Internet Press Conference with Ambassador Pádraig Murphy

The internet press conference for Armenian, Azerbaijani and Georgian mass media with the Special Representative of the OSCE Chairperson-in-Office for the South Caucasus Ambassador Padraig Murphy took place on November 26, 2012 on Public Dialogues website.

Joint Internet press conferences with leading experts from different countries on the topical issues of the modern times are organized within the framework of the project, entitled "Enhancing knowledge and understanding of ‘the other side’ by Armenians and Azerbaijani through Alternative and First-Hand Information". This project, implemented by Region Research Center (Armenia) and the Institute for Peace and Democracy (Azerbaijan), is supported by the British Embassies in Armenia and Azerbaijan.    

 

Sona Kyurkchyan, “Hetq” online newspaper-www.hetq.am (Armenia)

-What are your expectations from the upcoming meeting of the Foreign Ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan?
 
- I hope that the Foreign Ministers will take a constructive, future-oriented approach to the negotiations, and move closer to a solution. No matter how much the international community can be involved, the solution in the end lies with the sides to the conflict, and not with mediators, whose role is to promote such a solution. It is essential to prevent any further backward slide in the process, and to ensure that already existing commitments are implemented.
 
Aydin Kerimov, "Novoe Vremya" newspaper-www.novoye-vremya.com (Azerbaijan)
 
-Do you think that the unsolved territorial issues in the South Caucasus destabilize the situation in the region?
 
- Yes, protracted conflicts do pose a threat to stability and security, in the South Caucasus region as well as in the OSCE region as a whole. Our security is indivisible, and as long as the conflicts remain unresolved they are a threat to our security. Furthermore, they prevent the development of the societies that suffer from them, so the sooner the leaders of these societies take the bold decisions that are necessary to bring the processes to peaceful solutions, the sooner the people they represent can thrive. 
 
David Stepanyan, "Arminfo" news agency-www.arminfo.am (Armenia)
 
1.Recently, the President of Armenia Serge Sargsyan accused the international community of the application of double standards in the matter of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement. He referred to the example of Kosovo where the question of self-determination was decided by means of military intervention at the international level. Until today, Yerevan has distanced itself from such a position. What can be the reason for such a change in the Armenia’s position?
 
- I do not want to speculate on the reasons of a particular statement from anyone. However, each conflict is different in terms of its scope, background, history, and involvement of international actors, and has to be dealt with individually. 
 
2.A legislative body of the largest Australian state, New South Wales, unanimously adopted a resolution to recognize Nagorno-Karabakh Republic and its right to self-determination. Before that, resolutions which were similar in spirit were adopted by the US states Rhode Island and Massachusetts. Which trends, do you think, this international process reflects?
 
- The OSCE starts from the positions adopted by its participating States. The Co-Chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group are endeavoring to find a solution, a formula, through negotiations which would allow people on all sides to live peaceful, safe and economically stable lives. 
 
Artak Barseghyan, Public Radio of Armenia-www.armradio.am (Armenia)
 
1.How does the OSCE perceive the fact that South Caucasus countries exceed quotas on conventional arms? 
 
- The OSCE collects, processes and distributes information on conventional arms among its participating States. By doing so, the OSCE seeks to ensure military transparency and openness among all of its 56 participants, including the countries of South Caucasus. This should help decrease tensions and contribute to building trust among the participating States. 
I am worried about the arms build-up in the South Caucasus. In the context of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, this creates a very dangerous situation for as long as the sides remain unable to come to an agreement. 
 
2.Mr. Murphy, in your opinion, how viable today the Madrid Principles of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict  settlement are? 
 
Answer-
 
Tarana Kyazimova, "Turan" news agency-www.contact.az (Azerbaijan)
 
-After the Kazan meeting of the Presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia in June 2011 negotiations on Nagorno-Karabakh settlement practically came to a dead end. Many experts think that the Madrid Principles have already exhausted themselves, and that new ideas and proposals are needed. What steps can the OSCE take to animate the process of negotiations?
 
Answer-
 
Gagik Baghdasaryan, "News Armenia" news agency-www.newsarmenia.am (Armenia)
 
-Should one expect new proposals from the OSCE Minsk Group Co-chairs within the framework of the Nagorno-Karabakh settlement negotiations, taking into account the current developments after the extradition and setting free of Ramil Safarov?
 
