|
Characterizing
his speech as a "new initiative", Obama said that to resolve
problems it is necessary to stop being prisoners of the past.
These words are significant in the Caucasus region as well.
Indeed, it remains hostage to the past; the Armenian politicians
try to justify their actions by their own interpretations of
history. This applies particularly to the characterization of the
Armenian rebellion in eastern Anatolia as the "Armenian Genocide",
as well as ongoing attempts to prove that the Karabakh is
allegedly a historical Armenian land.
Obama's words should make it clear for Armenian public and
leadership once again that the interpretation of history,
especially with a shade of nationalism, is not a weighty argument
for land occupation, ethnic cleansing, creation of mono-ethnic
societies and territorial claims against neighbors in the early
21st century.
To survive in conditions of globalization in the 21st century,
tolerance, cooperation and integration are fundamental terms.
In my opinion, Obama's statement that America would not continue
to impose a system of state establishment under pretext of
democracy is interesting. In doing so, the U.S. president also
noted that his country would cooperate, as always, only with
governments, which are based on the will of the people and respect
human rights. This part of the speech is very important in terms
of reevaluation of the U.S. approach to addressing regional
separatist conflicts, including Karabakh.
The experience of Kosovo, Abkhazia and South Ossetia showed that
under Bush's administration, America had no desire to completely
solve regional conflicts on the basis of the understanding of
justice, but only in terms of their own interests. Indecisive
conflicts were resolved by the change of power in one of the
conflicting countries.
Obviously, in the case of Kosovo the election of pro-Western
Serbian President Boris Tadic ensured a relatively silent
rejection of Kosovo in exchange for promises of integration into
the EU. Almost the same model was applied in Georgia, where the
actions of Mikhail Saakashvili removed the separatist conflicts
from the agenda after recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia by
Russia though did not settle them.
In Azerbaijan and Armenia, this option did not succeed because of
the consequence of internal factors, as well as the influence of
Russia. That is why the Karabakh conflict will not be resolved by
the model applied in Kosovo, Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The new
U.S. administration understands that in order to solve conflicts
respect to the mediator should not be imposed, but earned.
The strategic importance of Azerbaijan is gradually being realized
in the issue of the Karabakh conflict settlement. Today,
Azerbaijan holds the most independent policy in the region and at
the same time, by virtue of geography, power and cultural factors,
it is the only gate for the United States to the Turkic Central
Asia. Azerbaijan is a secular Muslim country with deep traditions
of tolerance, it is Azerbaijan bordering with Iran that will be
visited by Israeli president and it is Azerbaijan that might be a
reliable model of tolerance and mutual understanding for the
Muslim countries of the region.
We hope that the recent decision by the administration of U.S.
President to upset the balance of military assistance to Armenia
and Azerbaijan in favor of the latter, as well as a new bill in
the U.S. Congress to repeal the amendment Jackson-Venik and
lifting trade restrictions in the relations of the United States
and Azerbaijan, will be a beginning of a new, more pragmatic and
successful approach of the U.S. in the Caucasus region. |
