Analysis | 06.07.11 | 14:53
“To the East from Kosovo”: Yerevan and Baku take the same stand on Palestinian issue
Practically all of the contemporary political tremors – the events in Greece, Belarus, and Arab countries had been accumulating for several decades and were dictated by the systemic crisis of the world regime.
Drastically increased international efforts on settling the Armenian-Turkish and Armenian-Azeri relations stand out on the backdrop of the leading superpowers' desire to construct a model of a new post-crisis world order.
The contours of the future world order are best discernible in the Middle East. Regardless of a number of principal antagonisms in the relations among a number of Arab countries, “the Palestinian issue” remains the key consolidating factor in the Arab world.
In terms of the “Palestinian vector” it is “easier”, “more convenient” and “more demonstrative” for the US president to show the United State’s support to the hard-to-control Arab movements.
In May, US President Barack Obama stated that one of the main principles of resumption of negotiations between Israel and Palestine is the creation of a Palestine state and recovery of its borders of 1967.
Obama's speech was perceived as an appeal for taking concrete steps.
Both Armenia and Azerbaijan have registered a shift in Washington's foreign political course. In November of 2007, when foreign ministers of both countries were handed the so-called Madrid principles on the Karabakh issue settlement, US Department of State representative made an unequivocal statement that there will be no new states in the nearest future “to the east from Kosovo”.
Representatives of Armenian political circles have visited Palestine and held a number of meetings with local leaders there, among them the leadership of the ruling Palestine National Liberation Movement (Fateh).
A few weeks ago Fateh’s Central Committee member Nabil Shahat paid a three-day visit to Yerevan during which he met with Armenian foreign minister Edward Nalbandyan and other high-ranking officials.
While in Armenia, Shaath stated that he has discussed the Palestinian plan on gaining UN’s support in order to proclaim Palestine’s state sovereignty in September.He specifically stressed that he had felt Yerevan's support both on official and people's level.
Within the same time period (late June) leader of the Palestinian Autonomy Mahmoud Abbas visited Azerbaijan and had a meeting with president Ilham Aliyev. Baku political analysts split in their opinions about the visit, as up until quite recently Azerbaijan had been developing close relations with Israel.
Azeri analyst Zardusht Alizadeh said that the recognition of Palestine's independence and defense of Palestinian people's rights is “Azerbaijan's task” too. If Azerbaijan doesn’t give its support, it cannot expect the international community’s help in the Karabakh issue settlement.
The results of Abbas’s visit surfaced some three days after its completion: Azerbaijan revealed its intentions to support Palestine during the UN voting scheduled for early Autumn.
Hence, Yerevan and Baku are in accord on the “Palestinian issue”. But if the Armenian position is dictated by the realization of the “precedent importance” of formation of a new state “to the east from Kosovo” (i.e. transformation of the “Kosovo” precedent into “Palestinian”), in case with Azerbaijan, Ankara’s influence is quite obvious – Turkey is successfully positioning itself as the main advocate of the interests of the Islamic world and as the main mediator between the West and Muslim East.