IS AN N-K SETTLEMENT DEAD? EVERYONE POINTING

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 YEREVAN 000237

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR EUR/CARC, EUR/SNEC

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/15/2016
TAGS: PREL PGOV AJ AM
SUBJECT: IS AN N-K SETTLEMENT DEAD? EVERYONE POINTING
FINGERS


Classified By: DCM. A.F. Godfrey for reasons 1.4 (b, d).

--------------
SUMMARY
--------------


1. (C) Official Yerevan remains careful not to close the door
on the possibility of a settlement in the long-running
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, while opposition politicians and
thinktankers appear almost gleeful in what is being widely
reported as a breakdown in the talks at Rambouillet. Most
importantly, the presidential administration and the Foreign
Minister (septel) are at pains to emphasize Armenia's
willingness to continue negotiation. End Summary.

--------------
BLAMING AZERBAIJANI INTRANSIGENCE...
--------------


2. (SBU) Interviewed by "Hayots Ashkhar," a pro-government
tabloid, Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly Tigran
Torosian (a member of the Republican Party and part of the
governing coalition) called on international organizations to
end their long-running policy of equating Armenia with
Azerbaijan after the failed summit. "This would help to
broaden their room for maneuver and to take steps against the
party which is dragging out the negotiations," he said. If
not, "there will hardly be any real possibilities of settling
the Karabakh conflict in the near future." Oppositionist
daily "Aravot" continued to muse, "One may wonder why the
West is not exerting pressure on Azerbaijan to accept the
Rambouillet variant of a settlement. This might have happened
had we been even half a step ahead of Azerbaijan in terms of
being a democratic and civilized country. But because the
leaders of the two countries are displaying the same
authoritarian mentality, it is meaningless to expect any
privileges (from the international community)." The paper
claimed that the peace deal discussed at Rambouillet could
serve as a "basis for sound mutual compromise. But as was the
case at Key West (in April 2001),the Azerbaijani side proved
unprepared to take the decisive step towards peace."


3. (SBU) On February 13, the Chairman of the Standing
Committee on Defense and National Security, Mher Shahgeldian
(Orinats Yerkir, part of the governing coalition) spoke out
saying he didn't think that the Nagorno-Karabakh settlement
had reached a deadlock. Commenting that, "It's obvious that
the process will be continuous," Shahgeldian expressed a
willingness to see international peacekeepers deployed in the
conflict area, noting that "we should accept this proposal if
it positively affects the process."

--------------
...AND A LACK OF DEMOCRATIC LEGITIMACY
--------------


4. (SBU) Former Foreign Minister Aleksandr Arzumanyan (and
opposed to the current administration) commented February 13
that an N-K settlement remained elusive because both Aliyev
and Kocharian "lack domestic legitimacy" and neither leader
has held a presidential or parliamentary election recognized
as democratic by the West. "That is the reason why there
will be no progress in the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process as
long as they remain in power." In a February 15 interview,
opposition leader Aram Z. Sargsyan commented on the high
expectations surrounding the Paris talks that were not
realized, "The expectations were groundless. First of all
persons that have undertaken to solve such a painful issues
must have the corresponding inner force, they have to be
bright individuals, and be accepted by the society. Neither
Robert Kocharyan, nor Ilham Aliev have the inner force to
solve this issues and to present it to the society. Neither
do they have the desire or the possibility. Both strangle
democracy in their countries." Sargsian noted further that
he couldn't comment on whether "agreement has been achieved
only on seven issues out of the nine discussed, saying that
"Nobody can say whether this corresponds to reality, as the
negotiations are held in strict secrecy, and the presidents
do not make any statements."

--------------
PRESIDENT "VALUES HIS TIME"
--------------


5. (C) Responding to Armenian press reports commenting that
Azerbaijani Presidential Office staffer Mamedov had claimed
that "Robert Kocharian left the negotiations in Rambouillet
unfinished," Armenian Presidential spokesman Viktor
Soghomonyan provided a sharp rejoinder in an interview

YEREVAN 00000237 002 OF 002


February 14. Soghomonyan told reporters that "In reality, on
February 11 in Rambouillet, the Armenian President proposed
that they summarize the talks when it became evident that no
results would be achieved. Robert Kocharian values his time
and does not take an imitation of negotiations seriously, not
even to prolong his stay in beautiful Paris." (Note:
Armenian press reports had previously cited various reasons
for Kocharian's early return to Yerevan, including the death
of Minister of Defense Serzh Sargsian's father-in-law,
although Embassy employees spending February 12 at
Kocharian's favorite winter resort spied the President skiing
and snowmobiling. End Note.) As the Presidential Spokesman
continued to comment on reports of Mamedov's statements, he
said, "I do not want to make any judgements about their (the
statements') aims. The signs of bad upbringing of a
mid-level official are evident, however, as he allows himself
to comment on the actions of another country's president."

-------------- --------------
COMMENT: TRYING TO SHIFT "BLAME," KEEP DOORS OPEN
-------------- --------------


6. (C) Clearly stung by a series of press reports that
portray President Kocharian as the one to "walk out" of the
recent talks in Rambouillet, along with renewed attacks from
some of the more credible opposition thinkers (claiming that
Kocharian could never make a deal because of his lack of
political legitimacy) the Presidential Administration has
begun to launch a small PR counter-attack. Governing
coalition partners in the National Assembly (with the
exception of the ARF-Dashnaks) have also lent their voices to
a "glass-half-full" interpretation, and certainly the Foreign
Minister has weighed in as well. Nonetheless, with no real
information about the talks except for the acknowledgement
that no agreement was reached, comments and speculation among
the general population are generally conforming closely to
previously held positions. The GOAM appears to want to avoid
taking any blame for what some quarters are portraying as
"failed talks," and to leave the door open for potential
future progress on resolving the Nagorno-Karabakh issue,
whether in the near- or long-term.
EVANS