Matthew Bryza: We hope within several more months to finalize the framework agreement that is defined by the basic [Madrid] principles

ANS TV:  You have been lately a frequent visitor to the region. What was the reason for that?

Bryza:  I’m here in my capacity now as the co-chairman of the OSCE Minsk Group.  Also as the person who day-to-day is in charge or coordinating US-Azerbaijani relations.  So this trip, which began a week and a half ago here in Baku, I’ve been asked to come to the region by Secretary Clinton to do everything possible to accelerate progress toward a Nagorno-Karabakh settlement.

ANS:  Already Secretary Clinton is expressing her optimism about some type of settlement up to month of June.  What specifically is considered as a resolution?  What type of decisions?  Is it an agreement? Or Madrid Principles?  What’s behind those words?

Bryza:  I don’t think Secretary Clinton mentioned a date specific.  Not June or any specific month.  I think what she said in our Congress was within the next several months.  What she’s talking about is significant progress or a breakthrough.  What that means is, indeed, on the Madrid Principles, there are several very important elements of the Madrid Principles that need to be agreed upon, and we hope in the next few months to finalize those agreements and then within several more months finalize the framework agreement that is defined by the basic principles.

ANS:  Mr. Bryza, everyone talks about progress.  Secretary Clinton talks about it, you are talking about it, and President Aliyev has also talked about it.  I know you wouldn’t go into details, but what type of issues have been agreed upon that it wasn’t possible to be agreed like a month or two ago?

Bryza:  The Minsk Group process is ongoing, and we make progress incrementally, step by step.  What we need to finalize soon is mutual agreement by the two parties on how we strike the right balance between key elements, key principles of the Helsinki Final Act.  There is territorial integrity of Azerbaijan; there is the principal of self-determination; and there is the principle on the non-use of force, to which all of the countries that are members of the OSCE are committed.

So we are working very hard to find the right balance between those three principles that is acceptable both to Azerbaijan and Armenia.

And if I may add, it is difficult to find just the right balance that is acceptable both to Azerbaijan and Armenia, but President Aliyev is right and Secretary Clinton is right, that we are making such progress.

The way this works is you have to make small, incremental steps to get to the full agreement on the balance, so you can’t always see the incremental progress happening, but we feel it inside the process.

ANS:  Mr. Bryza, as you know, Azerbaijan is always supporting step-by-step resolution of the process and is trying to convince the other side to stay closer to this process.  What do you think, does Armenia agree with the step-by-step principle of resolution?

Bryza:  We have found a way in the spirit of balance to define a settlement that is comprehensive but that will be implemented in a step-by-step way.  I do believe that both countries agree to that.  So the approach is both comprehensive and step-by-step at the same time.

ANS:  As you might know, the core issue disputed between the sides is the timing to determine the status of the so-called Nagorno-Karabakh region.  So, is there any progress on this issue?  And what’s the Armenian view?  How do they want to identify or determine the future status of that area?

Bryza:  There is, of course, always discussion about how to resolve the fundamental dispute between Azerbaijan and Armenia on the final legal status of Nagorno-Karabakh.  That’s one of the absolutely most difficult issues, and that will require a great deal of work by all of the leaders of the countries -- our President, our Secretary of State -- to achieve progress on that particular issue.

ANS:  As you know, the Azerbaijani President has reiterated again that he5 will grant the highest status to Nagorno-Karabakh region and will not be interfering in its internal affairs.  At the same time, the Armenian President during his travel to Iran and meeting with the Iranian Armenians said that Nagorno-Karabakh will never be in the territory or under the rule of Azerbaijan.  So if both sides are taking such a polarized stance and view, is there any chance to find any kind of common ground between these two positions?

Bryza:  What you just illustrated is the last point I was making about how difficult that issue is on the legal status of Nagorno-Karabakh, and how making that sort of concrete progress or resolving those severe or extreme differences and points of view requires work by all presidents.  Again, I mean Presidents Aliyev and Sarkisian and Obama and, hopefully, Medvedev and Sarkozy.  

There is a way to do this, and we’re working on it, and it is not simple.

But the answer will come from the other balance I talked about a little while ago: a comprehensive approach that deals with and resolves all the issues, but implemented in a step-by-step way.

ANS:  Mr. Bryza, there is information in the press that Armenia is going to liberate the regions surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh.  I know it is easier to tell the numbers than name those regions.  So in that sense can you tell us how many regions can be easily returned by Armenia to Azerbaijan without naming them?

