|
By Harut Sassounian Publisher, The California Courier
Matthew Bryza, the U.S. mediator for Artsakh (Karabagh), discussed in great detail for the first time the critical issues dealing with the behind the scene negotiations on resolving that conflict.
Mr. Bryza is the U.S. Co-Chair of the Minsk Group and Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs. He delivered a speech on the Artsakh conflict at the International Center for Human Rights in Tsakhkadzor, Armenia, on August 7. Mr. Bryza’s lengthy presentation, followed by an extensive question and answer period (19 pages), was transcribed by NEWS.am Armenian news agency.
While Mr. Bryza has regularly met with members of the media during his frequent visits to Armenia and Azerbaijan, often recanting in Yerevan what he reportedly said in Baku, he has never before disclosed the details of the settlement being negotiated between the presidents of the two conflicting countries and the three Co-Chairs of the Minsk Group, composed of France, Russia, and the United States.
The Armenian public certainly appreciates Mr. Bryza’s willingness to discuss the terms of a future agreement on the Artsakh conflict. Nevertheless, one wonders why was Mr. Bryza in such a talkative mood? Was he preparing the Armenian public for the painful compromises that are to be made or was he trying to impress his Washington superiors with his negotiating skills, as he is being considered for an ambassadorial post in Baku?
Mr. Bryza began his remarks by stating that the negotiations for the settlement of the Artsakh conflict are based on the three fundamental principles of the Helsinki Final Act: Self-determination, territorial integrity, and non-use of force.
Claiming that the Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan “right now are on the verge of a breakthrough,” an assertion he has made many times before, Mr. Bryza proceeded to disclose a highly controversial roadmap of the agreement currently under consideration. Mr. Bryza stated that Artsakh would preserve its current status for an “interim period.” Armenians would then turn over to Azerbaijan most of the “seven territories” surrounding Artsakh. After the Azeri refugees who left Artsakh during the war return to their homes, a referendum would be held to determine the final status of Artsakh.
During the question and answer period, Mr. Bryza stated that the Minsk Group Co-Chairs were disappointed that during their July 17 meeting in Moscow, Presidents Sargsyan and Aliyev did not come to an agreement “on several of the final elements of the basic principles,” despite the fact that, during their January meeting in Zurich, they had “agreed on the basic concepts.” He said he expected an agreement in September “on the last few elements of the basic principles that remain not yet agreed.”
When asked if Azerbaijan was making any compromises, Mr. Bryza pointed out Baku’s increasingly accommodating position on the Lachin Corridor which links Artsakh to Armenia, its concern for the security of Artsakh Armenians and their need to run their own affairs. Mr. Bryza further claimed that “Azerbaijan had to give up quite a bit from a position where it was in the beginning when it said it will never talk about self-determination. And, of course, to bring Azerbaijan to that point, Armenia had to give something up as well…. So, both sides are making compromises.”
Mr. Bryza defended the non-recognition of Artsakh by the United States, by pointing out that the government of Armenia has not recognized it either. He said that the reason Armenia does not recognize Artsakh’s independence is that “it knows that if it does that, the chances to negotiate a peaceful settlement finish.”
In response to a complaint from the audience that Artsakh was left out of the negotiations, Mr. Bryza blamed its absence on the Kocharian government. “Until 1998, Karabakh Armenians were formally part of the negotiations, when it was the former government of Armenia who decided to change that situation. It was not the Co-Chairs who made the decision — that was the government of Armenia,” he said. Mr. Bryza did not mention the fact that Azerbaijan had rejected Artsakh’s inclusion in the talks.
Responding to another question, Mr. Bryza made the surprising disclosure that the international peacekeeping troops to be stationed in or around Artsakh would not be armed, simply because they would not be able to compel the two sides not to fight, if they are intent on going to war against each other. He stated that “the Co-Chairs have to be smart and skillful enough to put at place a settlement in which the international peacekeepers will be primarily observers.”
Mr. Bryza candidly told his Armenian audience not to trust the international peacekeepers to secure the peace in Artsakh. He also stated that a “legally binding” referendum to determine the status of Artsakh would be held in several years, after the original Azerbaijani inhabitants, who before the war constituted 20% of the territory’s population, would return to Artsakh.
Mr. Bryza concluded by urging Armenians to accept “a compromise settlement now,” warning that “a decade ago, Armenia was in a much stronger negotiation position!”
The terms of the possible settlement, as outlined by Mr. Bryza, is a disaster waiting to happen to Armenians. They are supposed to first turn over to Azerbaijan practically all of the territories surrounding Artsakh. Then the former Azeri inhabitants of Artsakh are to return, after which a referendum would be held on the status of Artsakh, under the watchful eyes of UNARMED international peacekeepers. If Azerbaijan, at a future date, uses its massive petrodollars to acquire sophisticated weaponry and invade Artsakh, particularly after Armenians have given up the buffer zones they are currently holding, the population of Artsakh risks being completely destroyed.
