... not wholly reflect the essence of the conflict, the main sides of which are NKR and Azerbaijan.
Without the participation of Nagorno-Karabakh in the process of negotiations and taking into account the opinion of its people, it is impossible to solve the problem. Authoritative Russian political scientist K.S.Gadgiev ascertains: “To pretend that there is no such a state as Nagorno-Karabakh Republic and to insist on the negotiations for the solving of the conflict without the participation of one of the most important sides involved means not to realize the essence of the problem and to postpone its decision making till infinity”. (K.S.Gadgiev. Geopolitics of Caucasus. M. 2001.P 90).
The only existing agreement is that of Bishkek 1994, which is signed by the three parties including Nagorno-Karabakh.
Within the limits of Russian-American Dortmund conference on Nagorno-Karabakh, which was held in three party format, in 2005 the project of Frame agreement on peace process was gotten. The sound participation of Nagorno-Karabakh brought to a serious success and the breakthrough in the negotiation process and made possible the achievement of the agreement of all the three delegations.
Nagorno-Karabakh has serious remarks on the document. Meanwhile, for the first time after Bishkek agreement of 1994 a document is written which is proved by the representatives of all the three parties of the conflict –Nagorno-Karabakh, Azerbaijan and Armenia and which corresponds to the interests of the people of these countries.
It is important to mention that according to this document the regulation must be done only by peaceful means, through negotiations on 3 parties format. The negotiations must start without preliminary terms. The issue on the territories and refugees must be solved on agreed and mutual basis and must be synchronized with the peaceful process and not precede it. During the negotiations, the status of Nagorno-Karabakh should be legally formed and the peace treaty between Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan should be signed.
In the Frame agreement about the peace process the logics and principles of all-embracing peace process are defined, which include the following articles: all the parties of the armed conflict prove their predilection to the active cease of fire (i.e. proof of Bishkek agreement of 1994); all the parties declare about their liability of refusing the use of force or threat of force and to solve the discrepancy (disagreement) with peaceful means; all the parties are ready to solve the conflicts and problems through negotiations in bilateral and multilateral formats; all the parties agree that with the consolidation of mutual trust between the participants of peace process demands the cease of enemy activities and especially propaganda; all the parties are interested in the development of peace relations between them, which let them maintain and develop their identity, determine their mode of living and safe future; all the parties accept the liabilities to ensure the rights and needs of refugees and internally dislocated people.
As a whole, the package variant of the solving of Karabakh versus Azerbaijan conflict is the priority and more efficient in the modern international practice of the regulation of ethno-political conflicts. The last successful international precedent was the East Timor. In the case of stage after stage plan we have to base on natural peace stage after stage plan where on the first stage the mutual recognition of Nagorno-Karabakh Republic and Azerbaijan Republic and mutual refuse of violence must be fixed, predilection of the conception of peace co-existence of both states of Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan, and during the second stage the remaining more complex problems of regulation will be solved: territories, refugees, borders.
The mutual recognition of NKR and Azerbaijan must be the initial point of negotiations, but not the final. In fact, it is spoken about it in the statement of the radio station “Svoboda” in July 2006 of the American co-chairman of Minsk Group of OSCE Mathew Braze, who emphasized that according to the co-chairmen of MG OSCE, the question of the status of Karabakh must be decided by the people of Nagorno-Karabakh. It is evident for the world community, that without it the peace process cannot continue. The recognition of independence of NKR by Azerbaijan is the shortest way for the solving of the issues on territories and refugees.
The bringing up of dead end military pseudo-stage after stage plans of the regulation by Azerbaijan (i.e., at first territories and refugees and then the possible discussion of the status), are not acceptable for NKR according to some obvious purposes.
First, these plans don’t solve and don’t even consider the main issue of the conflict, i.e., the ensuring of the security of the people of Karabakh, the mechanism and important guarantee of which is the recognition of the independent state status of NKR. Second, the dead end pseudo-stage after stage plans solve only the problems of the governing body of Azerbaijan: the transfer of the territories of historical Nagorno-Karabakh, pretensions on which are announced by Azerbaijan and the return of Azeri refugees and with then, in fact, return of Azeri army. After it Azerbaijan loses its interest in the upcoming negotiation with NKR to sign peace agreement and mutual recognition and whenever it is convenient for them, to start a new war from the positions where it earlier started its wide-ranging aggression and ethnic purges. Third, dead end stage after stage plans breach the balance of forces and don’t guarantee the final decision. The breach of the balance of forces will instigate the governing body of Azerbaijan to start a new war.
The political process and the mechanism of accepting the external political decisions in the...

Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4