Tweet
Nezavisimaya Gazeta , Russia
June 21 2010
Yerevan does not violate agreements
Interview with Edvard Nalbandian, Armenian Minister of Foreign
Affairs, by Yuriy Simonyan, NG correspondent; 20 June 2010
Armenia will push the agreements forward if the partners in the
negotiations are in the mood for this.
In the days of the economic forum in St Petersburg, a trilateral
meeting, devoted to the Karabakh settlement, was held between the
presidents of Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan. In the estimation of the
majority of experts, it proved to be unsuccessful. At the same time,
in Nagorno-Karabakh, the forces of the NKR [Nagorno-Karabakh Republic]
defence army stopped the diversionary sortie of the Azerbaijan side.
In this case, both sides incurred losses. The day before, Edvard
Nalbandian, the Armenian Republic's minister of Foreign Affairs,
shared his opinion on the state of affairs in the South Caucasus with
NG correspondent Yuriy Simonyan.
[Simonyan] The sensational Armenian-Turkish reconciliation has simply
never taken place. How great is the likelihood that the process will,
all the same, move forward in the near future?
[Nalbandian] When Armenian president Serge Sargsian initiated the
process of normalizing Armenian-Turkish relations in September 2008,
they were deadlocked. One of the reasons for this lay in the
preliminary conditions proposed by the Turkish side, which made it
virtually impossible to conduct serious negotiations. In September
2008, the sides agreed to start the process without preliminary
conditions. It was with this general understanding that we began,
conducted negotiations, and arrived at agreements. Naturally, there
were no preliminary conditions in the protocols signed in October 2009
in Zurich. If the Turkish side is today taking a step backward and
returning to the language of the preconditions that it was talking
about before the start of this process, and if it makes this a
condition of the ratification and implementation of the protocols
concerning the Nagorno-Karabakh settlement - this is an obvious and
gross violation of the agreements reached. In this case the Turkish
side's claims that Turkey respects the principle of racta sund
servanda sound very strange. Here we have present an obvious conflict
with the causes.
We have heard, not only from Yerevan, but also repeatedly from Moscow,
Brussels, Washington, Paris and other capitals, that there can be no
linkage between the Nagorno-Karabakh settlement and Armenian-Turkish
normalization, and that attempts at this linkage may be detrimental to
both processes. Well then, as far as the likelihood of the advancement
of the process in the near future is concerned, as the Armenian
president stated, we will be prepared to move ahead when Ankara is
again prepared to normalize relations without any preliminary
conditions.
[Simonyan] Isn't the rapprochement observed between Russia and Turkey
dangerous for Armenia, in light of the fact that Ankara, let us put it
this way, by speculating in high-volume economic projects that are
attractive to the Russians, may prevail upon Moscow to bring pressure
to bear on its strategic partner - Yerevan, let us say, with respect
to the Karabakh question or other irritants to Turkey - in the
international campaign of the Armenian side for recognition of the
genocide?
[Nalbandian] From time immemorial, Armenia and Russia have been linked
by these strong ties of friendship, these fraternal bonds that have
grown into allied, strategic relations, that the hypothetical
scenarios being introduced simply make no sense. These are different
relations. Our two nations have throughout history never been on
different sides of the barricades, they have always fought against
common enemies. Our friendship has been tempered in a joint struggle
in periods of serious trials. It has been tested by time.
International recognition of the genocide of the Armenians is not only
a matter of the Armenian people, but one that has an international
dimension and significance that is common to all mankind. Recognition
of the first genocide of the 20th century is a pledge of the
prevention of new crimes against humanity.
As for the Nagorno-Karabakh settlement, we are grateful to Russia for
that weighty contribution and positive role that it is playing in the
regional processes, and especially in the settlement of the
Nagorno-Karabakh problem, extremely important for Armenia, as one of
the co-chairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group. Russian president Dmitriy
Medvedev is making great efforts to help the sides settle this
problem. It is thanks to his personal efforts that several important
meetings were held between the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan,
and with his mediation, in November 2008 the Maindorf Declaration was
signed - the first document signed between Azerbaijan and Armenia
after the trilateral (Azerbaijan, Nagorno-Karabakh, Armenia)
cease-fire agreement, also established with Russia's mediation in
1994. Russia has repeatedly stated that it is impossible to pressure
the sides, and that they themselves should resolve the conflict.
