NAGORNO KARABAKH SET ALOOF FROM OTHER 3 CIS CONFLICTS
Azg/arm
19 March 05
The issue of participating in the Sukhumi meeting of leaders of
Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Nagorno Karabakh and Transdniestria in April
“is not included in the agenda of NKR Foreign Ministry”, Arman
Melikian, foreign minister of NKR, informed on March 16 commenting on
the Russian mass media information aboutthe meeting.
“Nagorno Karabakh has necessary technical means to inform the public
about its plans”, Melikian said. Interfax agency informed citing a
“reliable source” that the leaders of Abkhazia, South Ossetia and
Nagorno Karabakh met in Moscow on March 16. According to the source,
presidents Sergey Baghapsh, Eduard Kokoyti and Arkady Ghukasian agreed
on holding a meeting of the leaders of 4 unrecognized republics in
Sukhumi in April.
The authorities in Stepanakert have been keeping aloof from
cooperation with the other 3 unrecognized republics of CIS. They well
understand that the Karabakh issue clearly differs from the other 3
issues with its historic, legal and political aspects. The world
community concurs with Stepanakert in this respect.
The OSCE Minsk group chairman, Dimitri Rupel, in his speech at the UN
Security Council called Nagorno Karabakh an arguable territory thus
pickingit out from among Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Transdniestria.
The statement of John Evans, US ambassador to Armenia, at Berkley
University on February 19 that “Nagorno Karabakh cannot be given back
to Azerbaijan asit will be disastrous” is hardly accidental. Rudolph
Perina, former US co-chair to Minsk group, said in Moscow in 2002 that
Transdniestria has to be returned to Moldova, Abkhazia and South
Ossetia to Georgia whereas “the issue of Nagorno Karabakh is
different”.
President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan continuously repeats that the
world community has to display unanimous approach to the secessionist
regimes of Karabakh, Abkhazia, Transdniestria and South Ossetia and
should not give way to the influential Armenian lobby in the US and
Russia.
Foreign ministers of the 4 unrecognized states met in Stepanakert in
2001 and agreed on holding meetings once in 6 weeks. Nagorno Karabakh
opted out of suchlike meetings after the Stepanakert get-together. The
character of Nagorno Karabakh’s cooperation with the other 3 republics
has been that of procedural, i.e. Stepanakert would send its
representative to take part in a presidential inauguration.
The Karabakh authorities noted many times that they are in no military
cooperation with the “peers” and will not participate in joint
military exercises. Stepanakert point it out that the defense army of
Nagorno Karabakh has no goal out of its borders.
Nagorno Karabakh did not take part at the Sukhumi meeting of
unrecognized states’ foreign ministers in October of 2004. A famous
Azerbaijani political scientist, Zardusht Alizade, said: “Nagorno
Karabakh sees itself a member of CIS, UN and OSCE that’s why it
prefers staying aside from representatives of unrecognized
structures”.
By the way, Tbilisi evaluates it positively that Nagorno Karabakh
limits its contacts with Abkhazia and South Ossetia. But Georgia,
certainly, does not speak out about this. Tbilisi did not vote for
Azerbaijan when the latter pushed the issue of “Situation in the
Azerbaijani occupied territories” into the UN agenda. It’s surprising
in view of Tbilisi’s constant support to Baku in international bodies.
Besides, Tbilisi did not condemn the elections of institutions of
local governing in Karabakh in 2004, which came as something new as
Georgia condemned all previous elections in Nagorno Karabakh.
By Tatoul Hakobian