A Political Whirlwind Engulfs Nagorno Karabakh

The other aspect which runs against the claim of Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity is that Karabakh has never been part of Azerbaijan’s territory; it had always enjoyed the status of an autonomous oblast or region.

While Karabakh’s case is a topic of hot discussion, the fate of Nakhichevan has been conveniently forgotten. That exclave also had a legal status during the Soviet era. It was an autonomous republic under the Baku administration, though outside its borders, thus an exclave. It had an ethnically diverse population, with an Armenian majority. That status was guaranteed by Russia and Turkey under the Treaties of Moscow and Kars.

As a member of the Soviet Politbureau, then-Azeri-leader Heydar Aliyev, who was born in Nakhichevan, was able to expel the Armenians under the nose of the leadership, to alter the ethnic profile of the region.

Today, Azerbaijan has quietly absorbed Nakhichevan as part of its territory, with Moscow’s tacit acquiescence. Based on historic and treaty stipulations, it is the Baku government which has usurped territory that does not rightfully belong to it.

Unfortunately., the powers that be interpret treaties and historic facts through political expediency, where the usurper comes on top as a victim.

Only Armenia maintains that there is no infringement on Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity in Karabakh’s independence. Even friendly nations, such as strategic ally Russia, acknowledge Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan.

Mr. Hoagland outlines the solution as follows:

In light of Nagorno-Karabakh’s complex history, the sides should commit to determining its final legal status through a mutually agreed and legally binding expression of will in the future. Interim status will be temporary.

• The area within the boundaries of the former Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region that is not controlled by Baku should be granted an interim status that, at a minimum, provides guarantees for security and self-governance.
• The occupied territories surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh should be returned to Azerbaijani control. There can be no settlement without respect for Azerbaijan’s sovereignty, and the recognition that its sovereignty over these territories must be restored.
• There should be a corridor linking Armenia to Nagorno-Karabakh. It must be wide enough to provide secure passage but it cannot encompass the whole of Lachin district.
• An enduring settlement will have to recognize the right of all IDPs and refugees to return to their former places of residence.
• A settlement must include international security guarantees that would include a peacekeeping operation. There is no scenario in which peace can be assured without a well-designed peacekeeping operation that enjoys the confidence of all sides.

The time has come for the sides to commit themselves to peace negotiations, building on the foundation of work done so far.

Mr. Hoagland’s statement has heralded the next two steps to be taken in light of his proposal. The first one is the meeting of the two foreign ministers, Edward Nalbandian and Elmar Mammadyarov, on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York. And as a follow-up, a meeting between the two presidents. If past meetings and negotiations are any indication, no resolution can be expected from spinning the wheels. That will allow Azerbaijan to continue its war rhetoric and border skirmishes, in the hopes of wearing down Armenia into making concessions or succumbing to complete annihilation.

All sides claim that there is no military solution while Azerbaijan continues its arms buildup. Lately, a more chilling scenario has been floated in the eventuality of war. Indeed, Azerbaijan’s former Foreign Minister Tofiq Zulfugarov, in a statement to Yeni Musavat daily, has raised the possibility of hitting Yerevan from Nakhichevan. He has noted, “We should clearly understand that it was impossible to benefit from the Nakhichevan factor in the first [Karabakh] war, as its defense was very weak. After the start of the second phase, it is very important for Azerbaijan to beef up its defense capacities there. Everyone realizes that if war starts, it will be between two states. If the military operations were in the Karabakh region provisionally, they would not be in that region now, as it will not be possible to describe it as an aggression against Armenia as the situation is different [in view of the Russian-Armenian Treaty].”

In as much as Mr. Hoagland planned to state that the US has a say in the region, the underlying message was also to reward Azerbaijan for its overt and convert services. Azerbaijan has been buying billions of dollars’ worth of military hardware from Israel, which is a boost to the latter’s economy. As it was revealed recently, additionally the Aliyev family has $600 million tied up in investments in Israel. Over and above those investments, political and military cooperation between the two countries has been significant. Israel and the US use Azerbaijan’s territory to spy on Iran and in case of military conflict, Azeri territory will become a launching pad against Iran. A Bulgarian journalist’s bombshell revelations in Trud daily newspaper demonstrates the extent of Azerbaijan’s services to the US and Israel. The investigative journalist Dilyana Gaytandzhieva has divulged that the Azerbaijani state airline, Silk Way, has been carrying weapons from Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and Turkey to Syria, under diplomatic cover and CIA direction. Therefore, we should not be surprised that paragraph 90 of Freedom Support Act, denying arms to Azerbaijan, is routinely bypassed through US presidential executive orders, rendering that piece of legislation into a farce.

Before departing, Mr. Hoagland intended to reward Azerbaijan, at the expense of Armenian lives.