Author: Harut Sassounian

For many years, the Armenian-American community has been dissatisfied with United States policy on Artsakh (Nagorno Karabagh).

Under the guise of neutrality, OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chair James Warlick and his predecessors have put the blame on both sides of the conflict each time that Azerbaijan has opened fire on Armenia and Artsakh. Such an unfair approach has encouraged Pres. Aliyev to escalate his attacks.

To eliminate or at least minimize such bloody aggression, 85 members of Congress recently signed a joint letter urging the Obama Administration to implement the following three steps regarding the border between the two countries: 1) withdraw the snipers; 2) increase the number of international monitors; and 3) deploy gunfire locators. Not surprisingly, Azerbaijan has rejected all three proposals, while Armenia, Artsakh, and the Minsk Group of mediators (France, Russia, and United States) have accepted them.

Last week, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce held a classified briefing with Amb. Warlick concerning the implementation of the proposals which he and Cong. Eliot Engel had initiated. Before the closed-door meeting, the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) had circulated a set of 10 suggested questions for Amb. Warlick. While it not known if these questions were raised during the congressional briefing, the Obama Administration should be asked to respond publicly to the 10 questions so that everyone becomes aware of its position on the Artsakh conflict.

To ensure that an official answer is received, I suggest the posting of these questions on the White House website, under the “Petitions” section. The website states that the Obama Administration will issue a formal response in 60 days to any petition that gathers over 100,000 signatures within 30 days of its posting. Azeris have already taken advantage of this unique opportunity by posting on the White House website two anti-Armenian petitions which gathered 105,686 and 126,828 signatures respectively. As expected, the White House did issue a statement in response to the two Azeri petitions.

Below are the 10 ANCA questions which should be posted as a petition on the White House website:

1) What specific steps, if any, has the U.S. government taken to ensure the implementation of the Royce-Engel peace proposals, specifically with regard to an agreement on the non-deployment of snipers, the addition of observers, and the deployment of gunfire locator systems along the line of contact?

2) The State Department has been both very vocal and highly specific about what it believes the Armenian side must concede. Is the U.S. government willing to match this public diplomacy with equally high-profile and similarly concrete demands upon Azerbaijan?

3) What are the specific facts, legal arguments, and policy considerations that led our government to officially recognize Kosovo but not Nagorno Karabakh?

4) Does the Azerbaijani government’s record of domestic repression and corruption in any way impact how our government views Azerbaijan’s claim to extend its governance over Nagorno Karabakh?

5) Why has Azerbaijan’s well documented (and video-taped) destruction of the medieval Armenian Cemetery in Djulfa never been mentioned in either the State Department’s Human Rights or Religious Freedom reports?

6) What is the U.S. government’s current request, if any, regarding the re-incarceration of admitted and still unrepentant axe-murderer Ramil Safarov?

7) What is the U.S. policy concerning the Azerbaijani government’s travel restrictions related to U.S. citizens of Armenian heritage?

8) What is the U.S. policy regarding NATO member states, notably Turkey, making sales or transfers of advanced, offensive weaponry to Azerbaijan?

9) What specific restrictions exist regarding travel and communication between the citizens and officials of the United States and Nagorno Karabakh? What are the justifications for any such restrictions of these freedoms? What, if any, are the perceived benefits of such restrictions?

10) What interests do you believe have been served, if any, by official U.S. public restraint in challenging Azerbaijan’s high-profile anti-Armenian incitements, threats, and cross-border aggression?

I believe that a well-publicized petition can gather much more than 100,000 signatures within 30 days of its posting on the White House website, particularly if prominent individuals with a large number of followers endorse the petition.

Given the joyful spirit of the holiday season, I wanted to dedicate my article to a cheerful subject. However, when I saw the text of the bizarre Resolution submitted to Azerbaijan’s Parliament on Christmas Eve, I knew that I could not pick a more disgustingly amusing topic.

The proposed Azeri bill is in response to the U.S. House Resolution 4264 (Azerbaijan Democracy Act of 2015) introduced by Helsinki Commission Chair Cong. Chris Smith (R-NJ) on December 16, calling for denial of U.S. entry visas to Azerbaijan’s leaders, their business partners, as well as security, law enforcement, and judicial officials. The Resolution also demands the curtailment of U.S. economic and energy projects with Azerbaijan.

