Expression `Zangezur Corridor` is incomprehensible and unacceptable to us - Nikol Pashinyan

ArmInfo. The trilateral statement  cannot be treated piecemeal, Armenia's Premier Nikol Pashinyan stated  in response to a question about the so called Zangezur corridor by  Turkish media outlets. 

"You know, first of all, the expression "Zangezur Corridor" is  incomprehensible and unacceptable to us, because first of all, the  Republic of Armenia has nothing to do with that expression, and the  fact that such an expression is used, in the Republic of Armenia it  is perceived as a territorial claim against the sovereignty and  territorial integrity of Armenia. I recently published an article on  this topic, the main meaning of which was that we are in favor of  opening regional communications, and let me say that first of all we  are interested in opening regional communications, because in fact we  are the ones who are under blockade. No other country in the region  is under blockade. We have 4 borders, two of which are completely  closed. And this fact in itself shows how much we need and are  interested in opening regional communications.

"Paragraph 9 of the trilateral statement of November 9, 2020 is often  referred to, but I want to draw your attention to a very important  fact, that in paragraph 9 of the trilateral statement of November 9,  there is no expression of corridor at all. I understand that the word  corridor is used differently in other regions and in international  discourse, but in the context of the trilateral statement of November  9, there is a nuance, there is the expression of the Lachin corridor,  which in this context is specific, that is, it is written and signed,  and in paragraph 9 of the trilateral statement of November 9, the  expression of corridor does not exist at all.

"And moreover, there is a lot of talk about the fact that in the  trilateral statement of November 9, there is a provision that the  security of the transportation of passengers and cargo through the  territory of Armenia must be ensured by representatives and forces of  third countries. There is no such thing at all in the trilateral  statement of November 9. Moreover, it is written that the Republic of  Armenia guarantees the movement of goods, vehicles, and passengers.  How can the Republic of Armenia guarantee security if it itself does  not provide security?

"But I also want to make the following observation regarding the  trilateral statement: the trilateral statement cannot be treated  piecemeal. For example, the trilateral statement mentions the  exchange and return of prisoners of war, hostages, and other detained  persons, but this issue has not been resolved yet.  Moreover, it is  being exacerbated by the trials taking place in Baku, which, in our  assessment, are staged trials where prohibited measures, torture, and  according to our information, other prohibited measures, etc.  are  being used. The trilateral statement mentions Nagorno-Karabakh, but  Azerbaijan continuously claims that there is no Nagorno-Karabakh. The  trilateral statement talks about the return of refugees to Nagorno-  Karabakh and adjacent regions, but following the trilateral  statement, on the contrary, the number of refugees has increased, and  forced displacement has occurred, etc. I mean, it is not a good  approach to treat the provisions of the trilateral statement  piecemeal. In some places, they say it is no longer in force, in  other places, they say it is in force, while attributing to it  provisions that do not actually exist. After all, it is a public  document.

"As for communications: is the Republic of Armenia ready to provide a  connection between the western regions of Azerbaijan and the  Autonomous Republic of Nakhchivan through its own territory? Yes, of  course it is ready. And we have made a very specific proposal to  Azerbaijan on this topic, which, in our opinion, is not merely a  proposal, but a solution to the problem in terms of railway freight  transportation.  And we are waiting for Azerbaijan's response.

"But I want to draw your attention to the fact that in general,  including in the trilateral statement of November 9, 2020, there is  no such separate agenda for providing a transport connection between  the western regions of Azerbaijan and Nakhchivan. This agenda is  included in the general agenda of opening regional communications.  Which means that Armenia and Azerbaijan must mutually open  communications for each other, both external and internal, that is,  from Armenia to Armenia through the territory of Azerbaijan, and from  Azerbaijan to Azerbaijan through the territory of Armenia.

"I would like to draw your attention to the fact that, for example,  there is no railway connection from the northern regions of Armenia  to Meghri, that is, the southern region, and the railway connection  passes only through the territory of Azerbaijan, that is, the  Autonomous Republic of Nakhchivan. In other words, this assumes, and  therefore we say, that we are certainly ready to provide the railway  connection and we expect that a similar connection will be provided  for Armenia, in particular, for the railway connection from Yeraskh  to Meghri, because due to the mountainous, highly mountainous  terrain, there are difficulties in having a railway from south to  north of Armenia.

"At the same time, in our understanding, this also means the creation  of a railway connection from Azerbaijan through the territory of  Armenia to Turkey and vice versa, and the creation of a road  transport connection, including from Azerbaijan to Turkey and vice  versa. This, in turn, means that Armenia can be connected to the  Islamic Republic of Iran and Russia via rail and road transport  through the territory of Azerbaijan. Of course, in this case, the  opening of the Armenia-Turkey railway is also assumed, etc.

"We are ready for these solutions. And we do not understand why  Azerbaijan does not respond to these solutions and, on the contrary,  an attempt is constantly made to use the topic within escalation  logic. In other words, the question has a very clear answer: is the  Republic of Armenia ready to provide the opportunity for railway  freight transportation from western Azerbaijan through the territory  of Armenia to Nakhchivan? Yes, it is ready. And we also expect that  the same opportunity will be created for the railway connection from  Armenia to Armenia through the territory of Azerbaijan. We are also  ready to provide road transport communication.

