Unlike Moscow, Yerevan and Washington Do Not View "Frozen" Conflicts on the Same Plane

Despite continuing assertions by the international mediators in the Nagorno Karabakh settlement, the authoritative international organizations, and the parties involved in the conflict that the co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group - Russia, the United States and France - act in unison, it has become evident over the past week that there are contradictions between Moscow and Washington, at least in relation to the settlement of the "frozen" conflicts within the CIS area (Nagorno Karabakh, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Transnistria) and the issue of the status of Kosovo.

On March 7 th Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told journalists after his meeting with US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice that Moscow and Washington differ on the methods of settlement of various local conflicts.

Daniel Fried, Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs, was harsher during his
testimony before the House International Relations Committee on March 8 th .

"We do not shy from the areas of disagreement. U.S. relations with Russia's neighbors and other countries in Eurasia seem to be viewed by some in Russia in zero-sum terms, a model that we have both publicly and privately told the Russians is false. We seek to work with Russia and others to resolve dangerous and debilitating conflicts in places like South Ossetia, Transnistria, Abkhazia, and Nagorno-Karabakh. We hope that Russia will take advantage of Georgia's proposals for a peaceful settlement of the South Ossetia conflict and work toward a solution that respects both Georgia's territorial integrity and the interests of the people of South Ossetia," Fried said.

And during his regular briefing, State Department Spokesman Sean McCormack, commenting on Russian President Vladimir Putin's warning that granting independence to Kosovo might set a very dangerous precedent for ongoing conflicts in the former Soviet Union, including
Nagorno-Karabakh and South Ossetia, said, "Each of those have unique characteristics that
need to be dealt with on their own merits, and that's how we view the issue."

It is worth noting that contradictions exist not only between Moscow and Washington but also between Armenia and Russia, which are considered to be strategic partners. In response to the view President Putin expressed on March 1 st that the future status of Kosovo should be of a universal nature, Armenian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hamlet Gasparyan said, "Without permitting myself to comment on statements by a president of a foreign country, I would, however, like to stress once again that Armenia does not view these conflicts on the same plane." Official Yerevan believes that each conflict has its own causes, and historical and legal bases that dictate specific logic and methods of settlement.

During his March 2 nd televised interview with the state-controlled TV channels of Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh, President Robert Kocharyan said he hadn't noticed "any contradiction, any attempt to take the initiative away from each other" among the Minsk Group co-chairs. "There has been no such thing for at least the last seven or eight years, let alone the last one or two years. Perhaps this is also one of the reasons that despite the difficulties, we have, nevertheless, come a very long way. This is also a reason that the Key West negotiations took place, where we were very close to a settlement, and the Rambouillet meeting took place, where again we were quite close to a settlement," Kocharyan said.

On the other hand, Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian doesn't rule out that in the future some difficulties may arise among the co-chairs. During his interview with Shant TV last Friday, Oskanian said that he didn't believe that "there is an attempt on the part of the United States at taking the initiative and, maybe such an impression has emerged because of the recent frequent visits to Armenia by high-level US officials-Matthew Bryza was in Yerevan, in the coming days we are expecting Daniel Fried and Stephen Mann in Yerevan and Baku.I haven't noticed contradictions in the activity of the co-chairs; perhaps in the future some difficulties may arise," he said.

The head of the Standing Commission on External Relations of the NKR Parliament, Vahram Atanesyan, admits that one of the main reasons that the conflict had not been settled is the diametrically opposed positions of the parties: Armenians cannot accept the return of Nagorno Karabakh to Azerbaijan, Azerbaijanis cannot become reconciled to the loss of the territories adjacent to Nagorno Karabakh. "But it is also obvious that there are contradictions among the co-chairing countries of the Minsk Group, in particular, between Russia and the United States. If the cease-fire was established in 1994 thanks to Russian mediation, why then should Russia yield the initiative vis-à-vis the political settlement?" Atanesyan said.

Former Finnish chairman of the OSCE Minsk Group (before 1994 the Minsk Group had one chairing country - Italy; then the institute of co-chairmanship was introduced - first with Russia and Sweden chairing, then with Russia and Finland; since 1997 the format of trilateral co-chairmanship has been in place with Russia, France and the United States chairing) Heikki Talvitie said in relation to potential contradictions among Moscow, Washington, and Paris that if Yerevan and Baku find a solution, the co-chairs and the international community will accept it.

"If you take Russia, the US, and France, most probably those countries have different ideas how the conflict should be solved. But if you take the co-chairs, they have worked together, so they have to find solutions which are attractive to the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan. Basically, the co-chairs work in a way that they ask Armenia and Azerbaijan what might be possible and they draft something and see whether it is possible. If Armenia and Azerbaijan find a solution, then everybody will accept it. The international community will accept it," Talvitie said.

In spite of the failure of the Rambouillet negotiations, the United States, unlike Russia, has not lost optimism regarding the possibility of settling the Nagorno Karabakh conflict in 2006.

Thus, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Matthew Bryza said during his March 7 th press conference in Yerevan, " I wouldn't characterize Rambouillet as a failure or agree with anyone who would argue that the process has stopped or that the Minsk Group has run its course. There was no breakthrough in Rambouillet, but that does not mean a failure. The sides are very close to an agreement or interim agreement. But it's always the last few steps that are the most difficult."

Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs Daniel Fried, who together with American co-chairman of the Minsk Group Stephen Mann will visit Yerevan and Baku later this week, has urged Armenian and Azerbaijani leadership "to seize the moment and help bring the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict to a close."

Following consultations held in Washington on March 7-8, the co-chairs of the Minsk Group issued a joint statement calling "upon the Government of each country to take steps with their publics to prepare them for peace, and not for war." The next meeting of the co-chairs is scheduled for March 20, 2006 in Istanbul.

A group of analysts from authoritative British weekly The Economist has assessed the Karabakh settlement process pessimistically for the foreseeable future. According to The Economist, the probability of resolving the conflict in 2006-2007 has decreased, since elections are scheduled in both Armenia and Azerbaijan for 2007 and this will make it harder for the authorities to make their case for the necessity of a compromise resolution of the Karabakh conflict.