Diplomacy resumes as Armenia turns the Safarov case to its own advantage.

Diplomatic efforts around the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict have restarted after days of tension and sharp exchange of words between Baku and Yerevan following the release of Ramil Safarov, on his return to Azerbaijani jurisdiction at the end of August. Safarov was imprisoned for life in Hungary in 2006 for killing an Armenian colleague in Budapest during a NATO language course.

The Special Envoy of the OSCE on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, Ambassador Andrzej Kasprzyk yesterday met in Stepanakert with the de facto leadership of the territory, including the President Bako Sahakyan. A spokesman for Sahakyan said that issue of the release of Safarov was raised during the meeting.

In the meantime the Armenian Foreign Minister, Edward Nalbandian, met in Yerevan the visiting Foreign  Minister of Luxembourg, Jean Asselborn. Speaking to journalistrs after the meeting Nalbandian said  that over the last days, he received dozens of phone calls from his counterparts from various states, including his counterparts from the EU countries, who unequivocally expressed their negative attitude towards the Azerbaijani-Hungarian deal. "There is not a single country which would express its support to Azerbaijan", Edward Nalbandian concluded.

Hungary's decision to send Safarov back to Azerbaijan, and the way that he was received there took the international community by surprise, and their has been widespread sympathy with the Armenian position, with statements from a number of key governments and international institutions. Armenia has been trying to turn the situation to its advantage by depicting Azerbaijan as an irrespionsible player in international politics.

On its part Azerbaijan has insisted that the whole procedure of the release of Safarov was conducted strictly within legal frameworks. Azerbaijan has also articulated its decision within the context of its conflict with Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh, the continued occupation of its territory by Armenian forces and the humanitarian suffereing resulting from the conflict all of which condition Azerbaijani public opinion which has to be taken into consideration

Commonspace.eu political editor said in a comment: "The debate around this controversy is now entering a new phase, with both sides trying to capitalise on the issue both domestically and internationally. Regardless of this however, the most serious impact of the turn of events is that the lack of trust between the two governments, and even more, between Armenians and Azerbaijanis in general, has reached it lowest point for a very long time. This is already reflecting itself in the ongoing peace process facilitated by the OSCE Minsk Group, and in a range of public diplomacy activities that have been constructed with much patience and effort over a long time. Both will need to recalibrate to get back on track. On the other hand neither Armenia nor Azerbaijan can afford the luxury of disengaging completely from either the formal negotiations or the public diplomacy efforts. This allows a small space for facilitators to consider futrure steps. It is dissappointing however that some of those leading these processes seem to think that their only option at the moment is to do less, when in fact their best option is to do more."

source: commonspace.eu

photo: The Fioreign Minister of Armenia Edward Nalbandian meeting the Foreign Minister of Luxembourg Jean Asselborn in Yerevan on 11 September 2012 (picture copurtesy of the Armenian Ministry of Foreign Affairs).

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Israeli parliament votes to bring back the death penalty, but only for Palestinians

Israeli parliament votes to bring back the death penalty, but only for Palestinians

