The Artsakh Peace Process

[Artsakh]

I am just curious to know what some of your ideas are on the latest Artsax peace process. How do you interpret the latest statements of officials saying that "compromises are inevitable", "it will require painful compromises from both sides". It is interesting, i do not hear any noise,kicks and screams from the ARF. Also interesting are the statements of the ARF head Vahan Hovanissyan saying "he personally favored a step by step" solution to the conflict. But wait a second, isn't that what the former president Levon der pedrossyan favored? How do you guys interpret these latest developments? Edited April 13, 2005 by Artsakh

[Armen Half-Celt]

i'm wondering, i've heard both sides at one point or another seemed to reacha compromise, but havn't. For example, would Armenia return the bufferzone in exchange for Artsakh's unification with Armenia and use of the Lachin Corridor?

[Harut]

i don't think there would be any immediate solutions/consecuenses, as such cyclical war-peace, compromise-no compromise situations have been going on since the ceasefire. and i don't see the problem resolved any time soon.

but clearly the current administration has failed to deliver on its promises and doesn't even follow what it was preaching in 1998. actually their stance has change so many times that it's not even clear what they want.

[Harut]

For example, would Armenia return the bufferzone in exchange for Artsakh's unification with Armenia and use of the Lachin Corridor?

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

i think (i could be wrong) that's always been the official stance (plus other security assurances, etc...). btw, not unification with armenia, but sovereignty for artsakh. but it seems azeris don't agree to anything less than an azari flag in "khankandi" in one form or another (semi-autonomy, autonomy, etc... for artsakh)

[Nazarian]

Yes, it's really funny how the tune, that the ARF, Hanrapetakan, et al. played has changed.

 

The compromise is inevitable, everybody except for the most hardcore ARF members knew/know that.

 

What comcerns me the most is that the current opposition/other political forces may try to use this to do a color revolution and overthrow Kocharian and company. I do not think that it should be done. Although I have very little sympathy for the Kocharian administration, I think that the nation should stand by their government during these difficult times.

 

Of course, it all depends on the administration's attitude as well. If they continue to behave like the a-holes they have been for the last few years, it may be difficult to bring yourself to actually support them.

[hytga]

There's no point in the stage by stage process unless azeris show that they're prepared to recognise Artsax as independent or as part of Armenia. The stage by stage process makes no sense. Let's give them the buffer zones, the security belt and then hope on their good will that they won't start claiming Artsax itself. it's plain idiotic to take the word of turks seriously.

[Artsakh]

The stage-by-stage solution to the conflict is simply suicidial for Armenia. If the Azeris are unwilling to recognize Artsakh's independence in exchange for the return of surrouding districts while we are in actual possession of those surrounding districts, then exactly what "guarantees" that the current leadership speaks of could possibly change the Azeris stance on this issue after the surrounding districts have been returned?

[Harut]

There's no point in the stage by stage process unless azeris show that they're prepared to recognise Artsax as independent or as part of Armenia. The stage by stage process makes no sense. Let's give them the buffer zones, the security belt and then hope on their good will that they won't start claiming Artsax itself. it's plain idiotic to take the word of turks seriously.

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

agree. there was a clear deman when the movement started in 1988. as i see it, nothing has changed in that area. the only changes happened in factual arena and all of them, as they appear, to armenians' favor: nkr used a soviet law to make demans, used another law to claim independence, the opposite side started armed movement, armenians de facto won the war, gained territories, etc...

we've just conducted very poor diplomacy, didn't capitalized on this and resloved the issue quickly.

[Aaron]

I read an interview of Vahan Hovanissian on the Yerkir webpage, and he got heavily criticized and even insulted for willing to make concessions to Azerbaijan. On the other hand, others insulted him for not having pushed for concessions until now, and clearly demanded return of territories and a quick peace deal.

 

"The government doesn't think about our national interests, they are selling the land, they stole everything and they are doing the same with karabagh" from one side and "the government is too nationalistic, too conceited, ARF and kocharian don't care about our youth who will have to fight another war if we don't compromise. Compromise, and compromise fast before it is too late" from the other side!

 

I wouldn't want to be in kocharian's shoes if you see what I mean! One thing we learned since 1988; if we stand united, nobody can beat us! Its the only truth that can be said about the republic of Armenia of the past 15 years. So, you may like kocharian or not, like sargissian or not, detest the ARF or not, loath the coalition or not, the primary rule not to break is unity.

