What Can Peacekeepers of Armenia, Azerbaijan Do Now?

(Interview of the Turan news agency with well-known Armenian peacekeeper Georgy Vanyan)

- In connection with the end of hostilities, the topic of the exchange of bodies of the dead and prisoners of war is increasingly heard. What role can peacekeepers on both sides play in this matter, as well as in the search for missing persons?

- Unfortunately, there are no peacekeepers on both sides of the conflict. Real peacekeeping presupposes the existence of an internal political dialogue, the existence of pluralism within our societies. Only in this way is it possible to enter into a direct Armenian-Azerbaijani dialogue.

Government bodies and international organizations, with the support of the Russian contingent stationed in the conflict zone, are already engaged and will be engaged in the exchange of bodies and the search for the missing. Deficiencies in their work should be in the spotlight and reaction of human rights defenders. I have big doubts that this will be possible at all, even when solving “our” problems, not to mention solving the problems of the “enemy”.

 Real human rights protection assumes that colleagues from Azerbaijan raise the issue with their colleagues from Armenia, and Armenian human rights defenders, using the legal mechanisms of their country, put forward a demand to their authorities, forcing them to solve the problem, and vice versa. This will not happen, since human rights protection does not work in our countries, or, to put it more mildly, in our countries selective human protection is carried out, depending on the conjuncture and the goodwill of the authorities.

- Given the hot phase of the conflict, it is difficult to talk about reconciliation. However, sometime this process must be started. What role can the peacekeepers of the two countries play in this, what steps and programs can non-governmental organizations of the two countries offer to the societies of Armenia and Azerbaijan?

- For 26 years, nomenclature non-governmental structures were created that were engaged in imitation of civil dialogue. Where did they go? They got involved in an information war, and perhaps their further role in reinforcing the inertial culture of "eternity of conflict" has already been outlined. They, who spent time and money on restaurant and tourist peacekeeping, are equally responsible for the loss of life with the authorities. For each person who was somehow involved in such projects, there must come a time of reflection and evaluation.

The peacekeepers were defeated in the 1980s, then they lost in 1994, and now the final defeat has come. Now comes a difficult period of mourning the losses, and grief has come to many families. Official mourning has not been declared in either Armenia or Azerbaijan. Now many people are experiencing the shock of losing their home. Many people who have seen the horror of war return to civilian life. Now the price of words and actions is extremely high. Both individuals and society as a whole must survive and survive without losing human dignity.

- Are you discussing any initiatives in this direction with your colleagues in Armenia and Azerbaijan?

- I don't know how to answer this question. Not long before the war, Zardusht Alizadeh and I sounded the alarm. The “Friends Statement” is the only thing we have been able to do in the faint hope of averting a catastrophe.

For those who today or tomorrow will claim the status of peacekeepers, I advise you to remember that only a direct Armenian-Azerbaijani political dialogue can be considered a victory.

Ilham Aliyev and Nikol Pashinyan should talk to each other, not about each other. This is now the goal of civil peacekeeping. When the opportunity arises, I will start my activities from the point where I left off. I will return to Tekali.

* "Tekali process" is the initiative of Georgy Vanyan. It implies direct dialogues between Armenians and Azerbaijanis in the Georgian border village of Tekali.

Within the framework of this process, for many years Vanyan has been holding discussions and discussions with the participation of representatives of civil society, political and public figures of the three countries of the South Caucasus.          -02I-