Armenia`s premier responds to criticism 

ArmInfo.Armenia`s Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has responded to the criticism of his statements on Nagorno-Karabakh at the December 24 online press  conference. 

"The discussions following my December 24 interview about the  Nagorno-Karabakh peace process have revealed a number of falsehoods,  and recording them is of paramount importance. 

1. The participation of the Azerbaijani population of the  Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region (NKAR) in determining the final  status of Nagorno-Karabakh is incorporated in the Madrid Principles  that were taken as a basis by the Armenian side for negotiations back  in 2007.  Fortunately or unfortunately, we cannot claim any Armenian  or Artsakh politicians were unaware of that because the Madrid  Principles were available on the Internet long before I became  Armenia`s premier. The question is: why did not the former  high-ranking officials stand up against it?

2. You will recall that after November 9, 2020, a question arose of a  possibility to stop the 44-day war in exchange for the right of the  Azerbaijanis and/or their families that once lived in Shushi to  return to the Shushi of NKAR times. Last autumn, the same circles  claimed that it was a chance to preserve Armenian Shushi, but I  refused to. In response I stated that Azerbaijanis constituted 90% of  the NKAR Shushi and how they could view a settlement with 90%  Azerbaijani population as an Armenian one. I was accused of claiming  Shushi was not Armenian. So why are these same people now upset over  the negotiations conducted before I became premier? Last autumn they  were for the return of Azerbaijanis that once lived in Shuhsi and  they are against it now? In 2007 they were for it and they are  against it now? 

3. And now they keep on saying that it is only the government elected  by the Artsakh people that can represent the Artsakh people in the  negotiations. And who is denying it? This is one of the most  important of my arguments in 2018. And another question: why did not  these same people kick up a row when in 1998, on Robert Kocharyan`s  initiative Artsakh was excluded from the negotiations? Do not even  think they want to see Artsakh back at the negotiating table. Rather,  their desire is to exclude Armenia from the negotiations as well. At  least, it is an occasion to reveal another secret.     

4. Serzh Sargsyan and the Republican Party of Armenia (RPA) are  accusing me of worsening our positions at the negotiations after, as  Armenia`s prime minister, I demanded that the mediators return  Nargorno-Karabakh to the negotiating table. In 2016 Serzh Sargsyan  himself demanded that the mediators immediately involve  Nagorno-Karabakh in the negotiations. Did that worsen our positions?   By the way, Serzh Sargsyan attempted to substantiate the argument  that the Azerbaijanis that once resided in the NKAR must participate  in determining Artsakh`s future status proportionate to the size of  their population in NKAR back in 1988. Why did he do that? Because he  realized that, following the negotiations logic, at a referendum that  could take place in 100 years Azerbaijanis would constitute a  majority in Nagorno-Karabakh? Could he resolve that problem? Of  course, he could not. And that is why in April 2018 he was speaking  of a hopeless situation, deadlocked negotiations and impending war. 

5. In reality, the propaganda by the well-known circles is deceiving  in that the terms "the final status of Nagorno-Karabakh" and  self-determination" necessarily mean independence of  Nagorno-Karabakh. Of course, it is not so because an autonomous  region is a status as well, and a region is a status, and  independence is a status.  Does the content of the negotiations I  took over specify the issues? Does it clarify what the status means?  Of course, it does not. The Armenian side has always been proud of  the fact that the issue(s) of a possible referendum on  Nagorno-Karabakh`s status must not be worded in any way and imply any  status. Yes, any status may mean independence and any status may mean  a region as part of Azerbaijan as well. And if we add the fact that  the negotiations do not specify where the referendum is to take place  or who is to formulate the question to be answered at the referendum,  it turns out that, considering the content of negotiations I took  over, the following question would be put at the referendum: do you  agree that Nagorno-Karabakh must be an autonomous region of  Azerbaijan? The content of negotiations does not specify what the  "con" vote or the "0" status is. 

By the way, the discussions cause a legitimate question to arise:  what is the goal of the talks about the points concerning the  Azerbaijani population of Nagorno-Karabakh? The goal is to defend the  right of the Artsakh citizens displaced during the 44-day war to  reside in Artskah under Armenia`s jurisdiction. But it is a question  of tactics and of further discussions," Mr Pashinyan`s Facebook  message reads.