Karabakh: Diplomacy swings into action, as violence takes a respite.

Commentary: This is a commentary prepared by the political editor of commonspace.eu

After four days of violence that claimed dozens of lives and left many wounded, a fragile cessation of hostilities was agreed as from midday on Tuesday (5 April)  between Armenian and Azerbaijani forces in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict zone. The debacle of the last days starkly exposed the dangers that face the region if this conflict is allowed to fester. It also raised the spectre that outside third parties may easily become embroiled, with huge consequences.

The diplomatic offensive of the last days has been three pronged, even if ostensibly complimentary.

The Russians moved first, they moved fast and they pulled out all the stops. Within hours of the first shots being fired president Putin was calling on the sides to cease hostilities, and the Russian Defence and Foreign Ministers engaged with their Armenian and Azerbaijani counterparts and worked tirelessly to broker a cease fire. Russia has a lot at stake in the region and does not want a large scale war. Informally Russia blamed Turkey of stoking up the trouble by instigating Azerbaijan to launch hostilities, but in public Russia stopped short of blaming Azerbaijan. President Putin was on the phone to president Aliev of Azerbaijan and president Sargsyan of Armenia on Tuesday, apparently using language more reminiscent of Kremlin leaders in Soviet times when dealing with the Union Republics. Prime Minister Medvedev and Foreign Minister Lavrov are visiting the region in the next days. That means that the Russians now have something tangible to propose to the sides. A Russian plan has been in the pipeline for several months. It now looks as if the Russians will use the latest crisis to push it forward.

Russia needs to have its actions in Karabakh acquiesced to by the international community. It has therefore remained committed to the format of the Minsk group co-Chair trio which it chairs with the United States and France. It has resisted calls for a re-configuration of the group, a position also shared by Armenia. But it knows that the failure of the co-Chair to deliver any progress in the negotiations is directly linked to the recent crisis. Russia has therefore allowed for the first time space for the full Minsk Group - the co-Chairs plus a number of other countries including Germany and Turkey, to be involved (or at least appear to be involved) in managing the crisis. Germany currently holds the Chairmanship of the OSCE. It convened the Permanent Council of the organisation in special session on Tuesday, and German diplomacy played some role behind the scenes to get the sides to move to a cessation of hostilities. The president of Armenia embarked this week on a pre scheduled visit to Germany, and no doubt there are plans for contacts with Azerbaijan at the highest level also.

The third element in the diplomatic offensive involved the United States. Vice President Biden met with the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan in Washington hours before the latest surge in violence. He was again on the phone to both of them as the fighting ensued. The US is wary to get too embroiled in the Caucasus, and has to balance a number of domestic and international interests - the Armenian diaspora; the strategic relations with Turkey; Azerbaijan's energy resources; the big picture with Russia, etc. It therefore, like Russia, prefers to wrap itself in the mantel of the Minsk Process. In that way it can be fully involved without appearing as if it is competing with Russia in a sensitive region which Mr Putin considers as his backyard.

So as violence takes a respite, diplomacy has now swung into action. But to do what exactly? To put  a lid on the violence only or to try to take the bull by the horns and push for a comprehensive settlement? Time will tell, but given previous experience it is quite possible that after a flurry of activity, once the searchlight of media attention is off, things will slip back to the lethargy of the past, until somebody once more resorts to brinkmanship as a solution to a problem that in fact can only be resolved by cool-headed reasoning.

 

This is a commentary prepared by the political editor of commonspace.eu

Ambassador Andrzej Kasprzyk (l), the Personal Representative of the Chairperson-in-Office on the conflict dealt with by the OSCE Minsk Conference, speaking alongside James Warlick of the United States of America, one of the three Co-Chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group, Vienna, 5 April 2016. Picture courtesy of the OSCE

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.
Editor's choice
News
Donald Tusk: "One for all, and all for one! Otherwise we are finished."

Donald Tusk: "One for all, and all for one! Otherwise we are finished."

Europe is rattled by events in Venezuela, and there are serious concerns that US disregard for international law may have consequences close to home.  The BBC diplomatic correspondent, James Landale, said, the question is how Europe may respond in the longer term to America's military operation in Venezuela. Will it provide a catalyst for the continent to take greater responsibility for its own security in the face of so much instability from what many see as an unreliable ally? Polish prime minister, Donald Tusk, appears to have answered the question, saying on social media: "No-one will take seriously a weak and divided Europe: neither enemy nor ally. It is already clear now. "We must finally believe in our own strength, we must continue to arm ourselves, we must stay united like never before. One for all, and all for one. Otherwise, we are finished." The US seizing of Venezuela's leader has faced strong criticism from both America's friends and foes at an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council, held on Monday, 5 January. Many member states agreed with the US that Nicolás Maduro had been an illegitimate and repressive leader. But many also condemned the US military action as a breach of international law and the UN Charter, and they demanded a democratic transition that reflected the will of the Venezuelan people. (click the image to read the full article).

Popular

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.