Nach Kazan: Friedliche Lösung des Karabach-Konflikts gefährdet?

Das mit vielen Erwartungen überfrachtete Treffen der Präsidenten Armeniens, Aserbaidschans und Russlands vom 24. Juni 2011 in Kazan zur Beilegung des Berg-Karabach-Konflikts endete enttäuschend.

Einen Tag vorher rief Präsident Obama die Präsidenten Sargsyan und Alijew an. In der Presseerklärung des Weißen Hauses steht dazu:

“The President reaffirmed the message expressed in his May 26th joint statement [in Deauville, R.K.] with the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs President Nicholas Sarkozy and President Medvedev that the moment has come for all the sides to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict to take a decisive step towards a peaceful settlement.

President Obama strongly encouraged the two leaders to finalize and endorse the Basic Principles during their meeting with President Medvedev in Kazan. Once the Basic Principles are agreed to, the parties can begin negotiating a final settlement based on the Helsinki principles of non-use of force or threat of force, territorial integrity, and the equal rights and self-determination of peoples.

President Obama told both leaders that now is the time to resolve this conflict and to offer the people of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Nagorno-Karabakh a better future for themselves and for their children. The United States will continue to support both leaders and the Minsk Group Co-Chairs in their important efforts to advance security and prosperity in the region.”

Entsprechend inhaltsleer ist auch die Gemeinsame Erklärung der drei Präsidenten:

“The Presidents of Armenia, Russia and Azerbaijan met in Kazan on June 24, 2011 and reviewed the process of the works conducted under their instructions and aimed at the endorsement of the Draft on the Basic Principles of the resolution of the Nagorno Karabakh issue.

The leaders of the States underlined that mutual understanding has been reached on a number of issues, resolution of which will enhance the creation of the environment conducive to the approval of the Basic Principles.

The Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan expressed gratitude to the leaders of the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chair states – Russia, the United States and France – for their constant attention toward the resolution of the Nagorno Karabakh problem and hailed personal efforts of the President of the Russian Federation aimed at helping to reach agreements.”

Gleichfalls dünn sind die Bemerkungen des amtierenden Vorsitzenden der OSZE, des Litauischen Außenministers Audronius Ažubalis, vom 25. Juni 2011:

“I welcome the efforts in reaching common understanding on a number of issues whose resolution will help create the conditions for approval of the Basic Principles. I hope the work to address the outstanding issues will be continued, to pave the way towards resolving the conflict …The OSCE stands ready to support and complement, including via my Personal Representative on the conflict, any efforts made at the tripartite level and under the auspices of the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs, to put an end to confrontation and instability in the South Caucasus.”

Warum auch dieses Treffen ergebnislos verlaufen ist, schilderte der armenische Außenminister Nalbandian so:

“The President of the Republic had stated in Strasbourg [bei seinem Auftritt vor der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarats vom 22. Juni 2011, R.K.] that it would be possible to expect positive results, progress in Kazan if Azerbaijan did not propose new amendments.

Yet, the Kazan summit didn’t achieve a breakthrough, because Azerbaijan was not ready to accept the last version of the Basic Principles proposed by the three Co-Chairs.

In Deauville the Co-Chair countries had urged the Presidents to come to an agreement in Kazan. President Obama in his phone conversations with the Presidents had made the same call. The President of France Sarkozy had sent messages to the Presidents, as well.

Despite of it the Azerbaijani side proposed approximately a dozen of amendments, and that is the reason why the Kazan meeting did not prove to be a breakthrough.

In any case, I think the meeting was useful in the sense that the detailed discussions continued. And the important point is that President Medvedev, who made a great input in this process during the last three years, expressed willingness to continue his efforts towards according the principles and achieving a final agreement over them.”

Auch wenn die aserbidschanische Seite das ganz anders sieht: Bemerkenswert ist, was zwei Tage nach Kazan sich in Baku abspielte. Bei einer gewaltigen Militärparade (Video 1, Video 2) hielt Präsident Ilham Alijew eine lange Rede.

Die entscheidenden Passagen daraus:

“Our military expenditure is growing from year to year. Whereas in 2003 our military budget was $160 million, in 2010 it reached $2,150 billion and this year a further $3,300 billion. The task I set a few years ago – to raise Azerbaijan’s military expenditure to the level of Armenia’s total expenditure – has already been met. Today, the money Azerbaijan is spending on the military exceeds the entire budget of Armenia by 50 per cent. We live in a time of war. The war is not over yet, only its first stage is, and a country at war should first of all focus on building the army. Today, military spending ranks first in the state budget of Azerbaijan, and this will be the case until our land is freed from occupation. Of course, if a peace treaty is signed, after an end is put to the occupation, such expenses may not be required. But at the same time, under any circumstances, our army must always demonstrate combat readiness. We will use all available opportunities to strengthen and modernize the material and technical base of the army.

We are aspiring to resolve the most painful issue for our country – the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh. Azerbaijani lands have been under occupation for many long years. … The territorial integrity of Azerbaijan must be restored. The territorial integrity of Azerbaijan is not and will never be a subject of negotiations. … Nagorno-Karabakh is native and historical Azerbaijani land. This has always been the case, and so is it today. It is simply occupied temporarily. However, this occupation cannot last long. I am absolutely convinced that Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity will be restored anyway. To do this, we must become even stronger.”

Wie glaubwürdig ist Ilham Alijew, der zwei Tage zuvor in Kazan eine friedfertige Erklärung mit unterzeichnet, um danach in Baku eine geradezu kriegslüsterne Rede an sein Volk zu halten?

Es wäre vernünftiger gewesen, wenn Alijew sein Volk auf eine Kompromisslösung vorbereitet hätte. Doch stattdessen verkündete er – wie in den Jahren zuvor auch – unrealistische Maximallösungen. Das ist unverantwortlich.

Manch einer mag sagen, all das sei bloße Rhetorik für das heimische Publikum. Selbst wenn: Irgendwann könnte Alijew Opfer seiner eigenen Kriegsrhetorik werden und den von ihm immer wieder angekündigten Krieg vom Zaun brechen. Die Folgen wären auch für sein Land fürchterlich, denn längst verfügt auch Armenien über wirkungsvolle Waffen, um die Quellen des aserbaidschanischen Reichtums empfindlich zu treffen, wenn nicht sogar zu zerstören.

Es ist im Interesse der Menschen in der Region zu wünschen, dass trotz dieser Vorzeichen letztlich die Vernunft obsiegt.

S. auch den Beitrag auf dieser Webseite „Berg-Karabach-Konflikt: Wie weiter nach dem OSZE-Gipfel in Astana?“