Azerbaijani analyst: Madrid principles are like time bomb

Azerbaijan and Armenia continue negotiations to resolve the Karabakh conflict. In  your opinion, how the parties should solve the problem? How can you evaluate the Madrid principles proposed to the conflicting sides?

The Madrid principles combine phased and package approaches to settlement of the Karabakh conflict. They stipulate that firstly, Azerbaijan, which insists on phased settlement of the conflict, will receive its seven regions in response to which Armenia, which insisted on the package solution, will achieve independence for Karabakh through referendum. Of course, Azerbaijan will have an opportunity to convince the Karabakh Armenians for 5-15 years that they will have better living conditions if they live within Azerbaijan. But, in case of failure, all will blame Baku of separating Karabakh from Azerbaijan through referendum.

For all the above reasons, we can conclude that the Madrid principles do not meet Azerbaijan’s interests and are a time bomb for Baku.

In your view, under what basic principles the Karabakh conflict is being solved at this stage?

It is believed that negotiations on the Karabakh issue are conducted in strict secrecy. But this is not true. Foreign Ministries of the OSCE Minsk Group member states have various commissions that convene a conference involving experts from the region in case nodal points are developed. I I have participated in such meetings. The subject of discussions at these conferences were Madrid principles since 2007 (they were called Prague principles from 2004 to 2007).

Essence of these principles is liberation of seven Armenia-occupied regions of Azerbaijan in exchange for a referendum on the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region which would end Azerbaijan’s control over this region. Under the principles, Armenia will withdraw from the five or six occupied regions in the first stage (currently disputes are underway over time of Armenia’s withdrawal from the Kalbajar region) where international peacekeeping force will be deployed.

With regard to the Lachin region, it will be returned later and will remain under Yerevan’s control. In exchange, the former Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region will hold a referendum on its withdrawal from Azerbaijan’s control and people will determine their future.

The debates are held over timing of the referendum. Armenia insists that it will a plebiscite to be conducted not more than 5 years after deployment of international peacekeeping forces in the region. Azerbaijan, in turn, postpones deadlines of expression of the will for 10 to 15 years. Issues like the mine area and international peacekeeping forces are easy to solve. 

So, I see no benefit in for Azerbaijan in the Madrid principles.

In your opinion, how and in what time frame may Azerbaijani refugees return to Azerbaijan’s lands occupied by Armenia?

These refugees can be divided into two parts. The issue of return of the first group which will return to the areas around the former Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region has almost been solved. Anyone who wants to return to their home will have that opportunity. As for the refugees directly from the territory of the former Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region, the issue is a matter of debate. Again, this raises question related to the status of Nagorno-Karabakh.  

However, I note that the idea that return of Azerbaijani refugees to their homes will change the demographic situation in these territories in Azerbaijan’s favor is an illusion. Armenia will b try to counteract this by all means.

Western countries have repeatedly stated that they are ready to provide financial assistance in restoring occupied lands of Azerbaijan once they are liberated. What will be the amount of this aid?

This issue was raised at an international conference where I also participated. At that time, amount of Western aid was announced at $5 billion. These funds will be provided by various financial institutions not at the same time and will be spent mostly on mine clearance, rehabilitation of houses and infrastructure for the resettlement of refugees.

Of course, these sums can be allocated only after Armenian troops withdraw from occupied Azerbaijani territories and comprehensive cost estimate is developed.

Azerbaijan already has experience of return of refugees to occupied areas. In 1993, after successful military confrontation in the Fuzuli region, 22 villages were returned. They were subsequently cleared of mines and Azerbaijani refugees went back to their homes.

Z. Ahmadov