ARMENIA THIS WEEK
Monday, November 1, 2004

MEDIATORS, ARMENIA CRITICIZE AZERBAIJAN’S KARABAKH TACTICS
Mediators from the United States, Russia and France last week criticized
Azerbaijan for its effort to force a debate on the Karabakh conflict at the
United Nations’ General Assembly (UN GA). Capitalizing on solidarity from
members of the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) and using a UN
procedural loophole, Azerbaijan was able last week to introduce the Karabakh
issue as an additional item on the UN GA agenda.

UN GA resolutions, unlike those of the UN Security Council, are not
mandatory for member states. The UN consensus is for the Organization for
Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), and not UN, to deal with the
Karabakh conflict.

In a deliberately vague memorandum that does not mention either Armenian or
Karabakh authorities, Azerbaijan alleged that unnamed entities were engaged
in “illegal activities” in Karabakh, “in particular by transfer of settlers
in order to create artificially a new demographic situation in those
territories.”

Azeri officials and government-connected entities have made numerous
unfounded accusations against Armenia and Karabakh over the years. Just last
week, Azeri Deputy Parliament Speaker Ziyafet Askerov told British MP’s
that Osama Bin Laden might be hiding in Karabakh. Armenian observers believe
that Azerbaijan chose the “settler issue” to raise at the UN since that
might resonate the most with Islamic countries, on whose support Azerbaijan
is counting, and which are known for their criticism of Israel’s settlement
policies.

Armenia’s Ambassador to the UN Armen Martirosyan accused Azerbaijan of an
effort to scuttle ongoing peace talks and attempt to add a “religious
dimension” to the Karabakh conflict. Martirosyan also repeated Armenia’s
position that should Baku step back from talks on a comprehensive settlement
of the conflict and make efforts to separately address its individual
components, such as raised in its UN proposal, then Azerbaijan should deal
directly with the Nagorno Karabakh Republic’s (NKR) government. Although
Azeris had negotiated directly with NKR when the sides secured the ongoing
cease-fire, Baku has refused to recognize the existence of Karabakh
authorities since then.

France’s Deputy Ambassador to the UN Michel Duclos, speaking also on behalf
of the U.S. and Russia, argued that Azerbaijan’s proposal “would be harmful
to efforts to find a just, lasting settlement” to the conflict. The
Netherlands’ Deputy Ambassador to the UN Arjan Hamburger, speaking on behalf
of the European Union and several candidate countries, opined that the UN GA
session underway was “neither the time nor the venue to pursue this and that
the Azerbaijan initiative may jeopardize the on-going negotiations.”
Ninety-nine countries, including the United States, abstained from voting on
what are typically consensual decisions.

Azerbaijan’s UN envoy Yashar Aliyev admitted last week that his country’s
initiative in the General Assembly was “meeting numerous resistances,” but
indicated that Azerbaijan would press on for a debate. Turkey, Pakistan and
Iran, along with thirty-eight other, mostly Muslim countries, backed
Azerbaijan’s effort. The Armenian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hamlet
Gasparian noted, however, that 40 percent of mostly Muslim OIC member
countries did not succumb to pressure from Azerbaijan and Turkey.

Azerbaijan also secured the support of Ukraine after the Azeri President
Ilham Aliyev made an unscheduled visit to meet with the pro-government
candidate facing a tight presidential race there. Georgia did not
participate in the vote.

As part of the UN discussion last week, the three mediators also suggested
sending an OSCE fact-finding mission to the region as a way to address any
concerns about developments there. Armenian officials indicated that they
would welcome such a mission, but noted that it would be up to the NKR
leadership to approve visits to areas under Karabakh’s control and that any
mission should cover both sides of the Line of Contact. Azerbaijan has made
no public comment on the proposal and it had previously opposed similar
missions.

Writing last week, the Azeri daily Zerkalo indicated that Azerbaijan was
deliberately seeking to undermine ongoing talks and that “Baku’s move might
bury pressure exerted on Baku by super powers to make it sign an unfavorable
peace accord.”

Most Armenian observers see Azerbaijan’s latest effort as another indication
that its government is aiming to postpone any settlement. Earlier this year,
President Aliyev stated publicly that he was not “in a hurry” to resolve the
conflict, and that since Baku was anticipating additional revenues from
development of the Caspian oil, the country would soon be better positioned
for a new war in Karabakh.

Armenian officials have in turn warned Azerbaijan of “disastrous
consequences” should its leaders resort to military force as they did in the
early 1990s. (Sources: Armenia This Week 2-13, 4-23, 6-18, 8-2, 8-30; Agence
France Presse 10-20; ANS TV 10-27; UN GA Press Release 10-27, 29; Armenian
Foreign Ministry 10-29; Azertag 10-29; Zerkalo 10-29)

A WEEKLY NEWSLETTER PUBLISHED BY THE ARMENIAN ASSEMBLY OF AMERICA
122 C Street, N.W., Suite 350, Washington, D.C. 20001 (202) 393-3434 FAX
(202) 638-4904
E-Mail info@aaainc.org WEB