Agreement on strengthening the ceasefire

  • Country/entity
    Armenia
    Azerbaijan
    Nagorno-Karabakh
  • Region
    Europe and Eurasia
    Europe and Eurasia
    Europe and Eurasia
  • Agreement name
    Agreement on strengthening the ceasefire
  • Date
    4 Feb 1995
  • Agreement status
    Multiparty signed/agreed
  • Interim arrangement
    Yes
  • Agreement/conflict level
    Interstate/intrastate conflict(s) ( Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict (1991 - ) )
  • Stage
    Ceasefire/related
  • Conflict nature
    Government/territory
  • Peace process
    Armenia-Azerbaijan-Nagorno Karabakh: Process 1990s
  • Parties
    M. MAMEDOV
    Minister of Defence of Azerbaijan

    Serge Sargsyan
    Minister of Defence of Armenia

    Samvel Babayan
    Commander of the Army of Nagorno Karabakh
  • Third parties
    Vladimir Kazimirov
    on behalf of the Co-chairmen of the OSCE Minsk Conference
  • Description
    This agreement details provisions to strengthen the Bishkek ceasefire regime. The agreement was drawn up as a series of letters: 1 sent out to the parties by the Russian mediator on behalf of the Minsk conference chairmen with the proposals for strengthening the ceasefire, followed by 3 identical reply letters from the parties confirming their acceptance of the terms of the agreement.


Groups

  • Children/youth

    No specific mention.

  • Disabled persons

    No specific mention.

  • Elderly/age

    No specific mention.

  • Migrant workers

    No specific mention.

  • Racial/ethnic/national group

    No specific mention.

  • Religious groups

    No specific mention.

  • Indigenous people

    No specific mention.

  • Other groups

    No specific mention.

  • Refugees/displaced persons

    No specific mention.

  • Social class

    No specific mention.


Gender

  • Women, girls and gender

    No specific mention.

  • Men and boys

    No specific mention.

  • LGBTI

    No specific mention.

  • Family

    No specific mention.


State definition

  • Nature of state (general)

    No specific mention.

  • State configuration

    No specific mention.

  • Self determination

    No specific mention.

  • Referendum

    No specific mention.

  • State symbols

    No specific mention.

  • Independence/secession

    No specific mention.

  • Accession/unification

    No specific mention.

  • Border delimitation

    No specific mention.

  • Cross-border provision

    No specific mention.


Governance

  • Political institutions (new or reformed)

    No specific mention.

  • Elections

    No specific mention.

  • Electoral commission

    No specific mention.

  • Political parties reform

    No specific mention.

  • Civil society

    No specific mention.

  • Traditional/religious leaders

    No specific mention.

  • Public administration

    No specific mention.

  • Constitution

    No specific mention.


Power sharing

  • Political power sharing

    No specific mention.

  • Territorial power sharing

    No specific mention.

  • Economic power sharing

    No specific mention.

  • Military power sharing

    No specific mention.


Human rights and equality

  • Human rights/RoL general

    No specific mention.

  • Bill of rights/similar

    No specific mention.

  • Treaty incorporation

    No specific mention.

  • Civil and political rights

    No specific mention.

  • Socio-economic rights

    No specific mention.


Rights related issues

  • Citizenship

    No specific mention.

  • Democracy

    No specific mention.

  • Detention procedures

    No specific mention.

  • Media and communication
    Rights related issues→Media and communication→Other
    Page 1, 1: In the event of incidents threatening the ceasefire, to immediately inform the other Side (and in a copy – the Mediator) in written form by facsimile or by the PM line with an exact specification of the place, time and character of the incident and its consequences.
    The other Side is informed that measures are being taken for non-admission of reciprocal actions which could lead to the aggravation of the incident. Accordingly, the other Side is expected to take appropriate measures immediately. If possible, proposals about taking urgent measures to overcome this incident as quickly as possible and restore the status quo ante are also reported.

    Page 1, 2: Upon receiving such a notification from the other Side, to immediately check the facts and give a written response not later than within 6 hours (in a copy – to the Mediator).

    Page 1, 3: The Sides agree that official sources will inform the mass media about the incident only after receiving the response from the other Side and if this response is delayed then not earlier than 7 hours after the transference of the initial address on a given issue to the other Side. At the same time, the Sides will objectively reflect the response of the other Side in the report for the press as well as notify that contacts on a given issue are continuing.

