skip to main |
skip to sidebar
This was originally published in December 1, 2007 Armenian Reporter.
by Emil Sanamyan
U.S., Russia, and France offer “joint proposal” on basic principles of Karabakh settlement
On November 29, the three countries that have for over a decade jointly led the international efforts to address the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict made what amounts to a new proposal on its settlement.
The office of the State Department spokesperson in Washington reported on the same day that during the annual ministerial meeting of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) held this week in Madrid, U.S. Undersecretary of State Nick Burns along with the Russian and French foreign ministers met foreign ministers from Armenia and Azerbaijan “to demonstrate political-level support for the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chair countries’ effort to forge a just and lasting settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.”
In that meeting, the three co-chairs transmitted a “joint proposal” that “offered just and constructive solutions” to address the existing disagreements over basic principles of settlement of the Karabakh conflict.
The Armenian and Azerbaijani governments with the help of the co-chairs have been engaged in what has been termed as the Prague process for the past three years, but have not fully agreed on basic principles of settlement that would precede a development of the full-scale peace agreement.
The most recent proposal is the fifth settlement option proposed by international mediators since 1996. The three proposals made up to 1998 sought to put Karabakh inside Azerbaijani borders or did not address its status. The two latest proposals focused on ways to formalize Karabakh’s 1991 secession.
Speaking in Madrid, Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian broadly welcomed the proposal “as a working document that can serve as the basis for a preliminary agreement.” He said that the “document addresses the core issue – the security of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh, through self-determination.”
But Mr. Oskanian also noted the continued efforts by Azerbaijan to undermine the peace process, most recently by obstructing OSCE’s monthly monitoring of the ceasefire along the Line of Contact.
Azerbaijan’s reaction to the proposal was not immediately available.
U.S., Russia clash on security policies, elections
Talks between Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and visiting Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov here this week again highlighted the long list of disagreements between the two countries. Mr. Lavrov was in the U.S. to participate in the Middle East peace conference held in Annapolis, MD.
In addition to now long-standing Russian opposition to a new U.S. missile defense system in central Europe, as well as tougher sanctions against Iran and support for Kosovo independence, Moscow this week accused the U.S. of seeking to undermine the international legitimacy of Russia’s parliamentary elections on December 2.
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) decided not to send observers to a vote in which Russia’s pro-government party is expected to win an overwhelming majority. Russian President Vladimir Putin blamed the decision on the U.S. But U.S. and OSCE officials said the decision was a result of the Russian government’s efforts to restrict the size and the mandate of the observers.
On November 26, the State Department went on to describe the Russian government’s efforts to “impede freedom of speech and peaceful assembly” ahead of the elections as “troubling.” Days before, the Russian police detained the former world chess champion turned political activist Garry Kasparov on charges of conducting an “unlawful march” through Moscow; he has since been released.
Studies by one of Russia’s main polling groups (www.wciom.ru ) put support for the pro-Putin “United Russia” party at over 55 percent of the voters. The next most popular party, the Communists, polled less than six percent. The Kasparov-led coalition, “The Other Russia,” which has so far enjoyed marginal public support, has been refused official registration and is not running for parliament.
Retired Illinois Rep. Henry Hyde dies
A former senior Republican member of Congress who in 2005 came around to support a resolution affirming the U.S. record on the Armenian Genocide passed away on November 29, U.S. media reported the same day.
Rep. Henry Hyde (R.-Ill.) served in Congress for 32 years. He chaired the House International Relations Committee (2001–6 ) and prior to that the House Judiciary Committee (1995–2001). He retired early this year.
Family members told the New York Times that Mr. Hyde, 83, died from complications following heart surgery.
During the September 2005 committee deliberations over the Genocide resolution, then-chairman Hyde, despite opposition from the Bush Administration and the House Republican majority, decided to vote in favor; the resolution subsequently passed overwhelmingly.
“I have thought long and hard about these resolutions and have decided to vote in favor,” Mr. Hyde said following the committee debate. “The overriding purpose in all of my work in Congress has been to promote the interests of the United States.
“I believe it is in the interests of the United States and of Turkey and Armenia both that we take the lead in dealing with this paralyzing legacy,” he went on to say. “And we must start with a recognition of the truth. For there is no possibility that this problem can ever be overcome if we seek to ground any solution on silence and forgetting.”
