Hayots Ashkharh , Armenia
Aug 9 2008

Europe’s ‘peaceful attack’ and our strategy

by Karen Nahapetyan

Almost all European entities recently started dealing with the South
Caucasus conflicts, in particular with the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict,
enthusiastically and consistently. Such activity and consistency of
the united Europe can go even beyond the framework of the OSCE Minsk
Group and become an independent political initiative.

Under such conditions two closely interrelated issues arise
immediately:

a) what model of settlement Europe will adopt regarding the issues of
the conflicts in the region, including the Karabakh conflict;

b) what will be the first steps that the European entities would take
to settle the Karabakh conflict.

One reality becomes obvious at present – the European Union, viewing
the South Caucasus as one whole, tries to find a model of settlement
for the Karabakh conflict which would be based on the ideology and
behaviour of forming this whole. This means that Europe views both us
and the Azerbaijanis as the potential bearers of its values.

In Europe’s view, the issue of the self-determination of the Karabakh
people should comply with the general standards, necessary for the
integration of the whole [South Caucasus] region. This was marked in
proposals made during the previous years. Experience shows that
application of European standards of settlement in environments which
have homogenous culture and civilization, has produced positive
results (let’s remember the case of Aland Islands).

However, the same process shows that in environments that have
heterogeneous culture and civilization (the Balkans, Cyprus) these
models failed numerously.

A question arises: standards of what environment are adequate for
Armenia and Azerbaijan, the Armenians and the Azerbaijanis?

The answer is more than obvious – definitely the second one, as like
both in the Balkans and Cyprus, here as well we deal with the fact of
contact between Christian and Islamic civilizations.

A number of typical examples of imposing such standards of coexistence
on peoples, which have civilizations of different orientations, exist
in the world. Their final result was the same, with minor
differences. This impulsion transformed into a more severe and bloody
fight for survival. Moreover, as a rule, peoples, which belong to the
European civilization, suffered as a result.

Even in Lebanon, which has been established as a state of Christian
Arabs – Maronites, as a result of the establishment of the standards
of such an existence, the Christian Arabs not only lost their
majority, but are facing the threat of disappearance.

Thus, Europe, exporting models based on its own level of development
and, most importantly on homogeneity, to our region, will sooner or
later face a difficult dilemma. It will have to either transform the
South Caucasus into new Balkans or realize the obvious fact that
before uniting the peoples of the region it is first of all necessary
to dissociate them.

What strategy has to be adopted at present in view of Europe’s
possible "peaceful attack"? We believe in this regard that a decisive
condition to resist the ordeals facing Armenia and Nagornyy Karabakh
is increasing Nagornyy Karabakh’s role in the negotiations
process. Armenia should give an opportunity to Karabakh to free its
hands – including in the issue of deciding the fate of the liberated
territories [Azerbaijan’s territories currently under Armenian
control]. Because if the Europeans demand that they be returned to
Azerbaijan, Nagornyy Karabakh can definitely raise the issue of its
status.

[translated]