"FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES" AGAINST PRINCIPLED BLINDNESS

"We note with satisfaction that Armenia and Azerbaijan agreed to continue the ongoing negotiations on the settlement of the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict during the forthcoming election year," - almost all regional media sources were quoting this passage from a statement by the OSCE Council of Foreign Ministers. As was expected, the council expressed its support for the efforts of the co-chairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group, which is involved in a process of elaborating the fundamental principles of peaceful resolution together with the parties to the conflict:  "We are strongly encouraging both sides to overcome the last remaining differences and thereby to endorse the overall concept of the settlement and to proceed on this basis to draft a comprehensive Peace Agreement," the document stresses.

In principle, this ministerial statement should have become the expression of common political will of the OSCE member countries, which would help advance the process of setting the conflict in quite a tricky situation: Presidential elections are scheduled for 2008 in both Azerbaijan and Armenia.

The co-chairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group, who urged Azerbaijan and Armenia to start implementing the Peace Agreement promptly, are still doing concrete diplomatic work within this context.  The joint statement of the co-chairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group, which was released after their meetings with the Azerbaijani and Armenian foreign ministers, Elmar Mammadyarov and Vardan Oskanyan, points out that, for the first time ever, the mediators handed to the two sides a package of written proposals on conflict settlement (fundamental principles of the peace agreement). As the co-chairmen say, they managed to persuade the parties to the conflict of the need to conclude the current phase of talks and start implementing the peace agreement on the basis of these fundamental principles as soon as possible. Especially as, thanks to the activities of the mediating mission, Azerbaijan and Armenia have managed to bring their positions noticeably closer together over the last three years of the negotiating process, and there are only a few issues requiring further talks.  The fact of the handover of the plan was confirmed by Russian Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, too, who highly approved of the document.  As for the proposals themselves, the minister said that they "derive from Baku's and Yerevan's experience, experience of the dialogue between the two presidents, and the heads of the foreign ministries of these countries.  We deem it especially important that the achieved agreements were compiled into a single document," Mr. Lavrov underlined.  However, the Russian diplomat did not disclose the details of the document, limiting himself to a restatement of the already known position that, presumably, the Karabakh conflict has no military solution.

Minsk Group US Co-Chairman, Matthew Bryza, did not divulge any details either and only made the following statement in his interview with www.day.az:  "What now lies on the negotiating table is the most logical formula for the regulation of the conflict at present.  I think that everyone with common sense will agree with all these principles."

At the official level, Baku effectively makes no comment on the document received from the co-chairmen.  However, the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry press service made public the main premises of Eldar Mammadyarov's speech in Madrid.  The minister said that the "Nagorno-Karabakh conflict can be resolved only within the framework of the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan."  "Armenia, which currently occupies 20% of Azerbaijani territory, is employing very dangerous rhetoric now, saying that the conflict is religious in nature, which is inadmissible in the OSCE area," the Azerbaijani foreign minister said in his speech at the OSCE Foreign Ministers' Council meeting, which he attended in his capacity as both Azerbaijani Foreign Minister and co-chairman of the GUAM [alliance of Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan and Moldova] Foreign Ministers' Council.

In Armenia, on the other hand, the new document sparked a lively discussion.  "We received a just and balanced working document, which can serve as a foundation for the achievement of a preliminary agreement on the Karabakh problem," Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan said with "campaigning" optimism.  According to him, the only possible solution to the Karabakh problem should be based on a compromise.

At the same time, Mr. Oskanyan noted with regret that beyond the negotiating process, there is a controversial and disappointing reality.  "We hear militarist slogans from the top levels of the Azerbaijani leadership.  The propaganda of hatred, which is waged by Baku, has achieved a horrible breadth in Azeraijan."  According to Oskanyan, the creation of arbitrary obstacles for the international diplomats who monitor the conflict region stands to upset the subtle balance that has been maintained thus far.

The head of the Armenian Foreign Ministry specifically emphasized that the Azerbaijani side's pro-activity and aggressiveness in search of international occasions where the problem can be raised hinders the achievement of a compromise.

"Hopeful though we might be that regulation of the conflict through negotiation is possible, a hostile atmosphere like this does raise our concerns," the Armenian minister said.  He added that the Armenians believe that there will be no new wars in the region.  "I know this because we will not start one, and they know that they will not win one.  There is no military solution to this conflict.  The only possible solution should be based on a compromise," Mr. Oskanyan said.  In his opinion, the document which has been laid down on the negotiating table rejects each parties' keen desire to achieve maximum results and instead focuses on a reasonable and acceptable decision which can be explained to the man in the street.

Perhaps it was precisely the optimism which Oskanyan so willingly displayed that prompted many Azerbaijani political analysts to make statements that the Madrid document does not promise much to Azerbaijan, etc.  Although the co-chairman of the OSCE Minsk Group expected that the plan they handed out would become the foundation of a major peace treaty, Oskanyan reduced its content to the level of an interim agreement.

