Post by Bozur on Feb 27, 2010 18:07:14 GMT -5
Commentary | 26.02.10 | 14:21
Balkan-Caucasian Parallels: Serbia’s controversial political standpoint on Karabakh issue
By Aris Ghazinyan
ArmeniaNow reporter
February 24 political consultations took place in Yerevan between foreign ministries of Armenia and Serbia. At first sight there was nothing principally important, especially taking into account the participation of deputies rather than ministers.
Nonetheless, it’s a symbolic event, because in some sense Armenian-Serbian relations are a mirror reflection of the controversy of the modern world order, hence, it is important to view this meeting as a separate link in the long chain of Balkan-Caucasian parallels.
On the one hand, these relations are almost a thousand years old, moreover, for ages Armenians and Serbians fought against Muslim domination, and after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire together they gained state borders by the Treaty of Sevres. On the other hand, however, Belgrade supports United Nations’ Azeri initiatives in Nagorno Karabakh ‘s right for self-determination and speaks for Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity.
It is noteworthy that both in Yerevan and Belgrade everybody understands that controversy is connected to different approaches to presenting and settling Karabakh and Kosovo issues. Belgrade thinks that Kosovo cannot become a second Albanian state; Baku thinks that Karabakh cannot become a second Armenian state. On this level Serbia and Azerbaijan have similar approaches.
However, both Armenia and Serbia realize that something has to be changed.
The hidden political motive of the negotiations is clear.
Three dozen new countries have emerged on the world political map and each of these new entities of international law declared its sovereignty on the territory of one or another state, which in its turn was a full member of the United Nations Organization – USSR, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Ethiopia, Indonesia…
In some cases the international community supported a people’s wish for independence, in others – it categorically rejected the validity of such claims.
Armenia declared its independence in the early 1990s and in March of 1992 became a universally recognized political entity. Along with Armenia a number of other countries gained an independent political status – Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, and San-Marino. More than enough for one day…
Not much later Monaco, Andorra. Georgia, Croatia, Czech Republic, Switzerland as well as less known countries Kiribati, Nauru and Tuvalu became members of UN. In 1993 Eritrea became an independent political entity, and a Republic of Palau’s flag was raised in 1994.
Closer to the end of last century the oceanic kingdom of Tonga managed to become a UN member. Timor, which in 2002 declared its independence from Indonesia, opened the list of new political entities of the third millennium .
In August 2008, Russia launched the recognition process of Abkhazia’s and South Ossetia’s independence, which, however, was not supported by the majority of countries, with the exception of Nicaragua, Venezuela, and insular Republic of Nauru.
It is understood that democratic or moral principles take a backseat to politics in the choice of recognizing or not recognizing a country.
This is why in summer of 2007 Serbian Prime-Minister Vojislav Koshtunitsa, desperately in need of allies, stated: “If we are talking about respecting territorial integrities and sovereignty of each country, that refers to all countries without exception, and, of course, to Azerbaijan.”
Several months later Belgrade supported the UN’s Azeri resolution “On Azeri lands occupied by the Armenians”.
Around the same period of time Azerbaijan supported Serbia in the Kosovo issue.
Nonetheless, in April of 2008, Serbian Ambassador to Armenia Liliana Bacevic, during her meeting with the then speaker of the parliament Tigran Torosyan, stated that “By supporting Azerbaijan’s resolution in UN on Nagorno Karabakh, Serbia made a disappointing mistake.”
The Ambassador also pointed out that that traditionally Serbia and Armenia had always been friendly states, but “that moment was extremely inconvenient and unfortunate incidents tend to happen in such situations”.
Yet last July Serbian president Boris Tadich visited Yerevan; during the meeting statements were made on the necessity to “develop joint projects, and partnership of the two countries in international organizations.” That became an extremely important decision.
Three weeks ago in Hague the issue of legality of Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of its independence was under consideration. Azerbaijan permanent representative in UN Agshin Mehdiyev made an attempt to prevent a possible warming in Armenian-Serbian relations.
In his speech in the Hague Mehdiyev together with Belarus’ representative criticized the international community’s standpoint on Kosovo, stating that “Fait accompli cannot be accepted. Power is not a right, and force is not law. The United Nations is against violation of sovereignty and territorial integrity of states”.
armenianow.com/commentary/21249/serbia_position_karabakh_conflict