Hyde’s successor at the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Rep. Tom Lantos (D.-Calif.), who also voted for the resolution in 2005 and again this past October, called Rep. Hyde a “giant,” who “transcended partisan political considerations.”
UN study: Armenia tops neighbors in “human development”
An annual United Nations study of the world’s development released on November 27 placed Armenia ahead of its neighbors and in the middle of the 175 countries ranked. The Human Development Index, which takes into account life expectancy, education levels, and per capita economic activity, ranked Armenia 83rd worldwide, followed by Turkey (84), Iran (94), Georgia (96), and Azerbaijan (98).
In the former Soviet territory, the three Baltic republics were ranked most developed, occupying places from 43rd to 45th; Belarus was ranked 64th, and Russia 67th. The HDI list was topped by Iceland, Norway, and Australia, while Yemen, Uganda, and Gambia were ranked at bottom.
The HDI report focused on the dangers of worldwide climate change, which it said was threatening “unprecedented human development reversals.” The UNDP administrator Kemal Dervis (a career World Bank economist who was Turkish economics minister in
2001–2) said that “fighting climate change is about our commitment to human development today and about creating a world that will provide ecological security for our children and their grandchildren.”
Connect at http://hdr.undp.org.
Nareg Seferian contributed to this week’s column.
This was originally published in November 17, 2007 Armenian Reporter.
by Emil Sanamyan
Former administration officials face credibility questions as they launch anti-genocide effort
Former Secretaries of State and Defense Madeleine Albright and William Cohen this week announced the formation of the “Genocide prevention task force,” which they will co-chair. But while launching the effort at a press conference at the National Press Club on November 13, they repeatedly heard questions, including from the Armenian Reporter, about their credibility on the issue.
In addition to working against Armenian Genocide affirmation while in government, last September both Ms. Albright and Mr.Cohen co-signed letters opposing House Resolution 106, which affirms the U.S. record on the Armenian Genocide. The former defense secretary’s lobby shop, the Cohen Group, maintains a “strategic alliance” with DLA Piper, one of the major lobbyists for the Turkish government.
Asked if their opposition to Armenian Genocide affirmation meant that the U.S. “shouldn’t be taking action on future genocides because of what it could mean to U.S. interests,” the former secretaries appeared to agree.
“There are no absolutes in this,” said Mr. Cohen. “There is an element of pragmatism... I think anyone serving in public office necessarily has to have a set of balancing factors to take into account.” In a follow-up comment one of the journalists noted: “It sounds as if both of you are saying that ‘if our friends do it, it’s not genocide, if our enemies do it, it is genocide.’”
“Secretaries Albright and Cohen can’t have it both ways,” argued the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) executive director Aram Hamparian. “Either they stand unconditionally against all genocides all the time, or, by choosing to only raise their voices when it’s convenient, they surrender their moral standing on this, the core human rights and humanitarian issue of our time.”
The Albright-Cohen “task force,” established jointly by the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, the American Academy of Diplomacy, and the U.S. Institute of Peace, “will generate practical recommendations to enhance the U.S. government’s capacity to respond to emerging threats of genocide and mass atrocities” in a report scheduled for release in December 2008.
Connect at http://www.ushmm.org/conscience/taskforce/press/?content=2007-11-13
Think tank warns of increased risk of war in Karabakh by 2012
The International Crisis Group (ICG), a Brussels-based think tank this week renewed its call on Armenian and Azerbaijani leaders to make progress toward a peaceful settlement of the Karabakh conflict, although admitting that “the oil boom and extensive military development in Azerbaijan and steady economic growth in Armenia suggest that neither will feel compelled to compromise.”
In its “Nagorno Karabakh: Risking War” report issued on November 14, ICG said that the international community should do more to prevent a potential military escalation. Its analysts concluded that while an “all-out war” was unlikely in the near future, the risk of war “may reach a new level around 2012, however, when Azerbaijan’s oil revenues are expected to begin to decline.”
“At that point, Baku might be tempted to conclude that the balance of power was at its most favorable and that an appeal to extreme nationalism could counteract popular disenchantment with the regime. Before this happens, the international community needs to lose its complacency and lobby with all available pressure for peace.”
The peace formula currently on the table involves withdrawal of Armenian forces from around Karabakh, with “special modalities for Lachin and Kelbajar,” and parties agreeing that Karabakh’s status should be finalized through a new referendum. ICG suggested that parties should endorse basic principles of settlement, while also noting their disagreements, as soon as possible.
