Khachatourian: War Threats Loom Over ‘Peace’ Talks

On Sun., Nov. 22, the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs issued a statement following the meeting in Germany between the Armenian and Azeri presidents on the Nagorno-Karabagh conflict. The representatives of France, Russia, and the U.S. expressed optimism over the progress of the peace talks, but failed to condemn Azerbaijan and its president, Ilham Aliyev, for inciting violence when he threatened military action against Armenia and Karabagh just two days before.

“That meeting must play a decisive role in the process of negotiations,” Aliyev had said late on Friday, in comments broadcast by state television in reference to the meeting.

“If that meeting ends without result, then our hopes in negotiations will be exhausted and then we are left with no other option,” he said, adding that Azerbaijan had the right to use force to “liberate” Karabagh.

“Azerbaijan is spending billions on buying new weapons, hardware, strengthening its position on the line of contact.” he said. “We are doing that because we never excluded and we do not exclude that option. We have the full right to liberate our land by military means.”

The above statements should have been enough to raise red flags for all parties involved. If the Minsk Group mediators were truly committed to the peace process, they should have not only canceled the meeting, but issued a terse warning to Azerbaijan for its use of military rhetoric.

Yet, even with the absence of a Minsk Group-initiated cancellation, Armenia should have pulled out of the meeting in protest of Aliyev’s remarks, sending a clear signal that it does not negotiate with parties that threaten its national security—or the security of Karabagh.

There was, however, an interesting and bold announcement from President Serge Sarkissian’s spokesperson, Samvel Farmanyan, who on Monday told reporters that an official recognition of the Nagorno-Karabagh Republic (NKR) by Armenia had not been ruled out—especially in light of Aliyev’s rhetoric.

This series of events calls into question the optimism expressed by the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs, as well as the validity of the peace process. One wonders if the parties involved have adopted another—still elusive—definition of the word “peace,” given that the atmosphere surrounding the Munich talks was tainted from the outset and before any matter of relevance could be placed on the agenda.

Was Farmanyan’s statement another knee-jerk reaction from Yerevan, or one that may actually have legs?

The Azeri foreign minister, Araz Azimov, on Monday told the press and his Turkish counterpart, Ahmet Davutoglu, that the Munich talks were encouraging. All sides are now looking at the OSCE summit in Athens to continue the process—or the progress, depending on your angle.

The Armenian side has not commented on the talks, but Farmanyan’s remarks indicate that it did not view any progress in the talks.

In fact, the diplomatic back-and-forth prior to the meeting demonstrated that neither party was on the same page. The Azeris, on the one hand, said the focus was on the timetable, by which Armenia would “return lands” to Azerbaijan. On the other hand, Armenia wondered aloud whether it was taking part in the same peace talks, whose focus, in Armenia’s opinion, was to determine the status of Karabagh.

This, coupled with continued assurances by Turkey that Turkey-Armenia relations are dependent on the outcome of the Karabagh peace process, as well as announcements by Karabagh authorities that they have never been presented with the so-called “Madrid Principles,” paints a dubious picture at best of the ongoing peace process.

In this climate, Armenia must act resolutely and put in motion the processes outlined by Farmanyan in his statement, before another round of talks between the “sides” insist on Karabagh’s complete participation in the peace process. (this last part doesn’t make much sense) At the same time, the Armenian Foreign Ministry should also engage in diplomatic talks with the Minsk Group countries and urge them o condemn Azerbaijan for its continued military rhetoric and non-peaceful disposition, which it has demonstrated from the beginning of the talks.

Furthermore, until such a condemnation is issued by the Minsk Group co-chairs, Armenia should refrain from taking part in the peace talks.

3 Comments

  1.  I completely agree. It is outrageous that Aliyev and Azerbaijan are allowed to make war threats
    in a peace. Without an appropriate response from the Armenian side,they almost sound like impatient victors; rather than the losing side in a conflictinitiated by thier oppressive state. I understand that it is, at times, in Armenia’s interest to not respond to such ridiculous statements,but we must be careful to not lose more ground in the public positioning debate. Aliyev’s continued
    barage of obsurdities, are designed to distort the truth by repeating comments to a naive or  uniformed public . I do believe that Armenia’s statement on recognizing Karabagh is a response
    along these lines and should continue.