Cong. Smith criticized Azerbaijan’s government for jailing journalists, opposition leaders and human rights activists, holding fraudulent elections, and violating rights of religious minorities.

To counter Cong. Smith’s initiative, Rovshan Rzayev, Deputy Chair of Azerbaijan’s Parliamentary Committee on Legal Policy, fearlessly rushed to propose a counter-Resolution on December 24 that would:

1) Refuse entry to Azerbaijan of: U.S. officials and family members; Senators and House members involved in discrediting Azerbaijan; politicians cooperating with Armenian Diaspora organizations; journalists, representatives of Non-Governmental Organizations, and experts conducting a “smear campaign against Azerbaijan”; Americans who have earned “huge funds as a result of their collaboration with U.S. authorities”; politicians elected “with the support of the Armenian Diaspora” and lobbying groups; persons involved in fraud in U.S. elections; and finally, those “opposing U.S. ratification of international human rights treaties”!
2) Break all business ties between Azerbaijani and American companies;
3) Ban U.S. Non-Governmental Organizations from implementing programs in Azerbaijan and close down their bank accounts; terminate activities in Azerbaijan of NGOs funded by the U.S. government and Congress; end all “cooperation with the United States in the fields of trade, energy, military and security;” withdraw Azeri troops from joint military operations in Afghanistan; prohibit transit of American military and civilian goods through Azerbaijan; and remove the U.S. co-chair from the Minsk Group of mediators on Nagorno Karabagh.

Incredibly, the proposed Azeri Resolution orders the United States to make substantial improvements and changes in the following areas before Azerbaijan would lift its sanctions:

1) Violations of human rights; racial and religious discrimination; manifestations of xenophobia and Islamophobia; and inhuman treatment of prisoners;
2) Disproportionate use of force against protesters;
3) Restrictions of freedom of speech and press, and violation of the privacy of U.S. citizens;
4) Corruption and lobbying activities;
5) Widespread electoral fraud;
6) Interference in the internal affairs of foreign countries;
7) Slander and smear campaigns against the Republic of Azerbaijan;
8) Unambiguous position on “the Nagorno Karabagh conflict in compliance with international law, sanctions on the aggressor country [Armenia], and no ties with the separatist regime of Nagorno Karabagh.”

The lengthy text of the proposed Azeri resolution accuses the United States government of scores of violations, such as:

1) Refusal to ratify 12 out of 16 United Nations human rights treaties;
2) Growing racial and religious discrimination, xenophobia and Islamophobia: “Some 50% of the people are shot by the police; 70% of those arrested and killed in New York are black; and one third of the black people between the ages of 20-29 are in prison”;
3) Genocide against the indigenous people of the United States, resulting in the killing of “more than three million American Indians”;
4) Importing “more than 12 million slaves” from Africa;
5) Violations of the freedom of expression and press; illegal interference by the intelligence agencies in the people’s private lives; widespread bugging and persecution; and “police attacks and arrests of journalists have become an everyday occurrence in the United States”;
6) “Legal corruption and lobbying”: In the first months of 2015 alone, 2,320 criminal cases on charges of bribery were filed against officials at various levels;
7) Widespread fraud in U.S. elections;
8) “Interference in the internal affairs of independent states on the pretext of fighting terrorism and establishing democracy;”
9) Support for “separatist regimes,” such as Nagorno Karabagh.

There is no question that the United States is not a perfect democracy, but to have the parliament of one of the most corrupt and despotic regimes in the world criticize the American Government and its shortcomings is totally ridiculous and outrageous!

Since Azerbaijan needs the U.S. far more than the U.S. needs Azerbaijan, we hope Azerbaijan’s Parliament will quickly adopt the proposed Resolution and cut off all ties with the United States. Good riddance! Americans would then have a better reason to celebrate the New Year!

Even the most uninformed person on earth is aware by now that Turkey is a major accomplice of ISIS. There have been countless news reports in the global media documenting Turkish complicity. Amazingly, there is one American diplomat who seems to be clueless about Turkey’s destructive role in the region, not only in Syria and Iraq, but also in Artsakh (Nagorno Karabagh)!

