Chairman of NKR NA Foreign Affairs committee, Vahram Atanesyan, does not consider the “Heritage” approach logical.
– In the agenda of the forthcoming session, the “Heritage” faction is going to re-circulate the draft on recognizing the NKR independence. “Today, new political realities emerge. You all know that there is a distinct separation with regard to the EU Association and the Customs / Eurasian Union, that NKR is not associated with the any Union, to which the Republic of Armenia will constitute”, such substantiation was presented by the leader of the faction, Ruben Hakobyan. He also said that they are going to consult the forces of the Four and NKR authorities allegedly to introduce the draft. Do you see logic in the “Heritage” offers?
-No. What does it mean saying that if neither the Customs Union, nor the European Union recognize Nagorno-Karabakh the territory of Armenia, hence, the Republic of Armenia should recognize the NKR independence. Should Armenia, therefore, with this step oppose the CU or EU member states? Recognizing the Artsakh independence should not result in new tension rather than be a guarantee for establishment of peace and stability.
– After the Sochi meeting of the presidents, the situation in Karabakh front seems to have calmed down, not only in terms of shootings but also politically eccentric statements voiced by Azerbaijan. How long will this silence last?
Read also
– I cannot tell how long it will last, but I think we owe not to the Sochi meeting for nowadays situation in the Contact line, but the Armenian armed forces, whose high preparedness vanished the aggressive initiating actions by Azerbaijan. It seems that the losses will force Baku not to retry bringing its army to “review”.
– What developments are expected on NKR issue under the current geopolitical situation?
– Thomas de Waal, who is considered to be a leading expert in the Karabakh issue, believes that the world today is concerned about entirely different issues. This is a realistic assessment. Hardly any major developments can be expected. Apparently, the mediators would try organizing another meeting of the Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan in the fall. If it becomes successful, then the situation perhaps would be balanced.
– What was your impression of the Sochi meeting and its subsequent statements? Is it possible for Russia to take on the monopoly of solving the Karabakh conflict and move out the Minsk group?
– This theme is a lot talked about lately, but I think that they are exaggerated predictions. It seems that Russia itself has no such desire. Simply, some analysts are trying to “move” the tension in relations between Russia and the West to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict context, but we must hope that the West and Russia would be so balanced that they would not create a new opportunity for diplomatic confrontation for them.
– Who holds the Karabakh conflict settlement in the hands? Why don’t the parties draw reconciliation? Who benefits from protraction of reconciliation?
– Seeking for the key to settlement in Moscow, Paris or Washington is a fruitless occupation. The resources of reconciliation and agreement, as well as hostility, are in the hands of the parties in conflict. Unfortunately, Baku always and everywhere acts with demonstration of hostility, which deepens the distrust of this country. It should be admitted that the problem has no military solution and move forward to increase the resources of mutual trust. People’s the nation’s fate cannot be subjugated to revanchist aspirations, as it is done in Baku. The elite should really prepare people to comprehensive, just and possibly lasting peace.
– After the meeting of presidents, Russian, as well as Armenian political and analytical circles voices accusations against the West for supporting and encouraging Azerbaijan in its subversive actions against Armenians states. Accusations were also voiced that Russia is standing behind all of this. Which side does the scale of the truth turn to, in your opinion?
– Certainly, one can see the “third hand” role-playing in the end of July – beginning of August tension, however, this is not a question of awareness by analysts or politicians, but rather, by intelligence, intelligence services and diplomats. We can record the fact. Ilham Aliyev for a long time was refusing the offer by the France to organize a meeting of the presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia, but he quickly agreed to go to Sochi. It is spectacular also that in the period following the military adventurism, the Azerbaijani authorities began an unprecedented brutal campaign against human rights organizations and separate individuals, whereas the media was presenting them as “people engaged in espionage for the benefit of Armenia at the expense of Western grants.” The conclusion can be deceptive, so I leave it to the readers.
– Arkady Ter-Tadevosyan stated that we had been protected for quite a long time and it is time to give a preventive strike to Azerbaijan. Is there any prospect in this offer from military or political point of view?
– The Generals, even when they are retired, are thinking by the laws of war. In this sense, Mr. Ter-Tadevosyan, of course, is judging rightly. From military point of view, it is not only attractive, but also seems quite realistic. But we should calculate also the factors of political effects. Anyway, for a long time, we have also left the intimidations by the Azerbaijani side unanswered, so let’s estimate Arkady Ter-Tadevosyan’s the August 26 press conference, first of all, in the dimension of “information war”.
Interviewed by Nelly GRIGORYAN
