Is Azerbaijan getting ready to attack Armenia?
“The Azeri army will attack Armenia in a few days,” reports Media Forum (Azerbaijan), with reference to www.hurhaber.com (Turkey). The web-site says that “this information has been provided by diplomatic sources.” “The Azeri authorities have been seriously preparing for liberating Karabakh and have already decided to start a war.” The intensive contacts between the US and Azerbaijan are also due to the forthcoming military operation in Karabakh. Referring to diplomatic sources, www.hurhaber.com says that US President George Bush will receive Azeri representatives on April 20 and notes that Bush approves of Azerbaijan’s plans to start a war in Karabakh. The web-site also says that the military operation in Karabakh may impact the world oil prices. (PanARMENIAN.Net)
“The vanguard of our army, our officers are fully prepared for war. But we still continue training them to make them even more professional,” says the director of the Training Center of the Azeri Defense Ministry, Maj. Gen. Lankaran Aliyev. He says that “the Armenian army is far behind the Azeri one in both psychological and physical training.” “The Armenians rely on the Russian base in their country. That’s why their army is much weaker than ours,” says Aliyev. He notes that the Azeri youth have shown increasing interest in military service in the last years. They come to the army prepared. “We have a normal base for training our soldiers in line with the NATO standards. Our officers are much better trained than the Armenian ones. But I don’t think that this is enough. We have yet much to do to make our officers even more efficient,” says Aliyev. (APA)
The director of the “Peace, Democracy and Culture” Research-Analytical Center, military and conflict expert, veteran of the Afghani and Karabakh wars Rauf Rajabov gives an interview to Day.Az (abridged).
“In early 2006 the Azeri Government set up the Defense Industry Ministry and budgeted $600 mln for the army. Is the army having plenty of problems – from bullying and corruption to lack of military doctrine – ready to ‘digest’ such big money?
The analysis of the Azeri army’s non-combat losses of the last few months has shown that no real reforms are being held in our defense ministry. But this is a kind of taboo in Azerbaijan. The same is for the use of budgetary assignments. I would like to note from the very beginning that I am talking about ordinary military units rather than a few elite and well trained groups.
What enemy will our army face if the war resumes?
The Armenian army has almost 61,000 servicemen (and 300,000-strong mobilization reserve). Jan 1 2001 Yerevan declared to have 102 tanks, 204 infantry fighting vehicles, including 677 units not subject to the TCAFE restrictions (Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe — REGNUM), 225 122-mm and more guns, 8 planes and 12 helicopters, 32 ‘Scad’ surface-to-surface ballistic missile units. As of today, the land forces of Armenia have 4 motorized brigades, 10 infantry regiments, 1 artillery brigade, 2 anti-aircraft brigades. The period of deployment of the uniquely strong Russian base in Gyumri is 25 years, but can be prolonged for an indefinite time. The duty of the Russians is to guard the borders with Turkey and Iran and to act within the CIS United Air Defense System. Besides ordinary motorized infantry, 90 tanks, 200 armored vehicles and 100 guns, the base has 25 MiG-29 fighters, 20 troop carriers and 4 S-300V anti-aircraft missile systems. No other Russian division this kind of equipment. The personnel is 3,500 people, with many of them ethnic Armenians with Russian citizenship. The headquarters of the 102nd base are in the Big Fortress, built by Cossacks in 1828.
And what armed forces does the so-called ‘NKR’ have?
Nagorno Karabakh is not a subject of the international law and, consequently, is not a member of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe. Hence, the territory of the Karabakh region is not inspected by international experts. Some analysts say that Nagorno Karabakh has 20,000 men in active troops, 60,000 men in reserve and 4,000 men in various security services. It also has 316 tanks (300 more ‘hidden’), 324 infantry fighting vehicles, 322 122-mm and more caliber guns, 44 multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS) and modernized S-123 and S-75 anti aircraft units. The whole 250-km contact line is a two-echelon field work. Also there, are 30,000 Armenian servicemen. The hardware and arms deployed in Karabakh is by no means subject to the TCAFE. This does not mean, however, that we should tremble before the enemy. No, we simply should know about it as much as possible and think in real categories: facile optimism has not yet given anybody any good…” (Day.Az)
PanARMENIAN.Net has interviewed First Vice President of the Academy of Geopolitical Studies, Colonel General, Doctor of Historical Sciences Leonid Ivashov.
How serious are Azerbaijan’s statements on readiness to resumption of hostilities on the Karabakh front?