The fact that the elections in Azerbaijan are drawing near did not particularly affect the authorities' political rhetoric.  Armenia is a different matter altogether, and former President Levon Ter-Petrosyan, who decided to run for president and who has a strong image as leader of the "peace party," is the biggest threat to the candidate from the "government party," Serzh Sarkisyan.  In Yerevan's interpretation, this was immediately transformed into accusations of nurturing a desire to sell "Artsakh."

And the most dangerous thing is that, in the campaign frenzy, Yerevan has already gone as far as claiming that, presumably, Armenia does not much need reconciliation with Azerbaijan.  As Golos Armenii reports in conspiratorial tone, "In November, Levon Ter-Petrosyan was invited to a dinner party at the French embassy, which was attended by the ambassadors of the EU member countries who are accredited in Armenia."

"Naturally, the meeting was held behind closed doors, but our source at one of the foreign diplomatic missions confirmed that the former president reassured the ambassadors that, should he win the election, he will resolve the conflict with Azerbaijan very quickly.  Furthermore, he expressed his understanding and compassion for the bellicose position of the Azerbaijani leadership which, in his opinion, cannot be any different given the loss of territory and the presence of 700,000 refugees.

"Ter-Petrosyan mentioned the establishment of good-neighbourly relations with four countries, Azerbaijan, Iran, Georgia and Turkey, as the main priority of his foreign policy.  At the same time, the issue of the international recognition of 'genocide' (quotation marks are ours - editor) will be immediately removed from the foreign political agenda of the Republic of Armenia, the former president promised.  Our source said that the former president was so unequivocal and persistent in his allusions that he was ready to make any concessions in exchange for support from the European countries that the diplomats were even slightly shocked by so much sincere zeal to damage one's own nation.  Both the European ambassadors and Ter-Petrosyan himself realize full well that in current conditions, any quick solution of the problem of 'Artsakh' can only be disadvantageous for the Armenian side and can only take place if unilateral concessions are made.  There is no other word for this position but the betrayal of national interests," Golos Armenii said.  In addition, Golos Armenii is very close to blaming Levon Akopovich [Ter-Petrosyan] for all the problems and failures of Armenian politics.  "The more they talk about concessions in Armenia, the bolder Baku gets.  The recent statement of Azerbaijani Defence Minister, Safar Abiyev, on his country's readiness to resolve the Karabakh conflict using armed force was a direct consequence of the intensification of Ter-Petrosyan's and his supporters' efforts!  Never before have Azerbaijani officials taken the liberty of coming out with this kind of invective during official meetings."

Then Golos Armenii went on to claim that Armenia has no need for reconciliation with Azerbaijan, which is the idea that Ter-Petrosyan supports:  "Our source reports that Ter-Petrosyan spoke about lifting the blockade of Armenia by resolving the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and normalizing relations with Azerbaijan and Turkey, at least in the area of the economic development of the country.  In his assessment, without resolving this problem, Armenia's future is not too promising," Golos Armenii "divulged" the "closely guarded secret."  And then said:  "The last 10 years have shown that the Armenian economy can develop under conditions of blockade by Azerbaijan and Turkey and that the blockade is not a sufficient reason to accept unconditionally the demands of Azerbaijan, the country which embroiled "Artsakh" in war and then lost that war.  Moreover, those who have first-hand knowledge of Ter-Petrosyan's lack of even the basic skills of economic management (the former president is absolutely ignorant of economic issues), remember very well that in his time as president, Ter-Petrosyan used to disguise his incompetence in the abovementioned areas by making references to the blockade.  Later on, incompetence was transformed into a blueprint.  The last decade proved that there is no need to give up on "Artsakh" to achieve economic growth."

Let us note here that this was being said to the accompaniment of nervous commentaries and assurances that, presumably, the new infrastructure projects in Azerbaijan mean nothing and make no difference.

Then the "heavy artillery" was brought into operation.  Armenian President Robert Kocharyan told journalists: "Today I straightforwardly say that the Armenian Pan-National Movement abuses people's trust.  The Armenian Pan-National Movement destroyed the country's economy and turned Armenia into one of the poorest countries in the world.  The Armenian Pan-National Movement came to power on the tide of the Karabakh movement, but then betrayed it.  The Armenian Pan-National Movement is alien to the national ideology, it is ready to forget about genocide and make Armenia Turkey's backyard.  I say with full responsibility that, before Levon Ter-Petrosyan's resignation, all negotiations were conducted in the context of Azerbaijan's territorial integrity.  The formula that was used envisaged that it would remain part of Azerbaijan de jure, but would have a relatively independent status de facto.  Effectively, it was going to have broad autonomy in Azerbaijan.  This was a defeatist position, and I had to spend many years to sort out its consequences," Kocharyan said.

And this statement makes it clear that the Armenian political establishment is obviously not ready for peace and compromise yet.