DISCUSSION: INSECURITY DE JURE IN RETURN FOR SECURITY DE FACTO
Vahan Arzumanyan

KarabakhOpen
31-05-2007 13:37:55

Immediately after the dissolution of the USSR the pan-Turkists stood
a chance to start expansion towards the West via Armenia which had
always been a hindrance to this policy. The result of the war in
Karabakh had to be the emergence of a corridor in the region of
Meghri of Armenia, which would connect Azerbaijan and Nakhidjevan,
not necessarily under the control of the Azerbaijani force. As the
best variant control over this corridor by the international force had
been foreseen. The goal was to settle the corridor with Azerbaijanis,
change the demographic pattern and actually sever this territory
from Armenia. Unfortunately, it should be noted that this variant
had supporters in the Armenian government.

The military failed, and the apologists of pan-Turkism launched
projects directed at isolation of Armenia, namely the Baku-Ceyhan
pipeline, the Tbilisi-Akhalkalaki-Kars railroad. It is planned to
station Turkish force along the pipeline under the aegis of NATO. It
will allow Azerbaijanis to settle in these territories to create a
Turkish corridor via Georgia and get control of the Armenian-Georgian
border.

Turkey refuses to set up diplomatic relations with Armenia, and the
reason is not only the Genocide and the Karabakh conflict. Armenia
with its present border does not favor Turkey. Therefore, all
the controversies are used to kindle the confrontation, which may
eventually lead to an armed conflict. And this is not raving. After
the capture of Lachin the Turkish army did not attack Armenia thanks
to the Russian force. What if Russia were not there?

The second direction is to scare the international community. The
international community (as well as part of the Armenians) is
worried about the militaristic statements by Azerbaijani officials,
who threaten to wage a new war.

Hence, pressure is put on Armenia to accept the conditions of
Azerbaijan. In additions, Karabakh is completely isolated (more exactly
self-isolated) from deciding its fate, although the people of Karabakh
had determined the outcome of the war. But is this the only reason
why Karabakh is not participating in the talks? Instead of adequate
actions in response to Azerbaijan’s attacks most Armenian politicians
call for peace and declare their readiness to make a compromise,
thereby demoralizing their people.

Meanwhile, Azerbaijan’s stance is becoming harder and harder, and in
every project of settlement the return of refugees is included with a
possible referendum in 10 or 15 years. Independence is not mentioned
at all. The purpose is the same – settlement of key border areas with
Azerbaijanis to displace Armenians gradually.

In this context, any compromise involving the return of territories
brings us closer to another war. Therefore, the return of territories
as well as the withdrawal of the Karabakh army should not be viewed
theoretically, for the current location of the Karabakh army is
the only factor which holds Azerbaijan back, and is the only real
guarantee of security of Karabakh.

As to international recognition, it is a mere declaration of
independence but not a guarantee against a new war. Unrecognized
but strong Karabakh has more chance to survive than recognized but
weak Karabakh.