– Former foreign minister Vardan Oskanyan says there have been problems with Europeans after all elections in Armenia, but there was a moment when it was very difficult to explain the difference between the words and actions of the government. Were there such times when there was difference between the words and actions of the government during your office as well?
– Vardan Oskanyan has numerously openly spoken lie since his resignation. If there were such problems a moral person would resign immediately. This person has backed the violence of March 1, come up with a speech for people and backed the violent authorities that falsified the elections. There was no disputable action or violent elections during my office and I am not shame for anything or be under pressure and not able to find a justification for certain facts.
– The political powers thought that Ter-Petrosyan’s announcement that Serzh Sargsyan has to ask for legitimacy not from outside but from the people was an offer for cooperation. Did he really mean a deal or cooperation?
– From the very beginning the ANC said that unconstitutional change of power was unacceptable. It means cooperation and the ANC have never refused to cooperate with the “de-facto” government. But we said that for doing this there had to be some conditions. No one has a moral right to cooperate with the ones who are keeping your friends as their hostage.
– The first president announced that in case of unclear conditions of the peaceful forces, Lachin corridor and referendum any settlement project for the conflict of Karabakh will be disputable for you. These three issues have already been formulated in the principles of Madrid.
– I have said that the principles of Madrid are unacceptable for us, especially we have emphasized that there are no formulations in these three principles, which would suffice us. When we say a referendum we understand certain action in accordance with the international principles. It is a concrete term, which is replaced with euphemism in the principles of Madrid. It speaks of some wish. If this wish is a referendum, let’s use that term. This euphemism gives us a suspect that this wish may be in a form of a document signed by Bako Sahakyan in the future, or a letter signed by workers of a farm asking Bako Sahakyan to sign another document. There is no word about peacekeeping forces; it is about peacekeeping actions. What does the action mean? Six international monitors may be considered a form of peacekeeping actions as well. There is no word about Lachin either.
– What is the specific formulation you would like to see there?
– I don’t have a problem with formulating my approaches now. Now I have a problem with announcing and saying that any document based on the principles of Madrid will be unacceptable both for Armenia and Kabarakh.
– The protocols were presented to the Turkish parliament and it seems the process was stopped. In spite of that the process of Karabakh conflict settlement was activated. What do you think about it?
– I have numerously said that as Turkey links the protocols with the conflict of Karabakh, they will delay the ratification as long as there is no improvement in the conflict settlement of Karabakh. Turkey proves again that develops relations with Armenia with preconditions. One of the most important preconditions is the rapid settlement of Karabakh conflict.
– Will the other countries backing this process let Turkey delay the ratification? They always say that the relations of Armenia and Turkey are not linked with the conflict of Karabakh.
– On the other hand the co-chairmen also say that the development of the relations will support the conflict settlement too. The process shows that the two issues are linked too. The ink of the protocol signatures had not got dry yet when Davutoglu managed to announce that the protocols would be ratified only in case of Karabakh conflict settlement. It doesn’t matter how much they say the issues are not linked; the facts show that these two issues are linked. The visit of the MG co-chairs to the region and their policy has been activated during the past weeks, which means that a document is to be signed in the near future and the final principles will be agreed.
– Maybe it will be better if Armenia ratifies the protocols first. Do you think Davit Shahnazaryan’s recommendation to do so is the right decision?
– I don’t think so. This is not Armenia’s game. I don’t think it is so important. The most important thing for me is the issue whether the ratification is connected with the conflict of Karabakh or no.
– There are different opinions concerning the Armenian-Turkish processes, according to which this process was stimulated under the pressure of other countries, Serzh Sargsyan has been caught by the trap made by Turkey, or the Armenian president started this process himself without having foreseen the wrong direction of development of the process. What did result in such development?
– I believe both the protocols and the principles of Madrid are the direct result of Armenia’s foreign policy of the past ten years. Since getting independence Armenia announced that would support the Diaspora sisters and brothers to have promote to the recognition of the Genocide and this issue was considered closed. When it was announced in 1998 that the genocide recognition would be a priority in the foreign policy, this issue became a subject for trade. In fact it was an offer to Turkey to make a deal. As a result of this trade the protocols were originated. The same thing concerns the principles of Madrid, and during the past years Vardan Oskanyan has worked on these principles as well. He is the architect of all these formulations and I don’t know why he thinks these are unacceptable. Simply the process goes faster now because the authorities are weaker and lack legitimacy. During the past years this process was going slowly but the violence of March 1 and the lack of legitimacy on part of the authorities stimulated this process. First of all the constitutional order should be recovered in Armenia and the society should recover the right of forming its own government by public vote. The president should resign and there should be extraordinary presidential and parliamentary elections. After that the legitimate government will be able to sit at a table with the co-chairs and speak from equal positions instead of advocating for the interests of certain groups.
– Isn’t it possible to recover the constitutional order without a revolution?
– This question is provocative.