Elchibey: on the logic of war and peace between Azerbaijan and Armenia

Elchibey Institute held a discussion on "Prospects of war and peace between Azerbaijan and Armenia: the position of national democratic forces". In the discussion, the historical significance of the ideas and provisions on the principles of conflict resolution, reflected in Elchibey's interview with Nezavisimaya Gazeta on May 5, 1993 (“War for many is a means of self-aggrandizement”), has been found useful in terms of its political and scientific-theoretical relevance in the current situation around the problem and clarifying some factual issues that have been distorted in the past, and it has been found useful and appropriate to republish it and bring it to the public's attention.

Undoubtedly, the opinions and assessments in the interview should be evaluated taking into account the military-political and geopolitical conditions of that time.

... On April 2, 1993, Azerbaijan had begun to overcome the military-political crisis it had suffered as a result of the occupation of Kalbajar. The enemy's advance in the direction of Murov and Fuzuli was stopped, and a number of positions were retrieved as a result of counter-offensive operations. Tendencies and attempts to disrupt political stability in the country were largely prevented... A military system was moved into with four times summons and conscription a year, and the first conscription was carried out exceedingly. According to the agreements reached with the Turkish state, 500 officers of the Turkish army participated in the training of conscripts as military advisers. Another 1,000 military specialists were expected to arrive... On April 30, 1993, UN Security Council Resolution No. 822 was adopted calling for the withdrawal of Armenian armed forces from Kalbajar and other occupied territories... In July, it was agreed to sign an oil contract with leading world companies for the production of Caspian oil. According to the intergovernmental document signed on March 9, 1993, in Istanbul on the construction of the Baku-Ceyhan oil pipeline, the design work was carried out rapidly... In the negotiations mediated by the United States, Russia, and Turkey, information about the document of the Urgent Steps of Regulation, which contained the preconditions of a peace agreement and is intended as a transition to a major peace agreement, was in the spotlight of the world media. The war would end in the summer of 1993 with the full restoration and preservation of Azerbaijan's international territorial integrity and sovereignty, and a new stage, which was to open completely different perspectives in the history of the country and the region, would begin...

***

War for many is a means of self-aggrandizement

- Abulfaz bey, the Azerbaijani army has suffered a serious defeat. Armenian armed forces have occupied a significant part of the territory of Azerbaijan - Kalbajar district and a part of Fizuli district. Do you think this does not prolong the prospects for peace?

- The defeat in Kalbajar is a big blow for us. This is a real tragedy for tens of thousands of people who have lost their homes and been displaced. However, I do not think that the tragedy of Kalbajar should necessarily lead to a prolongation of the prospect of peace.

First of all, this tragedy forced other countries - America, Russia, England - to become more active. The telegram sent to me by Clinton clearly states that the Armenians must leave the occupied territories. Iran and Turkey have taken a tough stance. We are strengthening our defense, will increase our military efforts, and I think that under the pressure of both our army and the world community, the Armenians will be forced to withdraw from the occupied territories. At the same time, if the current situation involves the world community in the conflict, active political intervention, the victory of the Armenians will be a defeat for them (Probably, it would be more correct to say Armenian expansionists, not "Armenians", because ordinary Armenians, like all normal people, are interested in peace.). The point is that no matter how strong the Armenian lobby, the Armenian propaganda, and anti-Islamic sentiments in some countries, when it comes to the principles of peace, both the UN, the CSCE, and these countries will be based primarily on international law. This is exactly what we need.

There is another important aspect of the Armenian military success. As you know, Ter-Petrosyan was attacked by the Dashnak opposition, which accused him of not being aggressive enough and "ready to compromise". His condition was not stable enough to take any steps for peace. And I also think that perhaps one of the purposes of the Kalbajar operation was to strengthen Ter-Petrosyan's position. Now, perhaps (and there is reason to hope so), Ter-Petrosyan's hand will be able to breathe again when no one can accuse him of being "sold to the Turks" and realism-leaning individuals manifesting themselves in his party - the EHY, as well as in other Armenian organizations (for example, New Path), will be able to defeat extremist and occupying forces.

