YEREVAN'S FAVOURITE TRICK

Despite the numerous optimistic forecasts, the summit of the Azerbaijani, Armenian and Russian presidents, which was conducted in Kazan on 24 June and at which everyone expected the basic principles for a settlement of the conflict in Nagornyy Karabakh to be accepted, has in effect ended fruitlessly.

The talks ended with words about the "achievement of mutual understanding on a number of issues" and the intention to "continue the dialogue", which have already been voiced more than once. The Azerbaijani and Armenian presidents also expressed their gratitude to the Russian, US and French leaders - the co-chairs of the Minsk Group of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the OSCE - and gave high assessments to the Russian president's efforts to promote the process of agreement.

The Russian newspaper Kommersant reports, citing a "Western diplomat who took part in preparing the agreement", that the main outcome of the Kazan meeting was to have been a document containing a "road map" based on the so-called Madrid principles and the agreements reached during the recent meeting of the Armenian, Azerbaijani and Russian presidents in Sochi. It was expected that, after putting their names to the "road map", Baku and Yerevan would start developing a peace treaty in cooperation with the international mediators. In other words, the Kazan agreement would be just the beginning of a lengthy process.

Shortly before the talks, Moscow, Washington, the OSCE, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) and European Parliament voiced their hope that the long-awaited "road map", based on the principles that were agreed during the OSCE conference in Madrid in 2007, would appear on the negotiating table.

"We have never been this close to success," Kommersant reported, quoting the "diplomat who took part in preparation of the high-level talks".

The authoritative Western newspaper, The New York Times, reported for its part that the "meeting at the presidential level, scheduled for 25 June, is the best possibility in many years to put an end to the territorial dispute".

"From my point of view, it is the most important phase in the negotiating process since 2001, when efforts were made in Key West to reach a peace deal," Robert Bradtke, US co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group, said.

OSCE General Secretary Marc Perrin de Brichambaut,, European Parliament President Jerzy Buzek, PACE President Mevlut Cavusoglu, US State Department official Mark Toner and other officials and political analysts made similar statements.

In addition, during the recent G8 summit in Deauville, the presidents of the three OSCE Minsk Group co-chair countries (Russia, France and the USA), Dmitriy Medvedev, Nicolas Sarkozy and Barack Obama, said that the time has come for "decisive steps".

Also, the co-chair countries were active before the Kazan summit to facilitate the success of the negotiating process. In particular, the Armenian and Azerbaijani foreign ministers held consultations in Moscow and Washington. Barack Obama had phone conversations with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan and urged the parties to agree on the basic principles. French President Nicolas Sarkozy made a statement to roughly the same end.

As for Russia and Dmitriy Medvedev personally, a positive result at the Kazan summit would have been a major foreign political success of the same ilk as a breakthrough in the Palestinian-Israeli regulation would be for Barack Obama.

As many observers noted, progress in the Karabakh regulation would be particularly important for Moscow against the backdrop of the consequences of the Russian-Georgian war, the unclear future of the Transdniestrian conflict and Russia's evident caution against getting involved in ethnic conflicts in Central Asia of the type that occurred a year ago in Kyrgyzstan. Especially as resolving the Karabakh problem might yield a great many economic and geopolitical benefits.

Of course, other co-chair countries voiced their unqualified support for efforts by Russia, a country which borders the parties to the conflict, has great influence on Armenia and methodically promotes its partnership relations with Azerbaijan and Turkey.

Moscow has indeed put in tremendous effort. Since the first meeting in November 2008, the talks in Kazan were the ninth meeting to be held with the direct mediation of the Kremlin. The preceding summit took place on 5 March in Sochi.

However, the long-awaited breakthrough in the talks has not materialized, unfortunately. As in previous years, Yerevan accused Baku of effectively thwarting the talks. Armenian Foreign Minister Edvard Nalbandyan, for example, said that the meeting between the Armenian and Azerbaijani presidents in Kazan turned out not to be momentous precisely because of Baku's position.

"The meeting in Kazan was not a watershed because Azerbaijan turned out not to be ready to accept the version of the basic principles for a Karabakh settlement proposed by the co-chairs. Baku suggested about 10 changes, which thwarted the breakthrough in the process," the Armenian Foreign Ministry press service said.