ICG is co-chaired by retired former senior British and U.S. officials Chris Patten and Thomas Pickering and led by former Australian foreign minister Gareth Evans. Its previous report on “Nagorno Karabakh: Plan for Peace” issued in October 2005 also warned that increased defense spending and war rhetoric were “ominous signs that time for a peace agreement is running out.”
Connect at http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=5157&l=1
See also the Armenian Reporter’s editorial on page A10.
Members of U.S. Israeli lobby visit Azerbaijan
American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) National Board member Ron Barness led the organization’s delegation on a visit to Azerbaijan, which included a meeting with President Ilham Aliyev on November 9, the latter’s press office reported the same day.
In the meeting Mr. Barness reportedly “stressed existence of tolerance and attention to the representatives of different confessions, including representatives of the Jewish community, in Azerbaijan.”
Israeli ambassador to Azerbaijan Artur Lenk told the Trend news agency on October 25 that the group intended to visit to Azerbaijan, as well as Turkey, to promote these countries’ relations with the U.S. and Israel, and that “after the visit to the region the issue will be raised at the U.S. Congress.”
There have been no public reports about the AIPAC group’s trip to Turkey.
Armenia declines to join another Russian demarche at OSCE
Russia along with Belarus, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan suggested more restrictive guidelines for registration of nongovernmental organizations at the Vienna-based Organizations for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the Washington-based Freedom House reported on November 6.
The initiative is unlikely to be endorsed by the OSCE, which operates on a consensus basis, but Moscow has used such proposals to gain leverage for concessions on other issues of interest.
Armenia, which joined an earlier proposal by Russia to curtail OSCE election monitoring (see Tatul Hakobyan’s report and analysis in the November 10 Armenian Reporter), declined to endorse the latest effort.
According to a source familiar with OSCE proceedings, the Armenian government resisted Russian lobbying because it has generally good relations with Armenian NGOs. After Armenia pulled out from the initiative, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyz Republic followed suit.
Nareg Seferian contributed to this week’s column.
Matthew Bryza: U.S. ready to help Armenia study new nuclear plant options
This was originally published in August 11, 2007 Armenian Reporter
WASHINGTON – Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Matthew Bryza has been the State Department manager for Armenia, Azerbaijan, Cyprus, Georgia, Greece, and Turkey for the last two years. On August 7, following his weeklong trip to the Caucasus capitals as well as Moscow, he spoke by telephone with our Washington editor Emil Sanamyan.
Reporter : On July 30-31 you were in Yerevan, which was part of a regional trip that also included Tbilisi, Moscow, and Baku. What can you tell us about the issues discussed in Armenia?
Bryza : I traveled there primarily in my capacity as U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State. The idea was to have the opportunity to explore all of the bilateral issues that I don’t ever have enough time to do if I come there just as a Minsk Group co-chair – when obviously all of our time gets chewed up with Minsk Group business [dealing with the Karabakh conflict].
[This time around] I had a chance to talk about the election, moving forward on democracy and democratic reform. I had some great discussions on energy diversification and a possible follow-on on the Metsamor [nuclear power] plant. We talked about general security cooperation between U.S. and Armenia, and I expressed, a couple of times, gratitude for what Armenia has done with us in Iraq, its contribution [there] which really means a lot to us. It means a lot!
Then of course, we spent some time talking about Karabakh as well.
Reporter : The Armenian government has made building a new nuclear power plant to replace Metsamor after its decommissioning a top priority. Most recently on May 30, President Robert Kocharian said that such a project is “justified both in terms of energy security and economically.” This issue has been discussed both with Russia, with which cooperation on this issue is long-standing, and U.S. Does U.S. have a position on this issue and are there any ongoing U.S.-Armenia consultations?
Bryza : Absolutely to all of the above. There are consultations, but they are very preliminary at this point, because the whole process of developing the follow-on investment to replace Metsamor is in its nascent phase. But we have for years encouraged Armenia to close down the reactor at Metsamor and always recognized that there needs to be a replacement.
We would like to do all we can to make sure that it is a safe and economically viable replacement. So we are in early stages of discussions. And much of what we do now focuses on making sure that Metsamor plant is as safe as possible in its remaining life-span. Because it is not going to be just a matter of flipping a switch at which point there would a follow-on power plant.