- The Basic Principles cannot be exhausted: they are principles, and have been affirmed and re-affirmed by both Armenia and Azerbaijan. As outlined by the Minsk Group Co-chairing countries’ Presidents in L’Aquila and Muskoka, they remain the basis for negotiations. The Nagorno-Karabakh settlement process has been going on for twenty years. After such a long time there are few, if any, issues that could be considered new. However, any proposals that the sides are ready to discuss will of course be facilitated by the Minsk Group Co-chairs. The elements of a negotiated solution are there. What is missing is the political will of the sides to take bold decisions for the sake of their peoples. 
At the same time, while the negotiations are carried out, steps should be taken to re-establish much-needed trust, including on the people-to-people level, the trust which has been eroded throughout the years of the conflict. Mass media, parliamentarians and civil society could play an extremely important role in this.
Confidence- and security building measures, including a mechanism for investigating incidents on the line of contact, must also be put in place – this has been agreed by the Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan. A mechanism of discussing issues at the level of local military leaders should also be developed, to discuss specific practical concerns and incidents on the ground that contribute to insecurity. The OSCE has experience in this – look at the Ergneti Incident Prevention and Response Mechanism set up after the August 2008 conflict in Georgia.
 
Aydin Kerimov, "Novoe Vremya" newspaper-www.novoye-vremya.com (Azerbaijan)
 
-Do you think the format of the OSCE Minsk Group should be changed, as the current activities of the Minsk Group are not effective?
 
Answer-
 
Rashad Rustamov, "Zerkalo" newspaper-www.zerkalo.az (Azerbaijan)
 
-The activities of the OSCE Minsk Group are criticized in Armenia and in Azerbaijan. What is the reason for this?
Have the current negotiations within the OSCE Minsk Group have any prospects?
 
- The format of the OSCE Minsk Group is the only framework for facilitating a political solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict which has been agreed by all sides. Peace requires efforts on the part of all those concerned, but especially a commitment on the part of the leaders in order to resolve the conflict for the benefit of the people. We welcome other initiatives aimed at bringing the sides of the conflict, their leaders, their communities, their media and civil society closer together. 
I understand that there is a certain degree of frustration, since the OSCE Minsk Group has been working for twenty years now. However, the peace cannot happen overnight, it requires time and strong leadership by the parties involved. We in Ireland know it well. The Good Friday Agreement which put an end to the Northern Ireland conflict was the culmination of more than thirty years of intensive efforts by Irish and British governments, and by the political parties in Northern Ireland, with the good offices of the international community, including the EU, the USA and Canada.
 
Gagik Baghdasaryan, "News Armenia" news agency-www.newsarmenia.am (Armenia)
 
-Which steps, in your view, are required from the sides of the Karabakh conflict to strengthen the ceasefire regime and prevent the frontline incidents?
 
Answer-
 
Emil Babayan, correspondent of "Regnum" news agency in Armenia-www.regnum.ru
  
-Why does international community fair to condemn, or at best makes highly vague and hard to understand statements, when Azerbaijani armed forces kill Armenians at the Line of Contact, shoot at kindergartens on the territory of Armenia, whereas Baku does all to impede the creation of the mechanisms to investigate incidents on the line of contact? 
 
Answer-
 
Mariam Levina, “News.am” news agency-www.news.am (Armenia)
 
-Much has been said on many occasions about the need to withdraw snipers from the line of contact in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict zone. However, Azerbaijan refuses to withdraw snipers and every year raises the number of breaches of the ceasefire regime. How would you comment this?
 
- Every death is a tragedy. This year alone 28 people were killed on the line of contact and on the border between Armenia and Azerbaijan. 
We can and do offer and develop new and enhance already existing mechanisms, including monitoring on the line of contact and investigating of incidents on the front lines. Essential prerequisites are, firstly, agreement from the sides; and secondly, resources. At the moment, we stumble on the first. No amount of statements can replace the political will of the sides to deliver on the commitments already made. 
We don’t give up, however. We continue working with the sides in the existing format of the OSCE Minsk Group and its Co-Chairs, as well as try to push through initiatives aimed at building trust between people, at individual level, with the help of media and civil society.
 
Natig Javadly, "Bizim Yol" newspaper-www.bizimyol.az (Azerbaijan)
 
-After the story with Ramil Safarov, Armenian-Azerbaijani negotiations have stalled, the Presidents of two countries do not meet anymore. Looking from this perspective, can one say that statements about the danger of renewed military actions are correct?
 
