High level talks on Karabakh conflict resolution concluded on July 17th and July 18th in Moscow. Armenian and Azerbaijani sides didn’t comment much. The OSCE Minsk group mediators sounded disappointed, even if they tried to accurately conceal that with phrases like “very open discussion took place” and “there was no progress, but there was not step back either”.
It seems like the reason for failure in progress was Armenia’s stance. There was a serious backlash in Armenia following the release of Madrid principles by the Presidents of OSCE Minsk group co-chairing countries at the G8 meeting in Italy.
Calls demanding resignation of Foreign Minister Eduard Nalbandian and reversal of policy on Karabakh by ARF-Dashnaktsutyuniun, criticism from Karabakh Ministry of Foreign Affairs, were followed by Nalbandian’s statement, which made clear, that there is hardly any point in the upcoming negotiations in Moscow.
Interestingly, it seemed from the side, that much of this halabaloo on the Armenian side was carefully staged by the authorities ahead of the negotiations. It seems there was pressure on them and they needed this backlash to adopt a more hardline stance.
The question than remains – why all this circus? Why don’t they just say – we don’t need no negotiations?
Artur Papyan
Journalist, blogger, digital security and media consultant
4 Comments
Comments are closed.
Maybe because, for so many reasons, Sargsyan needs to make it look like he is trying to solve the problem… Despite the enormous pressure on him now, perhaps there would be even more, if he just threw up his hands and said, “No”…
What I’m more worried about is the recent improvement in Rusia – USA relations. Obama and Medvedev seem to have understood each other pretty well – and if those two superpowers decide to really go on with Karabakh resolution, nobody will be able to stop them.
You have to talk… You have to talk so that you are considered to be a constructive party to the negotiations. Otherwise, you are a rogue. And while you talk, you build up your strength to gain advantages in the negotiations. And since your opponent does the same, it’s a zero sum game in the end. Both the parties keep up with each other and you end up with an arms race. That is, until one of them goes broke.
[…] եւ Ադրբեջանի նախագահների հանդիպումը, որի մասին ditord–ը իր գրառման վերջում եզրակացնում է. «Ինչի՞ համար էր այդ […]