TIMEOUT

From 17-18 July, Moscow hosted the sixth high-level meeting of the past year to resolve the Armenian-Azerbaijani, Nagorny Karabakh conflict. Initially, President Ilham Aliyev and President Serzh Sargsyan held an expanded meeting, with their foreign ministers and the co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group. This was followed by a separate meeting between the presidents, which lasted three and a half hours, after which the Minsk Group co-chairs met with the foreign ministers of both countries to discuss further action. The next day saw a tripartite meeting of the presidents of Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Although it had been reported previously that no signing of documents was planned for the Moscow meeting of the presidents, a breakthrough in the lengthy negotiations for a peaceful settlement of the conflict was still expected. But this did not happen.

Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov said, at a press conference in Baku, that the Moscow talks focused on the withdrawal of Armenian forces from five occupied districts of Azerbaijan as a first step towards a resolution of the conflict; this would be followed by the determination of Nagornyy Karabakh's status. He said further that the presence of Russian President Dmitriy Medvedev raised confidence in the success of the negotiations. He said that "a clear decision had been made on the withdrawal of Armenian troops from the territory of Nagornyy Karabakh". According to the minister, the sides are currently discussing the scope of withdrawal of Armenian forces from the occupied territories and the issue of returning internally displaced persons to their homes, providing them with proper living conditions and restoring the territories.

Eduard Nalbandyan, as if responding to his Azerbaijani counterpart, as well as to critics within the country, said at a media briefing in Yerevan: "The Armenian side has never officially stated that it approves the Madrid proposals. We have only announced that they are the basis for negotiations." As for the withdrawal of troops and the return of internally displaced persons to their homes, the Armenian foreign minister said that "these issues were not discussed at all during the Moscow meeting."

 In the Moscow talks, Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan also highlighted the biggest concern for the Armenian side: "It must be clear to everyone that the main issue is the status of Nagornyy Karabakh, which must be determined by free will and must be legally binding. When we are able to tackle the matter properly, the negotiations, I think, will move on more smoothly". No other reaction was expected from the leadership of Armenia.

It seems that the Armenian side has already begun to realize that the balance in the negotiations is tilting towards Azerbaijan. Sargsyan's cautious statements about some progress, "albeit not without difficulties", and, by contrast, the confident statements by the President of Azerbaijan show that the Armenian leadership does not really have a strong position. 

"I hope that if the Armenian side takes account of the real situation and analyzes and considers the increasing potential of Azerbaijan - its military, economic, political and diplomatic successes - the issue could be resolved soon. Of course, we very much want and aspire to resolve the issue as soon as possible so that our citizens can return to their homes. But this agreement has, first, to be fair, and second, to be based on international norms; and the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan must be fully maintained. I believe that the proposals on the negotiating table will resolve the matter in the form I have mentioned," stated Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, at an expanded government meeting held after the Moscow talks with the Armenian leader.

To complete the picture, it is also worth noting the reaction of the mediators. An aide to the Russian president, Sergey Prikhodko, said that "a lengthy and, in the assessment of our side, very constructive meeting, was held, during which discussions continued on a number of outstanding issues". The American co-chairman of the Minsk Group, Matthew Bryza, expressed disappointment that no new decisions had been taken: "The conversation was deep, specific and serious. Of course, I was disappointed that no new decisions had been taken but, on the other hand, we reached a stage at which the discussion of the remaining issues, which are very serious and quite complex, began". 

It seems that the meeting attended by Russian President Medvedev was more promising than the bilateral Armenian-Azerbaijani negotiations. Ac-cording to the Russian co-chairman of the Minsk Group, Merzlyakov, "... in the course of these meetings, we managed to find some very interesting possible solutions to at least some of the issues dividing the parties. There are interesting solutions, which the three presidents arrived at together. I think that in future this may yield a positive result".

