A statement released by German chairmanship of the OSCE dismissed the claims of official Baku.
The statement delivered by Ambassador Eberhard Pohl at the (Special) Meeting of the Permanent Council in Vienna on December 31, 2016 clearly indicates that the “reasons” to block extension of the mandate of OSCE Yerevan office that have been named by Azerbaijan are groundless.
The statement reads as follows:
“I understand that it was not possible to reach consensus in the Preparatory Committee today on the extension of the mandates of the OSCE Office in Yerevan, the Project Co-ordinator in Uzbekistan, the Office in Tajikistan, the Centre in Bishkek, the OSCE observer mission at two Russian checkpoints, nor on the revision of the 2016 Unified Budget. In all these decisions, we are however close to consensus.
The obstacle to reaching consensus on all these decisions today was an activity envisaged by the Office in Yerevan. In the course of our discussions, one delegation raised concerns that a planned activity of the OSCE Office in Yerevan, in the field of humanitarian demining, was not in line with the Mission’s mandate. Let me inform you that, following the UB negotiations 2016, the German Chairmanship sent Special Representative Bächler to Yerevan to assess the character of the Mission’s activities. Based on his findings, we came to the conclusion that the activity in question does not fall outside the Mission’s mandate. However, we took note that concerns persist, and we believe that it is possible to meet these concerns. Together with the incoming Austrian Chairmanship, we have been working to this end.
It is highly regrettable that it has not been possible yet to agree on the extension of the mandate of the Office in Yerevan, although, in terms of substance, a solution acceptable to everyone has been found. The remaining questions are of purely procedural nature, and we are confident that they will be resolved shortly under the leadership of the Austrian Chairmanship. It is our understanding that this would also enable us to take the other decisions currently blocked. As we expect decisions on the mandates of the missions soon, we would advise the Secretary General not to initiate the closing procedure of those missions at this point.
Let me stress that field missions are of particular value to this Organization, and that it is our common duty to ensure their proper functioning. I would like to underline that issues related to particular activities of field missions should be raised, discussed and addressed in the framework of the budget negotiations. In this regard, I would like to draw your attention to the exceptionality of this situation, which is far from being an example for future mandate prolongations.
On a more general note: It is worrying to see that those participating States that, against the background of persisting conflicts, could benefit most from the OSCE and its toolbox are the least inclined to compromise.”