 

Let's have some confidence on our leaders (and even I am surprised that such a sequence of letters are being typed by my fingers...... I might eventually take back that last part about confidence!)

 

Do you think Veterans like kocharian, sargissian, etc would really sell karabagh for a certain amount of money? for a mansion on some island? for more power? a bulletproof mercedes? a sleek race car? These guys lost members of their family and childhood friends in the war....... they also did big mistakes later on, when tasting power and luxury, of course!

 

But let's not fall in the "people always remember the last thing you did" trap, and forget that Kocharian kept his family under the bombs in Stepanakert during the toughest times ...... while some of his present day critics were in Moscow or elsewhere! If any armenian leader has the legitimacy of speaking of a deal on karabagh, then it is those who actively took leading roles in the war! If they judge concessions are the right way, then so be it!

 

By the way, why is everyone surprised at hearing the word "concession" from Kocharian, maybe you should read his inaugural interview back in 1998 to understand that he always wanted a compromised deal with Azerbaijan. I'm no big fan of kocharian and I have expressed myself quite brutally on this forum about armenian leaders only a few days ago! But if Azerbaijan says:

 

"Well my armenian budy, we fought, went through tough times, we both have refugies and you won the war. Guess what? I don't give a damn that artsakh is important for you, that security is important for you, that you won on the battlefield, that artsakh has always been armenian, that there are hundreds of chuches there with armenian letters on their walls, that you fear going through another genocide if you hand over artsakh, that you are having debates in your political circles, that some of you want to stop this, that some don't, that your economy is suffering, that you are under siege with 85% of your borders closed, that you have massive emigration problems, that you can't lose artsakh by fear of turning the last page of your history, etc. I honestly don't care about your problems cause these are YOUR problems, all I want, and be sure that I will get it sonner or later, is my flag in khankendi, and your karabagh people subordinated to Baku. You can do it the easy way by returning EVERYTHING, or we can also do it the hard way, i.e I burn Armenia from A to Z, and god knows I have enough gasoline for it!"

 

If this is Azerbaijan's stance (and officially it is not far from this, ex: their vice defense minister declares that there will be no Armenia in 25 years), then we better stand tightly united. Very tightly! let's pray a lot! and trust Kocharian..... more than Aliyev!

 

Will continue later on!

A.

Edited April 13, 2005 by Aaron

[Artsakh]

.....the primary rule not to break is unity.

 

 

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

Agreed absolutely 100% At the same time, an opposition to the leadership which acts as a watch-dog is also essential to the keep the rulers on check.

[ED]

EURASIA INSIGHT

NAGORNO Artsax TALKS: PRELUDE TO PEACE?

Samvel Martirosyan 4/12/05

 

Tensions between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Artsax are growing in the run-up to an upcoming summit meeting to discuss new proposals from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe for an end to the 17-year conflict over the disputed region.

 

For the past month, skirmishes on the ceasefire line between Armenian and Azerbaijani forces have been reported almost every day. The exchange of gunfire has brought the highest casualty rate since the 1994 ceasefire agreement that ended the three-year war between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the territory. In March, at least six servicemen were killed in the exchanges. Three Azerbaijani soldiers have also been taken prisoner by Armenian forces, and the Armenian defense ministry reported on April 7 that an Armenian soldier was now held by Azerbaijan.

 

The clashes come as both sides state that they are ready to make serious compromises to resolve the conflict. Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian and Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov are scheduled to meet on April 15 in London as a precursor to a possible meeting between Armenian President Robert Kocharian and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev on the sidelines of a May 16 Council of Europe summit in Warsaw.

 

"We have never questioned the need for compromises in the settlement of the Nagorno Artsax conflict," Armenian President Robert Kocharian was quoted as saying by the news agency Mediamax at an April 11 meeting with students at Yerevan State University. "We have to understand that compromises in the settlement are inevitable. But we had better not speak about their possible scale today."

 

The extent of those compromises, Kocharian said, depended on Armenia’s domestic political and economic situation and the position taken by the international community on a resolution to the crisis. Azerbaijan has charged that the ruckus over the skirmishes is a negotiating tactic staged by Armenia to strengthen their position at the London meeting, as well as to shore up popular support for President Robert Kocharian’s government.

 

"[The Armenians] have to sit at the negotiating table and have their final say," Azerbaijani Parliamentary Deputy Speaker Ziyafat Asgarov stated on April 6, the Baku-based Space TV reported. "I believe that they are trying to avoid having their say and deliberately violating the cease-fire to give the international community the impression that stability is being disrupted."