Also, we would love to continue our work with both Armenia and Georgia on possibility of electricity cooperation, [which could involve] a new nuclear power plant, as well as the current plan for a new 400 kilowatt [transmission] line linking Armenia and Georgia; we are very supportive of that.
Finally, on infrastructure we had an opportunity to talk about strengthening transit and commercial ties between Georgia and Armenia in the area of road building. It would be nice to link up [the Armenian-populated] Akhalkalaki with the Armenian road system.
Reporter : Last June Georgian leaders made public their interest in nuclear energy and Georgia’s Prime Minister Zurab Nogaideli linked that interest to Armenia’s plans for a new plant. Have the relevant parties come together to discuss this issue?
Bryza : That is up to the countries to work out between themselves. And on this trip, I encouraged the Georgian leadership to talk to their friends and counterparts in Armenia to see if the economics wouldn’t make sense for there to be a one shared plant or two plants. The economics might dictate that there is a need for two plants and that there is a way to share electricity generation and exports. That is for them to think through. But we support that and any such cooperation.
Reporter : [A few months ago, the Armenian service of Radio Liberty carried comments by Tom Adams, the State Department coordinator for assistance to former Soviet states, reportedly made in May 2006 that “especially given the geology here, the earthquake zone, it might be better to come up with an alternative to a second nuclear power plant. Right now, we are leaning against that option.”]
In general, does U.S. have any concerns about plans for a new, safe nuclear power plant constructed in Armenia or Georgia for that matter?
Bryza : No. As long as a plant is safe and up fully to international safety standards, then we are happy to help Armenia explore its options to do just that.
Reporter : Prior and during your visit you praised the conduct of Armenia’s parliamentary election held last May as “freest and fairest election in this phase of Armenia’s independence” and they “brought the Armenian electoral process closer to international standards than any previous election.”
You added however that “there is still some room to go” presumably to improve some of the aspects of election-handling. What are these issues and are they being discussed in run-up to presidential elections early next year?
Bryza : At this point, I am not in a position to say which specific priorities there are, because the parliamentary elections just happened in May and presidential elections are ways away. We are just in early phases of coming up with our conclusions as to where the shortcomings may be. And we are doing that in conjunction with OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR), because they are the real experts. Over the next few months we will sit down with OSCE and the government of Armenia to see what additional steps are ought to be taken. We anticipate and hope that the Armenian government would do that with us.
Reporter : Staying on the subject of elections, Nagorno Karabakh elected a new president on July 19. Prior to that, on July 13, you along with Russian and French co-chairs issued a statement claiming that that the “presidential elections in Nagorno-Karabakh have already caused an increase in tensions.” Could you elaborate on how elections there cause an “increase in tensions” and have they really?
Bryza : Did we say that? [Pauses.] Well, they do. Because the holding of a presidential election against the backdrop of a claim of the status having been settled could imply that such an action is pre-judging the outcome of negotiations on that very status to be settled in the future. The whole point is we don’t favor any steps that would prejudge negotiations on status.
Reporter : Still, the term “elected representatives” of Nagorno Karabakh had been used in OSCE documents pertaining to the conflict. And people living in Karabakh should be able to exercise self-governance even before their status is settled internationally. You would probably agree that doing so through elections is not a bad thing?
Bryza : I would probably agree that effective self-government based on democratic principles is generally a very good thing. But the Co-chairs’ statement of course speaks for itself in terms of the current context of where the negotiations are.
Reporter : While the Karabakh negotiations process is taking a bit of a break, there are reports of a new resolution being floated by Azerbaijan among other countries at the United Nations’ General Assembly that essentially endorses the Azeri position on Karabakh. This is something that was tried in the past, but a vote was never scheduled. In those past instances, the U.S. did not take a favorable position on bringing this issue to the UN General Assembly. Has anything changed on that?
Bryza : I would say that any country in the world has the right to bring any issue it wishes to the United Nations’ General Assembly. That is the right that every UN member has. So, in principle we do not oppose countries’ inscribing into the agenda discussion of any item.
The real question is whether the United States would support any particular resolution. In the case of Nagorno Karabakh settlement, I can just say, as we stated over and over again, that we believe that the question of status of Nagorno Karabakh needs to be resolved on the basis of a compromise, on the basis of Helsinki principles, United Nations [Security Council] resolutions. So, I can’t pre-judge on what our stance would be on any [UN General Assembly] resolution until we see the way it is actually phrased.
