Will we lose Karabagh?
I am not sure if this message will eventualy get me in trouble as teh phrasing of teh new amendments to the media and information is somewhat unclear. Nonetheless, I think this is very important for us to know.
you can read this news on several sites, reuters, google, yahoo.
On March 14, UN General Assembly adopted a resolution recognizing Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity and demanding Armenian forces to withdraw:
The reolution adopted by UN General Assembly says:
1. General Assembly respected for sovereignty of Azerbaijan and recognized its territorial integrity within borders adopted by international laws.
2. General Assembly demands withdrawal of Armenian military forces from occupied lands urgently, completely and undoubtedly.
3. General Assembly recognizes the right on returning the population to their lands and paying compensation to them.
4. General Assembly supports to ensure security of Azerbaijani and Armenian Communities of Nagorno Karabakh and provide condition for their activity.
5. General assembly supports the activity of OSCE MG co-chairs within international legal norms and wished them to increase efforts to gain the peace.
6. General Assembly asked for UN General Secretary to make a report about execution of resolution on situation in Azerbaijani occupied lands in 63rd session.
Pakistani representative spoke on the behalf of Organization of Islamic Conference. He stated that they supported Azerbaijan’s position and noted that there were one million people exiled from their lands as a result of aggressive policy pursued by Armenia and stressed that Azerbaijani religious, historical heritage was ruined in Nagorno Karabakh. He noted that OIC condemned aggressive policy of Armenia every time and called members of organization to vote for resolution . Uganda representative stated that Azerbaijanis are the victim of the war and noted that they support them. Turkish and Ukrainian representatives stated the same position.
Armenian ambassador to UN Armen Martirosyan noted that official Baku caused damage to negotiations raising the resolution in UN. He protested position of Ukrainian, Turkish and OIC representatives. Irrespective of this, 39 states voted for the document, 7 sates voted against it. 100 states took neutral position. The states against resolution were Russia, US, France, India, Angola and Vanuatu.
you can read this news on several sites, reuters, google, yahoo.
On March 14, UN General Assembly adopted a resolution recognizing Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity and demanding Armenian forces to withdraw:
The reolution adopted by UN General Assembly says:
1. General Assembly respected for sovereignty of Azerbaijan and recognized its territorial integrity within borders adopted by international laws.
2. General Assembly demands withdrawal of Armenian military forces from occupied lands urgently, completely and undoubtedly.
3. General Assembly recognizes the right on returning the population to their lands and paying compensation to them.
4. General Assembly supports to ensure security of Azerbaijani and Armenian Communities of Nagorno Karabakh and provide condition for their activity.
5. General assembly supports the activity of OSCE MG co-chairs within international legal norms and wished them to increase efforts to gain the peace.
6. General Assembly asked for UN General Secretary to make a report about execution of resolution on situation in Azerbaijani occupied lands in 63rd session.
Pakistani representative spoke on the behalf of Organization of Islamic Conference. He stated that they supported Azerbaijan’s position and noted that there were one million people exiled from their lands as a result of aggressive policy pursued by Armenia and stressed that Azerbaijani religious, historical heritage was ruined in Nagorno Karabakh. He noted that OIC condemned aggressive policy of Armenia every time and called members of organization to vote for resolution . Uganda representative stated that Azerbaijanis are the victim of the war and noted that they support them. Turkish and Ukrainian representatives stated the same position.
Armenian ambassador to UN Armen Martirosyan noted that official Baku caused damage to negotiations raising the resolution in UN. He protested position of Ukrainian, Turkish and OIC representatives. Irrespective of this, 39 states voted for the document, 7 sates voted against it. 100 states took neutral position. The states against resolution were Russia, US, France, India, Angola and Vanuatu.
posted by Raffi N at 3:33 PM
13 Comments:
the resolution is compleltly non binding and out of 192 countries just around 37 voted for it which were mostly countries from islamic conference organizations plus georgia. armenia,united states,france and russia voted against and more than 100 countries stayed neutral.Iran didnt vote at all.
I find UN resolutions to be quite political and often lame, and this vote by 37 members is a perfect case of that.
Also, Azerbaijan does not nearly have a million refugees, but I wonder exactly what the peace deal that they are "close to" these days says about the exact lands to be handed back. If the Armenians are eventually going to return the lands south of Karabakh (that's what everything I've read would lead me to believe), then I think it would be interesting to consider letting the former Azeri residents return today to those parts in the south (unarmed of course!). Just start rebuilding and living. If Azerbaijan doesn't agree, you can announce it over the airwaves and the refugees can return via Georgia/Yerevan.
things like this are usually referred to retroactively...this is what worries me.
Also the press has covered the resolution in an adversely negative way for armenia. And that is alarming as well.
please link to where you found this. I couldn't find any mention of it online.
