How are we going to respond to and prevent Aliyev’s policy?
About two weeks ago, the OSCE Minsk Group issued a statement regarding the subversive penetration attempt by the Azerbaijani troops on the state border in south-east of the village of Chinari, Tavush Marz, on December 29 which reads, “Baku and Yerevan continue to blame each other for the penetration attempt on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border on December 29, 2016, which resulted in human casualties.”
Later, the mediators have stated that the truce violations are unacceptable and are in contrary to the commitments assumed by the parties to bear the entire responsibility for non-use of force. They urge the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan to strictly keep to the agreements reached in talks in Vienna and St. Petersburg, as well as to finalize within possibly short term the OSCE’s mechanisms for investigation of incidents. The Co-Chairs have also urged to immediately return the bodies recalling the “exclusively humanitarian nature of the problem.” Why and how has the subversive group appeared in the Armenian side? Who has initiated the next attempt of subversive penetration? In general, which side does not keep the agreements reached in the talks in Vienna and St. Petersburg last year?…
Once again, there is no word about these issues. Certainly, the continued neutrality of the mediators or, as it is accustomed to say, the balanced position is not new, this was how they are guided over years to avoid further escalation of the situation. But after the April war, neutrality creates favorable conditions for Aliyev to “free his hands.” OSCE Minsk Group, of course, has been and remains the only format with which the Armenian side has remained committed to peaceful settlement of Karabakh conflict. The situation is different in the case of Baku: Minsk Group has always been stoned by Azerbaijan at various levels, and the same policy is continued. Nine months have been passed since the war in April and so much is spoken about the necessity of “lessons learned”.
Read also
What results has the Armenian side reported apart from the activities carried out in the frontline? What task has been accomplished to make the international community have a clear idea about the atrocities carried out by Azerbaijani side in April? Is it not clear that the continuous announcements with the style “everyone knows without the investigation mechanism who has attacked” do not affect the OSCE Minsk Group mediators? Or, if “it is clear to everybody” inside the heart, anyway, everybody continues not indicating the culprit, provocateur, and reckless. Therefore, something needs to be changed in our implemented policy.
Otherwise, one day it will become clear that the statements with non-positive emphasis on the Armenian side, and the hints begin to become more and more frequent. Sadly, today we have what we had before the war in April. Excited by the impunity, exclusively Aliyev seems to “reap” results from the situation. Recently, Azerbaijani president referred to the settlement of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and the attack of the Azerbaijani subversive to village Chinari in the government session, noting, “Former CSTO leaders have made a big political mistake by adopting a pro-Armenian position and using unacceptable wording (NKR). Today, we know their fate…”
Later, he again boasted that they are ready to solve the problem, “We are able to solve the problem by military means at any time.” Summarizing the diplomatic outcomes-2016 in the end of December, Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov, in an interview with Azerbaijani “AZERTAC” state news agency, said openly and clearly that Azerbaijan will continue the policy aimed at internationalization of the Karabakh conflict, not being limited to only by the OSCE Minsk Group format, “No institution can claim for the role of monopoly in the settlement process of the conflict.”
Aliyev will continue his tactics: threats, sabotage attempts at the forefront, criticism against the OSCE Minsk Group, and the traditional policy of raising the NKR issue at other instances, incidentally, accusing Armenia in “destructive policy”. Are we going to oppose, respond and possibly prevent this policy?
