Astana Statement on Karabakh Conflict Calls for More “Decisive Efforts”

Kazakhstan -- Presidents Serzh Sarkisian of Armenia (R) and Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan (L) attend the OSCE summit in Astana, 1Dec2010.

Days of speculation are over, OSCE Minsk group Co-Chairs did all the shuttle-diplomacing they could between Baku and Yerevan, and today a statement was signed on Karabakh at the OSCE Astana Summit, which doesn’t say or do anything new.

Sure, it calls for “more decisive steps“, and recalls and reassures this and that, but once you look at it, nothing is changed.

Below is an extract from the Astana statement, where Armenia and Azerbaijan are actually agreeing to something.

The Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan reaffirmed their commitment to seek a final settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, based upon: the principles and norms of international law; the United Nations Charter; the Helsinki Final Act; as well as the statements of Presidents Medvedev, Sarkozy, and Obama, at L’Aquila on July 10, 2009, and at Muskoka on June 26, 2010.

The Muskoka statement is the one, where there is a close about “the return of the occupied territories surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh”. The Armenian opposition will surely jump at the opportunity to criticize the authorities for signing under something which reaffirms Muskoka treaty where the word “occupied” exists. But hey, that’s what the opposition is for, isn’t it? Hopefully they will not just criticize, but also suggest some concrete steps to improve the situation.

The only important thing, really, is the fact, that the Astana statement has the signatures of Armenia and Azerbaijan. After all the war rhetoric Azerbaijan has been sending over to us, which triggered a couple of angry remarks from the Armenian side, it is important that they’re signing something together.

But if we add to it the fact, that at the last moment Azerbaijan’s president Ilham Aliyev changed plans and refused to meet Armenia’s and Russia’s president on a tri-lateral format to discuss Karabakh conflict, the value of that signature under the statement goes sharply down.

Advertisements

19 thoughts on “Astana Statement on Karabakh Conflict Calls for More “Decisive Efforts”

  1. If rk/ss regime gives back any land, 1 hecter (or acre) of our lands back to our enemies, as sure as the day he was born I will fly to Yerevan and get close enough to serjik the perjik and STAB HIM in his neck. I mean really, what could happen to me? nothing, everyone will praise me and declare me the new leader. I will be declared as Qaj Andranik 2.0 and take the country in the new direction it needs to be taken into. Finally we will have the Andranik leader we have longed for all these years. hele give back 1 oz. of soil serjik and you’ll see what I do to you. I’ll see to it you receive a CLOSED CASKET funeral

    1. Andranik, calls to violence are not welcome on this blog. I would delete your comment, but it is so darn funny, that I can’t force myself to do it :))))

      1. @observer
        ay txa, so essentially you are laughing at me???
        this is how you read my comments? you laugh at them?
        I never intend to be “funny” in any-all of my comments
        always I’m serious and mean every word I post
        we are suppose to be brothers to each other
        I never laugh at your comments or make light of them
        I never interfere in your comments or arguments with others
        I love & respect you as my fellow Hay, I would expect the same from you

        and I believe I’m well with in my limits for calls of violence on both our external & most importantly our INTERNAL enemies who seek the slow & miserable death of our Hayastan. ba asa Artur jan, if I harm your wife & children, would you seek a peaceful-calm resolution with me? or would you call for a violent revenge to eliminate such a threat? ay axpers misht qo cavt tanem !

        1. I’m laughing at the expression “Andranik 2.0” – it is just hillarious!

          I’m not laughing AT you. I said your comment is funny, because, along with calls to violence, it contains the above-mentioned phrase, “Andranik 2.0”, which is very funny in the age of “Web 2.0”, when you bring our Zoravar “Andranik 1.0” and make him “2.0”.

          I didn’t mean to offend you, and I’m ready to apologize, if it made you feel that way. I never laugh at anybody commenting on this blog.

  2. @observer
    che ara ays inch es grum apologize mopologize yev ayln
    menq axper enq iraru, neroxutyun meroxutyun petq chi
    I command unity with my ppl, not division
    de inch aper, indz k’neres yes ayl mtacelei vor du indz vra cicaxumeir
    ha cavt tanem mer Sparapet Andranik@ 1.0 eh u yes 2.0 em eli
    I will bring justice to my homeland & ppl. if we give each other the power & financial means, hele we can do it together. no thanks manks in return either, just happiness, smiles all around, and prosperity for all of Hayastan-Artsakh

  3. More BS from the international community. Azerbaijan will continue to squeeze life out of Armenia by blocking economic development. But their stance is absolutist and short of complete elimination of NKR, they will not accept a solution.

