ArmInfo. To justify his policy of surrendering Artsakh to Azerbaijan, Armenia's Premier Nikol Pashinyan resorted to a ploy at his press conference on May 22, Levon Zurabyan, Vice-Chairman of the Armenian National Congress (ANC), has stated.
He points out two legal barriers to the recognition of Artsakh as part of Azerbaijan by Armenia's premier.
"First, Armenia ratified the Almaty declaration on the CIS with ten reservations, with one of them reading that Armenia recognized Azerbaijan's territorial integrity without the Nagorno-Karabakh autonomous region.
"Secondly, in 1992, Armenia's Parliament approved a special decision on the unacceptability of 'considering any international or national documents mentioning Nagorno-Karabakh as part of Azerbaiajn'," Mr Zurabyan said.
The two legal norms remain in effect, and to sign any document ceding Artsakh to Azerbaijan, Armenia's premier is first of all supposed to have the documents invalidated by Armenia's Parliament (in this particular case, it is annulling the reservations). Otherwise, the premier signing a treaty of cession of Artsakh to Azerbaijan would be a violation of the Agreement, as it would be in conflict with a decision by the Supreme Body of a democratic government.
"Nikol Pashinyan is also aware of the fact that, despite having an absolute majority in Armenia's Parliament, he cannot submit such draft decisions to Parliament as it would cause a revolution in the country. So he is going to violate the Constitution and, as is his custom, later accuse the former authorities of violating the Constitution.
"So at his press conference on May 22, Pashinyan said: 'In 1989, the Supreme Council of Armenia and the Nagorno-Karabakh regional council approved a decision on unification of Nagorno-Karabakh with Armenia. In 1990, Armenia adopted an Independence Declaration, referring to that decision as well.' Then, Pashinyan claimed that the declaration of Nagorno-Karabakh's independence, as well as the positions of Armenia's former leaders on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement (they did not view Artsakh as part of Armenia) were in conflict with the Declaration of Independence related to the unification of Artsakh with Armenia and to the treaty related to the Declaration of Independence," Mr Zurabyan said. At first sight it seems logical, but Armenia's premier is lying, he added.
Mr Zurabyan goes on, stating that the Constitution was adopted in 1995 and referred to the Declaration of Independence, which contains the following words: "as a basis the fundamental principles of the Armenian Statehood and the nation-wide objectives enshrined in the Declaration on the Independence of Armenia."
In other words, it is not the Declaration of Independence as a final text, but the "fundamental principles.and the nation-wide objectives" having nothing in common with the decision on unification, the Constitution deals with.
"And the Declaration of Independence referred to the decision on unification for the following reason: Armenia announced its intention to become independent of the Soviet Union, united with Nagorno- Karabakh. Moreover, the vote was to be legally based, as, based on the decision on unification, only 10 of 260 members of the Supreme Council represented Artsakh. Thus, Armenia's Constitution by no means legalized the decision on unification, whereas the former Armenian authorities' positions on Nagorno- Karabakh were not in conflict with the Constitution," Mr Zurabyan states.
He emphasizes one more fact: Soviet legal norms were still in effect in Armenia when the decision on unification and the Declaration were adopted.
"In 1991, before the USSR disintegration, the USSR Constitutional Supervision canceled both the decision on unification Nagorno-Karabakh with Armenia and the decision on dissolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh autonomous region by the Supreme Council of Azerbaijan. In other words, legally, the decision on unification was not longer in force and cannot even theoretically remain a constitutional legal norm in independent Armenia," Mr Zurabyan said.
As to the Armenian premier's slogan "separation for salvation" during his election campaign in 2021a reporter reminded him of, Mr Pashinyan asked: "Separation from whom?"
"After his question I even thought he actually meant separation of Karabakh from Armenia and its cession to Azerbaijan. He asked the same question several times at his press conference. So Armenia's premier turns out to be not knowing the answer.
"Nagorno-Karabakh's goal had always been independence from Azerbaijan. In the Soviet Union the most important aspect of that struggle was a demand for uniting with Armenia because the USSR Constitution provided for a mechanism for an autonomous region's secession from one of the Soviet republics and accession to another. And that was the only legal mechanism of secession," Mr Zurabyan said.
After the USSR disintegration, when the world recognized 15 former Soviet republics as independent states, the only international legal way of seceding from Azerbaijan was declaring independence based on the principle of people's free self-determination enshrined in the Helsinki Final Act of 1975. Had that principle been followed, the international community would view Armenia as a country having territorial claims on its neighbor, which is a violation of territorial integrity.
"It was due to delicate diplomacy that we were able to avert dangerous developments back in 1997 and get an international settlement plan Azerbaijan agreed to as well, which opened the door to international recognition of Nagorno-Karabakh's independence. And that door was shut only because of an adventurist and maximalist policy, which climaxed with Nikol Pashinyan's disastrous governance.
"Disclosing Nikol Pashinyan's lies and manipulations must become an all-important task because it is these lies and manipulations that have until now enabled him to continue his disastrous governance," Mr Zurabyan stated.
READ ALL COMMENTS