Contributors

Monday, January 29, 2007

Statement of the Co-Chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group

Baku/Yerevan – January 29, 2007


After four days of meetings, the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs (Ambassador Yuri Merzylakov – Russian Federation; Ambassador Bernard Fassier – France; Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Matthew Bryza – United States) are encouraged by the constructive approach of the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan as they seek to finalize a set of basic principles for the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

Russian Federation Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov hosted Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian and Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov for talks facilitated by the Co-Chairs in Moscow on Tuesday, January 23. The Co-Chairs met with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev in Baku on Wednesday, January 24. On Thursday, January 25, they traveled to Nagorno-Karabakh to meet with NK leader Arkady Ghukasian. They met with Armenian President Robert Kocharian in Yerevan on Friday, January 26.

The Co-Chairs appreciate the efforts of all the interlocutors they met during the week. It is the responsibility of the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan, with the assistance of the Co-Chairs, to find a lasting, peaceful resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. The presidents are defending their national interests vigorously, and they are doing so in a way that allows the peace process to continue moving forward.

The Co-Chairs urge all parties to sustain this momentum in the negotiations and to prepare their publics for the necessary compromises. At the same time, the Co-Chairs urge continued pursuit of confidence-building measures and maintenance of the ceasefire to increase the level of trust and understanding between the sides.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

First of all I want to congratulate you. This initiative really encourages thousands and perhaps more than that to get to stun Armenian tricks. We are proud of you. I hope you never be out of exigency. Because from now on you are at a very insidious foe. Anyway either in country or abroad we have always sensible arguments at Armenians' defamations.

Thanks for all...

Anonymous said...

Again and again we have to hear the co-charimen's suggestion to the two presidents to prepare their public for compromises. What compromises do they really expect Azerbaijan to make? For almost 20 years the country has been hosting one million refugees and IDPs, the territories are landmined, the towns and villages are demolished and dismantled and literally ceased to exist. Meanwhile, not a single house was destroyed in Armenia, not a single bullet descended on the Armenian soil. Obviously, 210.000 Azeri refugees from Armenia and their descendants are not going ever to return to their lands and ask for autonomy. However, the Armenian minority of Azerbaijan is being kindly offered broad autonomy instead of being asked to relocate to the empty Azeri villages in Armenia. What other compromises do the co-chairmen expect from Azerbaijan? Broad autonomy within Azerbaijan is already the biggest compromise! Turning it down now and provoking our nation to forcibly liberate what has been illegally stolen will mean losing this offer in the future, when the first drop of soldier blood is shed and it is too late for any further bargaining!

Vugar Seidov

phyek said...

As I put our people/IDPs suffering for nearly two decades first, I fully agree with the Co-Chairs because I believe that a peaceful solution can only be achieved sooner though a mutual compromise. The region cannot truly prosper unless such conflicts end. As for threats of war (as suggested by Vugar S.), I think such language is destructive, and it pains me to even imagine another one breaking out...which aside from more blood, devastation, and major negative effects on the economy can result in an unfavorable or unpredictable outcome. One after the collapse was enough; let's hope this conflict is settled sooner than later through peace, though given the years, one can question how genuine either side is when it comes to a realistic resolution.

-phyek

Anonymous said...

Dear Phyek,

What you suggest could be acceptable, PROVIDED that the rule of international law is restored before the first gun opens fire. No Azeri man or woman is longing for a war per se. Only a sick person can dream of a war for the sake of the war itself. However, in the situation when Armenia continues to occupy (occupy militarily, not peacefully or through negotiations) huge part of Azerbaijan's territory, the pacifist rhetoric sounds irrelevant and very much defeatist. If the military solution is outlawed by definition and at the same time no international pressure is going to be applied on Armenia to make the latter withdraw the troops and recognize the state borders and territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, the only option left for Azerbaijan is to end these unnecessary talks and accept the territorial losses de jure.
I hate to disappoint you, but what you suggest is exactly what Armenia wants. After having completed the military phase of her mission and having occupied the vast territories, Yerevan starts calling for peace and friendship. No one minds in Azerbaijan to restore friendship with our problematic neighbor, yet leave our territory and then we can talk about brotherhood and cultural proximity. Imagine Napoleon enters Moscow and then calls on Kutuzov to stop resistance because war is immoral and brings deaths to both sides. Until the good will is demonstrated by the occupants in practice, the military solution will remain on the agenda regardless of the intensity of the pacifist calls from outside or inside.

Best wishes,
Vugar

phyek said...

Vugar,

If a resolution is reached where all the provinces are returned with Karabakh having a referendum a decade down the line, then that in my opinion would be a compromise in our favor. More importantly, IDPs would return and the country would move forward once and for all without waiting another 20 years or worse, war. This is not about pacifism or friendship.