The Russian newspaper Kommersant, with reference to anonymous sources in the Russian Foreign Ministry, reported that at the Moscow meeting, the key issue was the voting process for the self-determination of Nagornyy Karabakh and the essence of "the interim status" proposed for it. This information is credible. Indeed, the referendum, as it seems to the Armenians, is unacceptable to Azerbaijan and is not allowed by the current constitution. Shortly before the Moscow meeting, President Ilham Aliyev said in an interview with the Russian TV channel Vesti that negotiations on the status of Nagornyy Karabakh may continue for one, ten or even one hundred years. In essence, this is an invitation to withdraw the issue of the status from the negotiations and leave it for the future.

In return, the Armenians began to demand a more precise definition and said that the "interim" status specified in the Madrid principles should be as close to independence as possible. From their point of view, this is logical. After all, it is one thing to have an "interim status" for a short period, say, 5 years; there is no need then to go into detail. It is something else when the "interim status" may be prolonged for decades. In this case, in order to avoid subsequent disputes and conflicts on issues such as borders, property, legal and financial systems, investments, civil identification, international contacts and so on, the Armenians wanted to specify all of these points, and to consolidate them in a framework agreement with international guarantees. However, for Baku to legalize such vast powers for Nagornyy Karabakh, even in the form of "interim status", would imply de facto recognition of the separation of this part of Azerbaijan, which is unacceptable for obvious reasons. 

Thus, we get a clear bargain in the Madrid principles. If the provision on status through the expression of will is formulated vaguely, the "interim" status will have to be indicated more precisely, and vice versa. The presidents are not spending their time on an abstract debate about the replacement of certain words in the text of the agreement, but they are discussing fundamental, crucial issues. For this reason, the parties have taken a break to re-analyze the situation, consider possible counter-concessions, and then to formulate their opinion. 

It is clear that the negotiations undertaken by the Minsk Group on the basis of the Madrid principles for a peaceful settlement of the Karabakh conflict are in the home stretch. This is indirectly proven by the fact that, after the Moscow meeting, Russian co-chairman Yuriy Merzlyakov announced that, before the end of the year, he and his American counterpart, Matthew Bryza, will leave their posts. This can be seen as a call to use the time remaining before the end of the year effectively, in order to reach an agreement with the current mediators, who are fully aware of every detail of the negotiating process. But in this statement, if you wish, you may find an indication of uncertainty about agreement between the conflicting parties on the basis of the Madrid principles.

Nevertheless, I would venture to suggest that compromise is within reach, especially with the active support of the leaders of the powers - the co-chairs of the Minsk Group. The appeal made by the presidents of the Russian Federation, the United States and France at the recent G8 summit in Italy is not enough. It is not just political support for the negotiations that is required, it is also necessary to engage mechanisms of pressure, guarantees and incentives. Armenia is in a dire economic situation and desperately needs credit and investment. Promises of increased financial assistance if an agreement is reached to settle the conflict and a reduction in the event of obstructive behaviour could be an important motivating factor. Azerbaijan does not need money, but it needs peaceful conditions for the implementation of large-scale regional projects.

The co-chairmen announced that they intend to meet in late July in Krakow to analyze the outcome of the presidents Moscow meeting and to refine the Madrid principles, taking into account the discussions held. Then they intend to visit the region in September to prepare a new meeting between the presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia, which could presumably take place in early October in Chisinau, where a CIS summit is due to be held. 

Thus, efforts to achieve a peaceful settlement of the Karabakh conflict continue. However, it is possible that this round of negotiations, just like all previous ones, will fail. The domestic political situation in Armenia and the weak position of President Serzh Sargsyan make him vulnerable to criticism from the opposition, while forces that have no intention of withdrawing from the captured Azerbaijani territories are trying to use this situation in order to avoid fulfilling the legitimate demands of the international community.

The immediate future will show whether this is true or not, but we should begin to study options for action if the negotiations fail, including all aspects - diplomatic, military, economic and informational. Armenian military successes are a thing of the past, while the demographic, economic, financial, military and geopolitical superiority of Azerbaijan is growing from year to year. It is important not only for the Armenians, but also their protectors who act as guardians of international law, to realize this.