Armenian Deputy FM draws OSCE member-states` attention to  Azerbaijan`s disinformation campaign 

ArmInfo. On March 26, in Vienna, Deputy Foreign Minister of Armenia Robert Abisoghomonyan delivered remarks at the Special Meeting of the OSCE Permanent  Council, convened at the initiative of Armenia. 

During the meeting, representatives of around twenty OSCE  participating States also delivered remarks, mostly welcoming the  agreement on the text of the Peace  Agreement between Armenia and  Azerbaijan and the conclusion of negotiations, while calling for its  swift signing and ratification.

In his remarks, the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Armenia  noted:

"Excellencies,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I would like to thank the Finnish Chairmanship for convening this  Special PC meeting.

It is my distinct pleasure to be back to the OSCE, especially for  this important occasion - to inform the OSCE participating States  that the text of the "Agreement on Peace and Establishment of  Interstate Relations between the Republic of Armenia and the Republic  of Azerbaijan" has been agreed upon and that the negotiations on the  draft agreement have been finalized.

As a result of almost 3 years of intensive negotiations, on 13 March  2025 Armenia agreed on the last version of the Agreement and informed  about this decision the Azerbaijani side.

The finalization of the document is a huge breakthrough and a  milestone that represents a defining moment in the decades-long  conflict, offering a historic opportunity to pave the way for  regional peace. Needless to say, this process required genuine  commitment to the peace agenda, tireless efforts and strategic  patience to find solutions on a number of sensitive issues and  overcome initial differences. So, after all these efforts we have  finalized the draft text and now we stand ready to start discussions  on determining the date and place for its formal signature. On March  20, 2025 the Prime Minister of Armenia proposed to the President of  Azerbaijan to start joint consultations on the signing of the agreed  draft Peace Agreement.

A number of our international partners welcomed these positive  developments and encouraged parties to continue constructive  engagement towards swift signing of the Peace Agreement and achieving  positive results on other tracks of the peace agenda. In this regard,  I would like to express our sincere gratitude to all those states,  including around this table that have genuinely supported the  negotiations, that hosted the discussions, that welcomed the  finalization of the Agreement, that have contributed to this  achievement, and that continue to stand firm in favor of durable and  lasting peace and stability in our region.

Excellencies,

To our deep surprise the reaction of and subsequent actions by  Azerbaijan are both disappointing and alarming. In its unilateral  statement Azerbaijan, while accepting the fact of finalization of the  negotiations on the text of the Peace Agreement, simultaneously put  forward artificial preconditions.

Armenia has always stated that resolving all outstanding issues which  have been accumulated throughout decades of hostility in a single  agreement is impossible. It is obvious. However, the signing of the  Peace Agreement will create a conducive environment and pave the way  for addressing and resolving all outstanding issues.

As a unilateral proof of the constructiveness of Armenia, Azerbaijan  demands the termination of the Minsk Process structures, despite the  fact that throughout the negotiations the Armenian side on numerous  occasions has shown its constructive approach. They also demand  constitutional amendments in Armenia, claiming that the Armenian  Declaration of Independence to which there is a reference in the  Preamble part of our constitution, contains territorial claims  against Azerbaijan. 

The Republic of Armenia has already expressed its position at the  highest levels: we are ready to consider the dissolution of the  structures of the OSCE Minsk Process. However, it is crucial to  guarantee that this step corresponds to both the factual and legal  conclusion of the conflict. There would not be a need for further  activities of Minsk Process structures once the signing of the Peace  Agreement will formally and institutionally mark the conclusion of  the conflict. Otherwise, it would mean putting the cart before the  horse. If Azerbaijan is willing to put an end to the existence of  this structure, then signing the Agreement is the most logical and  legitimate shortcut. 

As for the Armenian Constitution, I would like to inform the  participating States that on September 26, 2024 within the framework  of the ratification of the regulation on the joint activities of the  border commissions, the Constitutional Court of the Republic of  Armenia adopted a decision, confirming that the Regulation, including  the delimitation of the borders between Armenia and Azerbaijan based  on the 1991 Alma-Ata Declaration, is in accordance with the  Constitution of the Republic of Armenia, which means that the mutual  recognition of territorial integrity within the borders existing at  the time of dissolution of the USSR, which is also enshrined in the  Agreement, fully complies with the Constitution of the Republic of  Armenia, and Armenia has no territorial claims against Azerbaijan. In  other words, the shortest way to allay Azerbaijan's concerns is again  signing the Agreement.

Moreover, the Constitutional Court noted that only those provisions  of the Armenian Declaration of Independence that are literally  articulated in the articles of the Constitution of the Republic of  Armenia carry constitutional authority, while those provisions of the  Declaration that are not directly incorporated into the articles of  the Constitution cannot have any legal force.

So, once again, the Constitutional Court's decision states that the  Republic of Armenia's Constitution does not contain any provision  that would imply a territorial claim against any third country.