[Simonyan] Azerbaijan charges Armenia with being unwilling to resort
to concessions. Let us for a moment leave aside the circumstance that
Azerbaijan itself does not intend to back down in the Karabakh
process.... In what, specifically, can the Armenian side resort to
concessions in the negotiating process?
[Nalbandian] I think that it would be more correct to talk about
compromises, and not about concessions. But let us talk about
everything in the proper order. As we know, today the negotiating
process is taking place on the basis of the Madrid document presented
by the co-chairmen of the Minsk Group in November 2007. Armenia
accepted this document as the basis for negotiations more than two
years ago. Azerbaijan in general denied the existence of this document
- the Madrid proposals - and now, two years later, is trying to
pretend that it is allegedly accepting something. What is Azerbaijan
accepting? The key question in settling the conflict, and naturally,
in the negotiation process, is realizing the right of the nation of
Nagorno-Karabakh to self-government. Attesting to this are certain
principles, published after the statement of the presidents of Russia,
the United States and France (the countries of the co-chairmen of the
OSCE Minsk Group) in July of last year at Aqua Ville, that are
contained in the Madrid Document, which says that the status of
Nagorno-Karabakh is to be determined through a legally binding free
direct expression of the will of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh.
Stating their readiness to grant Nagorno-Karabakh the high status of
autonomy within Azerbaijan, its leaders are attempting to predetermine
the outcome of the statement of will, thus essentially refuting the
principle of self-determination. This principle is one of the three
basic principles of the Madrid proposals, yet again confirmed by the
ministers of foreign affairs of the 56 member-countries of the OSCE in
December 2009 in Athens. Azerbaijan is rejecting, and what is more, is
grossly violating, the second of the abovementioned basic principles -
the principle of the inapplicability of force or threats of using
force. Azerbaijan is refusing to conclude an agreement on observing
this principle and is turning down the proposals of the OSCE on
adopting measures to strengthen the cease-fire, and on the withdrawal
of snipers. After the passage of the Maindorf Declaration,
Azerbaijan's leaders stated that the provision recorded in the
document on settling the conflict by peaceful means does not signify a
commitment not to use force. As they say - no comment. Threats of
using force are heard from Baku every day. They are apparently not
made in order to cause the negotiations to collapse. Azerbaijan is
clinging to just one principle - the principle of territorial
wholeness, and even then, in its own interpretation. It is hard to
convince anyone that you accept the Madrid proposals, if you refute
the largest part of them.
[Simonyan] In the Stepanakert demand, heard increasingly often, to
return to the negotiating table - it is confirmed that without its
participation the fate of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic will not be
decided. How realistic is it that representatives of the unrecognized
republic will join in to the negotiation process?
[Nalbandian] It is, of course, impossible to solve anything without
the full participation of Nagorno-Karabakh, especially since this is
stipulated by the mandate of conduct of the Minsk conference on
settlement. It is the statement of the will of the people of
Nagorno-Karabakh that should determine the status of Nagorno-Karabakh.
This is the cornerstone of the resolution of the conflict. The
co-chairmen of the Minsk Group have repeatedly spoken in public about
the importance of and the need for the participation of the
representatives of Nagorno-Karabakh in the negotiations. I remember
that the reconciliation achieved with Russia's mediation - in 1994 -
was also approved and signed by the Karabakh side. No agreement makes
sense without the participation and signature of Nagorno-Karabakh.
[Simonyan] How do you characterize Armenia's relations with two other
neighbours - Iran and Georgia? It seems that relations with Iran might
be more dynamic and quicker to develop - with Georgia, however, time
and again petty, but sensitive problems arise....
[Nalbandian] Armenia attaches important significance to relations with
those of its direct neighbour states with whom our partnership is in
the nature of friendly cooperation. Armenia and Iran are tied by
traditionally friendly relations. We carry out numerous mutually
profitable projects, particularly in the energy and transport spheres.
New economic projects are on the agenda. We are keeping close track of
the development of events concerning Iran's nuclear programme, and we
think that all the disputed problems should be solved through
negotiations. Let us also hope that as a result of the future efforts
of Iran and the international community, it will be possible to
achieve a coordinated solution of the problem.
With Georgia, however, I think that there are no problems that we
could not solve through joint efforts. Armenia is one of the countries
that is extremely interested in a stable, safe and prosperous Georgia.
Not only because about 70 per cent of our commodity turnover goes
through Georgia and there is a very large Armenian diaspora, but also
because our two countries are connected by age-old ties of friendship
and good-neighbourliness.
