On March 14, the Azerbaijani side of the negotiation process handed over to Yerevan a package of five-point proposals (also called principles), which were subsequently approved by Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan. Then Pashinyan went to Brussels and Moscow, on April 19 he met with President Putin. On April 25, Armenians began protests dissatisfied with the upcoming signing of an agreement with a clause on the recognition of the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, with Karabakh included in it. On May 5, the head of the Armenian Security Council, Armen Grigoryan, announced his conditions in six points: five are Azerbaijani principles, and the sixth was added by Yerevan, about discussing the status of the Armenian-populated Karabakh. The Azerbaijani society began to talk about the intention of the Armenians to disrupt the negotiations, repeating the actions of their predecessors. However, on May 6, the Russian Foreign Ministry issued a statement obliging the Armenian leadership to implement the tripartite statement of November 9, 2020.

Three prominent Azerbaijani experts discussed what is happening between Baku, Yerevan and Moscow, posting their views on Meta.

The former director of the Center for Strategic Studies under the Presidential Administration Farhad Mammadov explains: the Armenian side is ready to recognize the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, including Karabakh, if Baku starts negotiations on security guarantees for the Armenians of Karabakh: the topic of “status” is seen as a mechanism that ensures security. 5 basic principles of Azerbaijan + 1 Armenian. Without this, the Armenian side sees no reason to continue negotiations on any of the topics on the agenda.

– It is interesting that neither Brussels nor Moscow mention the sixth principle put forward by Armenia in their statements. That is, during the negotiations in Brussels, this moment was either not touched upon, or it was bypassed, since in the statement of Charles Michel there is no hint of the topic of “status” and no mention of Karabakh at all! That is, this point is not fixed as the sixth basic principle.

– it means that Armenia’s insistence on this issue did not occur after Brussels, but after Pashinyan’s visit to Moscow. This is exactly what Lavrov had in mind at a meeting with Mirzoyan when he said that “the West is sacrificing the interests of Armenia”, refusing the institution of the OSCE Minsk Group, where there was a theoretical opportunity to raise the topic of “status” and security guarantees…

Thus, the preconditions of Armenia are dictated by the internal dynamics and the demand of Russia (since the guarantees of the security of the Armenians of Karabakh are about the mandate of the RMK and the period of their stay on the territory of Azerbaijan).

It’s time for Baku to make a choice:

– or go to negotiations and introduce the issue of security guarantees for the Armenians of Karabakh into the basic principles. Modify the topic of “status” into a set of self-government mechanisms in accordance with the Constitution of Azerbaijan, undertake obligations to resolve all issues by political methods, and in return ensure the withdrawal of the remnants of the armed Armenian formations;

– or act with the tried and tested method of pressure and pressure, weakening Armenia and the Pashinyan government to the point where they will accept our agenda in its entirety and without preconditions. This is a plus for us in that both the Russian Federation and the EU are aware of the variability of Irevan’s position. Chaos in Armenia can become a reason for cardinal decisions to defeat the Armenian armed formations remaining in Karabakh and continue to unilaterally establish the border, F. Mammadov concluded.

@mneniyefm

https://t.me/bagramyan26/37833

Diplomat Tofig Zulfugarov believes that the process of agreeing on principles and points can continue indefinitely….

“According to the logic of the Armenian side, the main topic for discussion should be guarantees of the security of the Armenian population in the zone of responsibility of the peacekeeping forces. I think that they will require both military and political guarantees (status), possibly international ones.

The main goal of the Armenian side, as well as their sponsors from abroad, is to change the algorithm of the current situation – the logic of the November 10 Statement, namely the fulfillment of the requirements of the winner in the war, to change to the logic of negotiations of two equal participants in the negotiations….

Until Armenia fulfills the conditions imposed on it by Azerbaijan, the victorious country, it is not necessary to negotiate peace with it. Azerbaijan should force Armenia to take the following measures:

– identification, disarmament and withdrawal from the zone of responsibility of the SPM of all military personnel of Armenian citizens;

– disarmament and dissolution of all illegal armed formations;

– to perform the above tasks, the JMP command should be given a period of no more than 1 month, subject to joint control of the results by the monitoring mission and representatives of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Azerbaijan;

– taking control of the zone of the Zangezur corridor by the troops of the FSB of the Russian Federation within no more than 15 days;

– in case of non-fulfillment of this condition, taking the Lachin corridor under full control by the relevant state structures of Azerbaijan.

Then you can start negotiations on a peace agreement, slowly, – summed up T. Zulfugarov.

https://www.facebook.com/tofig.zulfugarov

Political scientist Ilgar Velizade believes that the theses about the “status of Nagorno-Karabakh”, voiced by Grigoryan, are absolutely unacceptable for Azerbaijan and are fraught with the fact that Baku can openly raise the issue of the status of Zangezur. Speaking in Shusha, President Ilham Aliyev made it clear that the Azerbaijani side reserves the right to put forward counterclaims to the Armenian side, which threatens with very serious consequences, primarily for Armenia itself.

Unfortunately, mutually acceptable approaches to the delimitation and demarcation of the border have not been found either.

“Discussions are underway around this issue. We hoped that by the end of April it would be possible to find solutions and move forward, but I can note that intensive discussions on approaches are currently ongoing,” the head of the Armenian Security Council said.

Moreover, he voiced that it is hardly a realizable thesis on solving the problem of enclaves (to be precise – exclaves) between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

“A possible solution is as follows: the enclaves of Armenia remain with Azerbaijan, the enclaves of Azerbaijan, which are located on the territory of Armenia, remain with the RA,” Grigoryan said, adding that the issue of enclaves has not been raised so far.

“There are enclaves on both sides: on the territory of Azerbaijan there is an enclave of Artsvashen (Bashkend – Azeri), and on the territory of Armenia there are enclaves, and their territories are almost equal,” he said.

However, the Armenian side overlooks one important circumstance. The fact is that the Azerbaijani exclaves on the territory of present-day Armenia occupy a strategic position on the map of the country and the region. Thus, the village of Karki is located within the Armenia-Iran highway and occupies a place on a hill, which provides visual control over the entire western part of the border between Armenia and the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic of Azerbaijan.

The exclaves of Yukhary Askipara and Barkhudarly provide control over the communications linking the southeast of Armenia with Georgia, and also allow the creation of an additional security belt around the Azerbaijani strategic pipeline and electrical communications in the direction of Georgia.

As for the Bashkend exclave on Azerbaijani territory, it is surrounded on all sides by heights controlled by the Azerbaijani side and is not of particular interest from a strategic point of view, since it is located in a remote mountainous area remote from the main settlements.

So, the proposals of the Armenian side can safely follow the same forest path from which they came.

Whether the process of preparing a peace treaty and delimitation turned out to be on the verge of failure is too early to say, but it is obvious that this process risks being delayed with the consequences of the aggravation of the regional situation, Ilgar Velizade wrote in Meta.

https://www.facebook.com/ilgar.velizade

Five principles proposed by Baku for negotiations with Yerevan:

– mutual recognition of sovereignty, territorial integrity, inviolability of international borders and political independence of each other;

– mutual confirmation of the absence of territorial claims of states against each other and a legal obligation not to make such claims in the future;

– refrain from threatening each other’s security in interstate relations, from using force and threatening force against political independence and territorial integrity, as well as from other circumstances incompatible with the purposes of the UN Charter;

– delimitation and demarcation of the state border, establishment of diplomatic relations;

— opening of transport communications, establishment of other relevant communications and cooperation in other areas of mutual interest.

Source: Turan News Agency