Kazimirov: Stage-by-Stage and Territories-for-Security Realistic

MULTISTAGE SETTLEMENT-SCHEME OF KARABAKH CONFLICT AND FORMULA
“TERRITORIES FOR SECURITY” MORE REALISTIC THAN OTHERS: FORMER RUSSIAN
CO-CHAIRMAN OF OSCE MINSK GROUP

YEREVAN, JANUARY 19. ARMINFO. The multistage settlement-scheme of
Karabakh conflict and the formula “territories for security” are more
realistic than others, writes the former co-chairman of OSCE Minsk
Group on resolution of Karabakh conflict, Ambassador Vladimir
Kazimirov in a new article published on the web-site of Regnum News
Agency.

He said that Baku will not be able to adopt the status of Nagorny
Karabakh demanded by Armenians in the “package,” it is necessary to
leave it for the best time. “At the first stage, it is necessary to
start release of the region outside the borders of Karabakh in
exchange for return compromises. But first of all, a number of issues
must be made clear,” Kazimirov says. In his words, return of the
territories requires, first of all, a guarantee that military actions
will not be resumed (in the course of the negotiations of 90s, a
number of guarantees were on question, in particular, deep
demilitarization of the liberated territories for the whole period
before determination and granting the status to Karabakh). “If anyone
plans to make the returned territories a base for military actions, it
is also naivety. The territories will be released only in case of a
system of guarantees with a large international component,” Kazimirov
writes. That is why the threats to resolve the conflict in any way are
counter-productive, he writes. However, Kazimirov thinks that there is
much shorter way to withdraw the troops, quite an opposite way,
i.e. serious commitments of the parties to settle any disputable
issues, including the status of Karabakh, by exclusively peaceful
means. Then “security zone” will not be necessary either.

According to the Ambassador Kazimirov, Nagorny Karabakh itself is a
special point. Demanding withdrawal of troops from there is possible
only together with the native population. The persistence of Ilham
Aliev in this issue is perceived only as a requesting position. If the
parties really seek for a peaceful resolution of the conflict, they
should recognize Karabakh both the subject and the object of the
dispute. In the essence, the whole world recognizes this fact, except
the parties, Kazimirov says. It is necessary to search for a new
border, and it is impossible without Stepanakert. Protraction of this
issue means protraction of withdrawal of the troops. It is time for
the parties to stop the dispute around the circle of the negotiation
participants. The more so as the resolution of OSCE Summit in Budapest
(1994) has not been cancelled, Kazimirov says.

He writes that the Azerbaijani leadership put the main stress on the
force resolution on the conflict and not on the negotiations. He says
that the reasons of the reconciliation are quite other: the result of
military failure of Azerbaijan on the one hand, an opportunity to
avoid a collapse of the power, on the other hand.

There are still so many issues waiting for agreements between the
parties, that one fails to declare the successes of 2004. They are too
insignificant in this background, Kazimirov writes for conclusion.-m-