2010 'a wasted year' for Karabakh resolution
Fri 21 January 2011 13:03 GMT | 15:03 Local Time
News.Az interviews Prof. Gerard Libaridian, director of the Armenian Studies Program at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
There is an opinion that 2010 was an unsuccessful year for the Karabakh settlement, despite Russia's activity as a mediator. What is your opinion?
2010 was another wasted year as far as the Karabakh conflict is concerned, that is obvious. In fact, it appears from the rhetoric emanating from the authorities in Azerbaijan, Karabakh and Armenia that we have taken a few steps backward.
What are your expectations of 2011? Do you expect any progress in the peace process?
Unless there is a clear change in the politics of the authorities in question, to begin with in the rhetoric, and in the expression of political will to settle the conflict, I see a worsening of the situation, with great dangers.
In the absence of a genuine effort to resolve the conflict and political readiness to achieve peace through negotiations based on serious compromises on all sides, the only way to achieve a settlement in the near future is an imposition of a formula by the international community led by Russia and Russian diplomacy.
Do you believe that Azerbaijan and Armenia can solve bilateral problems by peaceful means?
I have no doubt that this conflict can be resolved peacefully by all the parties concerned.
Former and present Armenian presidents are confident that Armenians and Azeris are not able to coexist in the neighbourhood. How would you comment on that?
It is not clear what you mean by "coexistence in the neighbourhood". Does it mean one will have eliminated the other or one of these countries will one day pack up and go somewhere else, if the two cannot coexist? History shows that Armenians and Azeris have coexisted for a long time, although there have been problems and conflicts.
I am not sure also what you mean by "former president of Armenia". Ter-Petrosyan, the first president, never expressed such a view nor did he hold such a view. Kocharyan did come close to making such a statement but for most of the time he said he wanted a peaceful resolution; and any resolution implies coexistence. As for Sargsyan, the current president of Armenia, I have not heard him or read anything from him that is close to what you are stating. I may be wrong.
Regardless of who expresses them and why, such views are groundless. History shows otherwise. I also think these are harmful positions. After all, you don't have to be in love with your neighbour in order to coexist peacefully.
Do you believe in the success of public diplomacy between Azerbaijan and Armenia?
Public diplomacy, citizen diplomacy and other such endeavours are extremely important. First because they build confidence; second because they are an obstacle to the process of dehumanization of the "other" that is taking place on all sides. Third because they legitimize the possibility of a peaceful resolution and create a peace environment. Moreover, such efforts may yield new ideas and approaches which governments may want to incorporate in their negotiating positions, although this particular seems unlikely at this point.
Most importantly, such contacts disprove any contention that the two nations cannot coexist.
How realistic are improvements in Armenian-Turkish relations any time soon?
The failed attempt at normalization between the two countries toward the end of 2009 has made the situation worse. While they were negotiating the protocols, official Armenia and Turkey were polite and their rhetoric was mutually respectful. Since then there seems to be less trust and more antagonism, at least in their public discourse.
For good or bad reasons, it seems to me that progress on that front will have to follow progress on the Karabakh conflict front. For a variety of reasons Turkey has been unable to de-link the two issues; at this stage the question of normalization of relations with Armenia is important for Turkey but not critical enough to de-link it from the Karabakh issue. The Erdogan government, enmeshed in so many critical battles within the country, is unwilling or unable to invest political capital in this de-linkage or in de-linkage of bilateral state relations from the issue of the international campaign for the recognition of the genocide.
By and large I do not see a resolution of the question of Turkish-Armenian bilateral relations in the immediate future. That too is unfortunate for all concerned.
Prof. Gerard Libaridian teaches history and is director of the Armenian Studies Program at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. He has authored a number of books. From 1991 to 1997 he held positions in the government of Armenia, including senior advisor to President Levon Ter-Petrosyan and negotiator with Azerbaijan and Turkey.
Leyla Tagiyeva
News.Az