SETTLEMENT AT A STANDSTILL

The heads of the Azerbaijani and Armenian foreign ministries,  Elmar Mammadya-rov and Eduard Nalbandyan on 22 July met separately with the co-chairs of theOSCE Minsk Group- Igor Popov (Russia), James Warlick (the United States) andPierre Andrieu (France). The personal representative of the Chairperson-in-Office, Andrzej Kasprzyk, also took part in the meetings. As a resultof the meeting a statement was drawn up and published on the official website of the OSCE. In the statement the co-chairs of the Minsk Group expressed their serious concern about the increase in tensions and violence, including the targeted killings of civilians along the line of contact and on the Armenia-Azerbaijan border. Mediators urgently called upon both sides to commit themselves to avoiding casualties and to a repudiation of the targeting of the civilian population.The co-chairs of the Minsk Groupdiscussed with the foreign ministers of the opposing sides possible items on the agenda for a proposed meeting between the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan to make progress in peace talks. New York has been chosen as the site for the meeting, which will be held at the same time as the next meeting of the UN General Assembly. The co-chairs declared that they will continue to facilitate an atmosphere of trust and contact between the two sides, because they believe that these conditions are essential for the establishment of a lasting peace. 

The inability of mediators to organize direct talks between the foreign ministers proves that negotiations for a peaceful settlement of the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict are still at a deadlock. The Armenians in every way possible back away from implementation of the well-known "Madrid principles" for a peace agreement and offer up for discussion questions like the strengthening of ceasefire agreements,the withdrawal of snipers, the carrying out of "confidence-building measures." In general, anything, so long as they get away from concrete discussion ofthe most important issue - the withdrawal of the Armenian armed forces from the occupied territories. 

On the other hand, Baku is ready for serious steps - substantive discussions of the text of a major peace treaty. Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov declared this during the recent visit of the co-chairs of the Minsk Group to the region. The Azerbaijani president's deputy chief of staff Novruz Mammadov commented on the Brussels meeting with these words: "Our country's position is this: if any sort of meeting takes place with the Armenians, then we must see beforehand some reason for the dialogue and have a good idea of why we are going to the meeting." N. Mammadov says that if dialogue does not bring real results, then there's no point in having any.

All right-thinking people hold that the only option is a peaceful resolution of the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict. In this sense Azerbaijan values the mediatory efforts of the OSCE Minsk Group. However, for several years there has been a standstill in the negotiations process, while the international community is unwilling to exert a sobering effect on the Armenians. This raises the question: is it so unthinkable thata change in the current unjust state of affairs is impossible without another war?

Azerbaijani society, political figures, and media outlets have watched as the United States and the European Union not only strongly condemn the annexation of the Crimea and Russian's subsequent actions in the Ukraine, but also impose sanctions on Moscow that get more severe with each passing week.Armenia, on the other hand, not only does not hide the fact that it has an occupying army numbering in the thousands in seized Azerbaijani regions, but openly flaunts it, illegally carrying out large-scale training exercises and parades, which are attended by the president, defence minister, and other public officials from Yerevan. In defiance of international law and after the initial looting of Azerbaijani territory, there is now illegal economic activity and the resettlement of Armenians. Instead of condemnation of the Armenian administration, we see continued economic aid to the criminal regimes of Yerevan and Xankandi [Khankendi]. Armenian leaders, many of whom are essentially war criminals, are accepted in European capitals; European officials shake their hands and even pin government medals on their chests. Is it hardly surprising to see growing disappointment with the process of peaceful settlement? As time goes on, it looks more and more like the OSCE Minsk Group is an instrument to maintain the existing status quo and prevent the outbreak of a new Armenian-Azerbaijani war. 

The people of Azerbaijan are impatient with an illegal occupation of their native cities, towns, and villages that has been going on for more than two decades. This impatience takes the form of not only words, but also actions. A clear example is the holding of Azerbaijanis Dilqam Asgarov and Sahbaz Quliyev in the occupied district of Kalbacar. Although the two are obviously of neither military age nor martial appearance, the Armenians have declared that they are spies and saboteurs, killing another Azerbaijani, G. Hasanov, allegedly while he was trying to resist detainment. The two others, who are in effect civilian hostages, were subjected to such severe torturethat they were kept from representatives of the International Red Cross for a week so that the traces of mistreatment and abuse could heal a little. In spite of the propaganda furor raised by the Armenians, it became clear thatthese Azerbaijanis had on several prior occasions taken mountain passes to get into Kalbacar District, where they had visited their homes and the village graveyard where their parents were buried. Short videos taken during the course of such dangerous trips have been found on YouTube, with some early videos dating from 2009.Now, with no legal grounds for the accusations leveled at them, the so-called "authorities" of the republic of Nagornyy Karabakh want to cruelly punish the captured Azerbai-janis. The reason is not only an inculcated Armenian hatred of the Azerbaijanis who are the rightful owners of that land, but also a fear of others making similar trips into occupied territory, which in the presence of appropriate support could lead to a partisan war. 

Meanwhile, in an atmosphere of great doubt as to the prospects for a peaceful settlement, there are regular violations of the ceasefire, with both sides carrying out local reconnaissance operations and large-scale military exercises. It is not hard to predict where this state of events will lead. Azerbaijani president Ilham Aliyev, who recently accepted a delegation headed by the newly-appointed EU special representative for the southern CaucasusHerbert Salber, noted that if the Nagornyy Karabakh issue is not solved fairly, within the bounds of international law, then the situation in the region may become further strained. 

Lately we can see a shift to a more principled position regarding the sides in the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict. During the visit of Azerbaijani president Ilham Aliyev to Rome on 14 July 2014 a joint declaration was made with the Italian president Giorgio Napolitano. The preamble included statement of Italy's support for the independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. The declaration stated that the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagornyy Karabakh conflict needs to be swiftly resolved within the OSCE Minsk Group. Before the statement the parliaments of a number of European, Latin American, and Asian countries had made similar statements. 

An important new factor might be an initiative by the United States Congress, which after two readings approvedlegislation recommending the US president to expand military cooperation with Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova, the Ukraine, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro, and Serbia. The legislation also proposes increased defence aid from the United States and NATO to these countries. The document provides forgranting the Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova the status of US allies without NATO membership for a period, during which each of the countries will qualify for the delivery of defence systems and security services. 

At the same time we can see a weakening of Armenia's position internationally and something approaching open disdain for its president Serzh Sargsyan. However, this has not yet led to decisive international pressure. Until there is fair and equal treatment of the victim of aggression that is Azerbaijan, whose territory has been recognized by four UN Security Council resolutions as occupied by Armenia, and of the aggressor that is Armenia, we will not see a change in this unconstructive position. 

A few days ago the US Senate unanimously approved resolution supporting the "territorial integrity" of Moldova and condemning Russia's "pressure" onChisinau. The resolution calls upon the Transnistrian authorities to renew talks on the political settlement of the conflict while respecting the "sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Moldova." What is keeping the United States from taking a principled position regarding the violation of Azerbaijan's territorial integrity? If this is the result of the "all-powerful" Armenian lobby, then what does that say about the USA's claims to global moral and political leadership? Partnership is a two-way street, even when talking about the relationships between great powers and small states. Brussels, Washington, Paris, and Moscow should realize this.