|
 YEREVAN
(RFE/RL)–Turkey will risk reversing its unprecedented
rapprochement with Armenia if it persists in linking the process
with a resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict desired by
Azerbaijan, Armenian Foreign Minister Eduard Nalbandian said.
In a videotaped studio interview on Sunday,
January 17, with RFE/RL’s Armenian Service, Nalbandian also
sought to cool talk of an imminent settlement of the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, saying that Baku is “not prepared for
mutual concessions in 2010.”
Commenting on the continuing Turkish linkage
of the two issues, Nalbandian reiterated his government’s
arguments that Ankara and Yerevan set no preconditions when they
embarked in 2008 on an intensive dialogue culminating in the
signing in October of two agreements to normalize bilateral
relations. He also argued that neither “protocol” makes any
mention of the Karabakh dispute. The interview with Nalbandian
was aired by both the Artsakh public television broadcaster
inside Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as by regional Armenian TV.
“Had there been preconditions, we would not
have started this process and reached agreements in the first
place,” said Nalbandian.
“If one of the parties is creating artificial
obstacles, dragging out things, that means it is assuming
responsibility for the failure of this process,” he warned.
President Serzh Sarkisian, who met today in
Moscow with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, explicitly
threatened last month to walk away from the agreements if the
Turkish side fails to ratify them unconditionally and “within a
reasonable time frame.” But he did not set any concrete
deadlines for Turkish ratification.
Nalbandian also avoided mentioning any dates,
stressing instead the fact that Western powers and Russia also
stand for an unconditional normalization of Turkish-Armenian
relations.
“If Turkey takes a step back, then this will
be not only a violation of the agreements with Armenia but will
demonstrate that it is not respecting the international
community’s opinion, with all resulting consequences and the
loss of credibility in the first instance,” he said.
“Armenia, on the other hand, will — let’s not
say win — not lose anything that we had before this process,” he
added.
The minister went on to dismiss domestic
opposition criticism of the protocols and, in particular, a
clause envisaging the creation of a Turkish-Armenian
“subcommission” of history experts.
“If we were to believe in what opponents of
the protocols have said, then Turkey should have rushed to
ratify these protocols a long time ago,” he scoffed.
Nalbandian insisted that the Sarkisian
administration will not stop campaigning for greater
international recognition of the 1915-1923 Armenian Ggenocide by
the Ottoman Turkish government, despite agreeing to what is
expected to be a joint Turkish-Armenian study of the issue. The
subcommission in question, he said, would be tasked with
“restoring mutual understanding and trust between the two
peoples,” rather than determining whether the massacres
constituted genocide.
Such statements show that Azerbaijan is not
prepared for mutual concessions in 2010 as well, and that
Azerbaijan remains a threat to the security of the Karabakh
people.Turning to the Karabakh conflict, Nalbandian denounced
Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev’s latest threats to win back
the disputed territory by force.
“Such statements show that Azerbaijan is not
prepared for mutual concessions in 2010 as well, and that
Azerbaijan remains a threat to the security of the Karabakh
people,” he said, adding that they “cannot make any impact on or
intimidate Armenia or Artsakh [Karabakh].”
Aliyev issued the warning in a New Year’s
address to his nation. He also claimed to have secured broad
international support for Karabakh’s return under Azerbaijani
rule.
Nalbandian brushed aside the claim.
“What are the mediating countries saying?
They are saying what Armenia says: That the Karabakh problem
should be solved in accordance with the principles and norms of
international law and, in particular, the principles of nonuse
of force, self-determination and territorial integrity,” he
said. “This is made clear in the statement which was recently
adopted in Athens by the 56 OSCE member states.”
“Azerbaijan’s leadership is trying to
predetermine the result of the negotiations,” he continued.
“Namely, the question of Karabakh’s status, Karabakh’s
self-determination. And yet the question of Karabakh’s status
must be decided by the people of Artsakh themselves.”
Nalbandian pointed to a joint statement on
Karabakh that was issued by the presidents of the United States,
Russia, and France — the three countries spearheading the peace
process — in July. The statement reaffirmed, in general terms,
the essence of the “basic principles” of Karabakh peace proposed
by the American, French, and Russian co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk
Group.
“Contrary to Baku’s claims, it is indicated
there that the people of Karabakh hold the key to the Karabakh
settlement,” said Nalbandian. He also stressed the importance
for the Armenian side of the reference to peoples’
self-determination made in a Karabakh-related declaration that
was adopted during an OSCE ministerial conference in Athens last
November.
“It was the first time that such a statement
upheld the right to self-determination,” he added. “A statement
that was also signed by Azerbaijan.”
Azerbaijani leaders maintain, however, that
under the existing Minsk Group proposals, Karabakh’s
predominantly ethnic Armenian population would be able to
exercise that right only within the framework of Azerbaijan’s
territorial integrity. These diametrically opposite
interpretations of the proposed deal raise questions about the
mediators’ ability to get the conflicting parties to overcome
their remaining disagreements anytime soon.
Nalbandian cautioned against excessive
expectations from the negotiating process in the coming months.
“I see no point in artificially accelerating
the process, and I think everybody agrees with that,” he said.
“Of course, some progress in bringing the
parties’ positions closer to each other was registered last
year,” he added. “But that was not enough to achieve a
breakthrough. If we are able to maintain the positive dynamic of
2009, then it will be possible to improve prospects for the
conflict’s resolution.”
|