From the Armenian point of view, the only acceptable solution to the Artsakh conflict would be to either maintain the status quo or to agree to a package deal that would require Azerbaijan’s recognition of Artsakh’s independence and the establishment of a demilitarized zone on the Azeri side of the border, before giving up a single inch of land or allowing the return of a single Azeri refugee! |
Matthew Bryza’s Plans for Artsakh: Formula for Disaster for Armenians
Comments
3 responses to “Matthew Bryza’s Plans for Artsakh: Formula for Disaster for Armenians”
-
ARMENIA NEVER WILL RETURN ARMENIAN LANDS to azeries!!!
Armenia didn’t begin the WAR, just ARTSAKH declare the INDEPENDENCE! After Azerbaijan begun the war, which ARMENIANS WON!!!!!!!!!!
Why Matthew Bryza and etc. have forgotten this TRUTH!
The STATUS of ARTSAKH is OUT of DISPUTE!!! REMEMBER FOREVERE!!!
P.S.
Last week in the Azeri press disseminated information that the Ministry of National Security of Azerbaijan interrogated 43 citizens voted in favor of the Armenian singers Inga and Anush Arshakyan at the Eurovision Song Contest 2009. In this regard, the European Broadcasting Union EBU started their own investigation.
SHAME ON YOU!!!Many people in Armenia voted for a song performed by Azeri singer (also for Turkish singer) and no one went as far as to call KGB!
-
Armenian National Committee of America
1711 N Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036
Tel. (202) 775-1918 * Fax. (202) 775-5648 * [email protected]ANCA CONFRONTS BRYZA BIAS ON NAGORNO KARABAGH
WASHINGTON, DC – Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) Chairman Ken Hachikian today sent a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton outlining the concerns of the Armenian American
community regarding the recent biased remarks by Matt Bryza, the U.S. Co-Chair to the OSCE Minsk Group charged with helping to negotiate a settlement of the Nagorno Karabagh conflict.The four-page letter, dated August 20, 2009, addressed, in detail, recent unfair, inaccurate, and counter-productive statements by Bryza, and, more broadly, expressed the view that his actions reflect the failings of an Administration that, having already broken a series of pledges to Armenian Americans, is now in the process of effectively handing over decision-making on U.S. policy on Armenian issues to the Turkish government: In the letter, Hachikian stressed: “Today, seven months after the start of the Obama-Biden Administration, we are seriously concerned that this Administration has abdicated its responsibilities by
effectively outsourcing our nation’s foreign policy with respect to Armenian issues to the Republic of Turkey, as every single policy dealing with Armenia has been made along the lines that Turkey has dictated, rather than along the sound principles of morality and democracy that you, President Obama and Vice President Biden unambiguously articulated during your presidential campaigns last year.”The full text of the letter is provided below.
#####
August 20, 2009
The Honorable Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street N.W.
Washington, DC 20520Dear Secretary Clinton,
I am writing on behalf of the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) to voice the Armenian American community’s grave concerns regarding recent unfair, inaccurate, and counter-productive statements by the U.S. Co-Chair of the OSCE Minks Group, Matthew Bryza, regarding the Republics of Armenia and Nagorno
Karabagh.Mr. Bryza’s recent actions as a part of the Obama-Biden
Administration, as well as his past conduct during his time as Deputy Assistant Secretary, as U.S. Co-Chair of the OSCE Minsk Group, as a senior National Security Council staff member, and as an Eurasian energy advisor for the Department, reflect a pattern of consistent, material, and transparent bias against Armenia and Nagorno Karabagh. His behavior in the months since President Obama’s inauguration are especially troubling because they stand in
such dramatic contrast to the public commitments that the
President, Vice President, and that you made to the American electorate during the 2008 Presidential campaign.As you may know, the ANCA has consistently registered public concerns regarding Mr. Bryza’s biased diplomacy on Armenia-related matters, including his pro-Azerbaijani bias in the Nagorno Karabagh peace process and his longstanding role as a promoter of U.S. complicity in Turkey’s denials of the Armenian Genocide. Our
community’s attention was again drawn to his representation of our government’s policies following a speech he delivered, on August 7, 2009, in Tsakhkadzor, Armenia, as well as by news reports that he is being considered as a candidate to serve as our next Ambassador to Azerbaijan. In his remarks in Tsakhkadzor, Mr. Bryza, once again, made a number of statements that directly contradict the President’s pledge to work toward a “lasting and durable settlement Nagorno Karabagh conflict that is agreeable to all parties, and based upon America’s founding commitment to the principles of democracy and self determination.”Most notably, Mr. Bryza has argued that the fatally flawed Madrid principles are a balanced set of concessions, when, at their heart, they represent nothing more than a major, irreversible, up-front concession of fundamental security on the part of the Armenian side with only a vague promise that some undefined process, involving undetermined actors, will take place regarding Nagorno Karabagh’s status, according to his own words, “at some point” in the future.
