Saturday, February 11, 2012


Caucasus Report

Mediators Note Progress In Munich Karabakh Talks

Armenian President Serzh Sarkisian (left) watches military exercises in Nagorno-Karabakh on October 22.
TEXT SIZE - +
Armenian President Serzh Sarkisian and his Azerbaijani counterpart Ilham Aliyev met for four hours in Munich on November 22 to continue their discussions of the so-called Basic Principles for resolving the Karabakh conflict drafted by the OSCE Minsk Group.

The group's three co-chairmen said after the meeting that progress was made in unspecified areas, while other issues "remain open."

The Munich meeting was the sixth between the two presidents this year, and according to the French co-chairman, Ambassador Bernard Fassier, it was "particularly long, because very constructive, detailed, and in-depth discussions took place between the two presidents on all the basic elements that have yet to be agreed on. Some of these elements were discussed for the first time in such a detailed and deepened manner."

Toward A Referendum?

Former U.S. Minsk group co-chairman Matthew Bryza told RFE/RL after the two presidents' second meeting this year (in Prague in May) that there are 10-20 "Basic Principles." Fassier did not say which ones were discussed in depth in Munich for the first time, but the Russian daily "Vremya novostei" on November 23 quoted an unidentified "source close to the talks" as saying that the discussion encompassed the nature of the "temporary status" to be bestowed on the unrecognized Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (NKR) after the signing of a formal settlement and pending the holding of a referendum on its final status; the wording of the preamble to the settlement agreement; and the future status of the Lachin corridor that forms a land bridge between the NKR and Armenia.

The Basic Principles envisage "special modalities" for Lachin and Kelbacar, including the deployment of international peacekeepers. The two presidents reportedly did not discuss the logistics of the referendum on the region's final status.

On the eve of the Munich meeting, Aliyev had warned, as he did during a July address to the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London, that if it failed to yield results, Azerbaijan would abandon all hopes of resolving the conflict peacefully. Aliyev noted that the UN Charter allows for the "liberation of our territory by military means."

...And Two Steps Back

Such threats represent a step back from the declaration that Aliyev, Sarkisian, and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed in Moscow in November 2008 affirming their shared commitment to seeking a peaceful solution to the conflict.

The three Minsk Group co-chairs delivered a diplomatically worded but clear rebuke to Aliyev on November 22. Fassier told journalists that "in Moscow, Paris, and Washington, our governments are of the opinion that war is not an option because war could be providing no solution."

Russian co-chairman Yury Merzlyakov similarly said that "we have told the presidents that at this delicate moment of negotiations, it's better to refrain from making disproportionate accusations toward each other and especially not to talk about the possibility of a forcible solution to the issue."

Sarkisian's press spokesman Samvel Farmanian issued a statement on November 23 warning that "if the peaceful negotiations are interrupted and hostilities start, then nothing will prevent the Republic of Armenia from recognizing Nagorno-Karabakh's independence."

Yerevan has declined for the past 18 years to do so, most recently on November 12, when the Armenian government rejected a bill drafted by the opposition Zharangutiun (Heritage) party "On Recognition of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic."
This forum has been closed.
Comment Sorting
Comments
     
by: RD
November 24, 2009 17:22
War did not resolve the NKR conflict, and that is why we are here today after dozens of meetings between presidents and foreign ministers. What makes Ilham Aliev think war will resolve the problem this time around? Sounds very logical to me. If you try something and it fails, try the same mistake again and again in the hopes that it will work next time around. Solid leader Azerbaijan has. Diplomacy is difficult, but much easier than sinking your country into chaos as a result of war. Even if Azerbaijan regains NKR, what does Ilham Aliev think the Armenians will do this time around. Accept the fact that they are part of Azerbaijan again and live happily ever after?

by: greg from: virginia
November 24, 2009 18:50
if aliev cannot abide by an agreement he already signed pledging non-use of force, who in their right mind believes the armenians can afford to trust Aliev's signature on a peace agreement? The fact is, azerbaijani's are silly with the desire to break out their oil purchased army and wipe out the karabagh armenians. they have no interest in any negotiation that involves compromise. they want karabagh to capitulate. so let them have their war and see how easy it will be to get karabagh to capitulate that way.

by: HA!
November 25, 2009 14:30
Aliyev noted that the UN Charter allows for the "liberation of our territory by military means." ... OSCE Minsk Group should first deal with Aliyev monarchic hunger. Maybe reform school with Tibetan monks? Only then Aliyev should meet with civilized men... For the sake of progress of the Nagorno-Karabakh settlement and a peaceful future in the South-Caucasus.

by: Hamik C Gregory from: Reno,Nevada USA
November 25, 2009 20:31
Russians are no longer in Azerbaijan. If Azerbaijanis continues threatening Armenia, the Armenian ambassador in Iran should start encouraging the Iranian leadership in Tehran to abrogate Golestan (1813) and Torkemanchayi Treaties (1924) and put an immediate claim on Azeri territory. It’s about time Azerbaijanis joined their former native homeland. Many sincerely religious Shia Azeris might in fact be delighted. They will be able to go to the Iranian mosques and Shia holy pilgrimage centers in Mashhad and Quom and worship their God without Aliev’s government bulling them. And for the Iranians, Baku oil fields and southwestern Caspian continental shelf oil reserves might be too tempting. To the delight of Armenians, with the West being preoccupied in Afghanistan and Iraq, Iranians might march all the way to Baku and overthrow Aliev’s threatening government.
It was unfortunate that Fathali Shah-e Ghagar of Persia being preoccupied with Circassian and Georgian slave girls in his harem, ignored to protect the northwestern periphery of his empire. Armenians can help Iranians to declare abovementioned two treaties null and void and eventually annex Azeri territory. It will be nice to get rid of a mean, cantankerous, and bellicose enemy.

by: Nick from: USA
December 02, 2009 23:55
Very interesting moment !!! Armenians so bold in speeches and only from
out of Karabah!? Real situation in the Karabah is very hard. Residents of
Karabah need peace as air. Armenians who not from Karabah only don't understand what really need to their nation fellows. Somebody today happy in Karabah ??!

by: RD
December 04, 2009 20:15
Nick, I have been to NKR a number of times and to answer your question, you are right, residents of NKR endure many hardships, but they have one key thing that emanates from their eyes, and hearts; hope. Hope, which they never had under Azeri rule.

by: Sohrab from: Baku
December 11, 2009 09:45
Dears,
When a discussion comes up on this topic, for some reason, people from the west have unusually unfair double standards. You know how many regions there are that resemble Karabakh? History of the region is very complicated - so I would not want to discuss history. But do mind that a larger number of Azeris were cleansed from Armenia during 20th century (close to half a million with last 200 thousand in 1988). Unfortunately, no one remembers this. Karabakh conflict was an adjustment of ethnic communities to newly found national boundaries. This mismatch was created on waves of imperial wars that took place in 18th and 19th centuries in this region. And if you really care about ethnic rights and self-determination, first do it in your own countries. the last time i remember someone in the US wanted to split, Lincoln started a war that lasted four years. Russia's Chechnya war, Spain and Britain treatments of Basque and IRA movements are in fresh memories.
In this international context, countries do have legal right to enforce territorial integrity. Here Ilham Aliyev is asserting the currently granted right of sovereign states. He is not making a war in Afganistan and Iraq or Vietnam. and please make fun of your presidents (you elected George Bush as your president, for God's sake) - you have no right to ridicule other presidents.