ALAND ISLANDS ARE FAR AWAY FROM KARABAKH

PanARMENIAN.Net - Head of the "Institute of Peace and Democracy" NGO, Leyla Yunusova persistently tries to deprive Heydar Aliyev of his monopoly of conducting negotiations on Karabakh issue. She has worked out her own "plan of settlement of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict", in which "the interests of Armenia are also taken into account". (This, evidently, is guaranteed by the fact that the "plan" has been submitted for consideration of an Armenian NGO). An alternative plan of conflict's settlement was elaborated also by the former adviser to Azerbaijani President Eldar Namazov and ex-Foreign Minister Tofik Zulfugarov. Both of them do not represent any state structures or political parties. Unlike the plan prepared by Ms.Yunusova, the "Namazov-Zulfugarov Charter" puts the emphasis on the military resolution of the conflict.

Meanwhile, a well-known protector of rights, Chairman of the Azerbaijani National Committee of Helsinki Civil Assembly Arzu Abdullayeva does not agree with the military way of conflict's settlement. She continues to search for a model that would satisfy the Azerbaijani people, but would have nothing to do with bloodshed. While trying to find such a way she more and more inclines to the so-called "Aland" model.

Recently Abdullayeva made a statement urging to discuss the possibility of using the experience of the settlement of the territorial dispute between Finland and Sweden in the Karabakh settlement process. The matter concerns a scheme through which the contradiction concerning the right of property for an archipelago consisting from 8 thousand small islands was solved.

We'll recall that the "Aland" autonomy model was denied several times both by Stepanakert and Yerevan. The Russian co-chair of the OSCE Minsk group Nikolay Gribkov also said recently that the attempts to use this scheme for Karabakh settlement had no future. He noted that in mid-90s the idea of using the experience of the Swedish-Finnish conflict was discussed, but not developed. At present the mediators have lot of serious problems, so they would not start discussing variants that were denied by at least two from the three conflict sides. But this does not stop Arzu Abullayeva. She is not interested in the opinion of Armenia and NKR concerning her idea. She is too enthusiastic to convince her compatriots of the usefulness of the "Aland" scheme. Ms. Abdullayeva is very surprised with the fact that a negative opinion concerning this scheme is being voiced sometimes in Baku.
In her opinion, this model is rather acceptable for Azerbaijan, as a peaceful agreement based on the proposed scheme will allow to make Karabakh the undividable part of Azerbaijan and to disarm it.

Let us recall that the Swedish-language population of Aland archipelago, being worried about maintenance of its national originality, was satisfied with autonomy allowing it to be independent in such spheres as education, culture, health, transport, communal economy. At the same time, they accept the prerogative of the official Helsinki to carry out the foreign policy of the common Finland, deal with issues of defence, control over the ship-construction, and carry out investigation of criminal cases. Alands are not against of a common Finnish currency and common tax and customs system.

According to Abdullayeva, "Based on the "Aland" model, Azerbaijan may create an international document thus giving an impulse to peaceful settlement." Head of the HCA Azerbaijani committee urges her compatriots to focus on the fact that the present-day status of Aland islands is not higher of the status of the Nagorno Karabak autonomous region till 1988. The difference is that "it was a Soviet autonomy, while the "Aland" model is European". Abdullayeva assures that if Azerbaijan agrees to find a settlement based on the "Aland" scheme, Karabakh's rights will be equal to those of Nakhichevan, in accordance with the Constitution of Azerbaijan. At the same time it is odd, why the Armenian side should discuss this scheme. Where is the compromise, if Karabakh gains the same status as it used to have till 1988.

From the historic point of view there is really some likeness between the Alands and Karabakh. The Islands of the archipelago have never been part of the independent Finland, as Karabakh has never been part of the independent Azerbaijan. But the Swedish-language Alands have never had mechanisms for constitutional settlement of the issue of becoming independent from Finland. While Karabakh has left the territory of Azerbaijan in accordance with the laws of the Soviet Union and after the USSR's collapse it has a legal basis to consider itself a subject of the international law, as Azerbaijan itself. We must take into consideration also the fact that in the common Finland the Swedish-language population of Aland Islands has not been under a threat of physical destruction, while the Armeians were exposed to it in Sumgayit city of Azerbaijan. The Swedish-language Alands were not obliged to be involved in a war. While the population of Karabakh, exposed to aggression, was obliged to defend its security. Their factual victory in the national-liberation war cannot be ignored during the negotiations.

The civilized Finland cannot be compared with totalitarian Azerbaijan, where, judging from the big number of political prisoners, even the civil rights of representatives of the titular nation are not protected. On the continental part of Finland millions of Swedish-language citizens live calmly today, and they have everything necessary for feeling themselves a population of a free country. If in Azerbaijan Armenian language were the second state language, as Swedish is in Finland, and if in Baku the Armenians were as much prosperous, as the Swedes in Helsinki, or Tamper, in that case the possibility of usage of the "Aland" model in Karabakh settlement could be considered. But now we must accept the evident fact that the population of Karabakh, who has defended its right for free life in the battle, must decide itself its relations with neighbouring countries, including Azerbaijan and Armenia. If the official Stepanakert has agreed to discuss the principle of the so-called "common state" proposed by international mediators, this does not mean that it is ready to listen to proposals supposing subordination to Azerbaijan.