We
came to this conclusion after speaking on Atkinson’s document to the head of Azerbaijani
delegation in PACE Samad Seidov. – Are you satisfied with Atkinson’s report
and the accepted resolution on Nagorno-Karabakh?- Certainly. The resolution
reflects those realities that exist in Southern Caucasus especially on conflict
between Armenia and Azerbaijan. The value of the document is that the CoE showed
clearly in its document what really existed in the region: the occupation of Azerbaijani
lands, separatism in Nagorno-Karabakh, ethnic separation, humanitarian disaster
and it was considered unlawful that the CoE country member kept occupied the territory
of another country. Here are the main concentrations to which I’d add that it
was mentioned in the report that it was necessary to take discussions with two
communities of Karabakh, negotiate and think about future.- You said in your
PACE speech that after the sitting of the commission on political issues where
the Azerbaijani suggestions were failed, other delegates approached you and admitted
that what they could do when mighty powers were behind the Armenians. If really
such kind of mighty powers exist why weren’t our suggestions accepted?- Yes,
those powers really exist. The existance of the Armenian lobby isn’t secret; it
is too powerful, influential and wealthy. And the Armenian lobby is able to do
what it wants. But the suggestions weren’t accepted, as they didn’t meet the reality.
As the relations in the modern world are different: a great country and a small
point may be equal partners in connection with international right. The same exists
here, yes; the influence was used to distort the text of the report for loosing
its balance. But besides all efforts the international community answered to it
rightly and adequately, there are international laws, which mustn’t be changed.
Thus the suggestions weren’t accepted.- The experts mention that chosen references
are done to the international documents in Atkinson’s document. For example, it
is spoken about resolutions of UN Security Council and additional meeting of CSCE
council of Ministers of Helsinki on 24 March 1992. But it wasn’t spoken about
the decision of OSCE Budapest assembly on 6 December 1994 which was the most forcible.-
I think all necessary documents have been produced in the report. The quantity
of them is enormous. But in all documents accepted by the international community
nobody casts doubt the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. The principle of nation’s
self-determination is mentioned as a counterbalance. But we have mentioned for
many times that the Armenians have already self-determined and have their own
state. And beside it the right of self-determination has never opposed to the
territorial integrity. – A lot of delegates mentioned during the discussion
of this report in PACE that the issue was impossible to solve without one of the
sides, the representatives of Karabakh and they must be included in negotiations
by all means. The members of your delegation objected to this calling it an attempt
to legalize the forcible attachment. Do you think it is possible to solve Karabakh
issue without taking into consideration the standpoint of Karabakh inhabitants?-
The representatives of your state tried to include in the resolution a formulation
that the representatives of NK administration must negotiate. The CoE, EU, UN
has marked those elections and administrative staff illegal. And as it is illegal
it can’t take part in legal actions. But common people mustn’t be deprived of
that right. So it is mentioned in the resolution that relations must be with the
representatives of the Armenian community but together with the representatives
of Azerbaijani community. We aren’t against it. We were only against the word
"elected", which was replaced by "administrative staff" phrase
as it is illegal and is an infringement of all accepted laws.Interviewed
Anna IsraelianStrasbourg P.S. By the way when the suggestion of
the Armenian delegation was being discussed in PACE to include the representatives
of Karabakh’s authority one of the member of Azerbaijani delegation mentioning
it was an attempt to legalize the administrative staff quoted the declaration
of the Prime Minister of The Great Britain Tony Blair that they recognized the
territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and Karabakh as the part of Azerbaijan.It
would be interesting to listen to the explanations of the Armenian Foreign Minister
whether the Great Britain isn’t a serious country? We must remind that Oskanian
was assuring that no serious country had declared in the last years that they
observed the solution of Karabakh conflict in the context of Azerbaijan’s territorial
integrity.
