Expert: The West and Russia have discrepancies on Karabakh conflict  settlement  

ArmInfo.Russia has launched a process, in which it is trying to pass by the issue of the status when settling the Karabakh conflict, Stepan Safaryan, Head of  Armenian Institute of International and Security Affairs (AIISA), has told ArmInfo.   

Safaryan notes that through diplomatic channels Russia says that as  the problem of the status cannot be solved today, the issue should be  put aside for now, while Karabakh should be given an interim status  and the territories should be returned to Azerbaijan. "The issue of  refugees is not being discussed at all, or if it is, then the matter  concerns the Azeri refugees only. The polemics is between the US and  France on the one hand and Russia on the other hand rather than  between Yerevan and Baku," Safaryan says.     

He recalls that US Co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group James Warlick has  repeatedly said that a package solution to the Karabakh conflict  should be found.  

According to the expert, if they speak of the need to return the  territories, it should be accompanied by a clear and package solution  to the problem of Karabakh's status. It is to this matter that  Azerbaijan objects.  Azeri leader Ilham Aliyev has recently said that  the international community exerts pressure on him in the matter of  recognition of Artsakh.  

"In this context, US Secretary of State John Kerry was more honest.  He said that either all the 6 tasks are comprehensively performed or  the settlement is delayed," the expert says. 

Safaryan thinks the OSCE Minsk Group Co-chairs do not want to make  public the fact that the West and Russia have discrepancies on  Karabakh conflict settlement. "They will always state that the  co-chair countries are unanimous about the settlement and that this  is the only platform where Russia and the US cooperate. It is  formally so, but the reality is different. Today we have a separate  process initiated by Russian President Vladimir Putin and the process  is discussing the so-called Russian plan through trilateral meetings.  The plan implies return of territories in exchange for interim status  and deployment of Russian peacekeepers," Safaryan says. 

He thinks that amid the Russia-West confrontation in Syria,  resumption of hostilities in the Karabakh conflict zone is more  probable today than achievement of settlement.  

He also stresses that initially the Armenian side made a tactical  mistake in 1994 when signing the ceasefire agreement. "The Armenian  side should have signed the agreement as the winning side," he says,  noting that if the agreement included all issues about the Armenian  territories occupied by Azerbaijan and at the same time the return of  Armenian refugees, the picture would be quite different now.  "Unfortunately, all the three presidents of Armenia put these issues  aside and we became the hostages of the rules of this game. On the  one hand, we realize that the problem cannot be resolved by these  rules, but on the other hand we are no longer strong to change the  game rules at the international level," the expert says.      

He recalls that after the April war he has repeatedly said that the  events in April were a new chance for Armenia to change the agenda of  the talks and to say that the game should be continued through the  example of Kosovo - by unilateral recognition of Nagorno-Karabakh. 

"Unfortunately, we failed to be consistent in our statements and  actions. Right after the April events, the Armenian president stated  that Azerbaijan must now negotiate with Nagorno-Karabakh, however,  this failed to happen. We stated that we would not sit at the  negotiating table as long as Azerbaijan keeps undertaking  provocations along the line of contact, but we are still  participating in the talks under the Russian pressure," Safaryan  says.