What is expected from the current visit of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs to the region considering the fact that mediators in Yerevan were dinned in their ears that Azerbaijan is maliciously violating the ceasefire regime?
For the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs who represent the leading countries of the world, position of Yerevan, its biased view of the conflict and the situation, its opinion that ‘Baku demonstrates aggression' should not be a serious ground to build their judgments about the conflict.
The protracted conflict and practical occupation of Azerbaijani lands for many years by Armenia which is beating gums on various issues must be the main factor for them. This must be the main argument for negotiations for the co-chairs.
It is necessary to consider the UN Security Council resolutions, the real situation in the region, and occupation of Azerbaijan lands. Yerevan’s subjective position voiced by various Armenian officials must not be a ground for the activity of the Minsk Group co-chairs.
Can we expect new proposals from them, including on organization of the new meeting of presidents?
In order to produce any specific results, along with demonstration of open political flirting with Armenia, should at least offer a specific agenda, accompanied by some ideas and proposals clearly stating the need to fulfill the resolutions adopted by international structures.
The real breakthrough in the conflict settlement requires the start of land de-occupation by Armenia at the initial stage. It is a priority. If the co-chairs do not have these proposals, no breakthroughs can be expected from the negotiation process and from their visit to the region.
For more than 20 years we have been used to such visits which are not backed by anything and which end in the co-chairs’ calls to resolve the conflict peacefully and find some compromises. And this is just claptrap. Therefore, real results can hardly be expected with such approach from their side.
The U.S. officials have recently challenges Russia’s ability to achieve success in the conflict settlement, though over the past years Russia seems to be the most active mediator…
Will the sole participation of the United States or France into the process give any positive results for Azerbaijan? Every year the U.S. Congress allocates millions of dollars for the separatist regime of Nagorno Karabakh. Will their sole attempts to settle the problem produce any specific effect? This is nonsense, the statements far from understanding of the really established situation.
There is at least some hope for the success of Russia’s mediatory efforts. But, certainly, this is not the issue of today or tomorrow. This issue requires active and dynamic, offensive diplomatic steps to produce effect.
Meanwhile, Azerbaijan is expanding cooperation with Russia and has recently admitted that it does not exclude possibility of joining EEU.
This is not the first such statement of Azerbaijan. We all remember the words of Azerbaijan’s FM Elmar Mammadyarov ‘Never say never’. Azerbaijan’s diplomacy is not limited to any specific direction. This is why our foreign policy is called multidirectional because to consider the realities, separate directions, issues related to accession to any structure. And we never kept the doors closed to any structures.
But the matter is that accession is not a simple issue for Azerbaijan. It is primarily associated with Armenia’s presence in this union, and our accession may have a positive impact on Armenian economy, promote resumption of the trade and economic cooperation, which Azerbaijan cannot tolerate. And I think it is not going to.
Therefore, I think even if the issue of joining this structure is at issue, Azerbaijan must set its requirements. Definite mechanisms which meet Azerbaijan’s interests must be worked out. If accession to this alliance leads to revival of Armenia’s economy, this does not meet the interests of our country. But I think we can consider this issue at definite provisions related to our presence in this structure.
In addition, we should not forget that this union involves the countries with which we cooperate, who support us and are our strategic partners. And this is a serious factor for the further consideration of this issue.