4 replies to this topic

[Yervant1]

17:00 19/12/2013 » INTERVIEWS

French expert: Recognition of Nagorno-Karabakh Republic is the only solution that can ensure stability in region

Panorama.am presents an interview with Adrien Gévaudan, expert in geopolitics and geo-economics, founder of analytical website IntStrat, who has recently published an article titled“Geopolitics of the Greater Caucasus and Nagorno-Karabakh” (also published in French). 
- Mr. Gévaudan, you have recently been studying the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and you have written an article on it. From your point of view what is at the heart of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict?
- Historically speaking, the heart of the problem is the disappearance of the Soviet Union (the beginning of its breakup to be more precise) which set the region on fire.
But today I believe the most important problem is the growing imbalance of powers in the region. Nagorno-Karbakh is isolated and its resources are limited. It is obvious that the power balance between Armenia and Azerbaijan is strongly in favour of the latter (for well known reasons: autocratic system, growing military forces and huge royalties from the hydrocarbon industry). Internationally speaking, when you have a status quo in a situation where there is a balance of power between the states concerned, you can assume they won’t easily change the way they act against one another. However, if the power balance changes too much and too quickly, it is only a matter of time before one side decides to take advantage of its weaker adversary; strategically speaking, it is only logical. And even if right now Azerbaijan is not willing to wage war against Armenia, let’s not forget that they did lose the previous war and that they still claim sovereignty over Nagorno-Karabakh. If you add to his strong geopolitical powers, such as Iran, Russia or Israel, you have a powder keg ready to explode.
- In that case don’t the Madrid principles, particularly the point about the surrender of territories, actually propose even further shifting of the power balance in favour of the already-strong Azerbaijan? If this point is ever implemented won’t this increase the likelihood of a new war by Azerbaijan against Karabakh as opposed to long-term peace?
- Theoretically speaking if an imbalance is created, consequences will follow. This imbalance already exists in favour of Azerbaijan. So in order to counter that and to avoid war, you have to propose a resolution that solves this imbalance. But how will it be possible when it seems Azerbaijan has no interest in solving the issue? As for how the furthering of the imbalance can result in peace, this is the key problem – it is unlikely to result in peace. This is why I will not be very optimistic, mid-term speaking.

- From a purely geopolitical perspective what configuration do you think is more likely to ensure long-term stability in the region – the affirmation of the status quo and the recognition of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (NKR) or a deal based on the implementation of Madrid principles?
- It is difficult to answer. The status quo is actually unlikely to last again because of the growing power imbalance, midterm speaking. For the same reasons, Madrid principles are not likely to be implemented right now; if this process did fail when the imbalance of powers was less vivid, why should it be successful now?
Therefore, the international recognition of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic is, in my opinion, the only solution to ensure the stability of the region. But let’s not get carried away: even if it happens, let’s not forget that war between internationally recognized countries can also (easily) occur…
- What do you think are the main reasons for the non-recognition of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (NKR)? Do you think the NKR has the necessary attributes to “deserve” international recognition?
- The main reasons for the non-recognition are of course political! 
As I have written in my paper, an entity can be recognized as an independent state when it meets the Montevideo criteria (1933) 1) stable territory; 2) permanent population; 3) political authority and 4) the capacity to build relations with other states. Let’s just say the NKR has the first three and the problem resides with the last one. But in order to build relations with other states you have to be recognized by them, which is quite a paradox.
This having said, we must at the same time acknowledge that international recognition has nothing to do with “deserving” it; recognition is an instrument of power and sovereign states are using it as such. Unfortunately states are not acting internationally driven by ethics but by interest. We can deplore it, and I personally do, but this is a fact. If the NKR wants to be recognized as an independent state, it has to give to strong geopolitical powers interest in doing so.
- And in what case can these powers have an interest in recognizing the NKR?
- As a matter of fact they already do have such interest given all the problems an open conflict would create if it were to explode in the South Caucasus. This especially should be a concern for the EU; this is why I think the EU should do more to promote the international recognition of the NKR. Nobody wants a new war right now (not even the Azerbaijanis); we should, we must take advantage of this while the consensus on peace is still existing.
- One final question: I wonder how you as a French researcher got interested in the topic of Nagorno-Karabakh and what motivated you to study it.
- I always have had a strong interest in protracted conflicts, especially those ignored by the dominant media. In general I dislike the way topics are chosen by mass media - on the one hand the media can create a “bubble” out of a trivial conflict and on the other hand it can completely censor a quite important and serious one. For this reason I got interested in the conflicts that are ignored by the media in the first place and in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict in particular, which I believe is a good example of the latter case. I can honestly say that if it hadn’t been for my contact with Save the Children NGO, I don’t think I would have ever heard about it. It is a pity that we have to depend on random, personal events to discover critical conflicts, especially this one.
- Mr Gévaudan, thank you very much for this interesting talk. 
Interview by Nvard Chalikyan
 
 

Source: Panorama.am

[Yervant1]

18:46 15/01/2014 » INTERVIEWS

Gérard-François Dumont: Neglecting historical facts makes solution of Karabakh conflict even harder

Panorama.am presents an interview with Professor of Demography at the University of Paris IV-Sorbonne Gérard-François Dumont.
Nvard Chalikyan: Prof. Dumont, in your recent article titled Nagorno-Karabakh: the geopolitics of a conflict without end you speak about the origins of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. How do you assess the fact that these historical realities are completely ignored in the current conflict resolution process? 

