Azerbaijan is pressing for an official United Nations response to a diplomatic incident at the Armenian mission in New York.
The source of Azerbaijan’s ire was the Armenian mission’s recent move to fly the flag of separatist-minded Nagorno-Karabakh.
“It has been revealed and properly documented that on September 27… the mission of the Republic of Armenia … installed two flags on its premises.., namely the national flag of the Republic of Armenia and a piece of colored stuff or rag purported to be a ‘flag’ of the ethnically constructed subordinate separatist entity, the so-called ‘Nagorno-Karabakh Republic,’” Azerbaijan’s UN envoy Agshyn Mehtyev wrote in a letter sent to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.
The Karabakh banner flew for only a few hours, reportedly coming down due to Azerbaijani pressure. Baku, however, doesn’t seem inclined to drop the matter. Azerbaijani officials believe the Armenian action violated the UN Charter, and therefore they are seeking an official UN response.
Armenia, the military and political guardian of the breakaway enclave of Nagorno Karabakh, is debating an idea to user its protégé into independent statehood. The Heritage Party-sponsored bill on recognition of the de facto state as an independent country arrived on the National Assembly floor on October 5, much to the chagrin of neighboring Azerbaijan, which claims authority over the ethnic Armenian-dominated territory.
Wary of international reaction, Armenian lawmakers are thought likely to kill the bill. Deputy Foreign Minister Shavarsh Kocharian asked lawmakers to take things in stride, saying that any precipitous move on Karabakh would harm peace talks and the eventual international recognition of the enclave. “Recognition [by Armenia] may be considered only in the context of its ultimate expediency so the general process [of international recognition] benefits from it,” said Kocharian.
The Prosperous Armenia Party, part of Armenia's ruling coalition, shared this view. “This would pit Armenia against the world centers of power,” said Prosperous Armenia MP Aram Safarian adding that his party would vote against the bill. The dominant Republican Party also sounded unenthusiastic and even the authors of the bill, the Heritage Party, hinted that they realize that their initiative has little more than ceremonial value.
The U.S.'s embattled nominee to be the next ambassador to Baku, Matthew Bryza, raised some eyebrows during his confirmation hearing in July by appearing to say that a serious skirmish on the Nagorno Karabakh line of contact was Azerbaijan's fault. This is what he said in July:
"What transpired that day remains not entirely clear to us, but we do know that there were several people killed. There was an Azerbaijani move across the line of contact, Armenia responded, resulted in deaths which, yes, Secretary [of State Hillary] Clinton did condemn."
But now he appears to be backing away from that statement. In responses to follow-up questions (pdf) from Barbara Boxer, a pro-Armenia senator, Bryza stepped back from blaming Azerbaijan:
While I said that the Azerbaijanis moved across the line of contact (LOC), the full details of what triggered the June 18 incident are unknown. Unfortunately, there are a number of LOC violations each year by both sides.
So was he right the first time? According to Jane's, yes. The skirmish was not planned by either government, but was a shouting match between soldiers on each side that got out of hand, resulting in an Azerbaijan non-commissioned officer opening fire (article not online):
[T]he skirmishes around Nagorno-Karabakh between 18 and 21 June may not have been as co-ordinated and planned as at first perceived. The fighting left four Armenian soldiers dead and four wounded...
The official version of the fighting provided by the Armenian military on 19 June was that an Azerbaijani unit tried to capture an Armenian forward position, but failed to do so and retreated, abandoning one of its dead. The Armenian soldiers died or were wounded defending their position.
Several days earlier, Armenia and Azerbaijan's neighbor, Georgia, secured UN support for a similar resolution that called for the return of ethnic Georgians expelled by separatists from the disputed Abkhaz and South Ossetian territories.
Baku said it decided to postpone discussion of the resolution in response to the trio's intention to field an international fact-finding mission to the territory, now occupied by Armenian troops. Armenia, in turn, responded that the Azerbaijani explanation holds no water since the mission was agreed months ago.
The US, French and Russian chairpersons of the Minsk Group, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe body tasked with mediating the talks, will lead the expedition to inspect the humanitarian situation in areas that border Karabakh.
A few weeks ago, when Hillary Clinton was on her tour of the Caucasus, the Associated Press reported that while in Yerevan, she "implicitly rebuked" Azerbaijan for violating the Nagorno Karabakh ceasefire:
At an evening news conference in Yerevan, Mrs. Clinton implicitly criticized Azerbaijan for a recent outbreak of violence. In mid-June, an exchange of gunfire along the front lines near Nagorno-Karabakh killed four ethnic Armenian troops and one Azerbaijani soldier.
However, if you actually read the transcript of that conference, you have to look extremely hard to find a rebuke of any sort. This is about as explicit as she gets:
The United States strongly condemns the use of force or the threat to use force. And we regret the loss of life that results as the use of force is used. These are unacceptable violations of the 1994 cease fire agreement. And it is also contrary to the stated commitments of both sides.
So, we have called upon everyone to refrain from the use of force or the threat of force because we, number one, do not want to see loss of life or injury; we do not want to see further dislocation of individuals or families; and we do not want to see the peace process harmed. So, my message is the same to everyone: the United States condemns the use or threat of use of force.
You have to have a pretty keen eye to detect any rebuke of Azerbaijan in there.
