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
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.