 

Speaking at the Armenian parliament’s March 29-31 hearings on Nagorno-Artsax, Armenian Defense Minister Serge Sarkissian charged that attempts by Azerbaijani forces in the territory to take better positions had reduced the distance between Armenian and Azerbaijani troops to a mere 35-50 meters in some places. "Where do we want to lead the people, what do we want - a new war? . . . Can war last for eternity?" the Armenian news service ArmInfo quoted Sarkissian, a former commander of Armenian forces in Artsax, as saying on April 7. "This is an option too, though. [W]hen people make such a decision, then the defense minister will also have to assume this position."

 

In Armenia, Russian news outlets have added to the tensions with reports that cite Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev as saying that "[t]he war may start at any moment." Azerbaijani media outlets have not carried the remarks.

 

The OSCE has also expressed concern over the growing Nagorno Artsax tensions. "Aggressive statements must stop and the sides must do their best to establish an atmosphere of mutual trust," OSCE Acting Chairman and Slovenian Foreign Minister Dimitri Rupel stated during a March 30 trip to Yerevan. During his stay in the Armenian capital, Rupel met with the de facto president of Nagorno Artsax, Arkadi Ghukasian, and told reporters that, despite the ceasefire violations, chances were strong that negotiations between Armenia, Azerbaijan and Nagorno Artsax would open by the end of summer.

 

The participation of Nagorno Artsax representatives in the talks would be a first for the OSCE-brokered peace process – and a move long opposed by Azerbaijan. The OSCE appears to hold strong hopes that Baku will yield on this point. "There are some details for which solutions are impossible without the participation of Nagorno Artsax," OSCE Minsk Group Chairman Russian Ambassador Yuri Merzlyakov told the Azerbaijani news agency APA in a recent interview.

 

Meanwhile, both sides stress that they are ready to talk peace.

 

Sarkissian has stated that the Armenian government would agree to a referendum on the status of Nagorno-Artsax to be held in the territory under the auspices of the OSCE and United Nations, and also agree to negotiations over the status of the seven Azerbaijani regions currently occupied by Armenian forces. The defense minister presented the fact that Armenia has not to date recognized Nagorno-Artsax’s independence as a third concession made to Azerbaijan, though the chances appear to be slim that Baku would acknowledge it as such.

 

Increasingly, Yerevan appears to be focusing its peace overtures on the seven regions bordering Artsax that are currently occupied by Armenian forces. "I think such a pragmatic approach by the Armenian side may become a pledge of success," Sarkissian told parliament. Armenia, however, he said, would not return the regions to Azerbaijan without "strict guarantees of security and non-resumption of war, guaranteed by the international community, separate countries and organizations."

 

The statements could be seen as a quid pro quo for Azerbaijani concessions to Armenian demands on Artsax itself. Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanian has indicated that Yerevan sees the two issues as separate. "We will not concede Nagorno Karabagh; we will not concede the security of Nagorno Karabagh population; and will not admit a status of enclave for Nagorno Karabagh," Oskanian told parliament. " All this does not mean that the option territories for status cannot be discussed."

 

Speaking at the parliamentary hearings in Yerevan, Vladimir Kazimirov, a key architect of the 1994 ceasefire and Russia’s former envoy to the OSCE Minsk Group, the body charged with overseeing the Artsax peace talks, pushed the Kocharian government to drop its traditional insistence on a package peace deal, terming the strategy "not realistic." Given differences between the two sides, he argued, a gradual approach is the only way to peace.

 

Meanwhile, Azerbaijan has indicated that it would agree to a step-by-step withdrawal from the seven occupied territories, but cautioned that the ceasefire must hold during the talks in London. "Regular violations of the ceasefire carry the aim of increasing tensions. Armenia wants to receive [from this] a postponement [of talks], citing the tense situation. But losing time is not advantageous to either of the sides," Deputy Foreign Minister Araz Azimov was quoted as saying by the Baku-based newspaper Zerkalo on April 8.

 

 

Editor’s Note: Samvel Martirosyan is a Yerevan-based journalist and political analyst.

 

Posted April 12, 2005 © Eurasianet

http://www.eurasianet.org

[Sasun]

Oskanian Sees No Meeting With Azeri Counterpart

 

www.armenialiberty.org

By Anna Saghabalian

 

Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian said on Wednesday that he does not plan to meet with his Azerbaijani counterpart Elmar Mammadyarov during a fresh and repeatedly delayed round of Nagorno-Artsax peace talks in London later this week.

