Friday, December 24 2021 23:52

ArmInfo.At an online press conference, Armenia`s Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan offered a number of his speculations on the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process.  According to  him, over 30 years none of the Armenian officials has ever disputed  the rights of Azerbaijanis who once lived in the Nagorno-Karabakh  Autonomous Region and the region has never been viewed as populated  by Armenians alone because Azerbaijanis were residents as well, which  fact has been admitted during the negotiations.

 And the protection of the Azerbaijanis` rights was "on the negotiations agenda." As regards  a referendum on the status of Nagorno-Karabakh, it was the entire  population of Nagorno- Karabakh - not only the Armenians - that was  to participate. So if the referendum had followed "Armenian logic,"  it would have given rise to the following question: "had the  Azerbaijanis applied this logic and exercised their right to  self-determination outside the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region,  what relations would have been established in such a case?" Mr  Pashinyan said. 

The premier noted it is not his own interpretation, but it is the  logic of negotiations, which has never been publicly discussed. In  this context, what is the picture of the territorial integrity of  Nagorno-Karabakh?  According to Mr Pashinyan, the statements being  made now have nothing in common with the real state of affairs at the  negotiations in progress in 2018. The Armenian side admitted the fact  the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region was not only an Armenian, but,  at least, an Armenian-Azerbaijani one, as Azerbaijanis had lived in  the region as well. 

"When I speak of a disaster in the negotiations in 2016, I mean this  multifaceted context. In 2016, the co- chairs proposed three  packages, which had for the first time since 2011 not mentioned  interim status of Nagorno-Karabakh. But even this is not a disaster.  According to the package, the specification of Nagorno- Karabakh  status was to be put on the U.N. Security Council agenda, which, in  turn, after holding consultations with Azerbaijan, Armenia, the OSCE  Minsk Group co-chairs and OSCE president, decided in favor of legal  and practical niceties. The problem is that, throughout the  negotiations, the Armenian side spared no effort to ensure that the  OSCE Minsk Group continue in control of the process. But in 2006, the  co-chairs decided to pass the issue of status to the U.N. Security  Council. Can the U.N. Security Council`s decision be predicted? The  question is the part of which of the states Nagorno-Karabakh is in  getting interim status before its final status is determined. And the  decision is predictable, as back in 1993 the U.N.  Security Council  adopted a resolution recognizing Azerbaijan`s territorial integrity,  while Nagorno- Karabakh was named Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region  of Azerbaijan. And if such status is determined for Nagorno-Karabakh,  its final status must be determined under the Constitution of  Azerbaijan. And this disaster occurred in 2016," Mr Pashinyan said. 

After he heard [Armenia`s third president] Serzh Sargsyan`s statement  that Artsakh was Armenian when he left the negotiations, Mr Pashinyan  was surprised to know that it was actually a quote from [Armenia`s  first president] Levon Ter-Petrosyan`s article entitled "War or  peace? Time for turning serious". According to the first president,  Armenian Artsakh was a task to be accomplished. Serzh Sargsyan had  earlier stated that Artsakh would never be part of Azerbaijan. Now,  however, he has not said the same. Rather, he said that Artsakh must  be Armenian. 

"But I disagree with this wording as well because Artsakh was not  entirely Armenian. It is the ethnic composition of the population  that is in question. And in the context of the negotiations it was to  be Armenian-Azerbaijani. Was Nagorno-Karabakh to have its  legislature? Yes, it was. And it was not to be entirely Armenian, but  with Armenian and Azerbaijani quotas. Is Nagorno-Karabakh expected to  have local government bodies? Yes, but not only Armenian, but also  Azerbaijani ones. That document was not only the consequence, but  also the cause of the April war," Mr Pashinyan said. 

Elaborating on the topic, Armenia`s premier recalled the "rather good  Kazan document" of 2011. Armenia agreed to sign it, but Azerbaijan  refused to for its own reasons. The Kazan document clearly defined  interim status for Artsakh. After that Azerbaijan launched an active  armament campaign. The year 2013 saw signs of military escalation,  and the following year saw further escalation and the co-chairs  offering Armenia to decline the proposal for interim status, with all  the ensuing consequences. Of course, the Armenian side did not agree,  as it was a matter of principle. The year 2015 saw further military  escalation, and in 2016 the co-chairs offered Armenia a new package,  which did not contain a point on interim status for Nagorno-Karabakh.  The Armenian side rejected the package, and a war broke out in April  2016. In July 2016, Armenia rejected the same package again. 

"And the package submitted in August contained the disastrous  scenario involving the U.N. Security Council that I have mentioned,"  Armenia`s premier said. 

Of course, Armenia is interested in signing a peace agreement, and  the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs recently proposed a negotiations  agenda with a peaceful and comprehensive settlement as one of the  points.  "Yes, we are interested in it, and we have not refused nor  will we refuse to discuss the topic," Mr Pashinyan said.