      1. I think the projections were about 60 years. But I think they have found new wells since then.

        The key is whether they will be capable of making the right investments as a contingency plan.

  4. proven reserves are at 1.2 billion barrels, this excludes newly discovered wells and the huge undiscovered reserves in the caspian sea
    therefore at the current production rate of 900,000 barrels still have around 4 years at least

    according to
    http://www.neurope.eu/articles/66411.php
    30 billion barrels
    so, around 90 years

  5. To my observations OSCE bases everything on the teritorial integrity/sovereignity concept, not the self determination. This is basic as many of its members have their minorities and the things coming out of it. e.g Russia – Chechnia, Daghestan etc, France- Basques, Sardinia and so on.
    The only country that doesn’t have such a concern is the USA. I have the feeling that times changed and the 1648 Westfalia Treaty is outdated. OSCE failed to meet the new world situations. USA realised that. It is now time for others to accept it. Resistence is futile, it is better to cope with it, who does it sooner will gather more. i.e. If Azerbaijan recognises the independence of NKR will benefit more rather than not doing it.
    P.S. Georgians lost their chnace.

    1. OSCE is the organization which helped tear Yugoslavia apart, so I can’t agree to your points there. It’s just a matter of who has leverage in OSCE at the moment and what those with the leverage want.

      1. I think it was not OSCE that tear it apart but US-led NATO. Yugoslavia was too powerful to be allowed to exist.

        OSCE is a time gaining/wasting machine to freeze things up. However looking at it now when Obama didnt even bother to take part and Medvedev walked out, seems that there is nothing much left to freez for to long. the organisation will still be there symbolically as a UN body.

        1. You forgot to mention that the nations making up Yugoslavia did not want to be part of it. Presenting it as if it was a NATO led actions sounds like the dark conspiracies we hear or read in the Armenian media. It basically discredits the argument.

          1. It is questionable if all the Yugoslav nations would have wanted to split if they knew what was going to follow or if they had given an option. This is not the subject though. My point was that OSCE failed continuously to achieve Security and Co-operation in Europe. One example is Yugoslavia.
            As for NATO-led things in Yugoslavia please read about Deyton Agreement, IFOR and then KFOR. All of those were NATO initiatives. Nothing to do with any conspiracies.

      2. Observer,

        I agree with you, and so does history, about OSCE role in tearing Yugoslavia apart. OSCE is a tool for the Western states to advance their own goals and interests. USA-NATO may have been the countries that bombed and killed and broke up Yugoslavia since they had the military powers but OSCE played a prominent role and approved USA-NATO involvement in bombing and breaking up Yugoslavia. The letter “E” in OSCE should give us an idea whose interests they serve. http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/oslo3.htm “Knut Vollebaek helps US Intelligence prepare the ground for war.” Knut Vollebaek was Norwegian foreign minister, also Chairman in Office of the OSCE. There are many investigative historic evidence of OSCE, NATO, USA involvements in the breakup of former Yugoslavia and other matters.

        Yugoslavia was suspended from the OSCE in mid 1992 because of its “involvement” in Bosnia and Herzegovina. After the election of Vojislav Kostunica as President, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was admitted to the OSCE in late 2000. OSCE opened mission in Belgrade and other parts of the former broken states claiming to “provide assistance and expertise in the fields of democratization.” They are like vultures.

        Why isn’t Azerbaijan suspended from the OSCE for its involvement in slaughtering Armenians? Why didn’t OSCE recommend USA-NATO to bomb Azerbaijan as they did and played a role in bombing Yugoslavia? Why weren’t USA and NATO suspended from OSCE for their involvement in the breakup of Yugoslavia. Why aren’t USA, NATO and other allies suspended from OSCE for their involvements and genocides in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Iran, Somalia, Yemen, South Korea, South American countries, Asian countries, Iran, etc.? Why isn’t USA suspended from OSCE for its involvements around the world, with its covert and overt operations under every president? OSCE functions as the extension arm of Western powers.

      3. Actually you used a very discriptive phrase ” tear apart”. It was definilty a tear apart. Not a division or co-operation but a tear apart. It was one of the bloodiest things in recent history in the middle of Europe.

Comments are closed.