  2. Dear  Stepan,
    Anti chronologically,to your above post.
    1.RA  should have done that long ago,that  is recognize Artsakhs´(Nagorniyi Karab agh) independence.Better  yet,should have done what  it started to do in the commencement of   it.
    “Miatzoum” ….after all if we declare it is Armenian territory,parecel  and part  of it,it SHOULD FORM PART  OF IT… usurped,”squattered” – in by azeris.lIKE YOU SAY, WE WERE  THE VICTORS.sINCE IT FAILED ,YES FAILED  TO DO SO ,THESE ARE THE CONSEQUENCES.Those people at the helm of the previous government,LTP ,to be exact, did  not   have the “cojones” to act appropriately
    After all a  man of letters and much knowledge..but Cultural-wise,not with abilitites  to steer the victorious “jogads”.There is proof that one or two or the latter comandants,had had the idea and suggsted to lTP or other inpower of the armed forces to make an incursion into NAKHIJEVAN and within a few hours   liberate  it too.Bygones are bygones!!!!!!
    As regrds your first and second paragraph´s ,I regret for  Armenian  Amerticans it is probably their being incognizant of  turkic,rather ,in spanish( turco-azeri ) “Khasiat”,voj  in Armenian,which means their nature or natural mode..even with their backs on the ground they will keep “Hokhortal” means boast,MORE  OR LESS.Several times over when Serzh Sargsyan was Ministre  of Defense, he boldly DEFIED  THEM  and said “come and get  it”this I describe Ala Americaine…
    But  nothing happened.So do not be dismayed  with their “Khasiat” -like boasting!!!
    However,they have  One IMPORTANT  factor  on their side,that  of great Turkey and  in exstension suppoting states….Viz.who-you go figure outplease…
    So it is high time we in the Diaspora also brface ourselves get mOBILIZED in case great Turkey really means what  it declares, that of being on the side of Azerbaijan and…even support it in case war breaks out.
    I do believe this is a probability as we have seen so far, their  unrelenting stance is not changing.They may mean business.
    A. There are two reasons  for this to happen.A.If their quest for entering in EU is not attained.Like in the past, they will then turn to the EAST.They have dropped  in this respect.
    B.TODAY, yes today their FM has declared openly we are NEO-OSMANLY….go figure that  out please.
    Hama Haigagani SIRO,
    gaytzag  palandjian
    ex-Executive Board  member  of Armenian (first)
    Co9ngress ,Paris 1979
     

  3. Russians are no longer in Azerbaijan. If Azerbaijanis continues threatening Armenia, the Armenian ambassador in Iran should start encouraging the Iranian leadership in Tehran to abrogate Golestan (1813) and Torkemanchayi Treaties (1824) and put an immediate claim on Azeri territory. It’s about time Azerbaijanis joined their former native homeland. Many sincerely religious Shia Azeris might in fact be delighted. They will be able to go to the Iranian mosques and Shia holy pilgrimage centers in Mashhad and Quom and worship their God without Aliev’s government bullying them. And for the Iranians, Baku oil fields and southwestern Caspian continental shelf oil reserves might be too tempting. To the delight of Armenians, with the West being preoccupied in Afghanistan and Iraq, Iranians might march all the way to Baku and overthrow Aliev’s threatening government.
     It was unfortunate that Fathali Shah-e Ghagar of Persia being preoccupied with Circassian -Georgian slave girls, and the imcompaetense of his Armenian eunuchs  to  managing his  harem, ignored to protect the northwestern periphery of his empire. Armenians can help Iranians to declare abovementioned two treaties null and void and eventually persuade Iranians to annex Azeri territory. It will be nice to get rid of mean, cantankerous, and bellicose enemies such as phony Turks in Baku!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*