 

He also played down new peace proposals that have reportedly been put forward by international mediators.

 

Azerbaijani officials and Russia’s chief Artsax negotiator, Yuri Merzlyakov, have said that Oskanian and Mammadyarov will meet in London on Friday in the presence of the French, Russian and U.S. co-chairs of the OSCE’s Minsk Group. Merzlyakov told RFE/RL last week that the two men will discuss a framework peace deal drafted by the troika.

 

However, Oskanian insisted that he and Mammadyarov plan no face-to-face encounters and will instead hold separate “proximity talks” with the co-chairs. He also said that talk of a new Artsax peace plan is “very exaggerated.”

 

“We are still not at a point where it is possible to come up with some package [of peace proposals] based on the results of our negotiations,” Oskanian told a news conference. “But it is true that the co-chairs need to know the presidents’ opinion about several questions. I don’t know if those several questions can be called a package.”

 

Oskanian did not deny that the London talks will determine whether Presidents Ilham Aliev and Robert Kocharian will meet in Moscow or Warsaw next month. He had noted earlier that an Armenian-Azerbaijani summit would be far more important than further meetings between the foreign ministers.

 

Merzlyakov likewise said that that an Aliev-Kocharian meeting could give a decisive boost to the peace process. “The co-chairs believe that a political decision is required at the highest level,” he added.

 

But Oskanian sounded less upbeat on prospects for peace, saying that the parties have only agreed what to discuss. “This is also progress,” he said. “In the past, one or another party was refusing to even discuss a particular issue. But when we go into details we see that our positions are still very far apart.”

[Artashes]

The geopolitical calculation for Azerbaijan centers around the prospect of slowed or delayed oil revenues if war breaks out.

 

It is in their interest now to keep things cool until they build up their infrastructure and military resources with oil revenues.

 

They also know that Christian Russia, EU, and US will tilt towards Armenia in the event they are aggressors in breaking the cease-fire.

 

They further know that Turkey is not on sure footing now with the US, so, they can't count on Turkey putting pressure on the US in their favor.

 

The wild-card is Israel. How will Israel react if war was to break out again between Armenian forces and Azerbaijan? I venture that Israel would follow the US lead officially, but, would support Turkey's efforts from behind the scenes to aid Azerbaijan.

 

From what I understand, Israel's ties with Turkey are more than geopolitically inspired. Perhaps, Israel and Turkey have some racial ties through the Khazars, some of whom adopted Judaism in the 8th Century, and comprise a faction within the Ashkenazim of Israel and Europe.

 

I think Armenia's biggest political leverage in the negotiations is Europe. The Europeans have a long memory with what the invading Tatars have done to Eurasia and to neighboring European nations, throughout history.

 

I think it is most important now for the Orthodox Churches across Eurasia, Europe, and the Middle-East to unite further among themselves, and to further make overtures towards the Catholic Church to make amends for the event of 1054.

 

Part of what ties the Azeris to the Turks is Shiite Islam. Indo-European and Slavic Catholics and Orthodox should also unite around the cause of Karabagh.

 

Part of the Zionists' historical strategy vis a vis the Indo-European Christians has been to split Russia from Europe through Eurasia. There are many legitimate accounts of "Crypto-Jews" in both Europe and Eurasia converting to either Islam or Christianity, in order to further this strategy from the inside-out. I firmly believe that there are Zionist elements in both Turkey and Azerbaijan working the Karabagh issue in favor of Israel and Zionism.

 

If prominent Jewish members of the US government have substantial sway over US foreign policy, then, it is, in the least, also plausible to posit that such Jewish leverage also works against Armenia in proportion to Israeli/Turkish/Azerbaijani wishes.

 

In summary, we have plenty of leverage in these negotiations, if we remain united, and if we can further rally other Christians around the world to our cause.

 

However, unity should never be at the expense of lively, well reasoned, well intentioned, and vociferous debate on what is the best way to proceed on this most important issue.

 

We need to strengthen and cultivate individualistic (agency) streaks and impulses within us, as well as the communal (unity). We need strong and articulate individuals among us to make up a strong and assertive Armenian Community.

 

Artashes M.

Edited April 16, 2005 by Artashes

[skhara]

You think US will back Armenia?

