HistoryofTruth.com - Armenian Allegations

Historyoftruth reprints from RIA Novosti an interview with Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov.

The foreign ministers of Azerbaijan, Armenia and Russia met in Moscow a couple of days ago to discuss resolution of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh. Moscow News interviews Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov about Moscow's diplomatic efforts and the general situation in the region.

Q: Minister, Russia has been making much effort lately to resolve the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh. Do you see any result?

A: I have fairly close contacts with Sergey Viktorovich Lavrov. The presidents now also maintain close contacts as Dmitriy Medvedev is personally involved in work to solve the conflict. Meetings are held regularly and conflict resolution tops the agenda of every meeting. This was the case previously, too.  But now, Mr President knows in detail the position of both countries, how we react one contradiction or another and he is truly trying to find common ground, so that the process is not frozen but moves forward.

Q: Is it moving forward?

A: Yes, there is movement. The current state of affairs, the so-called status quo, leads to regression in the development of the region and relationships, there is a large number of refugees and displaced persons. Plus, of course, the military factor is very serious. In this context, there is more and more movement, that is, an understanding that the status quo will lead to negative consequences.

Q: In other words, you consider the conflict frozen?

A: I have never considered it so. If we see troops, shooting and bombing on the front line, how can we call it frozen? The occupation of territories, the location of armed forces, the build-up of arms, including heavy equipment and air forces, are the road to nowhere. Transition from a state of sporadic skirmishes into a more active phase is really the road to nowhere. On the other hand, Azerbaijanis were driven from their homes where Armenians have never lived. This is highly explosive. More than 700,000 people demand a resolution of this issue.

Q: Is this factor important for domestic politics in Azerbaijan

A: Using oil revenues, a special state program has been designed for the resettlement of refugees, especially those living in tent camps, but people will have the opportunity to move to the places where they previously resided when they return home

Q: Do you think this time will come?

A: I am absolutely sure.

Q: Unfortunately, history knows no precedent of mass resettlement being were followed by a return.

A: Even it has not happened before, history must begin with something.

Q: How did the war in South Ossetia in 2008 impact the security and settlement of regional conflicts in the South Caucasus?

A: It was a shock. But it intensified negotiations to settle the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. An updated plan of the document elaborated within the framework of the OSCE in 2007, that is the Madrid document, was presented in 2009. It was later made public by the OSCE Minsk Group, including at the presidential level. The plan deepened the awareness that occupation of territories cannot last for every and, according to a fixed schedule, forces must be withdrawn from the occupied territories around Nagorno-Karabakh. Of course, the status of Nagorno-Karabakh has always remained on the agenda. The issue is important for the Armenian side.

We admit that the current state of Karabakh, absence of its status is a very serious problem for us, although we, like all countries, except Armenia, consider this part of the territory of Azerbaijan. If the withdrawal of Armenian forces from occupied territories opens opportunities ranging from confidence-building measures to opening of all communications, of course, safety issue should also be reflected. There is a fundamental decision that the international peace monitors will be placed in locations to be determined not only from political but also from a military viewpoint. People will begin to return, the economy will work. Confidence-building measures will begin which will provide an opportunity to take relations from the current rhetoric.

Q: You say that people will begin to return. Do you mean return to Karabakh in the long run?

A: People should return to Karabakh, too.

Q: But a new generation of people with different realities has grown there. This is not the reality of the Soviet inter-ethnic coexistence.

A: We must proceed from the axiom that people cannot live in enmity for ever. We don’t choose neighbours. We have a serious foreign-policy responsibility to find common ground. But when your territory is occupied, what do you do? I am confident that the withdrawal of Armenian troops, at least its start, will very seriously and dramatically change the situation on the ground.

Q: In 2008, a serious blow was dealt to the principles of inviolability of borders in Europe. The independence of Kosovo was recognized followed by recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The former taboo not to touch the administrative borders of the former unified states is actually no longer valid.

A: What you said means that we return to the situation where the right of the powerful becomes a priority. And where will this lead? There are basic documents, the Helsinki Final Act, the UN Charter. The international relations were built on them. And these principles must be preserved. There should be no revolution, but evolution. Without doubt, technological progress raises serious questions. Having access to the Internet, globalization erases borders. What began in the late XX century are tectonic processes. Are we ready for this? We can not move forward when the right of the strong dictates rules conduct for all. Until we have not invented new digestible approaches, I am a supporter of the classical approach as it helps to maintain a balance at least.

Q: You just mentioned tectonic processes. Does Azerbaijan feel echoes of the ongoing turmoil in the Middle East and North Africa?

A: We watch them very closely. We see Egypt, and all understand that the removal of president and army’s rise to power are always interpreted differently than the triumph of democracy. On the other hand, massive popular unrests should be carefully analyzed.

In the Libyan case it is not time to highlight key points, though ... There are the United Nations, UN Charter, Security Council that are main instruments to maintain international security under mandates recognized by all states.

There is also a resolution on the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict, which has been legal basis for a conflict settlement since 1993 but was never implemented. But a resolution on Libya was adopted and implemented immediately...

