SOLUTION TO NAGORNO-KARABAKH CONFLICT LONG-TERM PROCESS: CRISIS GROUP

Trend News Agency
Jan 30 2009
Azerbaijan

Azerbaijan, Baku, Jan. 29 /Trend News, E.Rustamov/ Trend News interview
with Europe Programme Director at the International Crisis Group
Sabine Freizer

Question: Can the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict be
solved in 2009?

Answer: The key to the solution of the conflict lies with the leaders
and peoples of Azerbaijan and Armenia. It is primarily Azeris and
Armenians, including those from Nagorno-Karabakh, who need to find
a mutually acceptable compromise solution. This solution should be
achieved through peaceful negotiations and with due consideration to
the rights and underlying interests of all major stakeholders in the
conflict, so as to ensure a stable, sustainable and just peace.

The external players, be it OSCE Minsk Group or individual states,
may only play a secondary role in shaping the dynamics of the conflict
and helping the parties to come to peace. We cannot fully exclude the
possibility of signing of a peace agreement in 2009. However, even if
Armenia and Azerbaijan sign a peace agreement, it will take years for
Azeris and Armenians to build trust and learn to peacefully coexist in
Nagorno-Karabakh and elsewhere. So, solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict is a long-term process.

We cannot exclude the possibility of a significant progress towards
peace in 2009. Both Armenia and Azerbaijan continue talks using Minsk
Group’s Madrid proposals as a framework. The August crisis in Georgia
has increased the importance and urgency the international community
attaches to the solution of the conflicts in the South Caucasus. The
Moscow declaration signed in November by Armenian, Azerbaijani and
Russian presidents, despite the fact that it was perceived as primarily
a Russian attempt to improve its international image after Georgia war,
was an important development in a sense that it was the first signed
document between Armenia and Azerbaijan ever since 1994 cease-fire
and called for a political resolution of the conflict.

Turkey is also stepping up its regional efforts in the Caucasus
and the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations would have a
positive impact to the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process. So, given
all these recent developments, there are some grounds for cautious
optimism. However, as I said, the solution to such complex problems
as Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is a long-term process and it will take
at least a decade, if not more, before the conflict can be fully
resolved. To start that process it is essential that leaders on all
sides start making their populations aware of the Madrid principles
and encourage confidence building measures between their societies.

Q: Can the war be resumed this year?

A: War can erupt at any time as long as the conflict is unresolved
and the two armies face each other in the trenches. The August
war in Georgia has demonstrated how fragile the status quo is in
the region. But it also had a deterring effect in a sense that it
showed what catastrophic consequences the resumption of hostilities
may have. This puts a special responsibility on the shoulders of the
Azerbaijani and Armenian leaders not to allow a similar scenario in
Nagorno-Karabakh, which represents an even bigger security challenge
for regional and European security than the one posed by August 2008
war in Georgia. The leaders of Azerbaijan and Armenia should benefit
from increased attention of the international community to the South
Caucasus and use its assistance to achieve a peaceful solution.

Q: What principles of the draft framework agreement on the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict remain uncoordinated?

A: The Minsk Group proposals, officially presented to the foreign
ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan at the Madrid summit of the OSCE in
November 2007 constitute the basis of present-day negotiations. These
proposals, also known as "basic principles", are an outcome of series
of meetings between Armenian and Azerbaijani foreign ministers since
2004 initiated in Prague, and thus dubbed the "Prague process". The
proposals are generally known, and have been previously elaborated in
Crisis Group’s relevant reports "Plan for Peace" (2005) and "Risking
War" (2007).

The proposals envisage determination of a final status of
Nagorno-Karabakh by a popular vote in the last stage of the peace
process, after all other confidence measures, including renunciation of
the use of force, gradual withdrawal of the Armenian forces from the
occupied territories, return of displaced population to their homes
and re-opening of trade and communications, have been put in place.

However, the parties have significant differences on the issue of
return of Kelbajar and Lachin districts, the modalities of the vote
which would determine Nagorno-Karabakh’s ultimate status, and the issue
of return of displaced Azeris to Nagorno-Karabakh before such a vote
takes place. The Minsk Group currently works with parties to bridge
the remaining differences so as to enable Azerbaijani and Armenian
leaders sign up to the "basic principles".

Crisis Group believes the ongoing negotiations based on Madrid
proposals constitute the best framework for peaceful resolution of
the conflict. In Azerbaijan there are widespread misperceptions and
cliche-type thinking about these proposals, as if they constitute
a hidden plot to legitimize Nagorno-Karabakh’s secession from
Azerbaijan. Analogical fears exist in Armenia too. It is crucial that
the leaders of Azerbaijan and Armenia inform and consult with their
societies on the substance of the Minsk Group’s proposals. Greater
public awareness and civic discussions within Azerbaijan and with
Armenian counterparts is very important for achieving a progress in
the peace process.

Q: Media outlets have reported Russia has transferred
800-million-dollar worth weapons to Armenia. Does this undermine the
peace process?

A: I have read about this in the Azerbaijani media and at this stage
it is hard for me to judge on the issue. The Russian side denies
the report and we do not have an independent verification of the
claim. However, if true, this fact certainly undermines Russian
position as a Minsk Group co-chair and impartial mediator in the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. The arms transfer also contravenes the
UN Security Council Resolution 853 (1993) urging the states to
"refrain from supply of any weapons and munitions which might lead
to an intensification of the conflict or the continued occupation
of territory".

We in Crisis Group believe any supply of offensive weapons to either
Armenia or Azerbaijan as long as the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is
unresolved serves only to undermine the peace process, brings further
militarization and diverts scarce resources away from public needs.