Useful meetings, but are they enough?

This is a commentary prepared by the editorial team of commonspace.eu

For the third time in as many months, the Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan have met under the auspices of the international community to discuss the relations between them and the resolution of the Karabakh conflict. After an upsurge of violence in the summer the Presidents first met in Sochi, under the auspices of President Putin of Russia, and a month later in Wales, on the margins of the NATO Summit in a meeting hosted by United States Secretary of State John Kerry. This month it was the turn of President Hollande of France to host the two leaders in Paris for the third meeting. Russia, the United States and France are the three countries that co-chair the OSCE Minsk Process that is mandated to facilitate a resolution of the conflict between the two countries that has raged on for nearly a quarter of a century. All the three co-Chair countries have now hosted a high level meeting each in this latest round. Diplomatic nicities have been satisfied and boxes ticked. It is now time to get down to substance.

The first reactions from the two countries about the Paris talks have been overall positive, even if not particularly enthusiastic. Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian characterised the meeting as "helpful, sincere and constructive". "I believe another small step was taken today towards drawing the positions of the parties nearer," Nalbandian was quoted as telling the press after the meeting. The Armenian Foreign Minister summed up the dilemma in which the negotiators and facilitators find themselves: Armenia wants to build confidence that would lead to a peace agreement; Azerbaijan wants a peace agreement from which confidence-building can be build. So we now know that the Karabakh conflict will be resolved once the two sides decide what comes first, the chicken or the egg. Foreign Minister Nalbandian also stated that the Paris meetings reaffirmed that the Minsk Process is the one and only framework for resolving the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. The love-affair of Armenia with the Minsk Process rages on.

Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov also described the Paris meetings as "positive and contributing to the mutual understanding of positions". He has also embraced the chicken and egg debate, and not surprisingly his view on the matter is the complete opposite of his Armenian counterpart. Azerbaijan wants a peace agreement first, and confidence-building later. In essence Mammadyarov said that snipers will continue to operate on the line of contact until Armenia withdraws from the Azerbaijani territories around Nagorno-Karabakh that it occupied during the war in the 1990s.

So what is one to conclude from this latest piece of diplomatic theatre?

The Paris meetings, were useful, but they were not enough. None of the sides, and none of the international mediators have cause for any self-satisfaction. The problem is that nobody knows what else to do apart from bringing the sides together, giving them a good dinner and hoping for the best. The most interesting feature emerging from the meetings in Sochi, Wales and Paris is the lack of interest in them within Armenian and Azerbaijani societies. Those who have followed this process for many years remember the excitement that meetings between the two leaders used to generate. Not anymore. The diplomatic theatre it seems has lost its audience. Yet every month people die on the line of contact from violations of the cease fire arrangements. Hundreds of thousands of people remain caught in a situation of constant tension or suffering in and around the conflict zone. They do not have the luxury to ignore the efforts to resolve the conflict. Which is why the pressure must be kept on all concerned to move this peace process forward and close once and for all this terrible page in the history of the South Caucasus.

This commentary was prepared by the editorial team of commonspace.eu

Photo: President Hollande of France hosted a dinner for the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan at the Elysee Palace on 27 October 2014 following a day of talks aimed at unblocking the impasse in the negotiations on a peaceful resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
''Coalition of the Willing'' meets in Kyiv to restate its support for Ukraine

''Coalition of the Willing'' meets in Kyiv to restate its support for Ukraine

The ''Coalition of the  Willing''  of thirty five countries, has renewed its support of Ukriane, at a meeting in Kyiv, held on Ukraine's national day on 24 August, under the chairmanship of British Prime Minister,A ndy Burnham. Burnham has promised to keep up the pressure on Russia despite Moscow's "outrageous threats", on his first official visit to Ukraine as UK prime minister. Burnham met Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and chaired his first meeting of the "coalition of the willing", set up by the UK and France under his predecessor Sir Keir Starmer. He said the coalition was "doing everything we can" while urging the US Congress to "ratchet up" economic pressure on Russia. The government has agreed to hand over blueprints for British-made components for the Scalp missile, a French version of the UK's Storm Shadow cruise missile - allowing Ukraine to produce the long-range weapon domestically. During the meeting with France and Ukraine, Burnham said allies were doing "everything we can" to "dig into our own stocks and help others dig into their stocks" of air defences to protect Ukraine. "This is the moment to keep up the pressure on Russia, the moment to squeeze their ability to fund this illegal war," Burnham said, praising the "strength" of the Ukrainian people. "Ukraine has been Europe's protector, not a drain on our security but the front line in keeping Europe safe." It comes after Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov criticised the UK's decision to share the missile blueprints. Peskov said it prevented "even the slightest progress" towards achieving peace. He told reporters on Monday that the Russian military was already gathering data to locate any missile production sites to destroy them. "Britain is involved in this war on the side of the Kyiv regime. Britain methodically and regularly adds fuel to the fire," he added. In response, Burnham said: "Who started the fire? That's the question, isn't it?" He added the issue of missile interceptors would be the main topic at the coalition of the willing meeting. Burnham chaired his first meeting of the "coalition of the willing" in Kyiv Burnham has been reaffirming the UK's backing for Kyiv in the wake of escalating Russian strikes on Ukraine in recent weeks - including one on a shopping centre on Friday that killed at least 16 people. In a joint statement after the meeting, Burnham and co-chairs French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said the group would aim to strength Kyiv's air defences "as a matter or urgent priority". They also condemned Moscow's "systemic and escalating strikes against Ukraine's cities, critical infrastructure and civilians" and pledged to "constrain Russia's war chest through sanctions and actions against the "shadow fleet". (click image to read more).

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)