Gérard-François Dumont: The ignorance of the historical facts which are at the heart of geopolitical conflicts is unfortunately quite common. This is clearly seen in the conflicts currently taking place in Sudan, Central Africa and even in Europe, where there is a marked tension between Hungary and the European Union. The main reason of the latter is that the treaty of Trianon, signed on 04 June 1920 in the aftermath of the World War I, was unjust. The truth is that the principle of the inviolability of frontiers currently endorsed by the international community results in complete neglect of the causes and history of the formation of these frontiers. 

Comparisons are not always appropriate, however, it is interesting to compare the situations in the South Caucasus and Ukraine. The USSR, having employed the principle of «divide and rule», in 1946 attached to Ukraine Crimea, which gave Moscow access to the Black Sea and then to the Mediterranean. This complicated the current geopolitical situation of Ukraine, which is vividly seen from the fact that Crimea was the only region which voted against the independence of Ukraine in the referendum of 1991. Ceteris paribus, the USSR drew the borders of Azerbaijan according to that same principle, a fact which is now largely ignored. Similarly, the pogroms of Armenians in Baku in 1988 have also been ignored. But the neglect of historical facts always has the same result – it makes the solution of the conflict harder and fuels it even more.
NC: Considering the fact that Azerbaijan continues to pose an existential threat to Nagorno-Karabakh today (given current anti-Armenian policies, military rhetoric, etc.) do you think the proposed Madrid Principles provide tangible security guarantees to the people of the Nagorno-Karabakh against possible Azerbaijani aggression?
Gérard-François Dumont: Historically the principles are like agreements and declarations. They have exactly as much importance as the politicians give to them. Geopolitics is a game based on power balance. No principle, however desirable it might be, can ever guarantee the security of a people. Whether you are for or against the Madrid Principles, they are only principles, the interpretation of which can vary greatly depending on the protagonists, while their implementation can be very different depending on the balance of power. In other words, Nagorno-Karabakh must be ready for all the possible developments. As a matter of fact, only the peace agreement which will include security guarantees, as well as willingness to preserve those, can guarantee the security.
NC: From purely geopolitical perspective is there a scenario that can bring to a final solution of the conflict and to a long-term peace in the region?
Gérard-François Dumont: History teaches us that conflicts are resolved only when the immediate parties to the conflict really want to put an end to it. Of course, international powers can contribute to the solution of the conflict if they refrain from igniting it and if they offer guarantees. The Minsk Group plays a useful role by trying to appease the conflict and facilitate the dialogue. However, it cannot solve the conflict, as past two decades have shown. The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict can only be completely solved if Azerbaijan, Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh find common ground and are equally eager to resolve it.
NC: And what would you say about the role of democracy in the resolution of this conflict?
Gérard-François Dumont: One of the factors that complicates the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is that it depends on the situation between the parties to the conflict. It is a lot easier to find a solution to those conflicts where the parties are democratic, as peoples do not like being imprisoned within closed borders and they eventually vote for those leaders who want the borders to be used as a means of exchange and trade. Thus we can only wish democratic progress to these countries.
NC: From the geopolitical perspective how do you assess the decision of the Republic of Armenia to become a member of the Customs Union? Could Armenia have possibly taken another rout being faced with the choice between Russia and Europe?

Gérard-François Dumont: Armenia, which has limited resources and is largely isolated because of the closed borders with Turkey and Azerbaijan, has to rely on those partners which have the capability and the wish to effectively contribute to Armenia’s security. The current situation in the international relations is such that the United States gives preference to Turkey at least merely due to what I call “the rule of numbers” - Turkey has a population of 76 million, while Armenia, together with Nagorno-Karabakh, has a population of three million. 

