Leaders prepare for meeting as war of words continues

Armenian and Azerbaijani officials continued to exchange sharp words ahead of a meeting of the Presidents of the two countries. The Foreign Minister of Armenia, Edward Nalbandian confirmed that the meeting will take place when speaking at a Press Conference in Yerevan yesterday (16 January), but refused to say where and when the meeting will be held. Earlier reports had suggested that the meeting will take place next week in Sochi and will be hosted once again by the Russian President Dimitri Medvedev.

Ahead of the meeting the two sides have continued exchanging sharp words and the situation is also tense on the line of contact separating the two sides.

Armenian sources claimed that Azerbaijan violated the cease fire ninety times on New Year's Eve and New Year's Day, firing more than 1200 shots, and that in the last week guns and snipers had been used. Earlier Azerbaijan had stated that five of its soldiers were killed by the Armenian side in October and November of last year.

The OSCE Special Representative of the Chairman in Office and his staff were today expected to conduct monitoring of the line of contact. However many consider that this monitoring, involving only three individuals is far from enough. The Armenian side has accused Azerbaijan of blocking the allocation of further financial resources that would enable more monitors to be engaged. According to a statement by the Armenian self declared Nagorno-Karabakh Republic Foreign Ministry "on December 22, 2011, the OSCE Permanent Council approved the unified Budget of the organization for 2012. Along with this, the Permanent Council discussed a request to increase the funding for the Office of the Personal Representative of the OSCE Chairman-in-Office to ensure sufficient resources to investigate potential incidents on the Line of Contact..." The statement claims that  "the OSCE member-states supported the idea of increasing the funds for the Office of the Chairman in Office Personal Representative. It was the Azerbaijani delegation that opposed the idea explaining its position by the fact that it could not approve additional funding for the Office until a final agreement on the details of the mechanism of the incidents' investigation was achieved".

The statement said that "This once again shows that Azerbaijan is not interested in the investigation of incidents on the line of contact, since it will prove that it is the Azerbaijani party that regularly provokes incidents, aggravating hostility and distrust of the parties towards each other and driving the negotiation process to a deadlock".

Similar accusations were also made by the Armenian Foreign Minister in his press conference in Yerevan.

This prompted a response from the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry, whose spokesperson Elman Abdullayev dismissed accusations by Armenia that it is hampering creation of a mechanism to investigate violations of the cease-fire. "The biggest problem is the occupation of Azerbaijani territory by Armenia. It is Armenia that occupies our lands and kills Azerbaijani civilians, even children. There is a need to investigate the murders committed by snipers. We would also like to know whether Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian is planning to hold a fair and honest investigation into the numerous murders of Azerbaijani civilians by Armenian snipers," Abdullayev said. The spokesman expressed regret that "Yerevan is not constructive on resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict".

Commonspace.eu political editor said in a comment: "It has become a common feature that ahead of meetings  of the Presidents the sides engage in a war of words to show that they are entering the negotiations from a position of strength. This often contributes towards creating a bad atmosphere in the negotiations. On this occasion there are even less expectations then usual that the meeting between the two Presidents will lead to a breakthrough in the negotiations. The sides should however at least consider a "propaganda cease fire" ahead of the meeting to give themselves and their citizens an opportunity to reflect more calmly on the issues at hand."

source: commonspace.eu with agencies

photo: The town of Agdam in Nagorno-Karabakh in ruins for the last two decades (archive picture)

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)