How could the U.S. Ambassador to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) be that ignorant to give a speech praising Turkey’s “valuable” role in the effort to settle the Artsakh conflict?

In his December 17 statement to OSCE’s Permanent Council, Amb. Daniel B. Baer had the audacity to praise Turkey’s “constructive role as a Minsk Group member” in the Artsakh conflict. He went on to state that “Turkey has been a valuable member of the Minsk Group and has worked cooperatively with the Co-Chairs on finding a way forward in peace talks” between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Amb. Baer expressed his disagreement with Alexander Lukashevich, Russia’s Ambassador to the OSCE, who had questioned two days earlier “Turkey’s constructiveness as a Minsk Group member.” The Russian Ambassador had criticized Turkey for siding with “one of the parties of the Nagorno Karabagh conflict [Azerbaijan],” and described Ankara’s position as “unacceptable” and “absolutely destructive.”

Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) Chairman Ken Hachikian denounced Amb. Baer’s statement, calling it “reckless.” Hachikian noted Turkey’s long list of staunchly pro-Azerbaijan policies: “The Erdogan government actively supports Aliyev’s virulent anti-Armenian positions, openly providing military aid and training to the Azerbaijani military, while, at the same time, blockading Armenia, contrary to international law, and seeking to isolate Yerevan in the international arena.”

The ANCA Chairman wondered why “U.S. officials allow themselves to be used as props in Erdogan’s farce, pretending that the Turkish government will — against all evidence — play the role of some sort of impartial mediator?” Hachikian concluded: “This Administration’s shameful legacy of endlessly caving in to Turkish threats — at the expense of our own values and interests as a nation — is truly a national disgrace — an embarrassment beneath the dignity of the American people.”

Several members of the U.S. Congress also condemned Amb. Baer’s scandalous remarks. Congressional Armenian Caucus Co-Chairman Frank Pallone (D-NJ) said he was “troubled by the recent statement praising Turkey’s role in the Minsk Group peace process made by our U.S. Representative to the OSCE. Turkey’s active and overt support of Azerbaijan with regard to the Nagorno-Karabagh conflict has been apparent from the beginning. A statement like this will only serve to polarize the negotiations.”

House Select Committee on Intelligence Ranking Democrat Adam Schiff of California stated unequivocally that “given Turkey’s behavior and longstanding support for Baku, they cannot be considered — in any way — a neutral broker in what has become an increasingly intense conflict along the Line of Contact.” Cong. Schiff further suggested that “instead of stacking the table against Nagorno Karabagh, all nations should insist upon the deployment of monitoring technology along the border, a step that Armenia has readily agreed to but has been resisted by Azerbaijan, doubtless because it would demonstrate their unprovoked aggression.”

This writer has yet to see a reaction from Armenia challenging Amb. Baer’s ill-advised and inappropriate remarks. Silence would imply agreement with the U.S. Ambassador’s unfortunate words. In fact, Amb. Baer should be severely criticized by everyone, Armenians and non-Armenians alike, for encouraging Turkey’s detrimental meddling in the Artsakh conflict. Instead of praising Turkey’s “constructive” and “valuable” role, the U.S. Ambassador should have followed the example of his Russian counterpart and lashed out at Ankara’s sinister and destructive efforts.

Two years ago, when he was sworn in as envoy to OSCE, Amb. Baer released a video in which he cheerfully announced: “My partner, Brian, and I, are excited to live in Vienna, along with our greyhound, Cleo. We look forward to exploring a wonderful city, and going skiing and hiking in Austria, and to traveling around the OSCE region.”

Amb. Baer seems more interested in tourism at US taxpayers’ expense than engaging in serious diplomatic work. If that is the case, Pres. Obama should relieve the Ambassador of his duties, so he can continue his sightseeing tour of Europe at his own expense!

For over two decades, the international community, led by OSCE Minsk Group mediators representing the United States, France and Russia, has been trying to negotiate a peaceful resolution to the Artsakh (Karabagh) conflict.

The main obstacle is Azerbaijan’s persistence in shooting while negotiating, and intensifying its attacks on the eve of every crucial meeting for settlement of the conflict. Such unconstructive behavior is totally unacceptable for everyone involved in the peace process. Azerbaijan intentionally escalates the violence on such occasions in order to pressure the international community to force Armenia into making unfair concessions on Artsakh.

