Today's Zaman

Sunday, 23 January 2011

AMANDA PAUL

The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict represents the biggest threat to security in the South Caucasus. Karabakh is legally part of Azerbaijan (although since the beginning of the 19th century it had a predominantly ethnic Armenian population).

Karabakh has been under Armenian control since the 1988-1994 war, with seven surrounding Azerbaijani regions also occupied.

Peace negotiations, under the auspices of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Minsk Group, have been ongoing for almost two decades. The two sides are currently negotiating a set of basic principles. The “principles” foresee the return to Azerbaijan of the seven territories surrounding Karabakh, the right of all internally displaced persons and refugees to return to their former place of residence, interim status for Karabakh that provides guarantees of security and self-governance, a land corridor linking Karabakh and Armenia, international security guarantees that would include a peacekeeping operation, and a future determination of Nagorno-Karabakh’s final legal status through “a legally binding expression of will.” While Azerbaijan states it has accepted the latest version of the basic principles, Armenia is still hesitating.

2010 was supposed to be a year of progress. In the end it was anything but. This was principally a result of Turkey’s decision to link its own rapprochement with Armenia to progress on Karabakh. This decision only served to bring the rapprochement to a halt but also to negatively affect the Karabakh peace talks, leading to a stalling of the process and heightened tensions. The delicate cease-fire was repeatedly violated, with more lives lost than in previous years, and an increased arms race in each country. The year ended extremely sourly, with the two presidents making belligerent statements at the Astana OSCE summit.
2011 has not gotten off to a good start. During Armenian President Serzh Sarksyan’s recent trip to Cyprus, he displayed anything but a conciliatory approach. During a speech in the Cypriot parliament, he denounced Azerbaijan, stating that “Azerbaijan has no legal, political or moral grounds for aspirations regarding Nagorno-Karabakh,” while at the same time accusing Turkey of destroying efforts to normalize relations with Armenia with its contradictory posture and inconsistent statements. Armenia has also now confirmed the existence of a sophisticated Russian-supplied S-300 air defense system in its military arsenal.

Armenia is also feeling buoyed up over the recent referendum determining the independence of South Sudan. It has given Yerevan increased confidence that the international community views the right of self-determination as more important than territorial integrity. With this, as well as the Kosovo example under their belt, there is increased hope that an independent Nagorno-Karabakh is becoming closer. However, Sudan is not Azerbaijan. Not only are the two conflicts very different, but, in order for such an outcome, you need to have the backing of the world’s greatest power -- namely, the US. The US has political interests in an independent Southern Sudan (not least large oil and gas resources). And while the Armenian lobby in Washington is strong, Azerbaijan is a crucial partner in the energy sphere and the fight against terrorism. I doubt Washington will be rushing to recognize Karabakh’s independence.

Azerbaijan is becoming increasingly frustrated. While Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity is recognized by the international community, including the UN, NATO and the EU, and there are four UN resolutions requesting Armenian withdrawal, it all just remains on paper. With peace talks seemingly endless, Baku believes the international community should place more pressure on Armenia to accept the basic principles rather than allowing Armenia to “drag out” the talks as long as possible by returning to issues that were previously agreed upon. However, with Armenian parliamentary elections slated for 2011, it is unlikely Yerevan will be able to do anything that may be viewed as a concession.

In a speech earlier this month, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev repeated that Baku would never allow the establishment of a second Armenian state on its lands. He went on to talk about the strength of the Azerbaijani armed forces and that Azerbaijan’s defense spending will exceed $3 billion this year.

While one would hope that Baku’s talk is simply for domestic consumption, renewed war cannot be ruled out. Of course there is a whole list of reasons why Baku would not go down this road, at the same time it would take only one cease-fire violation to spiral out of control and explode into a full-blown warfare-spreading catastrophe over the entire region, including key energy routes.

The two presidents need to stop this negative rhetoric and stop giving the impression they are in this process just for the sake of it. With time working against a peaceful solution, the international community needs to give Karabakh far more attention. This job should not just be left to Russia, which is very much driving the process these days. Moscow is neither an impartial nor an unbiased player. It should be balanced; therefore, the EU and the US need to play a much larger role.

Link to article