As for military conflict, are you telling me that you would rather Azerbaijan risk everything? What if the outcome is the same or worse at the expense of thousands? What if it destroys oil flow and foreign investment? On the other hand, it's possible that the lands are liberated, but to be truthful, I have little faith in the military. Furthermore, instead of spending billions on arms, why not use that money on people and IDPs?

Then again, for those of us outside Azerbaijan living comfortably in a home with a full refrigerator and internet access while most of the country carries on in poverty, it's easy to support notions of war. However, the country is not in a state to fight one (not any country in the Caucuses, for that matter). We should put people first, rather than give way into ideals that can hamper progress, development, and peace.

-phyek

Anonymous said...

Phyek,

I might agree with some of the points you have outlined, e.g. houses instead of weapons, stable oil flow instead of its absence, peace instead of war. In general, nice words perfectly acceptable in a peaceful time and nothing to argue with.

Yet:

The territory is occupied and the integrity is questioned. The aggressor refuses to leave. Until the internationally recognized state borders are restored de facto (and not just on declarations), all your arguments in fact echo what Armenia is trying to urge us at this moment: "let's be friends, guys, why do we need to fight? Isn't war an evil? Don't you want to spend your oil revenues for schools and hospitals instead of arms? Besides, our army is the strongest in the South Caucasus, and the Council of Europe will terminate your membership if you start the war."
OK, nobody minds to live in peace and rid the region of huge armaments, and nobody dreams of the war for the sake of war. However, peace presupposes compliance with international norms, which clearly outlaws illegal and forcible seizure of somebody’s property. Leave our territory first and then we can discuss friendship. The Armenian military contingent did not come to Azerbaijan upon kind invitation; it arrived forcibly, on tanks and armored personnel carriers, which Yerevan bought instead of building schools and hospitals. The arguments you have presented would have been relevant in the beginning of the conflict in 1988, i.e. before the war broke out, but not now that 20% of our territory has been occupied. If Armenia at least verbally declares "yes, we acknowledge that NK is technically part of Azerbaijan, but we will withdraw our troops when we see that the population is no longer threatened", we can consider this an expression of good will and agree to wait more. But the fact of the matter is that Armenia openly refuses to recognize our territory and does not make a big secret that the final goal is to add NK to her territory. How can Azerbaijan stop thinking of the army under these circumstances?

Of course, living in an atmosphere of a war that can resume any time is terrible and very nervous. But this is what Armenia fears now, fears more than us, because she sees our determination not to make any further territorial gifts and fight to return what belongs to us. I am also against the war in general. But go and tell a farmer in the occupied Belarus or Smolensk that the Red Army must stop fighting and the plants in Chelyabinsk must produce tractors instead of the tanks. Not the best timing for such pacifist arguments. Let the Germans leave home first and then we can talk about the restoration of peace between the two nations.

This is what our diplomacy does now – trying the utmost to make Armenia leave our territory without the war. And if our diplomatic efforts do not bring fruits, then the mission will be re-assigned to another ministry, for which our country has every legal and moral right.

As for the models of peaceful settlement, I really do not understand how the referendum in a 10-year time can guarantee the territorial integrity, even if the Azeri residents vote too. Besides, for the sake of balanced approach, if the status of an Azerbaijani province is taken to the referendum, why cannot the same referendum be conducted in the pre-war Azerbaijani-populated regions of Armenia? Why this concession? If the results of the referendum will be internationally legally binding, then what will guarantee that NK will remain part of Azerbaijan? I would appreciate if Tahir and Khazar address these concerns.

Furthermore, could you clarify what you mean by risking everything? Another defeat? If so, then the president and the defense minister must be held answerable for their numerous statements urging the public that the army is ready to liberate the lands any time. In any case, the war must not be resumed

1) if Armenia openly declares that she repeals territorial claims against Azerbaijan and recognizes the country’s territorial integrity and

2) until there is a confidence that the military operation will be victorious.

Let me also remind you that before Russia regained her independence from Mongol-Tatars, she had fought many unsuccessful battles. If necessary, Azerbaijan will fight 10 wars until the last inch of territory is liberated.

Finally, speaking about people's interests v. state interests, if people do not have any feelings towards Karabakh and are totally indifferent, then the state will no be able to force its citizens to liberate it. Then it will be the best time to say good-bye to this land. The fact that NK remains on the agenda is the manifestation of the people's dream to return it. After all, the integrity of Azerbaijan is needed first of all for Azeri nation and our future generations, and not just for the president and a couple of ministers.

I do hope that our countries avoid the military scenario and Armenia voluntarily withdraws behind her state borders.

Vugar

Elkhan Aghamirzayev said...

Hi,

Thank you for your initiative.

I visited the website of Ministry of Foreign Affairs and, frankly speaking, found it disappointing.

News in English are not updated, feedback form does not work at all, there are no other published contacts and there is no Russian version, though forming public opinion in CIS should be an important issue.

Please let us know whom should we contact to obtain information on various events with MFA involmement to publish on http://news.bakililar.az

Regards,

Bakililar.AZ administration