“I can’t say what data Tigran Balayan relied on because yesterday when I saw that part taken from the program with his participation, I reacted: where did such information come from, especially when a diplomat, a government official does it? He informed me that it is a part taken from his interview, which does not fully reflect what he said during the program,” Styopa Safaryan, the founder of the Armenian Institute of International and Security Affairs – AIISA, told Aravot.am, referring to the statement made yesterday by RA Ambassador to the EU Tigran Balayan that RA is now under the immediate threat of Azerbaijan’s invasion.
“The fact that Azerbaijan’s desire to not recognize the borders of Armenia is obvious; there are many proofs of this. Not only are the territorial ambitions presented at the highest level, not only by the development of the topic of enclaves or eight villages but also the past two aggressions speak about it. In any case, of course, there is a danger of invasion of RA, but how immediate it is, at this moment or in the coming weeks, I cannot say,” Safaryan continued.
Styopa Safaryan, the founder of the Armenian Institute of International and Security Affairs – AIISA
We also asked him whether he considers the statement of the Azerbaijani ambassador in Brussels to be a “bluff” that his country has no plans related to the internationally recognized territory of Armenia. According to Styopa Safaryan, “The issue is that Aliyev understands that he has no EU supporter regarding his territorial ambitions. Even more so, he did not have any in the case of ethnic cleansing. If declarations were made to protect territorial integrity, they were not intended to carry out ethnic cleansing. Aliyev understands that certain risks must be mitigated in this situation and has chosen a very cunning tactic. He does not make statements about having any territorial ambitions towards Armenia, but lower officials do.
Moreover, he doesn’t mention the topic of enclaves; he says eight villages, realizing that no one pursues enclave logic. If the world can’t do anything to keep 120,000 people in their homes, what should the world do to provide guarantees for people living in such isolated areas? The topic of 8 villages is just for him to talk about the problems of occupation, to keep that discourse, so that he does not directly recognize the territorial integrity of Armenia.”
Read also
In response to our observation, several times already, Azerbaijan has talked about eight villages occupied by Armenia, but there has been no response from Armenia, and many people have a question: what are those eight villages if there are three enclaves-34 sq․ on the 1974 Armenian SSR map? Mr. Safaryan continued. “I tell you, that’s why he doesn’t use the word enclave. I know what villages are, and the concept of these villages has not just been developed. Until 2018, films have been released, even of a fictional nature, reminding children that eight villages are under the control of the enemy… three of those eight villages are known: Azatamut, Voskepar and Tigranashen, which have absolutely no legal basis, there is no the document based on which that enclave and the other seven were formed are problems of interposition spaces, because they are more border villages, villages that are direct across the border and accessible both to them and to us.
During the May meeting in Brussels, Aliyev raised the topic of enclaves and received specific answers – several options for solutions and proposals, which he left unanswered. After that, during the meeting with the prime minister, I had a rather sharp debate with the prime minister because the problem was in a different field. I don’t want to reveal it, but my problem was that we should never develop the Turkish narrative of those eight villages because they are a problem of interpositional areas, and there are thousands of issues of such interpositional spaces. There are similar interposition space problems in all the border communities of the Tavush Region and Joghaz, about which the prime minister once announced that 850 ha of only cultivated lands were under the occupation of Azerbaijan, and the border pastures of Voskevar, which were unusable, and And Koti and Berdavan. There are thousands of such hectares.
Armenia’s answer should be that in case of demarcation of the border, such problems can be solved, but since Azerbaijan’s territorial ambitions are much bigger and are primarily related to Syunik, it hides under the concept of those eight villages, which becomes for itself to avoid a lifeline to recognize the territorial integrity of RA, to accept any borderline as a basis for the demarcation of the borders. At least five of those eight villages are not located in the territory of the Republic of Armenia.
Arpine SIMONYAN