Q: It is said that the events in the Middle East will eventually enhance Turkey's role and strengthen Iran's position. Both countries are very important for you. Recently you had a discord with Turkey. How are things going on now?

A: We do not call it a discord. There are issues that exist between any neighbors. Turkey's role has increased not only regionally but also globally over the past 20 years. Turkey is already one of the top 20 economies in the world, and the growth continues, the demographic factor plays a big role. Turkey's geographical location determines its involvement in many issues.

Q: Are you satisfied with the way Turkey today considers the interests of Azerbaijan in the process of the Armenian-Turkish reconciliation?

A: Armenia-Turkey rapprochement is a decision of Turkey, of course. We can not interfere in its internal affairs. But on the other hand, if this process runs in the same format as before, without taking into account the interests of Azerbaijan, we will react. The Turkish government has realized it. Fundamental reason that stands behind the closure of Turkey’s borders with Armenia was the occupation of Kalbajar, the first area outside Nagorno-Karabakh. And it was a conscious reaction of the Turkish authorities to occupation of Kalbajar. They can not build relations with the aggressor country. Has anything changed? Has kalbajar been freed? It is still under occupation. So, we urge Turkey as a very powerful country to play a stabilizing role and contribute to movements in the settlement process including withdrawal from the territories. I assure you that withdrawal of Armenian forces from occupied territories will stimulate positive processes.

Q: The Armenian side is carefully listening to what they say in Baku, and continuously notices aggressive tone. Azerbaijan threatens that its patience will end one day and force will be used.

A: One of the principles of international law is not to use force or threaten to use it. But in this case it has already been used and the principle of territorial integrity enshrined in the UN Charter, Helsinki Final Act and other international legal instruments has been violated. Threats to use force will end as soon as the consequences of the use of force are eliminated. Azerbaijan tries to build its entire foreign policy in a spirit of good neighborliness. Azerbaijan’s oil company in Georgia is the largest taxpayer in the country. We have are good relations with Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, our neighbors across the Caspian Sea.

We would build a similar policy with Armenia with great pleasure. But this will happen as soon as the negative situation in Karabakh is eliminated.

Another of your neighbor, Iran, is in the limelight and is one of the main targets of American policy. Many people believe it is not possible to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear status and this can happen only when either Israel or the U.S. use force.

Iran is a big state. It has preserved its own state for more than two thousand years. This factor should be taken into account. If, however, we summarize the situation with nuclear proliferation, I get the following impression.

As technology develops, more and more powers strive to enter the club of nuclear powers because this is something special and the policy of deterrence does not work here. We must shift from the policy of deterrence of nuclear technology to non-nuclear weapons policy and create serious international legal mechanism that would guarantee that even if you are the owner of nuclear weapons, you can not use it. Why then to have such expensive weapons?

Q: Is this possible? If there is a weapon, it can be used.

A: In the twentieth century, when nuclear weapons appeared, everyone understood that nuclear weapons will be difficult to use and it is aimed at curbing ambitions. We need transfer the deterrence to the next level, create a response mechanism for the use of nuclear weapons. It is extremely difficult to stop the spread of nuclear weapons.

Q: Do you mean that the deterrence on the global level can be transferred to the regional one? For instance, Iran and Israel deter each other? Or the United States providez nuclear guarantees to countries that are afraid of Iran?

A: Two levels – global and regional – will complement each other. Deterrence is a factor of predictability. It existed in the 20th, but is very weak know. It needs to be created again.

Q: Does Azerbaijan is frightened by the prospect of a nuclear Iran?

A: We are already in the vicinity of the nuclear powers. We understand that non-proliferation policy is extremely important. But we do not accept a military solution. As an immediate neighbor of Iran, home to many Azerbaijanis who are more than in independent Azerbaijan, we will, of course, not accept a military solution.

Q: Should non-use of a military solution apply with respect to all political issues including the one that we discussed earlier?

A: You are asking a question from the foreign minister.

Q: I understand it.

A: If you were talking to a defense minister, the answer would be different. Of course, I think the diplomats should be allowed to work until there are opportunities. Along with this, there is also a concept of military diplomacy. This factor that supports the progressive course of the negotiations has always existed and will exist.

Q: I conclude from what you said initially that Russia's present position and activity of President Medvedev impress you

A: Russia’s active involvement in the person of Mr. Medvedev is already yielding fruit. At the last meeting held in Sochi on 5 March, we saw a glimmer of hope that we move in the right direction. In addition, a year ago, in January, after the Madrid-2 (updated Madrid principles), there was a feeling that we were standing still. And I must say that Dmitri Anatolyevich Medvedev personally seeks common ground, non-standard solutions.

The last meeting in Sochi gave hopes. The current relations between Azerbaijan and Armenia do not satisfy anybody. I would like the progress to happen faster than we expect. After all, the principles do not mean a peace treaty. It is necessary not to double, but even triple efforts. The solution of the Karabakh conflict is very complex as it is tied to many factors. And even if we prepare a peace treaty, it does not mean an end, but it is a light at the end of the tunnel.

The material has been prepared by Moscow News newspaper staff as part of the joint project of Moscow News, RIA Novosti and magazines Russia in Global Politics, 20 Years without SSSR.