[Aaron]

Part 2:

 

The concessions Armenia might have to make? Well there was an article written in december by 2 senior european diplomats (one former NATO secretary general and a former spanish foreign minister if i'm not mistaken). In there it said that the status of Karabagh should be decided by another referendum in about 10 years from now, but until then, Armenia should return the occupied regions and as a security guarantee, the transitional control of Karabagh should go to Armenia! Fair enough no? if we exclude Lachin and possibly Kelbajar from the list of returnable territories for those 10 years and that security is guaranteed by international organizations as well as our army on the ground .

 

This is the limit beyond which it is impossible to reconcile both sides! Armenia asks for the three known principles to be respected: horizontal links between stepanakert and Baku, a land link with Armenia, strong security guarantees. Armenia gets the last 2 ones now, and leaves the door open for the first one, with strong chances (if karabagh develops well during those 10 years) of getting it later through an internationally accepted referendum!

 

As for Azerbaijan, it wants a step by step deal? he gets it. It wants return of territories and refugies? he gets it! It needs to show or act as if having a tough stance on Armenia for the sake of its own internal stability and the security of the Aliev clan? he gets it, because it can now sign a deal where he gets most of what he lost in 1994... without blood! It needs to maintain stability for his oil issues? again, he has it! It needs another 10 years to swallow its defeat, to "come out with a white face", not humiliated? This is his chance! The only thing he is quite sure of losing, is Karabagh itself (and possibly lachin and/or kelbajar)! But hey, you can't prepare omelette without breaking eggs, can you?

 

This is the sensitive part, if Azeri leaders do not prepare themselves to the fact that Karabagh is not and will not be theirs, then the only way is the rule of force. And I think, that the azeri stance is still the classical "EVERYTHING BACK, I don't care what Armenia thinks"! Well, this is not the most constructive approach and chances that it works are a bit low (I pray so!).

 

The problem is the following: If the prague talks (current negotiations) fail, then it will be cristal clear that negotiations are really useless since both sides are asking for contradictory things and because this deal had the biggest chances of satisfying all sides! In that case, the Aliyev regime will have to throw a new war sooner or later, at least to keep the power. They have been talking about it for a decade and prepared their population for it psychologically, so they can't back off now without losing their leaders. Even if they risk loosing the war, or changing nothing on the frontline, they will have to make a move, it's like a "check mate"...... for both sides! That's my fear; if these talks fail, then things will serioulsy start warming up for the worse! And I think the blame will be on azerbaijan, because of its "everything back to the way it was in 1988" position!

 

Let's hope the talks don't fail!

A.

Edited April 14, 2005 by Aaron

[Artsakh]

Good analysis Aaron, very interesting!

[Artsakh]

CONCESSIONS EQUAL TO TREASON

 

Today several women organized a press conference on behalf of the widows, mothers and sisters of the fighters who died in the Artsax war. They are displeased and concerned with recently voiced declarations concerning «return» of liberated territories.

 

Gohar Karapetyan was angry with the recent statement of Defense Minister Serzh Sarkisyan about «possible concessions for certain guarantees». «What guarentess do they want to get from the Turks, and what will be given in return?» ask the women. They declare that they speak on behalf of those 400 000 refugees, «real owners» of the territories. «It's at least treason not to take into account the sufferings, the heroic fight of Artsax population, and the blood they shed», say the women.

 

They reminded Robert Kocharyan of his pre-election programmes saying Armenians are owners of these territories. Women do not understand «how can Serzh Sarkisyan and Robert Kocharyan who had had certain participation in the fight, make such declarations». The widows of the fighters noted that if, God forbid, the war is resumed, they will be on the front line.

 

http://www.a1plus.am/eng/?go=issue&id=27125

[Artashes]

The concern I have about the 10 year time-frame is that granted the oil revenues that will be flowing within those 10 years of peace to the Azeris, God knows what kinds of leverage they will be able to build up within and around Karabagh.

 

The population of Karabagh is very impoverished, to say the least. With the tremendous amount of resources at their disposal during the ten years, the Azeris will resort to buying Armenians off within Karabagh and will start to work the internal political, economic, social and cultural factors so that they have a fair chance with the referendum in 10 years.

 

Let's say, for the sake of discussion, the blockade is lifted during those 10 years and Armenians within and without Karabagh get all the opportunity to build it up along the lines of Armenian interests. Who will pour - directly and indirectly - more resources into Karabagh? The Armenians or the Azeris?

