The announcements of the OSCE Minsk group co-chairmen in Vienna on June 22 and the interview given by the OSCE Minsk group American co-chairman, Matthew Bryza revealed the main principles of the Karabagh conflict negotiations being discussed.
I can’t say anything about why they made such announcements and why now, but I wonder whether Armenia is tougher now while negotiating as the current authorities say or have we become weaker as the former authorities assure because several years ago, the package deals of the conflict resolution recommendations presented to the conflicting sides in 1997 and 1998 were also revealed (the package deal and phasic versions of conflict resolution). What do the “phasic” and “package deal” recommendations mean? The “package deal” version contains the solutions of all problems within one draft package deal agreement, as well as determines the status of Karabagh and solution to all problems concerning the conflict. Based on the “phasic” version, the conflict is to be resolved according to several phases and after reaching an agreement on some principles the parties continue their negotiations some time later and thus try to reach a final agreement by going step by step. The main principle that has to be agreed during these negotiations is the determination of Karabagh’s status. Now the approaches of both parties concerning this principle are contradicting, thus the parties leave this issue for the future and postpone determining the status. In spite of the assurances of the current authorities that the draft agreement being discussed now is a “packaged deal”, it is still a “phasic” agreement. In order to prove this, please note that in the abovementioned announcement the co-chairmen said that they had revised their approach and hadn’t tried to solve all the problems in one package. They had also said that they worked according to the following principles: reach tangible progress, but leave several very important issues for the future and have new negotiations in the future. The mentioned announcement says, “With the purpose of determining the final juridical status of Karabagh, it is expected to organize a referendum or public voting in the future, but it is not clear when exactly. The parties have to continue their negotiations to arrange the time and format of the mentioned referendum”. This means that the proposed draft under discussion is a “phasic” one for sure. We wonder what the difference is between the “phasic” draft presented to the presidents in Bucharest recently and the one that had been presented to the parties long before that. Does this mean that Armenia is stronger now? Maybe it’s vice versa. The reader can make his own assumptions too.
“Phasic” draft, 1997
According to this draft, it is suggested that Karabagh take out its forces from the former Autonomous Region of Nagorno Karabagh with the fixed borders of 1988, besides Lachin. It was suggested to create a buffer zone there, which had to be installed along the border of Autonomous Region of Karabagh of 1998 and along the Northern and Southern borders of Lachin. International peacekeeping troops had to be allocated along the borders of Karabagh and Lachin. Parallel to taking out the military forces, the parties had to open the roads, railway, etc. This also provided that refugees could return back to their residencies. As for the security of Karabagh, it had to be protected by the then military troops and security bodies of Karabagh. After all these steps, the parties had to continue negotiating in order to determine the status of Karabagh. As for the status of Karabagh before determination, it had to keep its “status quo”, i.e. continue being a part of Armenia “de-facto”. This means, that according to that proposed draft, the conflicting sides were offered to make a peace agreement guaranteed by the international community, after which Karabagh would continue being a part of Armenia until its status was determined in the future. Meanwhile, a blockade would arise and Armenia could take part in the regional processes and play an important role in the development of the Southern Caucasus region. In 1997, Armenia agreed with that draft as a basis for further negotiations, however with some exceptions. Azerbaijan also agreed with that version, but Karabagh didn’t agree and it was a failure.
“Phasic” draft, 2006, Bucharest
As stated in the announcement of the OSCE co-chairmen in Vienna on June 22, the draft recommended to the presidents last month in Bucharest stated the following: “Taking Armenian military forces out of the Azeri territories surrounding Karabagh according to phases, meanwhile paying attention to the Kelbajar and Lachin regions”. What do they mean by “paying attention”? According to the explanations of the RA foreign affairs minister Vardan Oskanyan, the mentioned term means that Lachin is going to be a corridor connecting Karabagh with Armenia. As for Kelbajar, the minister said that “it can be returned only after organizing a referendum in Karabagh and determining its status”. According to the draft presented in Bucharest, international peacemaking troops are to be allocated in the region and the refugees are to return to “the territories they used to live in and suffered during the Karabagh war”. In spite of this, it is not clear where the mentioned international peacemaking troops will be allocated and there aren’t any concrete numbers either. One of the main factors of this “phasic” negotiation is the fact that even though it postpones the determination of the status of Karabagh, however it clarifies the concrete way of doing that. According to that, after reaching an agreement on all the extremely complicated issues, the parties are to organize a referendum in the future with the purpose of determining the status of Karabagh, but there is no concrete information about the time. I wonder where this referendum will be organized. Does the term “public voting” mean that the referendum will be organized in the whole territory of Azerbaijan as well? According to Oskanyan, only the people of Karabagh will have the right to take part in the referendum and the parties have to continue their negotiations in order to set the certain date for organizing the referendum. As for Karabakh, it will have a “parenthetic status” until then. I don’t know what this term means exactly, but as far as I know, it was agreed by Armenia, but rejected by Azerbaijan.
According to the Armenian foreign affairs ministry, the extremely complicated issues under discussion don’t concern the referendum and it is agreed between the presidents already, but concern overcoming the problems as a result of the war and the queue of solutions. In spite of this, last month the RA foreign affairs ministry announced that the recommendations presented by the OSCE co-chairmen served as a firm basis for continuing the negotiations and that Armenia was ready to continue. It is clear that there is more pressure on Armenia now and in this framework we can bring up the announcement made by Bryza when he said that the level of democracy is higher in Azerbaijan than Armenia; what’s more, he reminded us about the recent Constitutional amendments referendum. It is evident that the co-chairmen are trying to lead the process to the end this year because otherwise it may be prolonged for several more years because of the upcoming parliamentary and presidential elections in Armenia, Karabagh and Azerbaijan. On the one hand, we understand that the co-chairmen want to find a solution this year, but on the other hand we don’t understand why they pressure Armenia if Armenia agrees with the mentioned principles.
Anyway, even though the draft presented in Bucharest remains a myster, its main difference from the one proposed in 1997 is that we hope that there may soon be a referendum in Karabagh in order to determine its status, but we shouldn’t get ahead of ourselves because the sides still have to discuss the time and format. Someone could say that several countries will join Armenia, but the names of those countries will be mentioned in the future.