But maybe the AP was on to something. Because today, during the confirmation hearing for Matthew Bryza to be the next ambassador to Azerbaijan, Barbara Boxer -- a strongly pro-Armenia senator -- asked him about that:
Is the "international community" blaming Azerbaijan for the recent violence in Karabakh that killed several soldiers on each side? So claims Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian. Really? Well, not publicly, of course; the official statements are impartial. But Nalbandian says that that's what they are saying to the Armenians, according to RFE/RL:
“In contacts with us, those making such statements, especially after the latest incident, are telling us, ‘You can clearly see to whom our statements are addressed,’” he told a joint news conference with Austria’s visiting Foreign Minister Michael Spindeleger.
“Because clearly it’s not Armenia that makes bellicose statements, calls for war,” said Nalbandian. “It’s not Armenia that organized that provocation on the border and inside the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic’s territory. It’s not Armenia that rejected a proposal to reinforce the ceasefire regime which was made by the OSCE Minsk Group.”
Unfortunately I don't see any transcript of the press conference, and none of the press accounts report on whether Spindelegger commented on this assertion. But it would seem that either Nalbandian is lying, or talking about off-the-record conversations in public. Either one is surely annoying the international community which Nalbandian claims is on his side.
An international peacekeeping force in Nagorno Karabakh seems like it would be a long way away, but Iran has already weighed in on who they don't want participating: the U.S. Reports RFE/RL:
An Iranian diplomat says Tehran is strongly opposed to U.S. involvement in a multinational peacekeeping force that would be deployed around the disputed territory of Nagorno-Karabakh in the event of an Armenian-Azerbaijani peace accord, RFE/RL's Armenian Service reports.
Iranian Ambassador to Armenia Seyed Ali Saghaeyan issued the warning at a news conference in Yerevan on June 23....
According to Saghaeyan, the United States is keen to have troops in Azerbaijan's Fizuli district, which borders Iran and was mostly occupied by Karabakh Armenian forces in 1993. He claimed such a move would pose a serious threat to Iran given its tense relations with Washington.
"Iran is the only country adjacent to the conflicting parties, and in terms if ensuring its own security, it will not allow the deployment of American forces," Saghayean said.
This opposition seems a little premature. It's not clear what organization would oversee this potential peacekeeping force -- the UN? OSCE? -- but the U.S. participation in non-NATO peacekeeping forces is pretty minimal, and it's hard to imagine NATO providing the peacekeepers here.
Armenia and Azerbaijan on June 21 clashed for the second time in roughly three days on the Nagorno-Karabakh frontline, RFE/RL reports. The skirmish, which allegedly killed one Azerbaijani soldier, comes after a June 18-19 gunfire exchange that killed four Armenian soldiers and one Azerbaijani soldier -- the worst violation of the Nagorno-Karabakh cease-fire since 2008.
Mediators pleaded with both sides to tone down the aggressive rhetoric that has accompanied the violence, which started the day after the conclusion of a St. Petersburg summit between Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev.
Azerbaijan and Armenia have accused one another of all the mortal sins since they launched into battle over the separatist region of Nagorno Karabakh, but the list of assumed misdeeds at times seems endless.
Now Baku says Armenia is a compulsive arsonist, who apparently runs through Azerbaijani wheat fields, throwing lit matches left and right.
The blaze has destroyed wheat crops in the occupied region of Tartar and, with temperatures rising, the fire threatens to destroy some 1,300 hectares of farm land.
The Azerbaijani-Armenian conflict may have stemmed from deep-seeded differences, but the chronic bickering between the two countries has long become reminiscent of iconic writer Nikolai Gogol’s The Tale of How Ivan Ivanovich Quarreled with Ivan Nikiforovich. The two Ivans are good neighbors, but one unfortunate incident sparks a never-ending, excruciating squabble that no arduous mediation by their well-meaning community can resolve. The two country gentlemen reach the point of no return after one has the indiscretion to call the other a silly “goose.”
By comparison, such a mild insult, if delivered by one side or the other in the 22-year Azerbaijani-Armenian conflict, would most likely rank as an improvement in dialogue.
Are Iran and Turkey planning to gang up against Armenia in Nagorno Karabakh? That's what an Armenian analyst says, according to ArmInfo:
The Turkish-Azerbaijani tandem and Iran have arrived at a certain arrangement regarding deployment of international forces in Nagorny Karabakh, the political expert Hmayak Hovhanissyan told media on Tuesday.
"Iran's stance has sharply changed and now Tehran comes out for change of the status-quo in Nagorny Karabakh and even offers its assistance in the process. Azerbaijan has already accepted that offer whereas Armenia has not responded to that yet. As regards my concern about possible resumption of military actions in Nagorny Karabakh, it is not exaggerated, otherwise President of Armenia Serzh Sargayan would not touched upon this topic during his visit to Brussels," he said.
This seems alarmist, but it is worth noting that Iran and Turkey have been cooperating more lately (most notably on the Iranian nuclear deal), and Iran seems to be moving a little bit away from Armenia, and the Organization of the Islamic Conference just came out with a statement declaring Armenia the aggressor in Karabakh. On the other hand, things are a little rocky between Turkey and Azerbaijan because of the Turkey-Armenia rapprochement. All this is to say that this is a pretty fluid situation, and so it seems possible that, for better or worse, there could be some movement soon on Karabakh.
And if Iran and Turkey fail to resolve the situation, it may fall to Ashton Kutcher and Demi Moore to set things right. Today.az reports:
Hollywood actor Ashton Kutcher, reportedly, wishes to visit Baku, and support Azerbaijan in the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute...