Answer-
 
Gagik Baghdasaryan, "News Armenia" news agency-www.newsarmenia.am (Armenia)
 
-What do you think, is the signing of a legally binding document between the sides of the Karabakh conflict about non-renewal of military actions possible, a document which would be a certain “non-aggression pact”? Can such a document play a positive role in the process of the peaceful settlement of conflict?
 
Answer- 
 
Artak Barseghyan, Public Radio of Armenia-www.armradio.am (Armenia)
 
-Do you consider possible the renewed military action in the South Caucasus region (Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhazia, South Ossetia)? Has the OSCE any mechanisms to prevent the confrontation?
 
- The situation in the region is very serious. The tensions have grown lately, and the situation around Ramil Safarov, as well as the issue of opening of an airport in Nagorno-Karabakh added to the atmosphere of mistrust. Military rhetoric is used increasingly often, and it is vital to do everything possible for it to not grow into violent actions followed by retaliatory measures. I am convinced that military action cannot solve the conflict. I say this as Special Representative of the Irish Chairmanship in Office of the OSCE. Ireland witnessed a bloody conflict for many years. It would have unforeseeable consequences and only deepen the conflict further and multiply the hardships that the people in the region are facing. 
 
The Helsinki Final Act, signed by both Armenia and Azerbaijan, already contains important provisions related to the non-use of force of the threat of force. There is also a 1994 ceasefire agreement between the sides. Strictly respecting these commitments would already make a significant contribution to restoring security on the ground.
 
Any initiatives which would further reaffirm the non-use of force principle would be certainly welcomed. I remain convinced that a big deficit of the process is that there is no mechanism on the ground to deal with incidents. I am not only talking about an investigation mechanism, but also about one where local commanders can regularly sit together to discuss concerns such as shootings, troop movements, unmanned aerial vehicles over-flights, and other factors that contribute to insecurity for the soldiers. 
What we, in co-operation with other international actors, can do is to facilitate continued dialogue, help restore and maintain confidence, including through humanitarian initiatives and supporting contacts between people. We believe such initiatives could create atmosphere inductive to making progress in political negotiations.  
 
Mariam Levina, “News.am” news agency-www.news.am (Armenia)
 
-How would you comment on the threats of Azerbaijan to shoot down civilian aircraft in the case the airport in Stepanakert renews its activities?
 
- The situation around the opening of the airport in Nagorno-Karabakh has been another factor contributing to the recent increase of tensions. Whatever is done in regard to this airport can have no implications for the status of this territory. This summer, the Co-Chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group received assurances from the sides that they would refrain from any threat or use of force against civilian aircraft, pursue the matter through diplomatic steps, and refrain from politicizing the issue. I trust that these commitments will be fulfilled.
 
Emil Babayan, correspondent of "Regnum" news agency in Armenia - www.regnum.ru   
 
1.There is an opinion that no one – neither Armenia nor Azerbaijan or the Minsk Group Co-Chairs - needs a settlement of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Do you agree with such a viewpoint, and if no, why?
 
- There is no question that Armenia and Azerbaijan both need a peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. I cannot speak on behalf of the governments of Armenia and Azerbaijan, neither on behalf of the Minsk Group Co-Chairs, except to say that both Governments continue to engage with the Minsk Group Co-Chairs in order to find a solution to the conflict. Personally, as Special Representative of the Irish Chairmanship in Office of the OSCE, I can speak also from the perspective of a country which knows well the cost of the conflict to the ordinary people and the suffering it brings. If you think about the people on the ground, about their safety and prosperity, and about the future of their children, you realise the necessity for compromise and finding a negotiated solution. And the experience of Northern Ireland confirms that this is possible. 
It cannot be repeated often enough that one does not make peace with one’s friends; one makes peace with one’s enemies. To start perceiving your enemy as a negotiating partner is not easy, but this must be done, as peace and safety of thousands of people are at stake.
 
2.The President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev openly says that he can ignore the efforts of OSCE Minsk Group Co-chairs and launch the war. From the side of Armenia, nothing of the sort has ever been said. In this case, why would one continue to talk with Armenia and Azerbaijan as with “equally guilty”?
 