In fact, it is Azerbaijan's own constitution that raises concerns, as  it contains provisions that imply territorial claims against Armenia.  The preamble of the Azerbaijani Constitution contains a reference to  the Constitutional Act adopted by the Azerbaijani Parliament on 18  October 1991. In turn, the Constitutional Act refers to the  Declaration of Independence of the First Republic of Azerbaijan  adopted in 1918, which declares that the First Republic of Azerbaijan  includes Eastern and Southern Transcaucasia. In November 1919, the  Republic of Azerbaijan presented to the Entente its administrative  map, in which around 60 percent of the territory of the current day  Republic of Armenia was included in the territory of Azerbaijan.   Thus, the Constitution of Azerbaijan contains territorial demands  against the Republic of Armenia.

But why in that case we are not raising an issue of changing the  Constitution of Azerbaijan? The Peace Agreement contains an article  which stipulates that the parties cannot refer to their internal  legislation to justify the failure of implementation of the  Agreement. Another article says that the parties recognize each  other's territorial integrity, do not have territorial claims against  each other and will not raise such claims in the future. Moreover,  both Armenia and Azerbaijan recognize each other's territorial  integrity within the borders of the former Soviet republics.

Consequently, once the Peace Agreement is signed by Armenia and  Azerbaijan, receives the conclusion on compliance with the  Constitution by the Constitutional Courts and is ratified, it will  acquire a legal authority superior to that of any domestic law. 

In this regard, bringing forward any other issue as a precondition  for the signing of the document means delaying the establishment of  peace, to say the least.

Excellencies,

Let me also address Azerbaijan's disinformation campaign regarding  alleged ceasefire violations along the border. Why should Armenia  prepare to use force? What issue on the agenda of the Republic of  Armenia would imply the use of force?

As you may know, more than 200 square kilometers of Armenia's  sovereign territory is under occupation by Azerbaijan. However,  Armenia on the highest level has explicitly stated that it does not  seek to resolve this issue through military means. The ongoing border  delimitation process, along with the finalized text of the Peace  Agreement, provide all necessary mechanisms for addressing this  matter peacefully and legally.  Thus, Armenia remains fully committed  to the peace agenda and continues to act in accordance with these  principles. 

In line with this, the Ministry of Defense of Armenia is  investigating the alleged ceasefire violations. At the same time,  being genuinely interested in confidence and trust in the region, we  have proposed to the Azerbaijani side to establish a joint mechanism  to investigate the ceasefire violations, as well as other measures,  such as mirror distancing of the troops from border areas and mutual  arms control and verification mechanism. Regrettably, the mentioned  proposals have not been constructively reciprocated by Azerbaijan,  which raises questions about the genuine intentions of these  repetitive allegations.

The allegations of Azerbaijan are not isolated incidents; there is a  clear and established pattern in which Azerbaijan increases its  disinformation campaign regarding alleged ceasefire violations, using  this as a pretext to justify further escalation in the region. In  2020 and 2023 the Armenian side on numerous occasions brought to the  attention of the OSCE participating States similar tactics. My call  is to pay careful attention to this pattern of actions. The  deliberate spread of false information and the unfounded accusations  of ceasefire violations are not just an attempt to distort the truth;  they are a troubling precursor to military escalation. We must remain  vigilant against these tactics, doubling our efforts for  establishment of peace and stability in the region.

The recent escalation in rhetoric and growing threats against Armenia  also follow the same troubling pattern reminiscent of previous  military escalations. We firmly believe that peace requires a  commitment to restraint and constructive dialogue. Creating  conditions conducive to lasting peace must be an integral part of the  process, one that is built upon good faith engagement, and genuine  cooperation, not threats or blame games.

Mr. Chairperson, 

Distinguished colleagues, 

Despite the mentioned challenges, let me reaffirm Armenia's  unwavering dedication to the peace agenda.  We remain steadfast in  our commitment to establishing lasting peace in the South Caucasus.  Our commitment to a peaceful and stable region is not just a  political stance, it is a strategic choice for the future of our  region and our people. However, the realization of this vision  requires genuine engagement from all parties.

It is high time to abandon the policy of artificial delays and  procrastination, to refrain from introducing baseless pretexts that  only serve to obstruct the signing of the Peace Agreement. Mutual  blame games and endless obsession with putting forward new  preconditions could lead us to a well-known nowhere, which could pose  a real danger for future escalations. Instead, the path, that we  suggest, is a genuine commitment to peace and engagement in the  finalization of this process in good faith.

The resolution of this conflict remains essential for ensuring  long-term security and stability in one of the most sensitive and  volatile regions within the OSCE's area of responsibility. It should  be in the interest of all to ensure that peace prevails over war,  diplomacy over confrontation, and stability over uncertainty.

In conclusion, let me reiterate that the Armenian side is ready to  sign the Peace Agreement and proposes the Azerbaijani side to start  consultations on the date and place of signing the document. We are  heading to peace, not war.  Thank you."