Security issues should always be treated seriously. Given the complexity of the Nagorno Karabakh problem, security is the main task of the state and the major responsibility of the President and the Government. Only via military balance it’s possible to preserve political settlement. The threat of an armed conflict and resumption of hostilities is quite real. Keeping the situation within a political settlement is possible only via balance of military potentials. Domination of military force of one of the parties can result in a new bloodshed.
Which is Russia’s policy towards settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict?
The present Russian leadership lacks a precise strategy on the South Caucasus. In relations with Azerbaijan and Armenia, Russia tries to keep the balance of friendly interaction. This line has helped to maintain peace in Karabakh for many years already.
It seems lately that Russia is trying to strengthen its position in the South Caucasus by resorting to not very popular means. Is this true?
The reasonable part of the Russian leadership is trying to maintain its presence and influence in the Caucasus. It’s important for Russia to prevent destabilization in the North Caucasus, deployment of NATO military bases and projection of military force inland. In my opinion, Armenia is Russia’s foothold in the South Caucasus. At the same time, it is vitally important for Armenia to have allied relations with Russia. If Armenia relies on promises made by the West, it will lose its state system and independence.
Won’t Georgia’s and Azerbaijan’s possible escape from Russia’s influence leave Armenia isolated in its hope for the good will of Russia, who may well act the same way it did in 1921 by concluding an alliance with Ataturk?
Armenia has the right to establish relations with whoever it wants. But if it conflicts with Russia’s interests, Moscow can transform cooperation into the level of mutually beneficial relations without any political or economic preferences. However, such situation will conflict with Armenia’s national interests and will result in the isolation of the republic and even in its collapse. A large Armenian Diaspora lives in Russia. I think it could make a great contribution to the development of the Russian-Armenian allied relations.” (PanARMENIAN.Net)
If one cocks an ear to what the Kremlin has been saying recently, one will see that new war is not the worst way for Russia: war is better for that country than the peace proposed by the West, says 525th Daily in response to General Ivashov’s interview. It should also be noted that, unlike his US and French colleagues, the Russian co-chair of the OSCE MG Yuri Merzlyakov makes no demonstrative calls for reconciliation. “In this light, the statements of General Ivashov, who was the chief of Russia’s general staff before 2001, may well be taken as Moscow’s attitude to this problem. Besides, the organization Ivashov heads now is one of the leading security studies centers in Russia.”
The most acceptable way for Azerbaijan to solve the Karabakh problem is war, say 83% of the visitors of the web-site of Times.az independent daily. Apr 14 the daily summed up the results of its one-month on-line voting. 14.7% of the visitors hope for diplomatic solution and only 2.2% don’t care at all. (Noyan Tapan)
The mediators’ efforts
“War will be the worst scenario for the parties to the Karabakh conflict. War is new deaths, new refugees, money spent in vain instead of being spent on development. War will solve nothing. However it ends, the sides will find themselves in pre-war situation again,” De Facto reports the French co-chair of the OSCE MG Bernard Fassier as saying in Yerevan on April 14.
“Under no circumstances can war be a solution. That’s why we officially call on the sides to look to the future, to build peace despite past tragedies. One can’t drive a car by constantly looking into the backward mirror. He will certainly get into accident. You should not keep remembering who was the first who started the war, who was the first in history who settled down in Karabakh…,” says Fassier. “After Rambouillet the negotiating process has not died. It is alive.” Speaking metaphorically, the sides and the mediators came to Rambouillet with a half-full glass and just failed to fill it a bit more. Of course, the mediators understood that they would not be able to fill the glass at once, but they hoped to add a bit to its content. They failed. But the half-full glass was not overturned. And so, the negotiating process is continued,” says Fassier. He says that the OSCE MG US co-chair Steven Mann will visit the region after the Easter and he too may visit Yerevan and Baku in late Apr-early May. “All these visits are not private but are coordinated with the capitals of the co-chair states. On April 15, I will go to Moscow to meet not only with my Russian colleague Yuri Merzlyakov but also with Russian Deputy Defense Minister Karasin, who deals with the Karabakh problem,” says Fassier. Besides, in early May the OSCE MG co-chairs will hold a consultation in Moscow, after which they will visit the region all together. This may well be followed by new meetings. The objective of these visits is to pave the way for a new meeting of the Armenian and Azeri presidents. “I can’t give the date and venue of that meeting. Nothing is clear yet. We hope that we will be able to organize it in June-July. Everything depends on what the presidents will agree to. The presidents of the co-chair countries believe that — the sooner the better,” says Fassier.