[translated from Turkish]
From: A. Papazian
June 21 2010
Yerevan does not violate agreements
Interview with Edvard Nalbandian, Armenian Minister of Foreign
Affairs, by Yuriy Simonyan, NG correspondent; 20 June 2010
Armenia will push the agreements forward if the partners in the
negotiations are in the mood for this.
In the days of the economic forum in St Petersburg, a trilateral
meeting, devoted to the Karabakh settlement, was held between the
presidents of Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan. In the estimation of the
majority of experts, it proved to be unsuccessful. At the same time,
in Nagorno-Karabakh, the forces of the NKR [Nagorno-Karabakh Republic]
defence army stopped the diversionary sortie of the Azerbaijan side.
In this case, both sides incurred losses. The day before, Edvard
Nalbandian, the Armenian Republic's minister of Foreign Affairs,
shared his opinion on the state of affairs in the South Caucasus with
NG correspondent Yuriy Simonyan.
[Simonyan] The sensational Armenian-Turkish reconciliation has simply
never taken place. How great is the likelihood that the process will,
all the same, move forward in the near future?
[Nalbandian] When Armenian president Serge Sargsian initiated the
process of normalizing Armenian-Turkish relations in September 2008,
they were deadlocked. One of the reasons for this lay in the
preliminary conditions proposed by the Turkish side, which made it
virtually impossible to conduct serious negotiations. In September
2008, the sides agreed to start the process without preliminary
conditions. It was with this general understanding that we began,
conducted negotiations, and arrived at agreements. Naturally, there
were no preliminary conditions in the protocols signed in October 2009
in Zurich. If the Turkish side is today taking a step backward and
returning to the language of the preconditions that it was talking
about before the start of this process, and if it makes this a
condition of the ratification and implementation of the protocols
concerning the Nagorno-Karabakh settlement - this is an obvious and
gross violation of the agreements reached. In this case the Turkish
side's claims that Turkey respects the principle of racta sund
servanda sound very strange. Here we have present an obvious conflict
with the causes.
We have heard, not only from Yerevan, but also repeatedly from Moscow,
Brussels, Washington, Paris and other capitals, that there can be no
linkage between the Nagorno-Karabakh settlement and Armenian-Turkish
normalization, and that attempts at this linkage may be detrimental to
both processes. Well then, as far as the likelihood of the advancement
of the process in the near future is concerned, as the Armenian
president stated, we will be prepared to move ahead when Ankara is
again prepared to normalize relations without any preliminary
conditions.
[Simonyan] Isn't the rapprochement observed between Russia and Turkey
dangerous for Armenia, in light of the fact that Ankara, let us put it
this way, by speculating in high-volume economic projects that are
attractive to the Russians, may prevail upon Moscow to bring pressure
to bear on its strategic partner - Yerevan, let us say, with respect
to the Karabakh question or other irritants to Turkey - in the
international campaign of the Armenian side for recognition of the
genocide?
[Nalbandian] From time immemorial, Armenia and Russia have been linked
by these strong ties of friendship, these fraternal bonds that have
grown into allied, strategic relations, that the hypothetical
scenarios being introduced simply make no sense. These are different
relations. Our two nations have throughout history never been on
different sides of the barricades, they have always fought against
common enemies. Our friendship has been tempered in a joint struggle
in periods of serious trials. It has been tested by time.
International recognition of the genocide of the Armenians is not only
a matter of the Armenian people, but one that has an international
dimension and significance that is common to all mankind. Recognition
of the first genocide of the 20th century is a pledge of the
prevention of new crimes against humanity.
As for the Nagorno-Karabakh settlement, we are grateful to Russia for
that weighty contribution and positive role that it is playing in the
regional processes, and especially in the settlement of the
Nagorno-Karabakh problem, extremely important for Armenia, as one of
the co-chairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group. Russian president Dmitriy
Medvedev is making great efforts to help the sides settle this
problem. It is thanks to his personal efforts that several important
meetings were held between the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan,
and with his mediation, in November 2008 the Maindorf Declaration was
signed - the first document signed between Azerbaijan and Armenia
after the trilateral (Azerbaijan, Nagorno-Karabakh, Armenia)
cease-fire agreement, also established with Russia's mediation in
1994. Russia has repeatedly stated that it is impossible to pressure
the sides, and that they themselves should resolve the conflict.