    Page 1, 4: With a view to establish a reliable direct urgent communication each Side allocates two PM devices and ensures 24-hour duty of responsible officials at both devices. The corresponding numbers of the PM devices must be reported via the Mediator not later than February 6, 1995.
    If it is impossible to use fax for sending urgent reports by the Sides to each other or to the Mediator corresponding texts are dictated by the PM communication line.

    Page 2, 10: The Sides are obliged to refrain from public statements that can lead to the escalation of the conflict.
  • Mobility/access

    No specific mention.

  • Protection measures

    No specific mention.

  • Other

    No specific mention.


Rights institutions

  • NHRI

    No specific mention.

  • Regional or international human rights institutions

    No specific mention.


Justice sector reform

  • Criminal justice and emergency law

    No specific mention.

  • State of emergency provisions

    No specific mention.

  • Judiciary and courts

    No specific mention.

  • Prisons and detention

    No specific mention.

  • Traditional Laws

    No specific mention.


Socio-economic reconstruction

  • Development or socio-economic reconstruction

    No specific mention.

  • National economic plan

    No specific mention.

  • Natural resources

    No specific mention.

  • International funds

    No specific mention.

  • Business

    No specific mention.

  • Taxation

    No specific mention.

  • Banks

    No specific mention.


Land, property and environment

  • Land reform/rights

    No specific mention.

  • Pastoralist/nomadism rights

    No specific mention.

  • Cultural heritage

    No specific mention.

  • Environment

    No specific mention.

  • Water or riparian rights or access

    No specific mention.


Security sector

  • Security Guarantees

    No specific mention.

  • Ceasefire
    Security sector→Ceasefire→Ceasefire provision
    [Summary: The entire agreement details measures to strengthen the permanent Bishkek Ceasefire of 12/05/94.]

    Page 1, 1: In the event of incidents threatening the ceasefire, to immediately inform the other Side (and in a copy – the Mediator) in written form by facsimile or by the PM line with an exact specification of the place, time and character of the incident and its consequences.
    The other Side is informed that measures are being taken for non-admission of reciprocal actions which could lead to the aggravation of the incident. Accordingly, the other Side is expected to take appropriate measures immediately. If possible, proposals about taking urgent measures to overcome this incident as quickly as possible and restore the status quo ante are also reported.

    Page 1, 2: Upon receiving such a notification from the other Side, to immediately check the facts and give a written response not later than within 6 hours (in a copy – to the Mediator).
  • Police

    No specific mention.

  • Armed forces

    No specific mention.

  • DDR

    No specific mention.

  • Intelligence services

    No specific mention.

  • Parastatal/rebel and opposition group forces

    No specific mention.

  • Withdrawal of foreign forces

    No specific mention.

  • Corruption

    No specific mention.

  • Crime/organised crime

    No specific mention.

  • Drugs

    No specific mention.

  • Terrorism

    No specific mention.


Transitional justice

  • Transitional justice general

    No specific mention.

  • Amnesty/pardon

    No specific mention.

  • Courts

    No specific mention.

  • Mechanism

    No specific mention.

  • Prisoner release

    No specific mention.

  • Vetting

    No specific mention.

  • Victims

    No specific mention.

  • Missing persons

    No specific mention.

  • Reparations

    No specific mention.

  • Reconciliation

    No specific mention.


Implementation

  • UN signatory

    No specific mention.

  • Other international signatory
    As a third-party mediator:
    Vladimir Kazimirov
    on behalf of the Co-chairmen of the OSCE Minsk Conference
  • Referendum for agreement

    No specific mention.

  • International mission/force/similar

    No specific mention.

  • Enforcement mechanism
    Page 1, 5: The Sides agree that the Mediator will take into consideration only those addresses of the Sides in which it is proved that a given issue has already been raised before the other Side.

    Page 1, 6: In special cases the Sides may ask the Mediator to hold an urgent meeting with their representatives with a view to examine the incident and the formed situation.

    Page 1, 7: If necessary, by the petition of one of the Sides and with the consent of the other Side a mixed group of inspectors including, if the Sides asks about it, representatives of the Mediator may be dispatched to investigate the situation on the spot.

    Page 2, 8: Without waiting for the completion of the investigation of the incident the Sides are obliged to take measures to prevent the escalation with the purpose of restoring the status quo ante, at the same time maximally taking into consideration the possible recommendations of the Mediator.

    Page 2, 9: Depending on the severity of the situation, it may be submitted by the Mediator for investigation at a meeting of the OSCE Minsk Group or at the OSCE Permanent Council.
  • Related cases

    No specific mention.

