– What influence may the resolution 2216 adopted by the European Parliament have on the international reputation and foreign policy of Armenia? Or is this a certain hint regarding the resolution of the NKR conflict?
– This resolution has exposed all the dangerous motives, which have existed in the foreign policy of Armenia of the recent period. And the alerts regarding this process have remained with no response. Let me bring one example, which the media has never alluded to. As a direct consequence of the mistaken policy of Armenia is the 39th point of the document on the EU strategy, by which the European Parliament “re-affirms that Russia, Turkey and the US play a crucial role in the resolution of the conflicts in the South Caucasus.” Thus, the European structures have started to acknowledge the key role of Turkey in the NKR conflict resolution. And this is only the beginning. We may bring some other points from the resolution, which harm our policy and reputation. This makes it clear that the game proceeded in the field of only one player (the soccer admirers may understand what exactly this means in soccer). And as the European documents come to prove this process has been quite protracted. The draft of the resolution has been prepared back on October 20, 2009. In January of the current year it has been in the frames of the discussion of the foreign relations commission of the European Parliament. It means that there was quite a lot of time to become aware of what’s going on and what kind of resolution is being prepared to exclude drastic mistakes. But nothing was done. Moreover, the responsible forces and persons as always run after events and make efforts to justify themselves. We have even reached the point when the foreign affairs minister is explain to the European Parliament the European policy regarding the conflicts in the South Caucasus and the NKR specifically. Some people say that the resolution is not legally binding. Indeed, but when the European Parliament was adopting a resolution on the genocide or a favorable document on the NKR no one from Armenians would say that those documents are symbolic and are not legally binding. Others are blaming a Bulgarian MP Yevgeni Kirilov. But they forget that the document is not Kirilov’s document any more but is a European Parliament document. Indeed, the pro-Azerbaijani and pro-Turkish policies are well-known to everyone back then when he was a member of the Bulgarian delegation in the PACE. But we should have known this at the time when he was being appointed rapporteur. We should have made efforts to fail his appointment. A little later we should have at least brought up justified claims to the commission via the NA and the European Parliament members or through some other channels for changing certain thing. We could have at least worked closely with those PACE MPs, who have had favorable behavior in relation to Armenia. We could have mentioned many other things that could have been done prior to the adoption of the resolution.
– Who are guilty of adopting this resolution? Could we have had precluded the adoption of this resolution if the foreign policy officials of Armenia, ambassadors, relevant commissions and delegates had done a better job? Could we at least make sure that a less unfavorable resolution is adopted?
– I am not a judge to determine who the culprits are. But the responsible ones are known. Indeed, you can be sure that if the foreign affairs ministry of Armenia and the NA structures did the necessary work we wouldn’t have such a sad picture. Unfortunately, in Armenia during the past two years the professional work is missing. Many politicians and officials are busy with show-off, bragging, compliments to the authorities and are keen on blaming others of their failures, by forgetting that the results received are due to their work. In the best case they curse the Turks, the Azerbaijani and their loyalists. It is very difficult to expect anything else in a country when the loyalists of the government day by day laud the “wise policy” of the government and the president in various press clubs and on TV. As of the possibility of prevention of the adoption of such documents then I can bring many examples from the work of the PACE through the period of 2003-2007. Even in the case of the hardest situations it was possible to find solutions and a way out. All was necessary to do is conduct a consistent work. The ones, who wish to receive results, will find various opportunities and the ones, who wish to get away from responsibilities, may find hundreds of reasons.
– When at that time you were the head of the Armenian delegation in the PACE resolution 1614 was adopted. Back in the day you considered it a positive document but it gave opportunities to conduct certain discussions regarding the resolution of the NKR conflict. In that resolution the neighboring territories of the NKR were considered “occupied territories.”
– First I should say that unlike many others I don’t make abstract statements about the documents. Once again I am saying that it is necessary to be able to read and understand the documents. This is quite rare in Armenia. As of the resolution 1416 then it doesn’t have any comparison with resolution 2216. Moreover, resolution 1416 is the only resolution adopted by the international organizations, where the second clause reads that the NKR may be annexed from Azerbaijan in a peaceful manner in the free and democratic expression of the will of the people living there. As a result of this resolution the right of self-determination was first recognized in the framework of the Minsk Group as one of the main principles of the resolution of the conflict and was included in further documents. Nobody can forbid the international organizations to discuss this or the other matter. These matters have been numerously discussed in the PACE sessions regarding the Kosovo issue, Abkhazia and even Palestine. Only the ignorant and incompetent ones can claim that nobody will allow discussing these matters but they are powerless to change anything. Unfortunately in Armenia there are quite many people in Armenia occupying key posts. Having not been able to give a relevant response to the newly elected Turkish President of PACE Chavushoglu (all we had to do is not invite this person to Armenia, who had turned the disrespectful attitude of his country to the genocide a PACE policy), they have tried to move the issue into another platform. Yes resolution 1416 anticipates the establishment of a PACE sub-commission. And after becoming PACE president Chavushoglu said that he should be heading this sub-commission. Instead of carefully reading and examining the resolution and making Chavushoglu understand that the PACE president cannot lead a subcommission, some people have started to draw senseless judgments about this subcommission. The nonsense reached the level that there were statements that via this subcommission the process of regulation of the issue will be ousted from the Minsk Group format and will be moved to some other organization. Nonetheless, if people had carefully read the resolution they would have realized that the resolution not only evaluates the efforts of the Minsk Group cochairmen but also urges the parties to activate the Minsk Group format by suggesting that a subcommission should be established. According to the 5th clause of the resolution the Assembly has define only one goal for the subcommission. The delegations of the member states of the Minsk Group should annually submit reports to the PACE on what they have done to regulate the process. It is evident that no one has the right to use the subcommission for other purposes despite the attempts of doing so. In 2005-2007 the chair of the political commission of the PACE, member of the Turkish delegation Atesh tried to head the ad-hic subcommission after the adoption of the resolution. Then after having not able to do so he was trying to blame the ad hoc of everything that would go wrong but he would fail here too because every time he would be reminded that he didn’t have the right to intervene and “peek his nose” in the activities of the subcommission. Moreover, during this period active work has been done to ensure that the commission is headed by a PACE member, who wouldn’t violate the rules; we have numerously met with the late Russell Johnston. During 2005-2007 we haven’t had any problems within the commission. Therefore, in the event of necessary work it will be impossible to deflect the ad hoc from its main course and frames of powers in order to use for some covert purposes. But in the absence of such a work a lot of dangers will emerge which can stretch from the UN till the Minsk Group. As the adoption of resolution 2216 of the PACE evidently showed unfortunately such a work is absent on part of the Armenian officials and delegations.
– After the NKR elections the international structures, the co-chair states of the Minsk Group have stated that they don’t recognize these elections. Do you think these are regular and routine statements or certain motives are hidden as well, which may be construed as their attitude to the NKR conflict?
– I have numerously said that and now am saying one more time. By speaking on part or on behalf of the NKR Armenia virtually doesn’t recognize the NKR as a state and don’t accept the self-identification right of the NKR population. It is evident that in this case the international organizations and the co-chairs won’t recognize the elections regardless of the outcome. Moreover, during the recent period, the co-chairs incessantly remind that the independence of Armenia wasn’t even recognized by Armenia. Therefore, before demanding anything from anyone it is necessary that Armenia takes the first step by admitting the self-identification right of the NKR and cease expressing the standpoint of the NKR and let the latter decide and express it through its legislative body. The statements, according to which in that case Azerbaijan will refuse to negotiate, are groundless because it is wrong to obey the caprice and blackmail of the other side.