The President of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, has made it painfully clear that he will not even honor this weakly worded and effectively meaningless expectation. President Aliyev has chosen to reserve his public comments for threats of renewed aggression and assurances that, even if Armenia were to surrender territories, “it may take a year, maybe 10 years, maybe 100 years, or it will never be possible” to reach the point where Azerbaijan would
consent to a mere “discussion” of Nagorno Karabagh’s status.This “compromise” is not a fair deal, but rather a one-sided
surrender of Nagorno Karabagh’s rights, status, and security, in large measure, engineered by Mr. Bryza. This settlement, which would cement Armenia into profound strategic and military disadvantages and ensure continued regional instability, is, at present, being imposed upon the Armenian people through the full force and leverage of the U.S. government.In his remarks, Mr. Bryza compounded his biased defense of these flawed principles by falsely claiming that the Azerbaijani side has made a “concession” by agreeing to merely discuss the matter of Nagorno Karabagh’s self-determination. The fact is that Azerbaijan has neither the moral right nor the practical ability to grant either freedom or independence to Nagorno Karabagh. He also, during the question and answer period, assigned to the people of
Nagorno Karabagh a second-tier right to self-determination, one that requires the assent of Azerbaijan, as opposed to the right to independence enjoyed today by the people of Kosovo and recognized officially by the U.S. government despite the objections of Serbia.Also of profound concern in Mr. Bryza’s comments at Tsakhkadzor was his false assertion that Nagorno Karabagh’s exclusion from the OSCE Minsk Group peace process was driven by Armenia’s request to the others parties to the negotiations. This is simply not the case.
In addition to the concerns I have outlined regarding Mr. Bryza’s recent comments, we remain seriously troubled that he has continued to stand in the way of broad-based dialogue between the governments and peoples of the U.S. and Nagorno Karabagh. In his capacity as OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chair, instead of promoting open communication, he has enforced a set of outdated and counter-productive restrictions that block the hope for greater mutual understanding. He has, as well, even as recently as the current foreign aid cycle, failed to facilitate desperately needed U.S. development assistance
programs in Nagorno Karabagh. Finally, he has undermined his own credibility by making the patently false claim that neither he nor his State Department colleagues have applied pressure to Armenia regarding the settlement of Nagorno Karabagh.The concerns I have raised regarding the one-sided Nagorno Karabagh diplomacy that Mr. Bryza has conducted on behalf of the U.S. government reflect our community’s broader disappointment regarding the Obama-Biden Administration’s failure to honor its many pledges
on Armenian issues. Foremost among these, of course, is the President’s broken promise to recognize the Armenian Genocide. Rather than upholding this crystal clear covenant, the Administration has, instead, aggressively attacked the spirit and letter of this commitment by promoting Turkey’s artificial “roadmap” and pressuring Armenia to accept a “historical commission” that, in yet another transparent attempt by Ankara to perpetuate its campaign of genocide denial, calls into question the
veracity of the Armenian Genocide. The Administration has, in addition, sharply cut economic and other aid to Armenia, despite the President’s pledge to maintain assistance levels. This pattern of behavior represents a breach of faith with Armenian Americans, fundamentally damages our government’s friendship with Armenia, and effectively eliminates our country’s ability to act as an honest
broker in the region.Today, seven months after the start of the Obama-Biden
Administration, we are seriously concerned that this Administration has abdicated its responsibilities by effectively outsourcing our nation’s foreign policy with respect to Armenian issues to the Republic of Turkey, as every single policy dealing with Armenia has been made along the lines that Turkey has dictated, rather than
along the sound principles of morality and democracy that you, President Obama and Vice President Biden unambiguously articulated during your presidential campaigns last year.Thank you for your consideration of our views. We respectfully request an immediate personal meeting between you and the Armenian American community’s civic, religious, and charitable leaders so that we can address these matters in greater detail.
Sincerely,
Kenneth V. Hachikian
Chairman -
Hey ROZA & ALLA (a.k.a. The RAT),
Cry all you want! Whine all you want! Have as much cheese with that whine as you want! Considering Armenia’s well known history of attempted land grabs from Turkey, Azerbaijan (before, during and especially after WWI, and then again in 1992), and from Georgia (Dec. 1919), and each time getting your pathetic asses kicked back out again (we’re still waiting on the 1992 deal, which will be happening, and you WILL be returning that which you stole!), why would anyone in their right minds even listen to you pathetic whiners and liars?!!! Your bribe money will only work so far! There are still many honest people in this world that would rather spit in your faces than to take a penny from any of you dashnaks!! So stop your crying and just deal with what will soon become a reality!
Leave a Reply