– In the protocol on establishing diplomatic relations between Armenia and Turkey there is a provision on “mutual and multilateral responsibilities to respect the territorial integrity and borders firmness”. We wander whether it is not a precondition or indirect demand toward Armenia to recognize Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity.
– The provision on territorial integrity is included in every protocol on establishing diplomatic relations. If there is an opinion that it is also a document recognizing the territorial integrity of third countries, I don’t think it is a serious problem because ultimately by becoming a member of the UN and EXCE Armenia already took on that responsibility. As a diplomatic principle, we have never had a problem with Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity and we have never accepted the issue of Karabakh as a territorial claim, as a territorial dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan. That’s what we used to have during Ter-Petrosyan’s tenure, which gave us a huge diplomatic privilege. We started to have problems when the issue started to be viewed as a conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia. However it is a conflict between the Mountainous Karabakh Republic and Azerbaijan. And even if we have signed a document, which would recognize Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity indirectly, it does not mean that we are considering Karabakh as a part of Azerbaijan. We recognize the territorial integrity of the US as well, but if Texas goes out of the US territory, we will recognize its territorial integrity too.
– Isn’t it strange that the mentioned protocol is to be adopted by the parliaments of the two countries? Usually it is not common in the international practice.
– Yes, it is not an easy practice, and it seems it is done so that the presidents and parliaments share that responsibility. However, as the ANC’s announcement writes, it contains a risk that the problem may be put on the parliament. We are concerned about this possibility.
– Maybe the authorities want to reserve an opportunity to escape from an unwished solution.
– I don’t exclude this possibility. Maybe somewhere in the future the governments may decide that they will be faced with problems when they improve the relations and decide that they should fail the process. In such case they can do it through the parliaments.
– The ANC’s announcement concerning this issue was very mild, meanwhile the ARF was too critical to this issue.
– I totally agree with the announcement. There are issues, which should not be misused for political purposes. We have never played politics on issues which are important for the state interests of Armenia. To advocate for the Armenian-Turkish relations does not mean that we agree with it by all means. There are details in this process, which are cloudy to us and we are concerned of such things. The announcement of the Congress is our real approach to that document. We have not tried to resist or undermine anything artificially. As for the ARF, if they really want to struggle against the authorities, there are other methods and ways other than sharp critics, and they know about these methods pretty well. For example, they can make a joint opposition format with the ANC as Ter-Petrosyan has suggested, and demand the resignation of Serzh Sargsyan.
– Levon Ter-Petrosyan announced that Karabakh was given out already. Do you think that Armenia has compromised Karabakh? Why don’t you struggle against it rather than making announcements only? Why do you let them give out Karabakh?
– We are not quiet, we only expressed our opinion concerning this issue. Expressing an opinion concerning a document is different from showing an approach or policy. As for the opinion that this might have happened as a result of compromises in the conflict issue, it is a very reasonable conclusion. During dozens of years the Turkey’s policy was that the issue of the Armenian-Turkish relations were depending on the issue of Karabakh conflict settlement. I don’t see any reasons why Turkey’s policy may change in connection to this issue. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that it is a result of a compromise in connection to the issue of Karabakh conflict. We are concerned and we will express our political opinion when we get more information. As well as we should understand what has been compromised.
– Why do you think that there have been compromises in relation to the conflict issue of Karabakh? There is no provision about it in the protocol. You also said that the issue of territorial integrity is “up to the protocol”.
– I am concerned of the fact that Azerbaijan’s reaction to this issue is still weak. If it were not agreed with Azerbaijan, their reaction would be stricter. I am stating one more time that in order to make political steps we will need more detailed facts.