Baku is no longer surprised by these sorts of things. Indeed, after the meeting between the presidents in the Chateau de Rambouillet in France, when then-Armenian President Robert Kocharyan left the talks citing the urgent need to go to the toilet as an excuse, the latest trick by the Armenian side was not the most impressive one. We should at least give the Armenians their due for not making an attempt in Kazan to flee back home again on the basis of some unusual pretext.

Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov noted that Yerevan "is misrepresenting the facts and misinterpreting the documents again".

"For some reason, the Armenian side was silent when Azerbaijan announced the acceptance of the Madrid document which was officially presented by the co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group in Athens in 2009, but talks a lot about one of the many versions of the working document which is based on the newer version of the Madrid document. I would advise the Armenian Foreign Ministry to stop its PR campaign and instead work hard on changing the negative status quo that has taken shape, which is what the leaders of the Minsk Group co-chair countries are urging them to do," the Azerbaijani foreign minister said.

"The Armenian side is again taking advantage of the situation that has taken shape in the negotiating process, driven by ulterior motives, and is accusing Azerbaijan of thwarting the acceptance of the 'basic principles' to mislead the international community," Novruz Mammadov, head of the Foreign Relations Department at the Presidential Administration, said. "Everyone knows that it is Armenia that failed to honour the agreements that were reached in Athens and St Petersburg. In Sochi, the Armenian delegation arrived with its own draft document which had not been agreed with the mediators at all. In other words, Armenia has grown accustomed to playing different tricks. Unfortunately, this is exactly what the Armenian foreign minister is continuing to do."

Elmar Mammadyarov said that the Kazan meeting of the presidents of Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia was one of the longest in this format. "Problematic issues which create obstacles to progress in the process of regulation of the conflict were discussed. Unfortunately, we were not able to reach a compromise solution on a number of key issues, because the Armenian side demands maximum concessions from Azerbaijan and thereby distorts the purpose of the negotiating process which started seven years ago," the Azerbaijani foreign minister said.

In the meantime, commenting on what motivates Armenia to thwart the talks, Novruz Mammadov said there was no need to look very far.

"I think that, taking into account the sensitivity of the current phase of the negotiating process, it would be inappropriate to make any comments. But I think that, if our journalists, political analysts and experts closely analyse the situation that has taken shape, they will easily guess what forces are behind Armenia."

Indeed, even the preliminary comments by the Armenians before the summit made it possible to guess that they were going to Kazan not to reach an agreement, but to mislead the international community again.

However, the basic principles have been developed with the participation of the mediators for many years, and now the peace talks have been thrown back again. Even despite the fact that international mediators have clearly intensified their efforts.

The message to Serzh Sargsyan, which was sent shortly before the Kazan summit by Nicolas Sarkozy, is a good example: the French president noted in his letter that there are "moments in history when heads of state must find inner strength in themselves to show their people the way of courage, wisdom and peace."

In other words, courage and wisdom is what the Armenian authorities lack. It takes courage and wisdom to abandon groundless territorial claims, stop scrounging off Russia and other members of the international community and finally allow your people to develop normally, instead of making them outsiders who are sidelined from all the important economic and geopolitical processes in the region.

At the same time, political analyst Vafa Quluzada lays much of the blame at the mediators' door.

"The mediators have never condemned Armenia's position. I, for example, have never heard them demanding in a tone of an ultimatum that Yerevan should withdraw Armenian troops from the occupied Azerbaijani territories. Seeing this kind of tacit support, Armenia makes its position increasingly rigid," the political analyst said in an interview with 1news.az.

He also drew attention to the fact that right before the meeting, Russia passed a law that some of the armaments from the Russian military base in Gyumri, Armenia, can be transferred to Armenia, and underscored that the second co-chair (the USA) also keeps funding Armenia, and the third (France) already calls Armenia a sister. All this makes Armenia more confident.

At the same time, Azerbaijani political analyst and parliament member Rasim Musabayov points out that there is a difference of opinion between Medvedev and Vladimir Putin on how to regulate the Karabakh conflict.

At any rate, what is next? The more time passes, the more failures and disappointments there are in the negotiating process, the lower the likelihood of a peaceful solution is. Especially as preparations for the elections of 2012 and 2013 in the region and in the Minsk Group countries are to begin soon - or have already begun in some countries - and this means that continuing the dialogue will be even more difficult.

