Tweet
HOW TO CURB AZERBAIJAN'S AGGRESSIVE DESIRES
Lilit Poghosyan
Hayots Ashkhar Daily
Published on April 11, 2008
Yesterday, during and after the discussions over the National
Assembly's statement on the "Nagorno Karabakh Conflict" (proposed by
NA Speaker Tigran Torosyan), the native parliamentarians introduced
interesting considerations and practical proposals in response to our
questions. How to counteract the Azerbaijani blackmail tactics and
impart a "more initiatory character" (as enshrined in the document)
to the passive policy implemented by the Armenian side with regard
to the settlement of the Karabakh conflict?
VAHAN HOVHANNISYAN (ARFD)
"In a conference held recently in Berdzor (Kashatagh), the NKR
leadership introduced a brilliant document which, for the first time,
plainly states the following, 'we do not manage to repopulate the
liberated territories because, when speaking on different occasions,
different state officials and politicians express their willingness
to cede the territories to Azerbaijan.' And our sole response to the
present-day Azerbaijani-Turkish extensive aggression is to repopulate
those areas.
Perhaps, it's time for the National Assembly to sum up the extensive
material accumulated as a result of the hearings and discussions over
the Karabakh issue and publish its conclusion as to what ideas the
Armenians finally have about the fair solution of the Karabakh issue
and, why not, introduce it as the Parliament's attitude.
In this connection, I would like particularly to speak about the policy
implemented with regard to the Karabakh issue in general. Never ever in
the course of the negotiations has Azerbaijan said what concessions it
is going to make. We have never heard anything about it. They say they
are ready for mutual concessions and then announce, 'if the territorial
integrity of Azerbaijan is not restored, we'll start a war.'
And we, for some reason, go into details and say, 'we'll cede this
territory, we'll return this region etc.'
What region? What territory? It's time, after all, to speak about this;
and not only speak but also make steps. Charity foundations may have
a serious role here, but this has to be a national program which,
I think, should be touched upon by the National Assembly during the
next discussion over the Budget.
Another observation: you say Azerbaijan uses blackmail against the
Co-Chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group. Why does it use blackmail? Because
the Minsk Group is the world's most specialized structure in terms of
dealing with the Karabakh settlement process, and their proposals are
little by little becoming more pro-Armenian. That's why Azerbaijan
is becoming furious and undertaking relevant steps.
But this doesn't mean we are satisfied with the Minsk Group. We
are not.
But if they are threatening us with the prospect of dissolving the
Minsk Group, we mustn't clutch at that as a drowning man would clutch
at the foams of water. If they want to dissolve the group, let them
do so. In that respect, I believe, our tactics is feeble. We should
have quit the negotiation process the day Azerbaijan destroyed the
cross-stones of Jugha in a barbaric manner; we should have threatened
them with discontinuing the talks. Whereas we are proceeding with
the talks as if nothing had happened.
Lilit Poghosyan
Hayots Ashkhar Daily
Published on April 11, 2008
Yesterday, during and after the discussions over the National
Assembly's statement on the "Nagorno Karabakh Conflict" (proposed by
NA Speaker Tigran Torosyan), the native parliamentarians introduced
interesting considerations and practical proposals in response to our
questions. How to counteract the Azerbaijani blackmail tactics and
impart a "more initiatory character" (as enshrined in the document)
to the passive policy implemented by the Armenian side with regard
to the settlement of the Karabakh conflict?
VAHAN HOVHANNISYAN (ARFD)
"In a conference held recently in Berdzor (Kashatagh), the NKR
leadership introduced a brilliant document which, for the first time,
plainly states the following, 'we do not manage to repopulate the
liberated territories because, when speaking on different occasions,
different state officials and politicians express their willingness
to cede the territories to Azerbaijan.' And our sole response to the
present-day Azerbaijani-Turkish extensive aggression is to repopulate
those areas.
Perhaps, it's time for the National Assembly to sum up the extensive
material accumulated as a result of the hearings and discussions over
the Karabakh issue and publish its conclusion as to what ideas the
Armenians finally have about the fair solution of the Karabakh issue
and, why not, introduce it as the Parliament's attitude.
In this connection, I would like particularly to speak about the policy
implemented with regard to the Karabakh issue in general. Never ever in
the course of the negotiations has Azerbaijan said what concessions it
is going to make. We have never heard anything about it. They say they
are ready for mutual concessions and then announce, 'if the territorial
integrity of Azerbaijan is not restored, we'll start a war.'
And we, for some reason, go into details and say, 'we'll cede this
territory, we'll return this region etc.'
What region? What territory? It's time, after all, to speak about this;
and not only speak but also make steps. Charity foundations may have
a serious role here, but this has to be a national program which,
I think, should be touched upon by the National Assembly during the
next discussion over the Budget.
Another observation: you say Azerbaijan uses blackmail against the
Co-Chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group. Why does it use blackmail? Because
the Minsk Group is the world's most specialized structure in terms of
dealing with the Karabakh settlement process, and their proposals are
little by little becoming more pro-Armenian. That's why Azerbaijan
is becoming furious and undertaking relevant steps.
But this doesn't mean we are satisfied with the Minsk Group. We
are not.
But if they are threatening us with the prospect of dissolving the
Minsk Group, we mustn't clutch at that as a drowning man would clutch
at the foams of water. If they want to dissolve the group, let them
do so. In that respect, I believe, our tactics is feeble. We should
have quit the negotiation process the day Azerbaijan destroyed the
cross-stones of Jugha in a barbaric manner; we should have threatened
them with discontinuing the talks. Whereas we are proceeding with
the talks as if nothing had happened.