My first political posting

Listening to all these people yesterday I wondered for the nth time about taking sides: how do you keep out of taking sides? I don’t know. I don’t know if it’s ever possible… doesn’t “not taking sides” mean making no judgments? If it means making no judgments how do you tell the right from the wrong? Transcendence is the answer, but when has transcendence been a political principle (perhaps the only exception was Gandhi. I really need to study his life more)?

According to L. Broers he was trying to be all-inclusive, which in Armenia (and most probably in Azerbaijan it will be same) is interpreted as “artificial symmetry”. I’m fine with all-inclusiveness, but I can’t stop siding with what the adviser to the NKR President said, “Conflict cannot be resolved unless based on the principles of fairness”. So, even all-inclusiveness should reflect these principles.

Another Broers argument which did not sound too convincing (to me at least) was the statement that ACCORD does not attempt to provide a historical overview of the countries. Well, yes, but erring against historical accuracy in any excerpt that is HISTORICAL, does provoke bitterness, and instead of instigating constructive public dialog (which according to the CR is the aim of the publication) it will kindle a heated and hateful historical debate who was before whom…

Finally, going beyond labels: again, too much contradiction in what he says should be done about them. Labels are really what matter in negotiations. How many times have we felt the weight of a wrong word cracking a sound relationship? And here we’re talking about a frozen conflict…

And before I go to Mango for a nice pair of jeans (have my fingures crossed! Can’t really find a decent pair of jeans in this country:-) the final comment: I can’t figure out what is more beneficial in this situation: treating the conflict as one between Armenia and Azerbaijan or one between NKR and Azerbaijan? This uncertainty bothers me..