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iuDA3dfUU94OmQxqW2F1qEVMrXog
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/03/15/news/UN-GEN-UN-Azerbaijan-Armenia.php
http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN14438976
Armenia is not going to lose Karabagh. As it has been stated before, the UN resolution is non-binding. Furthermore, as far as I understand there is no talk of returning Karabagh during the current negotiations. They are only talking about returning the Azeri lands. The talks right now are at the stage where they are deciding how wide the path between Karabagh and Armenia should be. Besides, in my opinion it is better to prolong the talks as much as possible. If we can keep the Azeri lands for another 40-50 years, there will be no talk of returning them any longer. We'll just keep them, just like the Turks have taken over our lands and kept them (I understand that the historical background in that situation is a little bit different since we were under Ottoman rule at that time). Nevertheless, it is rare that newly populated lands are returned. We should do the same with the Azeri lands. We should build on them, populate them and tell them that they can only get it back if they pay us back the amount of investment we have put in. The Americans did that with the Mexicans, and now there is no talk of returning those lands. The area we have taken from the Azeris is worthless piece of land right now. Azerbaijan may not even want it back if we put a high price on it.
the reason I posted was to show the opinion of other countries regarding a cause dear to us. It seems more countries are ready to voice their opposing vote than those willing to cast an in favor vote. This should tell us at least where we stand in regards to our "friends".
Why would Ukraine (a Catholic, Christian state) vote on the side of Azerbaijan - especially with its historic ties to Armenia? that was my initial concern and not the fact that this UN resolution will force us to do anything.
I would like to comment on the current trend of negotiations. We lost golden oppurtunities in 96 and 97 to establish a peace deal. IF anyone remembers, back then, kelbajar and lachin were never on the negotiating tables, now azerbaijan wants it all and they have the military budget to back it up. To everyone who thinks the mighty russians are with us..PLease remember that russia is looking out for their own interests. AT one point, Russia's interest will change, and it is our chance to make peace now and hold on to more land then we will end up with if we chose to keep all of the lands. For the person who wishes to keep every region of azeri land, please go to horadiz for 1 week and stay at the border, you will see what the 17yr old soldier is going through. THere has been close to 200 deaths on the border during "peace time". People do not buy weapons if they dont intend on using them. My point is that the next karabagh war will not be like the last....during the war 91-94..the actual "real war" started in mid 93-94..when HEavy artillary was used.. hunting rifles and a few grads do not constitute war..when the next war starts, both sides have a lot more destructive fire power. Apparently when robert came to power, he really thought that a package deal can work..obviously he was wrong and he reverted back to the step by step plan that levon had suggested..however, now azeris are much more nationalistic bolstered by oil profits and less willing to negotiate. AS far as the UN resolution, yes it was really bad for us, however, in all honostly no body really takes UN resolutions that seriously. Israel has been breaking UN resolutions for 60 years. But the day will come when russia's interests might change... Russia is building a multi-billion dollar pipeline underneath the black sea..this has never been done before( of this caliber)..directly to turkey. Whoever believes the russians are with the armenians forever is very wrong..the day might come that russia will decide that armenia's control of karabagh is hindering its regional expansion..we have to think about this and put nationalistic feelings aside. Making peace is much more difficult then making war.
Greg, I think you are remembering wrong. There were no "golden opportunities" in 96/97. Azerbaijan had agreed neither to independence, nor to Armenians keeping the Lachin Corridor.
Raffi N, you're right, I'm disappointed with Ukraine and some others, but impressed at who DID vote against the resolution. USA, France, Russia, India.
if you remember, azerbaijan always talked about 5 occupied lands (zangelan, khubatlu, jebrayil, fizuli, aghdam, and horadiz)..now they say 7(kelbajar and lachin )..you can look at the old documents of you dont believe me.. the numbers changed to ...occupying 14% of azeri land..and now they say 20%. Everyone who believes that the karabagh solution will be on our side if things go on as they are now..meaning so much time passes that eventually it will be annexed to us and no refugee would want to come back..will regret their statements and be trully ashamed when they see the realities of the next war. It is inevitable..unfortuanately.
What I don't remember is any peace plan including either independence, or full Armenian retention of the entire corridor - so that's why I don't understand what golden opportunity was being missed. I do remember a "phased settlement" which Azerbaijan wanted, which included an immediate withdrawal from the southern 5 territories, in exchange for opening the borders with Armenia. However since they could close the borders again the day after they got their land back, it sounded like a rather "crappy opportunity" to me.
If you have some references to the contrary, I'd be interested in seeing them.
I don't think war is either likely or inevitable... I don't really see it as beneficial for either side at this point.
I'm also upset that Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova all sided with Azerbaijan on this, despite their close historical and cultural ties with both Armenia and the Armenian people.
They could have at least been neutral.
What I really would like to know is why Vanuatu supported Armenia on this . I guess there must be Armenian diaspora there as well.
<< Home