  • Source
    ALI ABASOV, HAROUTIUN KHACHATRIAN, THE KARABAKH CONFLICT Variants of settlement: Concepts and reality
    Third edition, revised and updated, Baku-Yerevan, 2006. Available from: http://www.ca-c.org

TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE AZERBAIJAN REPUBLIC Mr. HEYDAR ALIYEV*

Dear Heydar Aliyevich,

According to the exchange of views on the issues of strengthening the ceasefire regime, which took place in Baku, I am sending to you, as it was agreed, the proposals of the Minsk Conference co-chairmen.

The proposals of the mediator on strengthening the ceasefire in the Nagorno Karabakh conflict

On behalf of the Co-chairmanship of the OSCE Minsk Conference (hereinafter – the Mediator), with the purpose of strengthening the ceasefire regime established in the conflict region since May 12, 1994 and creating more favourable conditions for the progress of the peace process, we jointly suggest that the conflicting sides (hereinafter – the Sides) should assume the following obligations:

1. In the event of incidents threatening the ceasefire, to immediately inform the other Side (and in a copy – the Mediator) in written form by facsimile or by the PM line with an exact specification of the place, time and character of the incident and its consequences.

The other Side is informed that measures are being taken for non-admission of reciprocal actions which could lead to the aggravation of the incident.

Accordingly, the other Side is expected to take appropriate measures immediately.

If possible, proposals about taking urgent measures to overcome this incident as quickly as possible and restore the status quo ante are also reported.

2. Upon receiving such a notification from the other Side, to immediately check the facts and give a written response not later than within 6 hours (in a copy – to the Mediator).

3. The Sides agree that official sources will inform the mass media about the incident only after receiving the response from the other Side and if this response is delayed then not earlier than 7 hours after the transference of the initial address on a given issue to the other Side.

At the same time, the Sides will objectively reflect the response of the other Side in the report for the press as well as notify that contacts on a given issue are continuing.

4. With a view to establish a reliable direct urgent communication each Side allocates two PM devices and ensures 24-hour duty of responsible officials at both devices.

The corresponding numbers of the PM devices must be reported via the Mediator not later than February 6, 1995.

If it is impossible to use fax for sending urgent reports by the Sides to each other or to the Mediator corresponding texts are dictated by the PM communication line.

5. The Sides agree that the Mediator will take into consideration only those addresses of the Sides in which it is proved that a given issue has already been raised before the other Side.

6. In special cases the Sides may ask the Mediator to hold an urgent meeting with their representatives with a view to examine the incident and the formed situation.

7. If necessary, by the petition of one of the Sides and with the consent of the other Side a mixed group of inspectors including, if the Sides asks about it, representatives of the Mediator may be dispatched to investigate the situation on the spot.

8. Without waiting for the completion of the investigation of the incident the Sides are obliged to take measures to prevent the escalation with the purpose of restoring the status quo ante, at the same time maximally taking into consideration the possible recommendations of the Mediator.

9. Depending on the severity of the situation, it may be submitted by the Mediator for investigation at a meeting of the OSCE Minsk Group or at the OSCE Permanent Council.

10. The Sides are obliged to refrain from public statements that can lead to the escalation of the conflict.

We ask to confirm officially the readiness to assume the aforementioned obligations in full measure at the level of the top military leadership no later than on February 4, 1995 in order to consider, after receiving an appropriate response from the Sides, these obligations as effective beginning on February 6, 1995.

Vladimir Kazimirov

on behalf of the Co-chairmen

of the OSCE Minsk Conference

3 February, 1995

________________________________________

Attached:

The proposal on the text of the response.

The Co-chairmanship of the OSCE Minsk Conference

To Ambassador V. N. Kazimirov To Ambassador A. Burner

I confirm the readiness of Azerbaijan to assume the obligations stated by you in your proposal of February 3, 1995 in full measure.

In case of receiving your confirmation about the general consent to these obligations, we will consider this agreement as effective beginning on February 6, 1995.

M. MAMEDOV

Minister of Defence of Azerbaijan

4 February, 1995

Note:

On the same day, February 3, 1995, similar letters were sent to President of Armenia Levon Ter-Petrosyan and leader of Nagorno Karabakh Robert Kocharyan.

On February 4, 1995, the same day when the letter of Mamedov was received, reply letters were received (identical with the one cited above) from Armenia’s Minister of Defence Serge Sargsyan and Commander of the Army of Nagorno Karabakh Samvel Babayan.