The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“U.S. SUPPORT FOR PEACE AND STABILITY IN THE CAUCASUS” mentioning the U.S. Dept of State was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H4826 on June 18, 1998.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
U.S. SUPPORT FOR PEACE AND STABILITY IN THE CAUCASUS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, yesterday two of my colleagues, Mr. Kennedy of Massachusetts and Mr. Kennedy of Rhode Island and I met with Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbot and other top State Department officials to discuss the resolution of the conflict in Nagorno Karabagh, a state in the southern Caucasus region of the former Soviet Union. Our goal was to try to develop some new ideas on how we can work to promote greater cooperation and stability in this strategically-
located region.
Although the State Department clearly considers Nagorno Karabagh to be of the utmost importance, my colleagues and I are concerned the U.S. diplomatic efforts have either stalled or are going in the wrong direction. We are concerned that our diplomatic priorities are being eclipsed by commercial interests in the region and that the traditional American mission of promoting democracy is being diverted by the desire to develop oil resources.
Secretary Talbot and his colleagues from the Department of State who met with us were most gracious, I should say, but there are differences between the State Department and those of us in this Congress who are staunch supporters of Armenia and Nagorno Karabagh.
And, Mr. Speaker, as I have mentioned in this House on several occasions, the people of Nagorno Karabagh fought and won a war of independence from Azerbaijan. A tenuous ceasefire has been in place since 1994, but a more lasting settlement has been elusive. The United States has been involved in a major way in the negotiations intended to produce a just and lasting peace. Our country is a co-chair along with France and Russia of the international negotiating group commonly known as the Minsk group formed to seek a solution to the Nagorno Karaagh conflict. Pro Armenian Members of this House welcome the high profile U.S. role in this process. As I have indicated, we have some substantive differences.
Unfortunately the State Department is most reluctant to drop its support for Azerbaijan's claim of so-called territorial integrity despite the fact that Nagorno Karabagh has been inhabited by Armenians for centuries.
{time} 2230
I would say, Mr. Speaker, it is time for the U.S. and our Minsk Group partners to forget about the idea of Azerbaijan's so-called
``territorial integrity'' as the foundation for peacefully resolving this conflict.
In the first place, given Nagorno Karabagh's autonomous status in the old Soviet system, there is no reason why they must be considered part of Azerbaijan. But more importantly, Mr. Speaker, the people of Nagorno Karabagh do not consider themselves to be a part of Azerbaijani society. And, considering the horrible treatment visited upon the people of Karabagh and the Armenian community in Azerbaijan proper, it is apparent to me that Azerbaijan really has no use for the people of Karabagh.
The State Department officials that we met with yesterday seemed to be open to new ideas coming from the parties to the conflict, and that created a certain amount of optimism. They stressed that if Armenia, Azerbaijan and Nagorno Karabagh all agreed on a status for Nagorno Karabagh that left it free of Azeri suzerainty, the United States would go along. There was a clear understanding on the part of the State Department that the earlier Minsk Group proposal that did not address the status issue was no longer acceptable to Armenia or Nagorno Karabagh.
Mr. Chairman, as we stressed at yesterday's meeting, our top priority should be to push for direct negotiations, involving Nagorno Karabagh and Azerbaijan, without preconditions. And I should add that any proposal that starts with the premise that the map of Azerbaijan must include Nagorno Karabagh is a big precondition.
As a first step, Mr. Speaker, I would stress the importance of strengthening the current, shaky cease-fire as a priority for the Minsk Group. Making a priority of securing the cease-fire would help end the violence, stop the continuing casualties, and help build confidence for further agreements between the parties.
I believe we should also consider the idea of ``horizontal links,'' a federation between Azerbaijan and Nagorno Karabagh among equals. This model has been used in resolving the Bosnia war and in the current negotiations aimed at resolving the Cyprus conflict.
Another key is the need for security guarantees for Karabaugh. As I mentioned, Karabagh won the war and holds the strategic advantage. But it is unrealistic and unfair to except Karabagh to give up its gains on the battlefield for vague promises at the negotiating table by the United States or the other Minsk Group cochairs.
Finally, let me say, Mr. Speaker, that America's role should be that of a nonbiased mediator. It is a role that we have played honorably and with great success in conflicts raging from the Middle East to Bosnia and to Northern Ireland, and there should be no difference here in the case of Karabagh.
____________________
