"A territory controlled by Russia has appeared in Karabakh now"

***

Question: What did you and Hikmet Hajiyev mean when they said that “Baku and Moscow have not yet agreed on the mandate of the Russian peacekeepers in Karabakh”?

Answer: The statement of Hikmet Hajiyev is quite clear. That is, there is a document on the table that regulates the status of Russian peacekeepers. The document was prepared by Russia. However, the Azerbaijani side has not yet signed the document, as it does not suit Azerbaijan. In this regard, negotiations between the parties continue.

Question: It turns out that at present there are no legal grounds for the presence of peacekeepers in Karabakh, and their activity is carried out on the basis of an oral agreement? In other words, does Azerbaijan have the right to expel Russian peacekeepers from its territory at any time?

Answer: Russian peacekeepers operate in Karabakh on the basis of an agreement of November 10, 2020, that is, a joint statement. However, this statement is not a document regulating the activities of peacekeepers. It indicates only the entry of the peacekeepers into the area, their number and the amount of military equipment at their disposal. It also indicates where the peacekeepers will be deployed. That is, on the line of contact and along the Lachin corridor. By the way, Russia's actions actually contradict this provision. As I have already noted, the statement says that the peacekeepers will be deployed on the line of contact and along the Lachin corridor, but in fact today a territory under Russian control has formed in Karabakh. De facto, there is a territory controlled by Russia, and the sovereignty of the Azerbaijani state is not ensured there. State bodies of Azerbaijan cannot enter this territory. In essence, this contradicts the November 10 statement. As for Azerbaijan's right to expel Russian peacekeepers from its territory, a specific deadline was set in the November 10 statement. There is a deadline. If none of the parties objects 6 months before the expiration of the first 5 years, the mandate of the peacekeepers will automatically be extended for another 5 years.

Question: According to the Russian media, on the eve of November 10 there were reports that along with the statement there was a separate document on the status of the peacekeepers. Although Russia and Armenia signed the document, Azerbaijan refused to sign it. Why did Azerbaijan refuse to sign the document? What did not suit Azerbaijan in this document?

Answer: The received information shows that the Azerbaijani side has conditions for signing the document. The main condition is control over the Lachin corridor. But there are other conditions. This is unofficial information. Other conditions are the expulsion of all illegal Armenian armed groups in Karabakh and Azerbaijan's participation in the creation of local self-government in Khankendi. In other words, Baku has set these three conditions. These conditions are aimed at restoring Azerbaijan's sovereignty both over the Lachin corridor and over the territory in Karabakh, de facto controlled by Russia. But it seems that Russia does not agree with these conditions and does not accept them. For this reason, the question is being delayed. These conditions, of course, fully comply with the norms of international law. Because we are talking about the internationally recognized territory of the Republic of Azerbaijan. Russia has de facto illegally established an administration in the area. Now Azerbaijan wants to restore its control and sovereignty over these territories. He put forward conditions in this direction. If the conditions are accepted, Azerbaijan can sign a document on the mandate of the peacekeepers.

Question: According to the media, Azerbaijan demands that only Azerbaijan and Russia sign the document on the status of Russian peacekeepers. In your opinion, can Azerbaijan put forward such a demand and is he right in putting forward it?

Answer: Of course, this document must be signed between Azerbaijan and Russia. Because  the talk is about a peacekeeping operation carried out on the territory of Azerbaijan. The Armenian state has nothing to do with this issue. From this point of view, if such a condition was really put forward by Baku, then it is quite fair and corresponds to international law.

Question: What do you think, is it even worthwhile for Azerbaijan to sign such a document and thereby giving the Russian peacekeepers a legal basis?

Answer: The document on the mandate of these peacekeepers has not yet been published, and we do not know its content. We do not know what specific provisions are there, whether there are points that contradict the sovereignty of Azerbaijan. But having examined similar documents adopted during Russia's previous conflicts in the post-Soviet space, that is, peacekeeping operations in South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Transnistria, we will see that the peacekeeping forces have very broad powers there. Peacekeepers have extremely broad security, law enforcement and humanitarian responsibilities. In fact, they act as local governments in these areas. I think that the Azerbaijani government is trying to prevent the inclusion of such items in the document. Most likely, these articles are also in this document. Because Russia wants to apply the already implemented ready-made model of the peacekeepers' mandate in Karabakh. Azerbaijan is absolutely right when it does not accept this and, as I said, puts forward additional conditions aimed at ensuring the sovereign rights of Azerbaijan. From this point of view, of course, it is impossible to sign the document in the form in which Russia is proposing it. But if the conditions of Azerbaijan are accepted, then it can be signed. Provided that the document does not include new terms for the stay of peacekeepers in Karabakh. Because there are speculations about Russia's intentions to keep its armed forces in Karabakh on a long-term basis. If the document provides for a new term, then Azerbaijan should not agree to this.

Kamran Mahmudov