No surprises in Karabakh. Bako Sahakyan is re-elected President of the self declared Nagorno-Karabakh Republic polling 67% of the votes

There were no surprises in the elections in the self-declared Nagorno-Karabakh Republic held yesterday. First results indicate that the incumbent President, Bako Sahakyan secured more than two two-thirds of the votes cast, whilst the main opposition candidate Vitaly Balasanyan has gathered 31.40 per cent of votes. The third candidate got less than 1%. The official results are expected on Sunday.

Voter turnout was reported high, at 73%. 273 polling stations were set up across the territory, along with one in Yerevan for Karabakh voters living in or visiting Armenia. According to Karabakh's Central Election Commission, some 98,000 people were eligible to vote The day passed relatively smoothly, with few complaints recorded.

Although the voting process has been monitored by observers from several countries, the international community has distanced itself from the process. Catherine Ashton, the European Union's High Representative for Foreign Affairs, said in a statement that the EU "does not recognise the constitutional and legal framework in which [the poll] will be held. These 'elections' should not prejudice the determination of the future status of Nagorno-Karabakh in the negotiated general framework of the peaceful settlement of the conflict". NATO's Special Representative for the Caucasus and Central Asia, James Appathurai, expressed the alliance's position that "Holding such elections is in contradiction with the peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict". This view was reiterated by the foreign ministry of Azerbaijan, which stated that the Karabakh polls "damage the negotiation process".

For Armenia, however, and for Nagorno-Karabakh's de facto authorities, an internally consistent and peaceful election under international observation, while unrecognised, is seen as evidence of the latter's capability and legitimacy, and as a vital part of their diplomatic armoury in the dispute with Azerbaijan. The opposition Armenian National Congress stated, that "In the military and diplomatic war with Azerbaijan,  high level and active democratic instituions should be among NK's primary resources, and this will be noticed by the international community ... The latter's reaction to the elections will greatly depend on the quality of the elections".

While Armenian media and political figures have stressed the presence and diversity of the monitoring missions, the Azerbaijani press has concentrated on reporting different countries' statements of non-recognition of the election, and Azerbaijani political commentators' dismissal of it as an attempt "to attach the visibility of democracy to the military regime which exists in Nagorno-Karabakh today".

Commonspace.eu political editor said in a comment: "The elections have changed very little either domestically in Karabakh, or in the context of the ongoing negotiations for the settlement of the conflict. Politics in Karabakh has been largely stagnated over the last five years and thanks to the efforts of opposition candidate Vitaly Balsanyan the election campaign introduced a little excitement in it for the first time in many years. The result was however as expected. It is unlikely that Karabakh will see any major changes in the current context. With the elections out of the way it is hoped that all sides can now focus again on the peace negotiations. The Foreign Ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan are scheduled to meet in New York in September on the margins of the UN General Assembly, and there is also a possibility they may meet earlier in Europe. These meetings are seen as important to keep the lines of communication between the sides open. They will not however produce the long awaited breakthrough, which requires a more direct engagement by the presidents of the two countries." 

source: commonspace.eu with agencies

photo: The President of the self declared Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, Bako Sahakyan (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)