to the enclave, Aliyev continued. "The future will
show how much time is needed for such negotiations."
Local experts cotend that the co-chairs' statements on the Karabakh
talks have fanned pro-war sentiment in Azerbaijan. "The popular
argument in Baku is that if a reality created by force is acceptable,
then we should create one favorable to Azerbaijan whenever the
opportunity appears," Mammadov said.
According to Aliyev, the only way to avoid war over Karabakh is
for Armenia to withdraw from the occupied territories without
preconditions. "War must not be ruled out. There is a fragile
cease-fire regime, no security measures are provided at the
front-line. There are no countries separating us, no peacekeeping
troops. Thus, an 'unpleasant incident' can appear at any time,"
he told Jumhirriyet.
Azerbaijan's opposition, its political position considerably
diminished after the November 2005 parliamentary elections, has
also expressed readiness to take up arms for Nagorno-Karabakh. Ali
Kerimli, leader of the Popular Front Party of Azerbaijan (PFPA),
one of the country's largest opposition parties, has pledged to be
at the front line himself if war breaks out. "I will be at the front
and will call on my supporters to take part in the liberation war,"
he said. According to Kerimli, in 1997 Azerbaijan's opposition parties
signed a joint memorandum that they would cooperate with all political
parties if war occurs in Nagorno-Karabakh.
In keeping with that approach, the PFPA, in a rare show of solidarity
with the government, also supports Aliyev's refusal to compromise
on Karabakh.
"The international community will put pressure on the Azerbaijani
leadership, demanding that it accept these principles [in the draft
framework agreement]. But the Azerbaijani opposition, even though the
government always saw us as enemies. . .must support the authorities
to stand up to this pressure," Kerimli told the news site Day.az on
July 10.
Meanwhile, a series of mysterious fires in the occupied territories,
which first broke out in early June, has further fueled a sense of
building conflict. Armenian officials have denied that the fires were
deliberately set, while the Azerbaijani foreign ministry has published
photos taken from space that it alleges show entire villages burning.
Some Azerbaijanis, especially in the region of Agdam, close to the
frontline, interpret the blazes as a sign that Armenian troops will
soon withdraw. "They do it because they want us to find only burned
villages when we go back to our homes," commented Alesger Mammadli,
a Baku-based lawyer originally from Agdam region.
Editor's Note: Shain Abbasov is a freelance journalist in Baku. Khadija
Ismayilova is an analyst based in Washington, DC.