The European Union, being an ally of the US, in 2005 started negotiations with Turkey for Turkey’s membership in the EU, or to be more precise, for granting Turkey a status of a candidate country, with all the financial privileges pertaining to it. But this situation is ridiculous: Turkey does not recognize the sovereignty of one of the EU members; neither does it guarantee the protection of the rights of its minorities, which is a fundamental European value.
Thus, being unable to rely either on the US or on the EU, Armenia had no other choice but to join the Russia-led Customs Union. Besides, Moscow has paid for it by offering to provide gas to Armenia with “friendly prices”. At the same time however the Customs Union cannot work miracles, for two reasons. First, the CU opens for Armenia a smaller market compared to that of the EU with the population of 500 million; second, the economy of the CU member states is based more on the exploitation of natural resources than on innovations. Having said this, it must also be acknowledged that Russia, the country that has founded the Customs Union, does after all provide a necessary security umbrella for Armenia.
NC: Professor Dumont, thank you very much for the interesting interview. 
The interview was conducted by Nvard Chalikyan
 
 

Source: Panorama.am

[Yervant1]

RUSSIA SHOULD BE FIRST TO RECOGNIZE NAGORNO-KARABAKH - UKRAINIAN EXPERT

13:47 * 10.02.14

Well-known Ukrainian political engineer Viktor Ukolov has commented on
a statement by European Parliament member Ewald Stadler (Austria),
who pointed out the need for recognition of Nagorno-Karabakh.

According to the expert, Russia should be the first as the major
regional factor.

"Once Russia recognizes Nagorno-Karabakh, other nations, which are
at a longer distance from Armenia and Azerbaijan, will be able to
decide on their stance," Ukolov wrote on his Facebook page.

The EU-Armenia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee held its
14th meeting in Strasbourg, on February 5 and 6. Speaking of the
possibility of settling the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict without official
Stepanakert's participation, Stadler said that the European Union must
recognize independent Nagorno-Karabakh. In this context, he announced
his intention to form an Austria-NKR friendship group in Austria.

Armenian News - Tert.am

[Yervant1]

19:46 27/02/2014 » IN THE WORLD

In reputable edition Le Monde French MPs call to recognize independence of Nagorno-Karabakh

To support the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic is to help to establish an ultimate peace in the South Caucasus, reads the joint article of the French national Assembly MPs François Rochebloine, René Rouquet and Guy Teissier. The article is placed in the reputable French daily Le Monde.

According to the publication, soon the 20th anniversary of armistice agreement, signed to stop a long and brutal war in Nagorno-Karabakh, will be marked. The agreement was signed in 12th of May in 1994. As a result of this war for independence a new state was born, located between Armenia and Azerbaijan, on the Armenian territories, at the crossroads of Russian, Turkish and Iranian cultures.

"Twenty years – it is one whole generation; generation of young Azerbaijanis and Karabakh people, who were to see only peace and whose inalienable right for life and security was to be recognized. However, it should be state that even if the war is over, the peace is still needed to be achieved: the truce is extremely shaky in the absence of a document of mutual recognition and even a direct dialogue between the parties. Therefore, Azerbaijan, as well as Nagorno-Karabakh, is deprived of prospects of normal and peaceful development," note the parliamentarians. 

In their opinion, the peace must be achieved. This means that the existing facts should be recognize and a transparent dialogue should consciously and voluntarily by initiated, with an ultimate goal to fix the mistakes. However, this requires pluralism and democracy in each of the countries.

"We, the members of France-Karabakh friendship group, are for the peace in the South Caucasus; we call on the parties to perform realism and pragmatism: neither threats, nor militaristic rhetorics and the military activities will not persuade the former colony, Karabakh, to return to the "bosom" of Azerbaijan. After 20 years of signing ceasefire provocations are being repeatedly performed almost every month which lead to deaths of soldiers and civilians in Karabakh from the fire of Azerbaijani soldiers, whose attacks are being prevented. Recurrence of identical tragedies holds away the prospect of peaceful coexistence every day. For us, recognition of Karabakh does not mean becoming an enemy to Azerbaijan. We, like other people who visited Karabakh, are recognized persona non grata by the Azerbaijani regime. This is ridiculous and destructive behavior," the material states. 

The French parliamentarians noted that the acquisition of the peace first of all means healing the wounds of the past. Crimes have been committed during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, which need to be uncovered. Armenians were their victims in Sumgait, Kirovabad and Maragha, and Meskhetiana in Khojalu.

"Sumgait pogroms organized on the 27th February in 1988, where hundreds of people became a victim, served a cause for the conflict. This, surely, led to the arrests and judicial verdicts by the Soviet authorities, however only the executors were punished. The real organizers were not brought to justice, and the fact that the murders were premeditated, was also ignored. This is the power of democracy – to be confident in your abilities, to establish the necessary commissions, which will expose and convict the real culprits, softening the pain and promoting the reconciliation," stressed the authors of the statement.

They note that "having witnessed an obvious progress achieved by the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, they are happy to know that the non-governmental organization Freedom House in its final report on the human rights and freedoms has assessed it as a partly free country."