Reporter : The nomination of Amb. Richard Hoagland to be Ambassador to Armenia was withdrawn last week. Can you give us any ideas in terms of a nomination of a new candidacy? Also, the issue of the Armenian Genocide was
central as to how the nomination process evolved in Mr. Hoagland’s case. What can State Department do to make this process a less painful one?
Bryza : This is not our call. From our perspective, Ambassador Hoagland was unfairly maligned. His statements were taken way out of context in a way that was not fair or did not accurately represent his views or the policies of the United States government. So, there is nothing that we can do to change that. It is a question of what people on the outside wish to do.
I can’t comment on the possibility of a new nominee – that is something for the White House to do. But Ambassador Hoagland never denied anything and he was treated deeply unfairly. And it was a real loss for anybody who cares about not only U.S.-Armenia relations, but Armenia itself that an Ambassador of the caliber of Dick Hoagland would not be going to Armenia and the fact that we had such a long gap in having an Ambassador there.
Reporter : On July 23, speaking at the Washington Institute on Near East Policy, you referred to the likelihood of the House Resolution affirming the Armenian Genocide coming to a vote this fall, and said that “we really need something from the Turkish government that… moves towards normalization of relations with Armenia, it is time for that to happen.” We have been here before, with resolutions in Congress causing Turkey to reassess its policy on Armenia, although no major changes have been made so far. Do you see any indication from Turkey that its government may again be thinking of normalization following its reelection last month?
Bryza : It is not appropriate for me to speak on behalf of the Turkish government. I can tell you what the United States does in this regard. And that is we encourage constantly our Turkish allies and friends to reach out to Armenia to move towards normalizing of relations. And those conversations remain intense.
From our view it is really important that in the current climate of Turkish politics, where I would argue that a very successful election just took place. An election that underscores how vibrant and healthy the Turkish democracy is. That there be a move forward, hopefully as soon as possible, in terms of normalizing relations between Turkey and Armenia.
Reporter : With six countries under your belt in addition to conflict management and energy issues, what keeps you up at night these days?
Bryza : We talked about Nagorno Karabakh and there is heck of a lot going on in Georgia. Just today, there was another aerial attack on Georgian territory which we condemned. [See this week’s From Washington, In Brief.] Just working with Georgia to deepen its economic and political reform and help Georgia achieve its own aspirations for NATO membership. That takes a lot of time.
The other burning issue is helping the European Union achieve its own stated objective of diversification of energy supplies. I work on that a heck of a lot. I spend a lot of time of thinking through the proper way to help not only our allies, but ourselves to integrate our Muslim populations into our democratic societies in a way that allows for these Muslim populations to be proudly Muslim and fully American or fully European and that is another burning issue.
Reporter : How exactly are you involved in that last issue?
Bryza : I’d rather not specify exactly what we are doing, but we have outreach programs in our individual embassies, we are trying to empower moderate scholars who share the belief that there is a crucial debate going within the Muslim world about indigenous traditions versus narrower interpretations of Islam that are often extremist and view jihad as an external struggle that involves violence.
We have to work with our partners in the Muslim world who share our view and our desire that the modernizing and broader interpretations of Islam are able to flourish.
Reporter : There was an article in a Turkish newspaper recently suggesting that you are about to become U.S. Ambassador to Cyprus, any truth to that?
Bryza : I am not planning to go to Cyprus. I choose to stay in this
job for at least another year because it really means a lot to me. It is the greatest job in the world. The things I get to do here, the people I get to interact with, the grand strategic thought and tactical limitation – I am not ready to give this up. So, I am staying right here.
Matthew Bryza
Since June 2005 Mr. Bryza has served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, and since June 2006, concurrently as U.S. envoy for Nagorno- Karabakh and co-chair of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Minsk Group. From 2001 to 2005 he was the National Security Council Director for the Aegean, Caucasus, and Central Asia – a key White House office that coordinates U.S. policy in the region.
Mr. Bryza joined the State Department in 1989, and his assignments since included advisor (1998–99) and then deputy envoy (1999–2001) in the office dealing with Caspian energy development; advisor in the office dealing with U.S. assistance to former Soviet states (1997–98); and postings with U.S. diplomatic missions in Russia and Poland. Mr. Bryza earned his bachelor’s degree from Stanford and Master’s degree from Tufts University. He is fluent in Russian and Polish.
