[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 80 (Thursday, June 18, 1998)]
[House]
[Page H4826]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          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.

                          ____________________