Azeri MP sees Russian deputy speaker’s Karabakh remarks as “drivel”
Ekho, Baku
10 Feb 05
The statement by the deputy speaker of the Russian State Duma,
Vladimir Zhirinovskiy, that the inclusion of Nagornyy Karabakh in
the Commonwealth of Independent States could facilitate a solution to
the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict is “drivel”, Azerbaijani MP Aydin
Mirzazada has said. “I don’t think he understands very well what
he says,” the MP told daily Ekho. The newspaper itself noted that
while Zhirinovskiy’s statement does not represent Moscow’s official
position on the problem, Russia has always backed Armenia as its
“historical ally” in contrast to Azerbaijan which is the “hireling
of the American imperialism”. The following is the text of Nurani’s
and R. Orucov’s report by Azerbaijani newspaper Ekho on 10 February
headlined “Zhirinovskiy suggests including Nagornyy Karabakh in the
CIS”; subheadings have been inserted editorially:
While the results of Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s visit
to Azerbaijan are still being discussed in Baku and plans are being
drawn up ahead of the Year of Azerbaijan in Russia, rather alarming
statements are being made in Moscow. For instance, some media, in
particular Regnum news agency, have reported that the leader of the
Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (LDPR) and the deputy speaker of
the Russian Duma, Vladimir Zhirinovskiy, has outlined his own vision
of a solution to the Nagornyy Karabakh problem.
“Compromise solution”
In a news conference in Moscow, Zhirinovskiy said the Nagornyy Karabakh
conflict is as impossible to resolve as the dispute between Israel
and Palestine. However, he expressed his confidence that the conflict
could be resolved if Nagornyy Karabakh is admitted to the CIS.
Vladimir Zhirinovskiy, as Regnum explains, thinks that neither Armenia
nor Azerbaijan will agree to the loss of Nagornyy Karabakh. “If Russia
insists that Nagornyy Karabakh be joined to Armenia, Azerbaijan will
take offence and vice versa,” he said. But he went on to say that
“Nagornyy Karabakh is a historical part of Armenia and is called
Artsakh”. And this leads to a simple conclusion – Nagornyy Karabakh’s
entry into the CIS, according to Zhirinovskiy, is a “compromise
solution”. Of course, the Russian audience was threatened with western
expansion again. The deputy speaker said the West is trying to apply
the so-called Dayton model [peace arrangement for Bosnia-Hercegovina]
to the Karabakh problem.
“Under such circumstances the Armenians will act as the Serbs, while
the Azerbaijanis are to be the Kosovan Albanians. The West wants to
suppress Armenia and create a 20m-strong Azerbaijan,” Zhirinovskiy
said. Obviously, Zhirinovskiy did not elaborate what the Dayton
arrangements had to do with the Kosovan Albanians.
However, it remains unclear whether at issue is the recognition of
Nagornyy Karabakh’s “independence” with its subsequent entry into
the CIS or its transfer into some sort of “direct administration”
of the Commonwealth of Independent States.
But frankly speaking, this can barely change the gist of the issue. If
Zhirinovskiy’s “compromise” envisages Karabakh’s entry into the
CIS as a fully-fledged member, then, let’s face it, this will
mean the fulfilment of the Karabakh separatists’ demands. Because
having received the status of “an independent state”, they will
have the opportunity to realize their “meatsum” [Armenian word for
unification] idea. But if Zhirinovskiy suggests introducing “direct
administration” of a part of Azerbaijani territory by the CIS, then we
are actually reviving the idea of putting Nagornyy Karabakh in “direct
administration” of Moscow, a suggestion first voiced in 1990. Then
Moscow set up a special committee headed by Arkadiy Volskiy. What
happened then is remembered only too well: Karabakh first seceded
from Azerbaijan “temporarily” and then this status became permanent
with all this entails.
Kremlin’s “official position”
It goes without saying that Zhirinovskiy has simply expressed his
own opinion and it would be “incorrect” to construe his statement as
the official position of the Russian authorities, not to mention
Zhirinovskiy’s ingrained habit of making super-extravagant
statements. But Zhirinovskiy’s shocking statements often
represent… [ellipsis as published] the Kremlin’s “official position”.
In other words, despite Azerbaijan’s latest advances to Moscow, which
have started to worry the West, they have failed to produce a tangible
shift in the “balance of Moscow’s sympathies and aversions”. It
still considers Armenia to be its “historical ally” and “brother”,
while Azerbaijanis are “hirelings of the American imperialism”
similar to the “Kosovan Albanians” (whether the West is prepared to
protect Azerbaijan as it did the Kosovan Albanians is the topic for
an altogether different discussion). And Moscow is even more unlikely
to relinquish the “confessional and historical priorities” which have
defined its policy in the South Caucasus for almost 300 years now –
starting from Peter the Great’s order to settle Armenians in the
Caspian region. And maybe Zhirinovskiy’s escapades suggest that we
need to think very carefully before making advances to Russia.
“Drivel”
When commenting on Zhirinovskiy’s statement, a representative of
the ruling New Azerbaijan Party in the Milli Maclis [parliament],
Aydin Mirzazada, described it as “drivel”.
“Although this man occupies the post of the deputy chairman of the
State Duma, I don’t think he understands very well what he says.” It
is known to all that Nagornyy Karabakh is a part of Azerbaijan,
the MP said.
“The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe [PACE] recently
recognized Nagornyy Karabakh as Azerbaijani territory controlled by
the separatist regime. PACE documents say that Armenia controls a
considerable portion of Azerbaijani territory. And this is stated by
a body of which Zhirinovskiy himself is a member,” Mirzazada said.
Zhirinovskiy has already made a number of unrealistic and aggressive
statements and each time the Russian official circles disowned them.
“I think statements like that are put in Zhirinovskiy’s mouth by
certain nationalistic circles interested in friendship with Armenia
and some Azerbaijani territories. But the CIS is the Commonwealth of
Independent States, while Nagornyy Karabakh is a part of Azerbaijani
territory. Therefore, I think Zhirinovskiy’s statement can only be
seen as drivel.”