- So do you think that despite all that has happened, Armenia and Azerbaijan are moving towards peace?

- Yes. I think this movement has a deep psychological basis. Irrational and suicidal-nature national hatred flared up. Millions of people took to the streets. However, this situation could not last long. Now all this is left behind. Now the Armenians are also tired of suffering, and most of them probably think of one thing - “I wish the war would end soon.” Of course, we are not talking about a shameful defeat but the majority in Armenia already accepts peace, and it is likely that both this acceptance and this majority will increase day by day. Even in Azerbaijan, the mood today is different from yesterday. Maybe our fatigue is less than that of the Armenians - somehow our resources are rich, our economic situation is better... But our fatigue is also increasing day by day... The tendency to peace is also growing.

- Maybe during your presidency, Azerbaijan was not so prepared to make concessions to Armenia? Maybe if you had enough agility, the war would already be over?

- Perhaps. After all, as I just said, we have changed too. But in any case, I think that before blaming us, before criticizing us for not being prepared enough to compromise, it is necessary to demand that Armenia take the easiest and most natural steps... After all, the decision of the Supreme Soviet of Armenia to annex Nagorno-Karabakh to Armenia has not been revoked yet. They rarely talk about this decision but they do not revoke it. In addition, the Supreme Soviet of Armenia has another decision too. According to that decision, any agreement or document of the Armenian government agreeing that Nagorno-Karabakh is the territory of Azerbaijan was considered illegal in advance. Apparently, in such a situation, it is difficult to take any steps for negotiations with Armenia.

- In any case, do you imagine any peace agreement that would not be humiliating for any of the parties, that no one would consider itself defeated? Or there is a harsh dilemma: either Karabakh remains in Azerbaijan - Armenia is defeated and humiliated, or it is annexed to Armenia - Azerbaijan is humiliated.

- Armenians must determine for themselves why they are waging this war. If they fight to take Karabakh from Azerbaijan, there will never be peace in the Caucasus. There may be a short break but then the war will flare up again. We cannot accept that Karabakh is not ours. The fact that Karabakh is the territory of Azerbaijan is a legal fact. The borders of Azerbaijan have been confirmed by the world community, and our war, in this sense, is not just a war for Karabakh, but a war for international law, the reaffirmation of the principle of inviolability of borders. Azerbaijan does not want to be the first country to undergo border changes that will lead the world into chaos.

However, if Armenia's goal is not to seize Karabakh and then annex it to Armenia (not immediately and soon but after a while, that is, to create an independent enclave in Karabakh that has lost its dependence on Azerbaijan and declare its "annexation" to Armenia), to ensure a normal way of life, civil and national rights for the Armenians of Karabakh, if the seizure of Karabakh is nothing but an extremist form of expression of this attempt, then it is possible to work in such a peaceful environment that both Armenians and Azerbaijanis consider themselves to have achieved their goals. This would not be a temporary but a permanent peace that will allow us to cooperate in economic, cultural, and other fields.

Of course, this is a complex issue, for which a great deal of work, real negotiations are needed. Karabakh must be disarmed, and there must be police in every village inhabited by Azerbaijanis and Armenians. Any form of control between the Karabakh Armenians and Armenia through Lachin should be applied in such a way that it really serves humanitarian purposes. There is a need for peacekeeping forces, and it is also necessary to ensure that foreign states impose economic sanctions on the party violating the terms of the agreement. There are many other problems here. But all these problems are solvable. And I think most of these problems will go away on their own if the peace process starts. Because just as there is the inertia of war now, there will be the inertia of peace then, and fear and mistrust will disappear. On the contrary, there will be a fear of losing the benefits that can be gained as a result of peace and economic integration (if there is peace, economic integration between Azerbaijan and Armenia will be inevitable).

- You say that Armenia has not yet revoked its decision to annex Nagorno-Karabakh. After all, you also uphold the decision to abolish NKAO.

