STEPANAKERT HAS ITS BASIC PRINCIPLES
Leonid Martirosyan
Azat Artsakh NKR
November 17, 2009
The last visit of the cochairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group in early
November in the region ended with a joint statement, which was about
that the Heads of Armenia and Azerbaijan would accepted the proposal
of the mediators about conducting another meeting with the Heads of
the States at the end of December. Strictly speaking, there is no
need to be surprised, because another thing could not be happened.
Indeed, the meetings have recently started to be regular, another
thing, which is their efficiency. According to press reports, the
notorious Madrid principles are still at the negotiation table, which
evidently do not satisfy either one or another part. Not to speaking
about Nagorno Karabakh itself, which has its own distinct position,
voiced more than once on a particular occasion. It consists in the
fact that NKR is an independent state and its borders are determined
by its Constitution. Indeed, in this situation lances of diplomatic
missions of Armenia and Azerbaijan are mainly broken.
If we believe to the statements of the official and semi-official
persons of Azerbaijan and Turkey, then the absence of the habitual
statements of cochairmen testifies about the increased (?!) interest of
mediators to the process of settlement. This paradox of Azeri-Turkish
estimation is caused by the activity of Turkey in the context of the
signing of known protocols. Recently in Azerbaijan, the opinion exists
that Turkey will soon become co-chairman of the OSCE Minsk Group,
with which, of course, rosy expectations is linked. The calculation
is made of the fact that in this case, Azerbaijan will get five
regions in the initial stage and later – two regions of Nagorno
Karabakh. As to the so-called interim status of Nagorno Karabakh, to
which official Yerevan and Baku are supposedly agree, then according
to Azerbaijan this status can be interpreted "only in the composition
of the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan". Let us leave the national
special features of Azerbaijani vocabulary and stylistics aside, as
there essence is clear and forms a basic principle of Bakish concept of
the settlement. In other words, the idea of a return to the situation
in 1988 is strongly pushed, unacceptability of which was repeatedly
emphasized by the authorities of the NKR. Moreover, this was said,
first of all, to the international mediators. I must say, that the
international mediators, as well as structures who are interested in a
just settlement of the conflict, adequately perceive the position of
Nagorno Karabakh. It is not accidentally that recently, precisely by
them is recognized the right of people of the NKR for the independent
determination of its future – political, economic, social… In this,
it is necessary to say that in fact the very essence of justice, to
which Azerbaijan likes to appeal in place or out of place. By the way,
the notion "justice" as such in politics is an ephemeral thing. But in
the understanding of Azerbaijan it clearly defines contours outlined
by them, in which the doctrine of pan-Turkism is very visibly entered,
now it is nonobjective as if partially forgotten by the chief world
political players. The theme, I confess, is a separate, but to
bypass its attention even in the context of the Karabakh settlement
is impossible, because Artsakh is an original bone in the throat of
the apologists of pan-Turkism in Ankara and Baku. Acting in the tandem
of "kind" and "evil" inspector, both these capitals are persistently
trying to realize their Pan-Turkish goals behind the screen of "fair"
settlement, from which they are not going to refuse. At the same time,
they do not choose the means, through habit resorting to the method
of blackmail. So this time, Azerbaijan and Turkey, each in its own
way, put forward charges against the co-chairs of the Minsk Group
in pro-Armenian position, in the ineffectiveness of its actions. So,
according to the Turkish President Gul, the mediators do not desire
to recognize "the fact of the occupation of territories of Armenia,
and according to Baku nonobjectivity of cochairmen consists in the
fact that they "have not recognized Armenia as an aggressive country
until now". It is not difficult to note that neither Azerbaijan nor
Turkey are intended to dismount from their dear horse. This means that
the solution of the problem will not be foreseen in the near future,
not to say – never.
The only positive point in all this "settlement" process consists
in the fact that Nagorno Karabakh was and remains with its opinion,
which it consecutively defends on the basis of its own interests,
not going into contradiction with the generally accepted norms
of international development. In other words, the solution of
Azerbaijan- Karabakh conflict is sufficiently simple – Azerbaijan
with its artificial territorial integrity in itself, Nagorno-Karabakh
with its historically based territorial integrity in itself. These
principles, as basic, should form the basis of the peace process
as for Washington, Paris and Moscow and so for Yerevan and Baku.
By analogy with the conventional political terminology, let’s call
them the Stepanakert. With all the attendant circumstances.