- It is not the role of the OSCE to assign guilt on the sides of the conflict. The Minsk Group Co-chairs facilitate the negotiations between the sides, and do not determine the participants in these negotiations, in practice, the Presidents and Foreign Ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan. Both Armenia and Azerbaijan agreed to the OSCE Minsk Group format and entered into a number of commitments, including non-use of force or threat of use of force. 
 
David Stepanyan, "Arminfo" news agency-www.arminfo.am (Armenia)
 
-Recently, the State Minister of Georgia on reintegration, Paata Zakareishvili, commented on the negative statements from Baku about the possibility of the restoration of railway connection through Abkhazia, and said that “Georgia does not intend to sacrifice its interests for the benefit of others”. Does this project have any prospects, and can the project, if implemented, radically change the breakdown of forces in the Karabakh conflict and in the geopolitics of the region?
 
- We are aware of the idea to restore the railway connection though Sukhumi, which is not new.  It is of course an interesting idea. Whatever would promote the movement of people and goods and stimulate trade and business is good, as it can create positive dynamics and contribute to stability. 
We’ve seen the positive impact of the restoration of railway transportation in another conflict area of the OSCE region, through Transdniestria.
The South Caucasus has a great potential in terms of crossroads. The more this potential is developed the more prospects we will see to overcome the present deadlocks. 
 
Tarana Kyazimova, "Turan" news agency-www.contact.az (Azerbaijan)
 
-What influence does the military presence of Russia in Armenia have on the security situation in the South Caucasus? Many experts in Azerbaijan and Georgia think that the military base of Russia in Armenia represents a permanent threat to security of Azerbaijan and Georgia. Which mechanisms can the OSCE offer to guarantee security of these two sovereign states?
 
Answer-
 
Natig Javadly, Bizim Yol" newspaper-www.bizimyol.az (Azerbaijan)
 
-Don’t you think that the settlement of national conflicts in the region is impossible if the interests of Russia in the South Caucasus are to be safeguarded? What is needed to “melt the ice”?
 
- Russia too has a stake in the security of the South Caucasus region, as it borders Georgia and Azerbaijan. It has strong economic and social links with the region. Russia also actively participates in the conflict resolution efforts in the regions – it is one of the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs. Russia is also a participant of the Geneva International Discussions. 
It is natural that all countries in the region have their political agendas. All these countries are participating States of the OSCE. The OSCE cannot impose policy on any OSCE participating State. Our role is to create conditions and offer platforms for the States to discuss their security concerns through the established formats, including the weekly meetings of the Forum for Security Co-operation in Vienna where politico-military matters of security are discussed. 
 
Aydin Kerimov, "Novoe Vremya" newspaper-www.novoye-vremya.com (Azerbaijan)
 
-Can the escalation of tensions around Iran have a geopolitical impact also on the South Caucasus?
 
- No country is isolated in today’s globalized world, and of course any tensions in Iran, which borders both Armenia and Azerbaijan, can have a serious impact on the neighbouring South Caucasus region. 
 
Aydin Kerimov, "Novoe Vremya" newspaper-www.novoye-vremya.com (Azerbaijan)
 
-When will the OSCE give a fair assessment of the aggressive separatism in our region, which hinders the soonest settlement of conflicts?
 
- The OSCE’s role is not to give assessments or assign guilt to any side of the conflict. The OSCE’s role is to facilitate dialogue between the sides, but it cannot replace them in the process.  
I would argue that the soonest settlement of conflict is not subject to how the OSCE or indeed any other international entity assesses the conflict. The soonest settlement of conflict is about how committed the sides are to negotiating a peaceful solution, and how prepared they are to take bold decisions, beginning with taking full responsibility for the implementation of the agreements and commitments already achieved. 
 
Rashad Rustamov, "Zerkalo" newspaper-www.zerkalo.az (Azerbaijan)
 
-Azerbaijan authorities claim that the Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh are fully-fledged citizens of Azerbaijan. The Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh themselves refuse to recognize themselves citizens of Azerbaijan. Can this somehow affect or does it affect the course of negotiations? 
 
- The status issue is at the core of the settlement process. An agreement between the sides to proceed on the basis of the Basic Principles would be instrumental for paving the way towards a peace agreement and resolving the question of the status of Nagorno-Karabakh.
 
Gagik Baghdasaryan, "News Armenia" news agency-www.newsarmenia.am (Armenia)
 
-Do you expect serious steps in the process of the Georgian-Russian relations normalization after the change of power in Tbilisi?
How viable and implementable, in your view, is the plan of the new authorities of Georgia to normalize the relations with Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Russia?
 
