The
member of PACE commission on political issues Gurgen Arsenian appreciates the
accepted resolution on Nagorno-Katabakh conflict in this way.-
Was it the decision of the delegation or the responsible persons of foreign policy
not to produce suggestions of changes in those standpoints of Atkinson’s report
that were more problematic?- We knew from the beginning the "nails"
we must pay attention and tried to prevent excluding what was unpleasant for the
Armenian side. A collegial opinion was formed as a result of the consultation
between the delegation and the foreign political department that those standpoints
were three, which we tried to correct. – Does it mean that neither the delegation
nor the Foreign Ministry considers unpleasant the expressions of the resolution
like "ethnic separations" and the formulation that the occupation of
foreign territories by the CoE member country is a serious infringement of obligations?-
I myself consider dangerous those formulations but we decided to attract our attention
to those changes, which we considered possible to realize. Besides you must take
into consideration that we were going to produce anti-arguments to the suggested
changes of the Azerbaijani side. Their suggestions were quotations from the documents
accepted before but violent, re-comprehension and adapted to their purposes and
strategy. So we also tried to explain our colleagues that the suggested changes
of the Azerbaijani side fell short of the content of those documents. Our arguments
were accepted as the commission of political issues voted against the suggested
changes of the Azerbaijani side.- According to our information the Azerbaijani
side has suggested the Armenian delegation beforehand to refuse from the attempts
of changing the resolution in exchange for their refusal from the suggestions.
And the Armenian side has seriously discussed that version.- This is a usual
working process when some discussions take place round the same document referring
to 2-3 sides. But the Armenian side refused that suggestion. By the way the third
side and not the Azerbaijani suggested it.- And what did happen in the sitting
of the commission of political issues in the morning of January 25. You informed
the journalists after the sitting that all our suggestions had been accepted.
While it was found out in the complete sitting that the commission had accepted
only one suggestion and some disorder was caused on replacing the word "separatists"
to "independents". Then the situation was explained by the circumstance
that the PACE new elected president was Turkish.- I have spoken about it to
the head of our delegation. I don’t think that what has happened is the reason
of the changed PACE president and his nationality. Atkinson suggested replacing
the word "independents" to "the powers craving for independence"
during the discussion of the commission on political issues. And the commission
liked this formulating by voting. Our suggested term wasn’t discussed any more
as another formulating had already been accepted.The Azerbaijanis simply took
advantage of this change for failing the proceeding opportunity. That means when
10 deputies object to the oral sub-change that correction is put aside. And the
head of the commission made a technical blander declaring that they had voted
against our written change. In my opinion it couldn’t be a planned distortion.
– Some Armenian figures who hasn’t even looked through the document make interpretations
that the resolution gives an opportunity to negotiate Azerbaijan with Karabakh
authorities. While PACE has refused that formulating by voting. Some others consider
this document very successful. Do you agree with these optimistic appraisals?-
I don’t agree with pessimistic appraisals. I think the document remained in the
positive than negative field from the neutral. The resolution wasn’t turned into
bad. And this document reflects only the European standpoint on this disputable
issue. Every side will simply try to perform its activities in PACE as a victory.-
Do you think the Armenian side has any reason to consider this document its victory?-
As the member of our delegation and the citizen of Armenia I can wish to conclude
from this document, analyze without unnecessary enthusiasm and pessimism. And
try to understand what opportunities this document gives us to solve this issue.
As we don’t have any right to inherit the unsettled Karabakh issue to our next
generation.Interview by Anna IsraelianStrasbourg
