The probability that the war can break out again is on the agenda as long as the causes underlying the war are not eliminated
13:39, May 28, 2016 | News, Other news
“The fact that nowadays we have no casualties and the hostilities are largely ceased is in itself a positive step. Nevertheless, the causes underlying this four-day war have not been eliminated yet. Moreover, I see no steps towards elimination of such causes to conclude that this ceasefire is not a temporary one.”
In his interview to galatv, with reference to the results of the meeting of the Presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia in Vienna, human rights defender Artur Sakunts stated that as long as the causes underlying the hostilities are not eliminated, they provide ground to conclude that the probability that the war can break out again is still on the agenda.
Note that on May 16, Sargsyan and Aliyev met in Vienna. The main goal of the meeting was to strengthen the maintenance of the ceasefire and to reduce the instances of violence.
Artur Sakunts referred to the causes that led to the four-day April war.
Artur Sakunts
“The matter concerns the ongoing arms race even under the conditions of this restored ceasefire. In other words, the Azerbaijani and Armenian sides continue to purchase arms. At the moment, the only factor for maintaining security and ceasefire remains the measure of mutual restraint in the form of increasing the quantity of arms, which I cannot consider a guarantee since as we saw it is the nature of a weapon to shoot.”
According to the human rights defender, political and diplomatic components, including ceasefire mechanisms relating to the introduction of the addressed accountability mechanism are not developed yet and are not applied.
“Maintaining the ceasefire only by increasing the number of arms is a dangerous process, and if the situation continues in this way, I think that this period is a time only to take a breath and consolidate the powers rather than a time for peace.”
Artur Sakunts also highlights the factor of responsibility noting that hostilities are launched by the authorities of one country, the authorities of another country respond to the attack; in this case, Azerbaijan is the party responsible, and this leads to numerous casualties. As for the issue of accountability of the authorities before citizens, it was pushed into the background, and inadequate attention to this issue is itself also a factor favorable for the war rather than the peace.
“And finally we have a serious challenge represented by Russian Federation, one of the co-chairs of OSCE Minsk Group. That is to say, as long as the support on the part of Russian Federation to the arms race is not terminated, the ceasefire continues to be at risk”, the human rights defender says.
Referring to the mutual military assistance treaty between Armenia and NKR, Artur Sakunts mentioned that he considered signing of such a document an unnecessary step, since from the very first days of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict it was clear and has been stated repeatedly in the international arena that RA acts as a guarantor of the security of NKR.
“Much more significant instruments recording this fact have been adopted on the international arena. If nowadays any additional document should be drawn on the mutual military assistance between Armenia and NKR, signing such a treaty will have no essential significance in any way; it is a document unable to resolve any issue.”
Sakunts believes that the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict should be settled only through negotiations. However, at the same time, he states that the process of ensuring negotiations may carry the negative impact of the factors below: arms race, the absence of mechanisms to investigate ceasefire violations and the lack of responsibility of the authorities of the parties to the conflict before their citizens. These are the factors the absence of which undermines the process of negotiations.
And in the end, Artur Sakunts referred to the area of 800 ha lost during the four-day war, which according Serzh Sargsyan is considered to be a non-strategic area.
“Nowadays, all the parties concentrate on the areas. However, before this war the de facto availability of such areas served no guarantee to prevent the danger that we faced through this war.”
According to the human rights defender, other factors are more decisive in terms of ensuring security, and their availability is essential for ensuring the security of people.
“I consider this issue in terms of the security of people. The area itself is not a guarantee for security. The guarantee for security and prevention of war are diplomacy, foreign and domestic policy, the responsibility of the authorities before citizens and public trust in the state and international organizations and building of mutual trust and dialogue between the conflicting parties. All this has nothing to do with the areas and without these factors, areas themselves cannot be considered a guarantee for security.”