“The issues will ultimately be resolved on the political level, simultaneously using the entire arsenal of international law. There is a fundamental doubt today, expressed by the expressions of the RA government and opponents, that our government verbally and somewhere in terms of documents agreed to Artsakh being a part of Azerbaijan. This is a dangerous phenomenon,” said former RA Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan at the conference entitled “The Imperative of International Recognition of the Republic of Artsakh.”
He said the mentioned circumstance would receive international recognition when the “Peace Treaty” is signed. Today, RA is trying to give such packaging to accepting the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and leaving Artsakh as a part of Azerbaijan, which will hide that very circumstance. “If they succeed, they will present it as an achievement. That packaging has linguistic and stylistic manifestations, both evident in diplomatic work.
Of course, it will be difficult for the RA government to blur or hide the fact that Artsakh will be part of Azerbaijan. The cover-up will refer mainly to the fact that there will be a provision in the agreement that there will be a dialogue between the representatives of Baku and Artsakh. In this way, they will give the impression that there is an open window regarding the right of self-determination of Artsakh. If my assessment is correct, if I am wrong, I will apologize. But if that contract is signed as I described, Artsakh will become Javakhk.
But the difference between Artsakh and Javakhk is that Artsakh will turn into Nakhichevan after years or decades. Therefore, let’s not engage in self-deception.” As for the stylistic packaging of the problem, according to Vardan Oskanyan, there are two factors: inevitability and lack of alternatives. “I reject that thesis, often circulated to justify the government’s inaction and failures. Today they are trying to say that it is inevitable that Artsakh should remain part of Azerbaijan. That is a false thesis, an unacceptable assumption, against which a real struggle must be waged. The war happened because the negotiations failed.
Read also
After all, we could not maintain the military balance. We conducted the war very badly; that’s why we lost shamefully. Until 2018, although relative, stability was maintained by diplomacy and military credit. It was like that during three presidents. During the time of the second president, when I was a minister, every time Azerbaijan rejected another proposal of the Council of Ministers, the president immediately ordered me to submit a new proposal and did not allow a diplomatic vacuum to be created.”
After mentioning several other examples from experience, Vardan Oskanyan added: “You know, there is no war that cannot be avoided. Accepting the opposite means that there is a hypothesis to justify political inaction and impotence. The political authorities failed the negotiations, so we are in this situation.”
Luiza Sukiasyan
