"Time for a big gesture." In an interview with Arminfo News Agency, Dennis Sammut looks at next steps needed on Karabakh peace process.

ARMINFO's News Agency David Stepanyan interview Dennis Sammut, Executive Director of LINKS on recent issues surrounding the release of Ramil Safarov and the future of the karabakh peace process.

The extradition of Ramil Safarov has already resulted in the cancellation of a range of initiatives aimed at developing Armenian-Azerbaijani dialogue. Is it possible to continue efforts to establish a dialogue between the Armenian and Azerbaijani public as a precondition to resolving the Karabakh conflict, as the OSCE MG co-chairs have repeatedly mentioned it?

Dialogue and public diplomacy were the first victims of the events of the last two weeks. The same thing happened in 2004 when the murder took place in Budapest. It took a lot of work and effort to restore at least a minimum level of dialogue, but it was achieved. The same must happen now. Those calling for cutting of people to people contacts are simply playing into the hands of extremists.

Evidently, extradition and glorification of the murderer Safarov will affect not only the region and the Armenian-Azerbaijani relations, but also the policy of Yerevan and Baku with regard to international partners. What do you predict will be the consequences of the current situation?

There is undoubtedly concern in the international community about how the events surrounding the release of Safarov unfolded. I think what irritated European countries in particular was the lack of sensitivity. The perception that Azerbaijan did not act properly will linger for some time. In the end it will depend on future actions too. But there is no doubt that Azerbaijani diplomacy will have some hard work to do to restore the confidence of international partners.


Safarov's pardon has made Aliyev more popular inside Azerbaijan , even if such actions contradict international diplomacy and International Law. Can one conclude that the retention of power has become the priority for Aliyev, superseding even the international interests of Azerbaijan ?

Every government has to balance between domestic and foreign policy. The government of Azerbaijan is not an exception. Nor is the government of Armenia. However these issues, and the whole debate over Nagorno-Karabakh should not be instrumentalised for short term political gain. There will be Presidential elections in both Armenia and Azerbaijan next year. We should expect a lot of rhetoric, but we need to see statesmanship not cheap politics.

The years of negotiations within the Minsk Group have already shown that it is impossible to speak of Nagorno Karabakh's future without taking into consideration the realities of the last twenty years. That is, "return" of disputed territories to the former mini-metropolises is out of question regardless of the claims of territorial integrity of entities established in the Soviet Union. Do you think that the restoration of Azerbaijan's territorial integrity in this context has any perspective?

We tend to see these things in black and white terms. A solution over Nagorno Karabakh is never going to be either black or white, but some shade of grey. The future status of Nagorno-Karabakh is perhaps the most difficult aspect of the conflict and will be determined last. This status needs to be underpinned by two considerations: the security of all states and the safety of all citizens, particularly of minorities living amongst majorities. The return to Azerbaijan of territory around Nagorno-Karabakh currently under Armenian occupation is generally accepted to be a precondition.

What should the international community be doing at this stage?

The Safarov incident has shown once more that the Karabakh conflict is a difficult and serious problem with the potential to spiral quickly into a big problem. Big problems require big solutions. There is a very worrying trend in diplomatic circles to try to address the problem with small measures. This is not going to work. Confidence building measures, public diplomacy and people to people contacts are important, even vital for any peace process to succeed. However they can be most useful if they are developed in tandem with a proper peace process.

We need a big gesture from the international community on Karabakh - something that the sides can see is serious, and can engage with seriously, because if they don't they have something to loose.

source: This interview is reproduced in full from Arminfo News Agency

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Key European countries back Denmark in the face of Trump's continuing insistence on taking over Greenland

Key European countries back Denmark in the face of Trump's continuing insistence on taking over Greenland

 Six major European countries have declared their support to Denmark following renewed insistence by the US that it must have control over Greenland. "Greenland belongs to its people, and only Denmark and Greenland can decide on matters concerning their relations," said the leaders of the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and Spain, in a joint statement, issued on Tuesday (6 January), together with Denmark. On Sunday, Donald Trump said the US "needed" Greenland - a semi-autonomous region of fellow Nato member Denmark - for security reasons. He has refused to rule out the use of force to take control of the territory, and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned on Monday that an attack by the US would spell the end of Nato. The issue of Greenland's future resurfaced in the wake of the US military intervention in Venezuela, during which elite troops went in to seize the country's President Nicolás Maduro and take him to face drugs and weapons charges in New York. Following the raid, Trump said the US would "run" Venezuela for an unspecified period of time. He also said the US was returning to an 1823 policy of US supremacy in its sphere of influence in the Western hemisphere - and he warned a number of countries the US could turn its attention to them. The US military raid in Venezuela has reignited fears that the US may consider using force to secure control of Greenland. A day after the raid, Katie Miller - the wife of one of Trump's senior aides - posted on social media a map of Greenland in the colours of the American flag, alongside the word "SOON". On Monday, her husband Stephen Miller said it was "the formal position of the US government that Greenland should be part of the US". In an interview with CNN, he also said the US "is the power of Nato. For the US to secure the Arctic region, to protect and defend Nato and Nato interests, obviously Greenland should be part of the US." Asked repeatedly whether the US would rule out using force to annex it, Miller responded: "Nobody's going to fight the US over the future of Greenland." Stressing they were as keen as the US in Arctic security, the seven European signatories of Tuesday's joint statement said this must be achieved by Nato allies, including the US "collectively" - whilst "upholding the principles of the UN Charter, including sovereignty, territorial integrity and the inviolability of borders". Greenland's Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen welcomed the statement and called for "respectful dialogue". "The dialogue must take place with respect for the fact that Greenland's status is rooted in international law and the principle of territorial integrity," Nielsen said. Trump has claimed that making Greenland part of the US would serve American security interests due to its strategic location and its abundance of minerals critical to high-tech sectors. Greenland, which has a population of 57,000 people, has had extensive self-government since 1979, though defence and foreign policy remain in Danish hands. While most Greenlanders favour eventual independence from Denmark, opinion polls show overwhelming opposition to becoming part of the US.

Popular