Isn’t the idea of “No inch of land” a principle any more?

07/02/2006 Lilit SEYRANYAN

Yesterday the RA National Assembly commission on foreign affairs issues made a decision to work out a statement on the hearings held on March, 29-30, 2005, where there is no information regarding the announcements made by different officials on solving the Karabagh conflict in a matter of several months or years. The commission members not only think that it is not late to present this statement, but also say that this document is very important in our history, though it is not a juridical document.

What’s important is that, in spite of the previous documents that were not considered as “statements”, this one doesn’t include any information about not returning any territories to Azerbaijan. They are doing this so as not to write in such documents sentences like “no inch of land to Azerbaijan”. Instead of this, the MPs have included some unclear provisions which our party is going to insist during the negotiation processes. Those provisions are the following: Karabakh can’t be a part of Azerbaijan, there must be a secure border between Azerbaijan and Armenia, citizens of Karabagh have to be secured, Karabagh must be guaranteed the right to take part in the world processes and the Armenians living in Azerbaijan that have had losses must be reimbursed. In regard to this, Aram G. Sargsyan, who represents the “Justice” alliance and is a member of the NA group on foreign affairs issues, said: “You are right, there is no information about giving or not giving territories in this document. There is no issue like this in this document, the only thing written on that paper is about providing security guarantees for Karabakh borders, but the document doesn’t state which borders. There is nothing written about returning or not returning any territories”.

“There is only one secure way for the peace settlement. The parties can reach peaceful agreement only by following the international standards and leading negotiations according to those standards. All other ways either lead to a dead end or to war”, as written in the conclusion. The MPs representing this commission think that there is one more important point in the statement: “In order to have peaceful negotiations and conduct the process effectively Karabakh should be involved in the negotiation process”. In regard to this an oppositionist said that during the Kocharyan-Aliev meeting in February, when the two presidents will be forced to sign the agreement, Kocharyan will refuse by pointing out this document and saying that “The National Assembly of Armenia does not look forward to these negotiations unless Karabakh is involved in the process of negotiations” . According to him this is the reason why the statement is considered to be so specific.

In this statement there are also explanations as to why Armenia takes part in this process but Karabakh doesn’t: “Karabakh is the main and independent side of the conflict. The Armenian side was brought into the conflict under the pressure of the aggression of Azerbaijan against Karabakh and Armenia and Armenia is the guarantee for the right of citizens of Karabakh to become oriented. Due to the fact that Karabakh is not recognized internationally, Armenia often takes part in different processes instead of Karabakh but Armenia can’t fully substitute Karabakh”.
We asked Aram G. Sargsyan whether the opposition advocates this statement and he said: “We generally agree with it. We think that the NA must find a way to prove the legitimacy of Karabakh to not be dependent on Azerbaijan and to take part in these processes as an independent party. But there is nothing about this in the statement. Recently the present day chairman of OSCE, De Gukht made a statement about this too. Although we have made the same suggestion several years ago, however, the NA and the authorities refused this suggestion but now Europe is telling them to do so. We are going to ask them the same again”.

Concerning the statement to be serious the oppositionist says: “I think the authorities must consider it, and besides that if it were included in the NA agenda and were adopted it would have more legal power”. According to head of the commission Armen Roustamyan, this document will be given to all NA parties as an important document. “It is a very important document because it is the first time that these kinds of issues are brought up and this kind of statement is written. There hasn’t been such a document written even by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs before”, said Aram G. Sargsyan.

In response to our question as to what kind of role this document could play in case the authorities didn’t consider it, Mr. Sargsyan answered: “In this case I think the NA will have to discuss what their commission has adopted and then make a decision”.

It is worth to mention also that this document will be sent to all embassies of other countries in Armenia.

P.S. By the way, the purpose of this statement is not clear also due to the fact that there is no provision there which hasn’t been spoken by the authorities and which can go against their viewpoint. The MPs have just made it a document. As for the purpose, it will be clear in the future.