Baku. 19 May. REPORT.AZ/ Liberation of Azerbaijan's occupied territories may have a positive impact on the reputation of the world's leading powers.
But, unfortunately, the OSCE Minsk Group co-chair US, France and Russia cannot grab such a reputation.
Instead, they continue to put pressure on state with occupied lands - Azerbaijan through various means, diplomatic channels.
On the day of Lachin's occupation - on May 18, the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs have issued a statement condemning Azerbaijan. The co-chairs said that on May 15, the Azerbaijani side, has launched rocket attacks on other side of the contact line. On May 16 and 17, Armenian Armed Forces opened retaliatory fire using various-caliber mortars."
Spokesperson of Azerbaijani Ministry of Foreign Affairs Hikmat Hajiyev in response to the diplomats said:
"A standard statement of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs on May 18 regarding ceasefire just has a symptomatic character against the background of the 25th anniversary of occupation of Lachin district of Azerbaijan by the Armenian armed forces and Armenian president's parliamentary speech ignoring updated Madrid principles."
The spokesperson also added: "Armed Forces of Azerbaijan based in the sovereign territories of Azerbaijan and ensure defense of our country and safety of civilian population from Armenian armed forces, which using force have occupied the Azerbaijani territories."
It is very regrettable and striking that the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs shamelessly say that on May 16 and 17, Armenian armed forces opened a "retaliatory fire". After all, what are Armenian troops are doing in the territory of Azerbaijan? So far, the international organization and its Minsk Group co-chairs hadn't mention the fact that Azerbaijani territories have been occupied by Armenia and its tutelary.
It can be considered that the co-chairs made such a declaration to support Armenian president Serzh Sargsyan and get his appreciation.
Yesterday, at first meeting of the new parliament of Armenia S. Sargsyan stated about refusal from Madrid principles and commitment to Kazan principles. Thus, official Yerevan has clearly stepped back from proposals that on the agenda in Yerevan since 1997 and then subsequently formed as the Madrid principles.
Notably, according to Madrid principles, in the first stage, Armenian armed forces must withdraw from 5 districts that are not part of Nagorno-Karabakh and they must be handed over to Azerbaijan. It is envisaged to return Agdam, Fizuli, Jabrayil, Zangilan, Gubadli and 13 villages of Lachin district to Azerbaijan at the initial stage. Then, all communication lines in the region will be opened, donor conferences will be held for rehabilitation of liberated lands. Peacekeeping observers will be placed in the region, security of internally displaced persons' (IDPs) return to their homes will be provided. In the next stage, Lachin and Kalbajar districts will be completely liberated, Azerbaijani community returns to Nagorno-Karabakh, after which the legal status of Nagorno-Karabakh is determined within the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. In such case, Nagorno-Karabakh is granted a high autonomy, similar to model of Tatarstan and Bashkortostan within the Russian Federation.
President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev declared that he can agree with Madrid principles updated in June of 2010. Kazan principles also similar to the document adopted in Madrid. But Azerbaijani side didn’t sign the document in capital of Tatarstan, as didn’t come to agreement on the issue related to status of the Nagorno-Karabakh.
During past time, Azerbaijan numerous times declared that it supports restoration of territorial integrity peacefully. Co-chairs of OSCE Minsk Group haven’t yet satisfied just and fair requirement of Azerbaijan.
They simply sound statements similar the one they made on May 18, try to blame Azerbaijan, call to follow ceasefire, prevent escalation on the frontline. None of these statements was effective for liberation of Azerbaijani territories from occupation.
In reality, statement of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs on the day of the 25th anniversary of Lachin’s occupation can be considered as an indicator of their indifference towards fair resolution of the conflict.
In other words, it can be concluded that the co-chairs are not concerned of the fact of occupation or even date of occupation of Azerbaijani territories.