"We are in full solidarity with the former NKR President Arkady Ghukasyan, who recently noted that "the purpose of conflict settlement is not only in the official refusal of hostility, but also in establishment of historic reconciliation between the two peoples ... for preventing the further conflicts" and that contacts between civil societies can outline the way," the statement reads.

The parliamentarians expressed hope that their appeal will be responded by the Azerbaijani civil society, and that the "new forces that are born there, will renounce propaganda of hatred and will look into the future."

"If these forces show up, if dialogue initiatives and contacts are born, then make sure that our modest group will be supporter and comrade-in-arms for them," concluded Rochebloine, Rouquet and Teissier.
 

Source: Panorama.am

[Yervant1]

15:02 09/09/2014 » INTERVIEWS

Francois Rochebloine: Recognition of Nagorno Karabakh Republic will ensure greater stability for people of Nagorno Karabakh

On the issue of criminalizing the denial of the Armenian Genocide in France as well as on the recent Azerbaijani provocations on the border with Nagorno Karabakh Panorama.am has spoken to the member of the National Assembly of France, author and the initiator of the Armenian Genocide Resolution in France, Mr. Francois Rochebloine.
- Mr. Rochebloine, you have been the author and the promoter of the law criminalizing the denial of the Armenian Genocide in France. What new steps are to be taken in this regard, particularly on the eve of the 100th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide in 2015?  
- First of all I am proud to have been the reporter of the law passed in January 2001 by which France publicly recognized the Armenian Genocide of 1915. This was a fundamental act of reparation which demonstrated our solidarity with the Armenian people. 

Then, as you mentioned, I was also directly involved in drafting and discussing the law that criminalizes the denial of the Armenian Genocide. As we know the Constitutional Council of France has repealed that law; it based its decision on argument which I personally disagree with, but which according to experts is very hard to dispute. The President of France has pledged to resume the examination of this question but so far hasn’t come up with a specific initiative, which is not surprising. This comes to prove that this is a very delicate matter. 

I have proposed that in our fight against denialism we present the question in the broadest way possible so that the criminalization refers not only to the Armenian Genocide but equally to all the genocides. The commemoration of the 100th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide may serve as a good occasion for raising this issue once again.  
- For countries like France which have recognized the Armenian Genocide, what should the next phase of this process be? How can a shift be made towards the phase of demanding reparations from Turkey and what should the international community do in this regard?
- Your question in fact asks how the international community, led mostly by countries which have, one way or another, recognized the Armenian Genocide, can force Turkey to make the reparations that it owes to the Armenian people, whose extermination it organized a century ago. 

Well, first of all I think Turkey has once and for all to accept its total responsibility. In this regard the condolence sent by Prime Minister Erdogan is an ambiguous and insufficient gesture. The Turkish intellectuals who courageously try to raise this question in their country and generate a public discussion on this issue are facing a major risk. In this regard the first step to be taken is to support them and try to protect them from pressure and persecutions. 
Second, we must continuously repeat from all the international platforms the following simple message – Turkey is a very developed country economically and has big ambitions. No big nation can live carrying the burden of such a grave crime committed in the past. This is a question of respect towards oneself and others. For me personally this is a constant question of concern when I participate for instance in the activities of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg.
- In the article recently published in Le Monde you call for the international recognition of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic; you also express your concern about Azeri provocations on the line of contact, Azerbaijan’s anti-Armenian propaganda and war rhetoric. Could you comment on the latest Azeri agression on the Nagorno Karabakh border? What steps must be taken to counter these actions of Azerbaijan and how can the recognition of the NKR by the international community mitigate these threats?  

- It has been 20 years already since the ceasefire put a temporary stop to the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. To this day peace has not yet been completely established on the line of contact, however the latest intensification of ceasefire breaches comes to prove that the Azeri provocations are not random acts but are tests programmed by the Azerbaijani army and its leaders with the purpose of testing the resistance of the Nagorno Karabakh defence forces. These instances furthermore reinforce my concerns. They must be harshly condemned. Unfortunately the tragic events in Syria and Iraq divert the attention of the international community from the South Caucasus. For this reason the friends of Nagorno Karabakh must multiply their vigilance and their support.
The Nagorno Karabakh Republic is a sovereign state with all the characteristics of the state defined by the international law. It has territory, population, stable state institutions and above all, also corresponds to international standards of democracy. The recognition of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic will be an expression of political lucidity and at the same time it will ensure greater stability for the people of Nagorno Karabakh which as all nations has the right to peaceful and secure existence.  
The Circle of the Friends of Nagorno Karabakh that I have the honour to preside aims to present the realities of this country in France and to ensure greater support for it. This is a challenging task; it requires great consistency and perseverance, as the adverse propaganda affects the public opinion and the politicians.
Interview by Nvard Chalikyan