srael’s parliament approved a bill on Monday that would allow the execution of Palestinians convicted on terror charges for deadly attacks, a move that has been criticized as discriminatory and immediately drew a court challenge. Sixty-two lawmakers, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, voted in favor and 48 against the bill, championed by far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir. There was one abstention and the rest of the lawmakers were not present. Ben Gvir in the run-up to the vote had worn a lapel pin in the shape of a noose, symbolising his support for the legislation. “We made history!!! We promised. We delivered,” he posted on X after the vote. The bill would make the death penalty the default punishment for Palestinians in the Israeli-occupied West Bank found guilty of intentionally carrying out deadly attacks deemed “acts of terrorism” by an Israeli military court. The bill says that the sentence may be reduced to life imprisonment under “special circumstances.” Palestinians in the West Bank are automatically tried in Israeli military courts. Meanwhile, under the bill, in Israeli criminal courts anyone “who intentionally causes the death of a person with the aim of harming an Israeli citizen or resident out of an intention to put an end to the existence of the State of Israel shall be sentenced to death or life imprisonment.” Criminal courts try Israeli nationals, including Palestinian citizens and residents of east Jerusalem. The bill sets the execution method as hanging, adding that it should be carried out within 90 days of the sentencing, with a possible postponement of up to 180 days. - ‘Parallel tracks’ - The bill appears to conflict with Israel’s Basic Laws, which prohibit arbitrary discrimination, and shortly after it was passed, a leading human rights group announced that it had filed a petition with the Supreme Court demanding the legislation’s annulment. “The law creates two parallel tracks, both designed to apply to Palestinians,” the Association for Civil Rights in Israel said in a statement. “In military courts — which have jurisdiction over West Bank Palestinians — it establishes a near-mandatory death sentence,” the rights group said. In civilian courts, the law’s stipulation that defendants must have acted “with the aim of negating the existence” of Israel “structurally excludes Jewish perpetrators,” the group added. The association argued the law should be annulled on both jurisdictional and constitutional grounds. During the debate in parliament, opposition lawmaker and former deputy Mossad director, Ram Ben Barak, expressed outrage at the legislation. “Do you understand what it means that there is one law for Arabs in Judea and Samaria, and a different law for the general public for which the State of Israel is responsible?” he asked fellow parliamentarians, using the Israeli name for the West Bank. “It says that Hamas has defeated us. It has defeated us because we have lost all our values.” - ‘Discriminatory application’ - Lawmaker Limor Son Har-Melech from Ben Gvir’s party, who years ago survived an attack by Palestinian militants in which her husband was killed, urged fellow parliamentarians to approve the bill. “For years, we endured a cruel cycle of terror, imprisonment, release in reckless deals, and the return of these human monsters to murder Jews again ... And today, my friends, this cycle has come full circle.” The Palestinian Authority condemned the law’s adoption, saying that “Israel has no sovereignty over Palestinian land.” “This law once again reveals the nature of the Israeli colonial system, which seeks to legitimize extrajudicial killing under legislative cover,” it added. In February, Amnesty International had urged Israeli lawmakers to reject the legislation, citing its “discriminatory application against Palestinians.” On Sunday, Britain, France, Germany and Italy expressed “deep concern” over the bill, which they said risked “undermining Israel’s commitments with regards to democratic principles.” While the death penalty exists for a small number of crimes in Israel, it has become a de facto abolitionist country — the Nazi Holocaust perpetrator Adolf Eichmann was the last person to be executed in 1962. Israel has occupied the West Bank since 1967 and violence there has soared since Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attack on Israel triggered the Gaza war. (read more by clicking the image above).

Popular

Editor's choice
Interview
Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Today, commonspace.eu starts a new regular weekly series. THURSDAY INTERVIEW, conducted by Lauri Nikulainen, will host  persons who are thinkers, opinion shapers, and implementors in their countries and spheres. We start the series with an interview with Murad Muradov, a leading person in Azerbaijan's think tank community. He is also the first co-chair of the Action Committee for a new Armenian-Azerbaijani Dialogue. Last September he made history by being the first Azerbaijani civil society activist to visit Armenia after the 44 day war, and the start of the peace process. Speaking about this visit Murad Muradov said: "My experience was largely positive. My negative expectations luckily didn’t play out. The discussions were respectful, the panel format bringing together experts from Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Turkey was particularly valuable during the NATO Rose-Roth Seminar in Yerevan, and media coverage, while varied in tone, remained largely constructive. Some media outlets though attempted to represent me as more of a government mouthpiece than an independent expert, which was totally misleading.  Overall, I see these initiatives as important steps in rebuilding trust and normalising professional engagement. The fact that soon a larger Azerbaijani civil society visits to Armenia followed, reinforces the sense that this process is moving in the right direction." (click the image to read the interview in full)