NATO Parliamentary Assembly Meeting in Tbilisi focuses on Karabakh conflict and wider regional issues. Parliamentarians emphasise the important role of civil society for the region's future.

The 83rd Rose-Roth seminar, held in the framework of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, ended in Tbilisi on Wednesday. The last day of the event was dedicated mainly to the Karabakh conflict and wider regional issues. During the discussion Members of Parliament from different NATO states reiterated the importance of civil society organisations in helping resolve the Karabakh conflict and in the development of a peace and democracy in the region.

The day started with a panel discussion on the theme "Armenia, Azerbaijan and Turkey: Prospects of regional reconciliation." Introducing the debate, LINKS Director Dennis Sammut said that there was stagnation in the Karabakh peace process and the protocols signed between Armenia and Turkey in 2009 have failed to be taken to their natural conclusion. He said there was a need to learn from the lessons of the last twenty years and to consider what new initiatives were necessary to get the region out of its present stalemate.

Alexander Iskanderyan, of the Yerevan based Caucasus Institute said that there was no immediate prospect of positive change since the position of the sides was diametrically opposed. It was however not right to say that this was the fault of the Minsk Group since it was not in a position to solve the conflict instead of the parties. He said that the conflict was embeded in the mentality of the societies which in some cases was the mentality of the 19th century. A 21st century solution was not possible until this mentality changes.

Fariz Ismailizade, the Deputy Rector of the Diplomatic Academy in Azerbaijan said that the Turkish-Armenian protocol initiative failed because it was "half-cooked" and failed to take into account the linkage to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. He said that the international community had in recent years decreased its attention to the problems of the region and that the international mediators did not even have a strong enough political mandate from their home capitals. There was an urgent need for a road map that would give the sides hope for a solution because the risk of war remained, and there was a constant danger of provocations that could lead to incidents and a spill-over.

Mustafa Aydin, Rector of Kadir Has University in Istanbul said that he was pessimistic about the immediate future and all concerned needed to reconcil themselves with the fact that there were no short cuts to finding a solution. Turkey's interests in the region had changed and it now does not look at Azerbaijan simply from a pan-Turkic perspective but primarily sees it as an economic partner and part of its energy and economic strategy. Turkey wants to see stability in the region and Georgia's stability is of paramount importance in Turkish thinking. The Armenian-Turkish protocols were build on a degreee of contructive ambiguity which allowed the two sides to address some, but not all of the issues outstanding between them. However the protocols came at a time when there was not enough trust between the sides - either the leaderships or the populations at large, and interested sides, such as Azerbaijan and the Armenian diaspora were ignored completely. This meant that it was easy to take the momentum out of the process and it will now be some time before it can be regained.

There followed an interesting question and answer session during which several parliamentarians from NATO countries put questions to the panel. Former Italian Prime Minister Lamberto Dini made a passionate appeal to civil society in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Turkey to take the lead and not wait for the politicians. He said think tanks and NGOs needed to develop their own road map for the future and they must also help to heal the pains of the past. Dini appealed to put young people at the centre staghe of this process.

A second panel focused on  the contribution of civil society to democracy and stabilty in the South Caucasus. The panel was chaired by French Parliamentarian Nathalie Goulet, and included Tengiz Pakhaladze from Georgia, Laura Baghdasarian from Armenia and Fuad Hassanov from Azerbaijan.

The event was closed with remarks by the Chairman of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, British parliamentarian Hugh Bayley.

source: commonspace.eu

photo: from left to right: Professor Mustafa Aydin, Dr Fariz Ismailizade and Dr Alexander Iskanderyan speaking in a panel at the NATO Parliamentary ASssembly Rose-Roth Seminar in Tbilisi on 1 May 2013. (Picture courtesy of the NATO PA)

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Landmines present to the European Union both a contradiction and a dilemma

Landmines present to the European Union both a contradiction and a dilemma

Finland’s decision to buy one million landmines creates a serious contradiction in the policy of the European Union, and is symbolic of a bigger dilemma facing European countries as they get used to the need to acquire “hard” power to face an increasing threat from Russia. Finland is seeking to acquire one million anti-personnel mines at a cost of 100 million euros. Finland, together with Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia last year abandoned the Ottawa agreement, the international framework that bans the use of anti-personnel mines, which the EU had been instrumental in establishing and supporting. All five countries cite the threat from Moscow as the reason. Colonel Riku Mikkonen of the Army Command told Finland’s national news agency STT that officials are now gathering information from suppliers regarding the deal, the AFP news agency reports. Helsinki would like domestic manufacturers to supply the mines, with contracts signed by the end of 2027 and production up and running by 2028. “It would be useful in many ways if Finnish companies produced the anti-personnel mines in Finland,” Mikkonen said. About half a dozen Finnish firms qualify, he told STT. “However, at this stage, buying the mines from abroad is not totally ruled out,” he added. LANDMINES PROVIDE THE EU WITH BOTH A CONTRADICTION, AND A DILEMMA Eliminating landmine contamination worldwide is one of the EU’s main soft power postures, and it basks in its record as the biggest funder of anti-landmine action in the world. But the fact that 5 of its 27 member states  have now left the Ottawa Treaty dents the EU moral high ground. It is a contradiction that is too big and important to be ignored. It also presents the European Union with a deeper dilemma. The threat from Russia is changing what the EU has stood for decades, namely a force for good able to mobilise its considerable soft power for the greater good of humanity. How the Union will implement this change will define its future. In the meantime landmines have not become any less lethal, benign, or unimportant. They remain in many parts of the world a major threat to life, an impediment to prosperity, and a potential trigger to further conflict. The 22 EU members states that still adhere to the Ottawa treaty must regroup, and be more assertive in their quest against anti-personnel land mines. All the reasons why they supported the Ottawa treaty in the first place still exist. The message must be clear: NO TO LANDMINES!
Editor's choice
News
Pashinyan says that he wants peace treaty with Azerbaijan by 2031

Pashinyan says that he wants peace treaty with Azerbaijan by 2031

Armenia should sign and ratify a peace treaty with Azerbaijan before 2031, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said. He described the objective as the top priority for his administration. Earlier, the Armenian prime minister also spoke about a possible land-swap with Azerbaijan Armenia and Azerbaijan should agree to establish a clear, conventional border without enclaves or exclaves, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said. Armenia controls three Azeri enclaves inside its borders while Baku controls one Armenian enclave – those could be subject to a land swap, Pashinyan announced.

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)