To make matters worse, every time Azerbaijani forces launch attacks on Artsakh or Armenia, the Minsk Group mediators issue a routine statement urging both sides to stop firing, thereby equating the violator with the victim. In addition, the mediators cover up their irresponsible statement by claiming that they are not certain which side initiated the shooting.

In October, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce (R–CA) and Ranking Democrat Eliot Engel of New York, initiated a letter signed by 85 House members, to U.S. co-chair, Amb. James Warlick, urging him to take all necessary steps to withdraw snipers from the border, deploy gunfire locator systems along the Line of Contact, and increase the number of field monitors. These measures were accepted by Armenia, Artsakh, the US Congress, and the Minsk Group co-chairs, but rejected by Azerbaijan because of its intent to conceal and continue its warmongering initiatives. Under these untenable circumstances, the three mediators may consider placing gunfire locators on the Artsakh side of the border to record the source of incoming fire. If the mediators are unwilling to take such action, Armenia should go ahead and purchase gunfire locators from US manufacturer Raytheon and recruit independent NGOs to monitor and report the results to the international community.

Once the source of the shooting is identified, the mediators would then be obligated to condemn the perpetrator; otherwise, they would be encouraging Azerbaijan to escalate the attacks on Armenia and Artsakh.

Meanwhile, the mediators must warn Azerbaijan’s autocratic President Ilham Aliyev that should he not cease and desist from making threats and shelling Armenia and Artsakh, they will be forced to submit Azerbaijan’s violations to the United Nations Security Council, to mandate economic sanctions against his country.

The mediators could also temporarily suspend their peacemaking activities by announcing that they are prevented from seeking a negotiated settlement to the conflict, while Azerbaijan keeps on shooting. Surely, it is not possible to fight and talk at the same time!

Since Azerbaijan is not ready to go to war — if it were, it would have started it already instead of merely threatening — it has no choice but to heed the call of the mediators to cease firing and start negotiating in earnest. Freezing the negotiations would be a serious setback for Azerbaijan because that is the only way it can hope to reach some accommodation with Armenia and Artsakh. Armenians, on the other hand, have already accomplished their objective of liberating Artsakh from Azeri occupation and have nothing to gain from further negotiations.

Should the mediators decide not to freeze the peace talks, the Armenian government may decide to suspend its participation in these unproductive negotiations, thus sending a clear message to Baku that shelling Armenia and Artsakh undermines Azerbaijan’s own interests.

If the negotiations are not suspended and Azerbaijan continues its attacks, the Armenian government may eventually respond with a “massive and asymmetrical retaliation,” as it has repeatedly warned. While some may be concerned that such an action would further escalate the violence, in fact it would diminish, if not halt the endless border skirmishes, once Azeri leaders realize that they have more to lose by fighting than talking. It is unfortunate that Pres. Aliyev is exploiting the deaths of young Azeri soldiers on the frontlines to distract his people’s attention away from massive violations of civil rights, corruption at the highest echelons of his government, and abysmal economic conditions due to diminishing oil revenues.

I had the opportunity to discuss some of these issues last week with various officials in Washington, D.C., while Artsakh’s Foreign Minister Garen Mirzoyan was in town to meet with members of Congress and US mediator Amb. Warlick. Two receptions were held to honor the visiting Foreign Minister at the Armenian Embassy and on Capitol Hill, the latter co-hosted by the U.S. Congressional Caucus on Armenian Issues, Armenian National Committee of America, Armenian Assembly of America, and the U.S. Office of the Nagorno Karabagh Republic. Several House members, Amb. Warlick, and other dignitaries attended the congressional reception to the chagrin of Azerbaijan’s Embassy which had dispatched a small group of Azeris to protest the event. Chairman Royce announced during the reception that he had asked Amb. Warlick to come to the House of Representatives this week for a briefing on the Artsakh conflict.

A large number of ANCA activists from throughout the USA, including this writer, joined Foreign Minister Mirzoyan in Washington last week, to share a message of peace and democracy for Artsakh with dozens of House and Senate members, urging them to recognize its independence from Azerbaijan.