- It is no longer possible to restore Nagorno-Karabakh. It was a specific Soviet institution. Now the situation is different and other forms are needed to ensure the national rights of the Armenians of Karabakh. What forms? We must talk about it with Armenians.

- When you say "we must talk to Armenians", do you mean the Armenians of Karabakh?

- You probably understand that, contrary to what Armenia has confirmed, it is not only local Armenians who are fighting in Karabakh. Not only trucks full of food but also tanks pass through the Lachin corridor. What Armenia says is fiction, Armenia itself is fighting. But we are not against talks with Karabakh Armenians. However, we see two dangers in these talks. First of all, these talks should not be the first legal step that could lead to the separation of Karabakh from Azerbaijan. They should be talks about the status of Karabakh, the rights of Karabakh Armenians in Azerbaijan.

Secondly, a situation should not arise so that Karabakh leaders, whose status has "risen" since the beginning of the war, (After all, the whole of Armenia and the entire Armenian diaspora look at them, they are now almost "heads of government", so the continuation of the war is, in a sense, beneficial to them.) should not violate all agreements while the main burden of the war fell on Azerbaijan and Armenia.

- What do you think is the main obstacle to peace?

- There is a concept called the inertia of war. Ending the war is not an easy task. After all, it should not end in shame, you should be able to say later that you did not wage a war in vain and that it was not aimless, especially when you started the war yourself. In addition, war is a means of gaining fame and status for many (For example, those leaders of the Karabakh Armenians, who were they in peace?). For others, war is a source of wealth. There are many among Armenians, ourselves, or those who sell arms to them or to us. After all, any military attack brings a lot of money to someone. For the most powerful and diverse forces, the end of the Azerbaijani-Armenian war means the purification of turbid waters, which create favorable conditions for fishing.

- Don’t you want to explain this topic in detail?

- No, I will not explain in detail.

- How do you see the role of Russia in the peace process?

- We welcome the mediation of any country or international organization, including Russia. We want to be good neighbors with Russia. One thing we want is not to become dependant. We do not want our independence to become fiction. There is a strong tendency in Armenia to "draw" Russia into the Caucasus, to turn it into a "protector" or "big brother" again. This is the traditional role of the Armenians, who began to play this role almost in the time of Peter I.

But it seems to me that Russia did not give up the Soviet Union in order to keep the former Soviet republics under its sphere of influence again. Armenia itself has a force with different positions. Independence is valuable for many Armenians as well, and they understand that the establishment of peace between us (both Armenians and Azerbaijanis) and our independence are inseparable. Continuation of the war will not only lead to unimaginable destruction, casualties, and economic losses but also result in the loss of the independence that our peoples have gained by working tooth and nail. On the contrary, achieving peace would be a severe blow to all efforts to restore the empire. And even if the imperial forces that are now in Russia, either in opposition or working secretly in government structures, come to power, they will not be able to subjugate the peaceful Transcaucasia - the "Caucasian House".

- I witness that Turkey is sharply criticized in your newspapers for helping Armenia. How do you see this situation, and in general, what is your opinion on the improvement of relations between Armenia and its "historical enemy"?

- Turgut Ozal once asked me how I feel about Turkey giving bread to Armenia. I told him that bread was not a weapon and that it was a sin not to give bread to a hungry person.

I think the Turks are moving in the right direction, thinking about the future historical perspective. If Armenians now reconcile with their main "historical enemy" due to the fear of isolation or the Karabakh war, they should take advantage of this because this war will end sooner or later but the neighborhood between Armenians and Turks is eternal. And if the Armenian hatred against the Turks is eliminated, it will be of great importance for the peaceful development of our region. However, Turkey's position on the Karabakh conflict is very strict and unequivocal...

Dmitri Furman. Nezavisimaya Gazeta, May 5, 1993

(The text of the interview in the Azerbaijani language was published in the Azerbaijan newspaper on May 11, 1993, under the headline "War for many is a means of self-aggrandizement."