 

With the Armenians, most of the resources will have to come from Diasporan Armenians, right - Armenia has enough of a challenge fending for herself economically and developmentally.

 

While the final status of Karabagh is up in the air during those ten years, most Diasporan Armenians will be reluctant to go all out there, whereas, and in contrast, the Azeris will have no choice but to build what they need to in all realms (military, economic, political, social, cultural, informational, etc.) all around Karabagh, and to the degree possible, within, through various native and/or inserted agents.

 

Comparing the relative weak interests of the Diasporan Armenians in Karabagh to the geographically immediate and strong interests of the Azeris results in the identification of this key difference in terms of who will do what, how, where, when, and how much, in and around Karabagh. Granted the Azeris’ present and expected oil revenues, that does not bode well for Armenians and Armenian Karabagh.

 

Granted the impoverished people of Karabagh, there is palpable susceptibility to various individuals and families being bought off by the Azeris through oil money.

 

So, if we are going to go down that route, we better start preparing a comprehensive plan in our Diasporan circles about an accelerated schedule of sustainable development for Karabagh, starting yesterday!

 

We need to make up in organization and time what we will lack in resources if this scenario unfolds.

 

Artashes M.

[Armen Half-Celt]

were is Shushi btw? at what part of the "occupied/liberated territory" is it? inside or outside of Artsax

[Harut]

were is Shushi btw? at what part of the "occupied/liberated territory" is it? inside or outside of Artsax

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

http://www.armsite.com/maps/

http://www.armsite.com/maps/mshow.phtml?when=now&slide=8

[Artsakh]

were is Shushi btw? at what part of the "occupied/liberated territory" is it? inside or outside of Artsax

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

Shushi is a historical armenian city, as historic and as important as Ani or van. It is located within the boundries of the Nagorno Artsax Republic. The liberation of Shushi is one of the most glorious pages in Armenian history. It is a great town, just beautiful you should really visit. Also, shushi was the former capital of Artsax. As General Garegin Njdeh (Der-Harutuyan) has said, "he who reigns over Shushi, reigns over the whole of the Southern Caucasus."

[MosJan]

The Date of liberation of OUR Shushi it's not to FArr

 

HAVERJ PARQ ZMER BYOUR NAHADAGATZ .

[hytga]

http://www.bakutoday.net/view.php?d=13156

 

 

 

‘No concessions for Armenia’ – parliament speaker

 

AssA-Irada 19/04/2005 13:37

 

Despite the OSCE Minsk Group’s insistence, Azerbaijan won’t make any concessions for Armenia, Parliament Speaker Murtuz Alasgarov said in a meeting with representatives of the EU-Azerbaijan Parliamentary Cooperation Committee on Monday.

 

Alasgarov said that granting the autonomy status to the Armenian community in Upper Garabagh after Azerbaijan’s occupied regions are liberated may be the only concession.

 

 

The speaker noted that although the conflict has remained unsettled for many years, international organizations fail to make serious efforts in this area.

 

“The peace talks are stalling due to the biased approach of international organizations to the issue.”

Head of the foreign delegation Maria Ishler Belqueen expressed concerns over unresolved status of the Upper Garabagh conflict and said that she has become familiar with the living conditions of internally displaced persons.

 

“Like the Minsk Group, we have an obligation to settle the conflict. It is possible that we have not correctly determined our activity for more than 10 years”, said Belqueen.

 

She said that the negotiations should continue at the meetings of Azerbaijani and Armenian presidents.

Touching upon Azerbaijan’s parliamentary elections due in November, Belqueen said the Committee wants them to be democratic and compliant with international standards.

[hytga]

i'm curious. If the armenia turkey diplomatic relatios develop and the border opens, will the azeris resort to military means finding themselves isolated and abandoned, or will they become more soft?

what do you guys think?

[Aaron]

The saga continues!

 

The ICG (International crisis group) completed its second report which focuses on a peace plan for Karabagh. The document can be downloaded in PDF format from the following address.

 

http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=3740&l=1&m=1

 

The first study can also be found on the same site and is entitled "Nagorno Karabagh: viewing the conflict from the ground". They are both worth reading to have a good understanding of where the conflict resolution is and may be headed from the perspective of western countries! I just finished reading the latest report. In my view, it could only work in theory, some points must be modified and reconsidered due to lack of pragmatism from the ICG.

 

Read it and let me know!

A.