POLITICAL RESULTS OF THE YEAR: ILLUSIONS AND THE REALITY
Leonid Martirosyan
Azat Artsakh Newspaper NKR
December 29, 2009
Very soon 2009 will become the property of history. What it has
introduced in the process of Karabakh conflict settlement, whether
it has justified hopes of possible progress in the work of solution
of the inveterate problem? On January, 2009 the Minister of Foreign
Affairs of Greece Dora Bakoyaniss, who as rotation has assumed duties
of the acting chairman of OSCE, on the eve of the introduction into
this post has expressed hope that current year will be possible
to achieve break in the given question. Moreover, representatives
of the countries-intermediaries, that is Russia, France and the
USA, from time to time optimistically declared real possibility of
settlement of the problem in visible prospect. The life has shown an
inconsistency of similar forecasts – practical results both were not,
and are not present. And it thus, that in the joint statement of heads
of delegations of the countries-co-chairmen of OSCE MG and Ministers
of Foreign Affairs of Armenia and Azerbaijan, accepted on December
1st in Athenes about the results of a meeting, "positive dynamic
of negotiations" has been pointed, which has promoted "to movement
to the coordination of main principles of a peaceful settlement of
the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict". Even the superficial analysis of a
situation in negotiating process confirms, that the serious bases for
achievement of significant success are not available. And the reasons
for that are few. First of all, base positions of the parties of
the Karabakh conflict still remain polarly opposite, so difficult
compatible. The behaviour of Baku which in the foreseeable future
hardly probable will undergo changes, with all definiteness testifies
its unwillingness in the trunk-call policy to start with a sober
estimation of existing realities. It is obvious, that accountings
which are constructed on illusions, cannot lead to positive results.
Rather originally treating international law, Azerbaijan has a
priori decided, that the conflict can be resolved exclusively on
the basis of a principle of territorial integrity. And it when the
right to self-determination was admited by all intermediaries as
one of principles of the conflict settlement. By the way, the days,
on December 18th, the UN adopted "General realization of the right
of the people’s self-determination " resolution, in which the appeal
contains: to pay special attention to cases of violation of one of
this basic principles of international law. Paradox is that under
the resolution Azerbaijan has put the signature and which declares
invariably about a primacy of a principle of territorial integrity.
Other reason of futility of negotiating process, as we think, is
hidden in Madrid principles, on the bases of which nowadays search of
decision of the problem is conducted.Being offered by intermediaries on
November 2007, they have undergone some changes since then and began
to be called as updated. In what their novelty is, it’s difficult
to say, as basic provisions of the given document, apparently, have
remained former and are unacceptable for the Karabakh party. Most
likely, study of the specified document is not finished yet, so it
means that it is hardly probable worth to hope in these conditions
for achievement of results on the basis of imperfect principles. As
Madrid principles have not been presented at all to Nagorno-Karabakh,
and thereupon it is represented rather problematic the realisation of
the future decision about the conflict, accepted without participation
of the Karabakh party. In similar conditions the NKR has the full
right not to incur the obligation on realisation of the hypothetical
peace agreement accepted without its participation and especially if
it contradicts its interests. All it once again confirms necessity
of participation of the NKR in negotiating process at all its stages,
up to the conclusion of the basic contract.
The important factor influencing on the process of the Karabakh
settlement is the political situation in the region which depends on
a number of components, in particular, interests of its active players.
It is obvious, that interests of the main characters – Russia, Iran,
the USA, the European Union – still enter into the contradiction with
each other. However the excessive activity of Turkey in its persistent
attempts to squeeze into the rows of co-chairmen of the OSCE MG
attracts attention. Probably, having come to grief with its notorious
"platform of stability and cooperation in the Caucasus", Ankara
nevertheless has not refused intention to become the leading state
in region , as in favour of its own interests to have an influence
upon the processes going here, including Nagorno-Karabakhian. And,
certainly,in favour of Azerbaijan’s interests. It confirms also
present process of so-called normalisation of Armenian-Turkish
relations, which Turkey, contrary to positions of known reports’
provisions, endeavours to co-ordinate to settlement of the Karabakh
conflict. Which inevitably extremely complicates achievement of
reasonable arrangements. Next year presidency in OSCE from Greece
will pass to Kazakhstan. Whether It will be possible to Astana to
bring sudden changes in the process of settlement or all remains at
level of good wishes,the time will show. In all cases it is necessary
for the NKR to strengthen the statehood henceforth, consistently to
achieve de jure recognition of the right to the self-determination
faultlessly realised by its people by the international community.