[Simonyan] Azerbaijan charges Armenia with being unwilling to resort
to concessions. Let us for a moment leave aside the circumstance that
Azerbaijan itself does not intend to back down in the Karabakh
process.... In what, specifically, can the Armenian side resort to
concessions in the negotiating process?
[Nalbandian] I think that it would be more correct to talk about
compromises, and not about concessions. But let us talk about
everything in the proper order. As we know, today the negotiating
process is taking place on the basis of the Madrid document presented
by the co-chairmen of the Minsk Group in November 2007. Armenia
accepted this document as the basis for negotiations more than two
years ago. Azerbaijan in general denied the existence of this document
- the Madrid proposals - and now, two years later, is trying to
pretend that it is allegedly accepting something. What is Azerbaijan
accepting? The key question in settling the conflict, and naturally,
in the negotiation process, is realizing the right of the nation of
Nagorno-Karabakh to self-government. Attesting to this are certain
principles, published after the statement of the presidents of Russia,
the United States and France (the countries of the co-chairmen of the
OSCE Minsk Group) in July of last year at Aqua Ville, that are
contained in the Madrid Document, which says that the status of
Nagorno-Karabakh is to be determined through a legally binding free
direct expression of the will of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh.
Stating their readiness to grant Nagorno-Karabakh the high status of
autonomy within Azerbaijan, its leaders are attempting to predetermine
the outcome of the statement of will, thus essentially refuting the
principle of self-determination. This principle is one of the three
basic principles of the Madrid proposals, yet again confirmed by the
ministers of foreign affairs of the 56 member-countries of the OSCE in
December 2009 in Athens. Azerbaijan is rejecting, and what is more, is
grossly violating, the second of the abovementioned basic principles -
the principle of the inapplicability of force or threats of using
force. Azerbaijan is refusing to conclude an agreement on observing
this principle and is turning down the proposals of the OSCE on
adopting measures to strengthen the cease-fire, and on the withdrawal
of snipers. After the passage of the Maindorf Declaration,
Azerbaijan's leaders stated that the provision recorded in the
document on settling the conflict by peaceful means does not signify a
commitment not to use force. As they say - no comment. Threats of
using force are heard from Baku every day. They are apparently not
made in order to cause the negotiations to collapse. Azerbaijan is
clinging to just one principle - the principle of territorial
wholeness, and even then, in its own interpretation. It is hard to
convince anyone that you accept the Madrid proposals, if you refute
the largest part of them.
[Simonyan] In the Stepanakert demand, heard increasingly often, to
return to the negotiating table - it is confirmed that without its
participation the fate of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic will not be
decided. How realistic is it that representatives of the unrecognized
republic will join in to the negotiation process?
[Nalbandian] It is, of course, impossible to solve anything without
the full participation of Nagorno-Karabakh, especially since this is
stipulated by the mandate of conduct of the Minsk conference on
settlement. It is the statement of the will of the people of
Nagorno-Karabakh that should determine the status of Nagorno-Karabakh.
This is the cornerstone of the resolution of the conflict. The
co-chairmen of the Minsk Group have repeatedly spoken in public about
the importance of and the need for the participation of the
representatives of Nagorno-Karabakh in the negotiations. I remember
that the reconciliation achieved with Russia's mediation - in 1994 -
was also approved and signed by the Karabakh side. No agreement makes
sense without the participation and signature of Nagorno-Karabakh.
[Simonyan] How do you characterize Armenia's relations with two other
neighbours - Iran and Georgia? It seems that relations with Iran might
be more dynamic and quicker to develop - with Georgia, however, time
and again petty, but sensitive problems arise....
[Nalbandian] Armenia attaches important significance to relations with
those of its direct neighbour states with whom our partnership is in
the nature of friendly cooperation. Armenia and Iran are tied by
traditionally friendly relations. We carry out numerous mutually
profitable projects, particularly in the energy and transport spheres.
New economic projects are on the agenda. We are keeping close track of
the development of events concerning Iran's nuclear programme, and we
think that all the disputed problems should be solved through
negotiations. Let us also hope that as a result of the future efforts
of Iran and the international community, it will be possible to
achieve a coordinated solution of the problem.
With Georgia, however, I think that there are no problems that we
could not solve through joint efforts. Armenia is one of the countries
that is extremely interested in a stable, safe and prosperous Georgia.
Not only because about 70 per cent of our commodity turnover goes
through Georgia and there is a very large Armenian diaspora, but also
because our two countries are connected by age-old ties of friendship
and good-neighbourliness.
[translated from Turkish]
From: A. Papazian