Bryza:  I think that, first of all we need to talk about all the regions and about their return in the framework of the comprehensive approach that I described earlier.  I don’t think it’s realistic to expect one or two or some number of territories to return now and then think that we can finalize the comprehensive approach.  I think we need, in fact, the way we’ve negotiated is to agree on the comprehensive approach and then begin the implementation.  And return of territories is implementation.

This is a very important point, so I’d like to be extra precise.  The presidents have agreed to a comprehensive approach according to which the issues in principle of how to deal with all the territories will be resolved, and then actual action will take place on the ground.

In practice, that means we must first finalize our basic principles, which our President and our Secretary of State are committed to helping do with their personal actions.  Then we will see changes on the ground.

ANS:  Mr. Bryza, obviously Turkey is not under your authority or on your radar, but I bet resolution of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and opening of the borders between Turkey and Armenia are not separate issues.

So my question is, why is the United States so much interested in the opening of the borders?

Bryza:  Well, Turkey is on my radar.  I am responsible at the State Department for U.S. relations with Turkey also.  In that capacity I can say that we believe that if Turkey and Armenia normalize their relations -- I’m not saying just open the border -- but normalize their relations, that will open up new channels of cooperation that are historic and profound and positive in nature.

Turkey is a NATO ally.  NATO countries are our closest partners in the entire world, so we want Turkey to be in the strongest possible situation as it prepares for future membership in the European Union, and we want it to have the best possible relations with countries to the east that lead to Azerbaijan, countries to its west, countries to its north as well as Iraq in the south.

We believe that by normalizing relations and over time reopening their border, Turkey and Armenia will create a much more positive spirit in this part of the world, in Anatolia and in the South Caucasus, and that that will help us resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

We know Azerbaijan wonders whether this new relationship between Turkey and Armenia will be helpful for Nagorno-Karabakh.  Our President and Secretary of State are committed to making sure that the answer is yes.

Azerbaijan is our friend and our strategic partner.  We won’t leave Azerbaijan alone.  On the contrary, we want to bring Azerbaijan as close as possible to us to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

ANS:  So does official Washington anticipate that having a breakthrough in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, sealed borders can be opened, right?

Bryza:  What I’m saying is we know we have to achieve significant progress or a breakthrough on Nagorno-Karabakh.  For that reason I have spent five of the last six weeks here in Azerbaijan and in Armenia and will stay as long as necessary and keep coming back with the support of my President and my Secretary of State, to achieve that breakthrough on Nagorno-Karabakh.

ANS:  Mr. Bryza, as you might know, official Baku feels in a way offended by the West, by the United States.  As you know, the President's Chief Foreign Relation Policy adviser was talking about all of the good things that Azerbaijan has done for the West.  Namely he talked about the positive stand on antiterrorism coalition and the participation of our troops in Iraq and Kosovo and also Afghanistan, Mammadov talked about BTC and Azerbaijan’s stand on the Nabucco Project.  So there is a big number of issues that have been done by Azerbaijan for the United States, for the West, but at the same time Novruz Mammadov is expressing his concern about the way Armenia is being treated by the United States, and Mr. Mammadov's point was that there are double standards applied and the U.S. is taking more pro-Armenian stance on these issues, which might result, in a way, in breaking some ties with the West by Azerbaijan.

So do you really think the United States applied double standards?  Different standards for Armenia, different standards for Azerbaijan?

Bryza:  No, of course we didn’t apply double standards.  We have a strong relationship with Azerbaijan; as I said, a strategic partnership.  And you described why or how we have a strategic partnership.  

Our partnership is two-way, it moves in two directions.  It’s not that Azerbaijan does things in the partnership to please the United States, to make us happy.  Azerbaijan does these things because they’re in Azerbaijan’s interests and in our interest, and we do the same.

On security, we are deeply grateful for Azerbaijan’s cooperation in fighting terrorism and in Iraq and in Kosovo, but that has also benefited Azerbaijan by increasing stability.

On Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan, again, Azerbaijan is crucial to that project, as to all of our efforts to develop a new southern corridor for natural gas.  But if you look around in this beautiful building we are now and anywhere in Baku, you will see that Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan has benefited Azerbaijan quite a bit as well.

We have a lot of work still to do on Nagorno-Karabakh.  Again, our President, our Secretary of State, this humble American mediator, will do everything possible to reach that agreement.  But Armenia has to be part of the process.  So a positive U.S. relationship with Armenia is not against Azerbaijan’s interests, it helps achieve Azerbaijan’s interests.

ANS:  Thank you very much.