On the other hand, the Azerbaijani Republic Defence Ministry's press service told 1news.az that at different times on 24 and 25 June, machine-gun and assault rifle fire was opened from positions near the village of Tap Qaraqoyunlu in Goranboy District and high ground in Fuzuli District of Azerbaijan on Azerbaijani fortifications nearby. In other words, the Armenian side continued to organize acts of provocation even when everyone expected that the talks in Kazan would achieve a turning point in the regulation of the conflict.

But how long will the Karabakh conflict remain frozen? Although this status suits Armenia, the patience of the Azerbaijani side, of one million refugees who have been deprived of their land and homes and from whom others want to take away their past and their Motherland, is running out.

Baku has more than once said that it does not want another war. This does not need much proving, a look at the level of Azerbaijan's development, its economic plans, especially in the areas of the non-oil sector, construction, tourism and agriculture, would suffice. It would suffice to count in how many international and regional projects Baku participates. Furthermore, no one here could possibly want the deaths of their sons and daughters, for past deaths and destruction will never be forgotten.

But it can be inferred from different publications in authoritative foreign media that international politicians, political analysts and different experts understand very well why "Azerbaijan's defence spending exceeds the entire budget of Armenia".

A grand military parade was held in Baku two days after the talks in Kazan to mark the 93rd anniversary of the Azerbaijani Republic Armed Forces and 20th anniversary of independence.

Some six thousand military service personnel, up to 400 units of military hardware and weapons systems, including about 50 units of upgraded military hardware, about 60 types of weapons that were manufactured or upgraded in Azerbaijan, 14 armoured personnel carriers, 35 combat helicopters, 22 combat and eight training aircraft, 28 ships, boats and other vessels took part in the parade.

In his speech during the gala parade, the president of Azerbaijan and commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces, Ilham Aliyev, said that morale in the Armed Forces is high and the Azerbaijani Army is fully capable of carrying out the tasks facing the country. "The war is not over yet, only the first phase of the war has ended. A country at war must focus first and foremost on military development. Today, military spending is the largest item on Azerbaijan's budget, and until our lands are liberated from occupation, that is how it will stay. If a peace treaty is signed and we put an end to the occupation, of course, this type of spending will not be needed. Our cause is just. We have not occupied the territory of another country, we do not claim lands in foreign countries, despite the fact that present-day Armenia was created on historically Azerbaijani lands. Nagornyy Karabakh is historically Azerbaijani territory, Azerbaijani land. This has always been so, and this remains true today, it is simply occupied temporarily. But the occupation cannot continue for a long time. I am certain that the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan will be restored one way or another. To achieve this, we must be even stronger. By carrying out reforms in all spheres of the country's life, by consolidating the country's position in the region, we will achieve our goals," the president of Azerbaijan stressed.

Azerbaijan continues to strengthen its economic and political position and consolidate its friendly relations with its neighbours. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, whose party recently won the parliamentary elections, is to visit Azerbaijan soon. He is to discuss economic cooperation and security issues in Baku.

Armenia hoped to drive a wedge between Ankara and Baku, but its destructive efforts failed utterly, and now Turkey and Azerbaijan seem even closer than ever.

It is increasingly more noticeable that Russia treats Azerbaijan precisely as an equal partner on which Russia's geopolitical situation in the region of the South Caucasus and Caspian basin depend in large part.

What does Armenia have, on the other hand? What awaits it in the future, given the aggressive policy toward its neighbours, absence of natural resources and access to the sea, the blockade of borders and huge social and economic problems?

In addition, everyone clearly understands that the incumbent Armenian leaders consciously thwart the talks time and again because they fear that, as the saying goes, heads might roll back home. They cling to power. But this is tantamount to driving yourself into a corner.

So, despite the obvious failure of the talks in Kazan, Azerbaijan should consider them quite successful. It is increasingly difficult for Yerevan to find plausible explanations for its destructive position.

After all, it is Armenia that occupies 20% of Azerbaijan's territory and conducted a policy of ethnic cleansing. It is Armenia, not Azerbaijan, that is refusing to carry out the provisions of the UN Security Council resolutions. It is Armenia that refused to sign the resolution which was passed by the 65th UN General Assembly on the need to respect the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of all countries. It is Armenian snipers who shoot Azerbaijani children, and it is the Armenian side who, under different pretexts, has been thwarting the peace talks.