“I would like to say that if we hope to organize a new meeting of the presidents, this means that we are ready to present additional ideas for them to enrich, enlarge and develop the principles we have already worked on. I also mean some new ideas, but not new talks or a new format. The format of the talks is and will be the OSCE MG, represented by the US, France and Russia. But, at the same time, this format is being adapted. That is, we are no longer satisfied with joint visits and mission. We are firmly resolved to use any occasion for resolving the conflict. For example, we used the visits of Oskanyan and Mamedyarov (Armenian and Azeri FMs — REGNUM) to Moscow and Washington. Some people may think that we have changed the format. No. We have just adapted of the content of the format,” says Fassier.
Commenting on Fassier’s speech, the expert of the Armenian Center for National and International Studies Stepan Safaryan says to A1+ that in this format the Karabakh peace process is doomed to failure, and the co-chairs perfectly know that. “Simply, they want to present the final picture of failure so the world community apply serious measures against the presidents. The world community sees that the presidents are not willing to resolve the conflict and are just making empty statements, while the co-chairs are trying to give them one more chance,” says Safaryan. He is sure that 2006 will be the last such chance.
Radio Liberty reports the Russian and US co-chairs of the OSCE MG Yuri Merzlyakov and Steven Mann to meet in Moscow on April 19. “He (Mann) is going to the region firmly resolved and expecting serious and fruitful meetings,” Merzlyakov says in an interview to RL. In early May the OSCE MG co-chairs are visiting the region. If they agree on a new meeting of the Armenian and Azeri presidents, will this mean that the presidents have accepted the MG’s new proposals? To this question Merzlyakov said: “No. Perhaps, after the meeting part of the proposals will be accepted, and the rest left for revision. All these issues should be discussed during the president’s meeting.” RL reports that the MG has already told the presidents about their new proposals. And whether they are acceptable or not will become known after the co-chairs’ visit to the region. While the Armenian and Azeri FMs will be in Moscow to attend the April 20 meeting of the CIS FMs, Merzlyakov will meet with Azeri FM Elmar Mamedryarov and, probably, with Armenian FM Vardan Oskanyan. The latter meeting is not certain as Oskanyan will stay in Moscow for a very short time.
“It is early yet to speak about the MG’s new proposals for the Karabakh conflict settlement. The proposals should first be grouped and formulated so we can say something about them. We will express our opinion only if a specific proposal is made,” the director of the foreign relations department of the Azeri president’s staff Novruz Mamedov says to APA. He believes that decisive are the positions of the sides rather than of the co-chairs: “The sides should make some changes in their positions, should take constructive stance and serious steps for solving the problem.” Commenting on the statements of the French co-chair Bernard Fassier that based on the last proposals the sides can achieve 80% of what they want and of the Russian co-chair Yuri Merzlyakov that if the sides get 50% of what they claim, the co-chairs will be able to consider their mission fulfilled, Mamedov says that the co-chairs’ proposals are based on their personal views: “Even their views do not coincide. Our key task is to liberate our occupied territories, to repatriate displaced people and to ensure the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan in line with the international law.”
Has Armenia changed its position on Nagorno Karabakh?
“Until recently we have said that the status of Nagorno Karabakh must be finalized before Armenia starts discussing the elimination of the conflict consequences: territories, refugees, security measures,” Armenian FM Vardan Oskanyan said at the opening of the 8th meeting of the EU-Armenia inter-parliamentary cooperation commission in Yerevan April 18. He said that this position has changed: “If Azerbaijan agrees that the Nagorno Karabakh people has a right to self-determination — if not at once then, at least, in the future — the Armenian side is ready already today to start discussing the problems of territories, refugees and security.”
Oskanyan said that this is “a serious concession by the Armenian side.” He said that the Azeri side has not yet reacted to this proposal, and today it is necessary to work with the Azeris more so “they take a step towards Armenians.” Commenting on one more serious issue – the statements of Azerbaijan that the conflict may be resolved by war, Oskanyan said: “If this conflict had a military solution, it would have already been resolved. But there is no such solution: there have already been two wars, and Armenians have won both of them. But we do not consider themselves as victors. We have won the battle, but the threat of war is still existent as Azerbaijan continues making warlike declarations. We need peace.” Oskanyan urged the Europeans to force the Azeris to stop their militarist rhetoric. “They should be clearly told that nobody will allow them to start a war against Armenia. This is very important, and I believe that the European Parliament should be involved in this process. Azerbaijan must understand that there is no other solution to the conflict than peace.” (Azg)
Yorumlar kapatıldı.