"By the way, I emphasized in my last article that if in other  conditions, in other cases there would still be a need to make  infrastructure investments, but right now, in the event of a  political and legal decision, it is possible to provide road  transport communication from Turkey through the territory of Armenia  to Azerbaijan through the Margara checkpoint, where the  infrastructure is ready, the roads are in normal condition, up to the  Tegh border point, after which, crossing the Armenia-Azerbaijan  border, to Lachin and from there deep into Azerbaijan.

"That is, just today, and I have publicly announced this, we are  ready to provide such a road connection, which is expressed and is  the combination of these perceptions, which we call the "Crossroads  of Peace".  Moreover, we have specifically chosen such a name for  this project so that none of our neighboring countries will be  allergic to this name. And I think that this is a very direct  justification of our constructive position and positioning.

"There is a very important addition to your question. Azerbaijan  actually raises an issue that it calls "western Azerbaijan". And  Azerbaijan calls "western Azerbaijan" approximately 60-70% of the  sovereign territory of the Republic of Armenia and invites us to  discuss the issue of "western Azerbaijan", while calling 60-70% of  the territory of the Republic of Armenia "western Azerbaijan". We say  that there is no "western Azerbaijan" in Armenia. If we want to look  for western Azerbaijan, or see western Azerbaijan, then western  Azerbaijan is the Kazakh, Aghstafa, Getabey, Kelbajar, Lachin,  Zangelan, Kubatlu regions of Azerbaijan, if I forgot to name some of  the regions, it does not mean a deliberate omission, but I mean, we  can look at the map and say where western Azerbaijan is. Here is  western Azerbaijan. There is no western Azerbaijan on this side of  this line. In case of great desire, Nakhchivan can also be considered  western Azerbaijan in geographical terms.

"I mean, they are trying to place this under the logic of  humanitarian issues, calling on us to discuss some issue, but I say  again, they call 60% of the sovereign territory of our country  "western Azerbaijan". And therefore, such an issue is not something  to be discussed by us, it cannot be discussed by any country.

"And in general, if we are talking about the topic of refugees, I  have already mentioned, we even have a document about the return of  refugees to Nagorno-Karabakh and adjacent regions. In Armenia and the  Diaspora, there are refugees from Nakhichevan, Baku, Sumgait, the  adjacent regions of Nagorno-Karabakh, Ganja, etc. Our perception is  that these are simply territorial claims against Armenia, and  therefore we cannot discuss this issue.

"The so-called "Zangezur corridor" is also unacceptable for us for  this very reason, because it contains a territorial claim against the  Republic of Armenia. If we are talking about transport communication  and economic communication, we are open and say yes, we are ready, as  I have already said, to unblock regional, transport and economic ties  under the conditions of the sovereignty, territorial integrity,  jurisdiction and reciprocity of the countries. And understanding that  there are complications, we even say that we are ready for certain  simplifications so that this becomes a reality, and we have made a  specific proposal for the restoration of the railway connection and  are waiting for Azerbaijan's response. Moreover, we are not  publishing the essence of this proposal for the simple reason to rule  out a violation of diplomatic ethics, since it would mean revealing  the essence of a working document, but in our assessment we have  resolved this issue and expect a similar solution for ourselves.

"Today I say that we have proposed a solution that will solve the  issue of railway freight transportation from western Azerbaijan to  Nakhichevan through the territory of Armenia. All that remains is for  Azerbaijan to agree to this solution. Moreover, since 2022, if I am  not mistaken, the Government has been circulating a draft Government  decision on the opening of three checkpoints on the border with  Azerbaijan.  In other words, the draft is about opening checkpoints  at specific border points so that Azerbaijani vehicles, cargo, and  citizens can travel through the territory of the Republic of Armenia,  including to Nakhichevan.  And this is how we see the issue.

"Azerbaijan contradicts itself. In what way? Azerbaijan contradicts  itself by the fact that they officially call 2021 and the following  period a post-conflict period. But they speak the language of  conflict every day. In other words, these two narratives of  Azerbaijan do not match each other. Every day the language of  conflict, every day aggressive rhetoric, every day force, if not  every day, very often, very often the threat of force and the use of  force, and the narrative of "western Azerbaijan" that calls into  question the very existence of Armenia, let's be honest, the very  existence of the state of Armenia. And in parallel, an invitation to  discuss, sorry, in my opinion, that is at least strange.

"By the way, and it is perhaps within the framework of that peace  formula that on the one hand I say that starting from this line,  western Azerbaijan is here, but there is no "western Azerbaijan" on  this side of this line, but I understand that this conversation would  be incomplete if I did not say that western Armenia is also here.  This is essentially two sentences, but this is our perception of  peace and our idea, because if these formulas do not exist, moreover,  I say again, there may be all sorts of different perceptions of  history, historical events, etc., but if we want to build peace, it  is impossible to build anything on a flowing region.

"By the way, there is something very important. Let us not forget  that the Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Azerbaijan already  have the first mutually ratified international document, which is the  regulations of the delimitation commissions of our countries, which  was signed by the commissions of our countries and ratified according  to the domestic procedures of our countries, where it is recorded  that the basis, the basic principle of delimitation is the Alma-Ata  Declaration. The Alma-Ata Declaration, which was signed in 1991,  makes two references in the context of our issue, the first is that  the Soviet Union ceases to exist, and the administrative borders of  the countries of the Soviet Union become state borders.  And  therefore, this narrative already contradicts the de jure document  existing between Armenia and Azerbaijan, it directly contradicts it.  We are committed to that agreement and are consistently and patiently  moving towards peace," Mr Pashinyan said.