|
ARMENPRESS: The co-chairs in their statement say that ³our
approach has been a modified one: we have not tried to solve all aspects
of the conflict in one phase. Instead our principles seek to achieve
a major degree of progress but defer some very difficult issues to
the future and envision further negotiations.² What does this
mean?
OSKANIAN: The actual negotiating document on the principles that is
on the table today is all-encompassing. It covers all the principles
affecting the resolution of the conflict. It includes the core issue
of status of Nagorno Karabakh, territories, refugees, security issues,
peacekeeping and every other conceivable issue that is necessary
in order to arrive at a lasting resolution of the conflict. Only
after full agreement on all these basic principles would the parties,
as the actual negotiating text says, ³in cooperation with the
co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk group to begin work on the elaboration
of an agreement on the settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict.²
In other words, the agreement on principles will be comprehensive.
The final agreement may envision implementation over time.
ARMENPRESS: In their report, the co-chairs say ³the
principles include the phased redeployment of Armenian troops from
Azerbaijani territories around Nagorno Karabakh, with special modalities
for Kelbajar and Lachin districts.² What are these special
modalities?
OSKANIAN: This formulation is indeed very broad, and for
a reason. This issue has two layers. One is the issue of Lachin,
where the actual negotiating text on principles provides clear language
stating that there will be ³a corridor linking Nagorno Karabakh
to Armenia.² For Armenia, it¹s very clear that this corridor
must have the same status as Nagorno Karabakh. The second layer
is the issue of Kelbajar. For Armenia, this also is clear: based
on security concerns, Kelbajar can be returned only after the referendum
is conducted and the final status of NK is determined. Azerbaijan¹s
position is different on Kelbajar. That¹s the disagreement
that the co-chairs are addressing in their statement. The co-chairs¹
language in the actual negotiating text, with regard to this issue,
is generally in line with our approach.
ARMENPRESS: The co-chairs say that there will be a referendum
/ popular vote ³to determine the final legal status of Nagorno
Karabakh,² but they don¹t say who will vote.
OSKANIAN: The actual negotiating text on principles clearly
specifies that ³the final legal status will be determined through
a referendum / population vote by the population of Nagorno Karabakh.²
ARMENPRESS: The co-chairs also say ³certain interim
arrangements for Nagorno Karabakh would allow for interaction with
providers of international assistance.² What does this mean?
OSKANIAN: This is only one element of a much more detailed
section in the actual negotiating text which addresses interim status
for Nagorno Karabakh. We think the co-chairs have emphasized international
engagement, because that¹s a major problem for the people of
Nagorno Karabakh. Their current, unrecognized, de-facto status,
has not allowed them to benefit from the generosity of international
organizations. In the actual negotiating text, the provisions address
such rights as control over their political and economic viability
and security, upholding their personal privileges and freedoms,
the right to democratically elect officials to govern Nagorno Karabakh,
the authority to effectively legislate and administer the internal
affairs of Nagorno Karabakh.
ARMENPRESS: What is Armenia¹s overall assessment
of the content of the document as it stands today?
OSKANIAN: This is not a perfect document. For anyone. However,
there are enough solid and balanced provisions, with the right trade-offs
on the main issues status, territories and security
that we are prepared to continue to negotiate on the basis of these
principles. In today¹s context, Azerbaijan¹s rhetoric
about autonomy and desperate calls for militarization surprise us.
We have at hand a real opportunity to resolve all issues, including
the much-maligned issue of refugees. But Azerbaijan must revert
to real situations and real opportunities, rather than illusory
maximalist hopes. Today, we hope that Azerbaijan will realize that
we have a chance to resolve the conflict and achieve a lasting peace.
|