Answer-
 
Sona Kyurkchyan, “Hetq” online newspaper-www.hetq.am (Armenia)
 
-How viable and implementable, in your view, is the plan of the new authorities of Georgia to normalize the relations with Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Russia?
 
Answer-
 
Maka Bregvadze, "Pirweli" news agency-www.pirweli.com.ge (Georgia)
 
1.Taking into account the Russian factor, is the initiative of the new government of Georgia to conduct direct dialogue with Abkhazia and Tskhinvali, implementable? Given the fact that despite the shift of power in Georgia, Russia has been firmly stating that it is not going to discuss the fate of Abkhazia and the so-called South Ossetia with anyone, don’t you think that the future of the conflict regions of Georgia is predefined?
 
- The statements made so far by representatives of the new Georgian administration with regard to normalizing relations with Russia, including through an appointment of the special representative, are encouraging. Representatives of the new government were present at the latest, 21st round of the Geneva International Discussions – this was a welcome initiative which demonstrated their commitment to the process.  We hope for their continued positive involvement, and we also hope that other participants of the Geneva International Discussions, including the Russian Federation, will demonstrate a constructive approach, too. 
In fact, the Geneva International Discussions is the framework which already includes participants from Moscow, Tbilisi, Sukhumi and Tskhinvali, so in this way the OSCE has already been assisting the dialogue - and will continue doing so in the future as one of the Co-Chairs of the Geneva International Discussions.
As for whether the future of the conflict regions, as you put it, is predefined, I would argue that the Geneva International Discussions are not about the political status of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. This is not on the agenda of the Discussions. The dialogue is about security and stability as well as about displaced persons and humanitarian issues. Within the Geneva International Discussions, the OSCE is putting a special emphasis on the need to improve the daily life of people in the conflict-affected areas. We are implementing EU-funded projects on providing potable and irrigation water to several hundreds of families living on both sides of the administrative boundary line. 
 
2.Within the 21st Round of the Geneva International Discussions the work on the text of the document on the non-use of force started. You stated that one is talking here about a peace document which will probably be signed by all participants of the process? What can you say more specifically in relation to this document? Do you see Abkhazia and the so-called South Ossetia among signatory parties to this document?  
 
- The co-chairs of the Geneva International Discussions (Philippe Lefort from the EU Antti Turunen from the UN and myself on behalf of the OSCE) have put a draft text on the table. At the 21st round of the Geneva International Discussions, the participants appointed experts who discussed the draft. As of today, the draft document envisages that the participants in the Geneva International Discussions could issue a joint declaration. It is not a protocol which would require signatures. The declaration would rather reaffirm existing commitments on the non-use of force.
 
3.The OSCE observation mission stopped its work in Georgia in 2008 as a result of Russia’s efforts. How possible is in your view the renewal of the activities of the Observation mission of the OSCE in Georgia, and is any work carried out with Russia to positive solve this question?
 
- The OSCE Mission to Georgia was closed down in 2009, as no consensus was reached on the continuation of its activities. Despite the absence of the Mission on the ground, we still are actively engaged with the country, and are looking into ways of stepping up this engagement. This would strengthen our contribution to the Geneva Discussions, our work on the ground and to the work of the Incident Prevention and Response Mechanism. At the moment, we are specifically looking into the option of establishing a Vienna-based OSCE support team, inspired by a UN model. Of course, all possible options must be discussed with and agreed by all relevant actors, including the Russian Federation. We are raising the issue with all those concerned, and will continue our efforts with a view to finding a solution which will advance the interests of all sides.

Videos

30 January, 2014
Right after the New Year, the citizens of Armenia were shocked by the gas and electricity bills for December.

Featured Interviews

Joint Internet press conferences with leading experts from different countries on the topical issues of the modern times are organized within the framework of the project, entitled "Enhancing knowledge and understanding of ‘the other side’ by Armenians and Azerbaijani through Alternative and First-Hand Information". ... >>

Bulletins

ARMENIA AND AZERBAIJAN: EVENTS AND COMMENTS - 2013
ARMENIA AND AZERBAIJAN TODAY: EVENTS AND COMMETS - 2012
ARMENIA AND AZERBAIJAN: EVENTS AND COMMENTS - 2011

Pages

Work by AGNIAN

All rights reserved. © 2018 Public Dialogues