Category: 2022

YEREVAN. – Hraparak daily of Armenia writes: A basketball tournament will start in Malta on June 29, in which the national basketball teams of Armenia and Azerbaijan will [also] take part.

The head coach of our team, Rex Kalamian, recently had announced in the US that they have a task ahead of them: to definitely beat the Azerbaijani national team, which received a heated response in Azerbaijan. Basketball player Amil Gamzayev stated that Azerbaijan has already celebrated its main victory, answered in such a way for 44 days [of the Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh) war in the fall of 2020] that that Armenians will hardly forget it. Then they started making threats.

And our athletes will stay at the same hotel with the Azerbaijanis, which is fraught with dangers. It is not known how the boasting Azerbaijani athletes, who had refused to come to Armenia to participate in a boxing championship, will behave in Malta.

A total of 91 organizations active in the EU Member states sent a letter to the President of the European Council Charles Michel, expressing profound discontent with his statement following the trilateral meeting with the Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and the Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev dating to May 23, reported the European Armenian Federation for Justice and Democracy (EAFJD).

The organizations welcome Charles Michel’s efforts for peace negotiations. Nevertheless, they emphasize the importance of ensuring that peace is negotiated based on justice and not by sacrificing the fundamental rights and needs of the Armenian side which has been a victim of vicious aggression of the Turkish-Azerbaijani tandem in 2020. 

The organizations regret that the press statement of 23 May disregards key principles of EU’s documented approach towards the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh (Artsakh) conflict and overall endorses the Azerbaijani stance on the conflict resolution in some crucial aspects. This includes using the wording “Karabakh” while referring to the conflict, instead of “Nagorno-Karabakh” which is a political entity with a defined territory. The letter further elaborates that using the term Karabakh by the Azerbaijani authorities is a part of the ongoing state policy of ethnic cleansing against the indigenous Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh.

Referring to the statement by the spokesperson of Charles Michel on May 31, the organizations express appreciation that it introduced important clarifications and emphasized key principles. The organizations express hope that EU’s future mediation on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict does justice to negotiating an equitable and lasting peace. For this purpose the call on the President of the European Council to base the mediation on six concrete aspects.

We had problems in the direction of Parukh village [of Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh)] in February-March. Under circumstances that have not yet been clarified and in the presence of Russian peacekeepers, the Azerbaijanis were able to capture a certain peak. President Vahagn Khachaturyan of Armenia said this during a meeting with the representatives of the Armenian community of Russia.

“I also participated in those discussions. We expressed a very tough position, and as a result of that position, the Russian side ultimately admitted that there is a shortcoming there. Now they are conducting an internal investigation to find out what the reason is. But they admitted during internal discussions that they had not fulfilled their obligation,” he added.

According to Khachaturyan, the situation was so tense that the people of Artsakh had said that if the Russian peacekeepers could not ensure their security, they will return to Armenia.

“The response of the Russian side was that they are obliged to ensure the security of the people; ‘we will do everything so you can live safely.’ They can even submit investment projects; they are ready to fund them.

After that, there have been no territorial conflicts; on the contrary, a number of meetings have taken place, including on the European platform—in Brussels. There, too, [Azerbaijani President Ilham] Aliyev indulged himself, after which [President of the European Council] Charles Michel had corrected him that this issue had not been discussed. It is about not using the word ‘Nagorno-Karabakh,'” Khachaturyan said.

Azerbaijan expects concrete steps from Armenia to sign a peace agreement as soon as possible. The statement came from Azerbaijani Deputy Foreign Minister Elnur Mammadov, speaking at the IX Global Baku Forum under the motto “Challenges to the Global World Order,” Haqqin.az reports.

He noted that “Azerbaijan expects that Armenia will finally take concrete steps to advance the peace process.”

“Azerbaijan, in its turn, presented to Armenia the five basic principles that must be adhered to,” Mammadov added.

And speaking about Azerbaijan-Georgia relations, the Azerbaijani deputy FM noted that they can serve as an example, adding that the acceleration of the peace process is necessary for the development of the entire South Caucasus.

Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan responded to Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev’s allegations that Armenia is not sincere in achieving peace and is protracting the process of unblocking regional transport communications, Armenpress state news agency reported.

Armenian News-NEWS.am presents the questions of Armenpress and the answers of the Armenian Foreign Minister.

“Question – The President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev stated in his speech yesterday that Armenia is not sincere in the process of achieving peace. How would you comment on that?

Answer – The Government of the Republic of Armenia has repeatedly proved its readiness to make efforts for the establishment of long-term stability and peace in the South Caucasus. At the same time, it is obvious that these efforts cannot be unilateral, Azerbaijan must also take practical and sincere steps in this direction. The establishment of peace cannot be the result of the efforts of one side alone, and peace talks cannot be based on the proposals of one side alone.

It is also obvious that for the success of these efforts, it is necessary to address the whole set of existing problems that have caused the conflict in order to find a solution acceptable to all parties. In this context, the statements made by official Baku that Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is solved are at least not understood or, moreover, cast doubt on the sincerity of the Azerbaijani authorities’ intention to achieve peace. No matter what statements are made, the Nagorno-Karabakh issue will continue to exist as long as the issues of security, sufficient guarantees for the protection of all rights of the Armenians of Artsakh, and the status of Nagorno-Karabakh arising from them are not addressed. In the modern world, the situation created by the use of force cannot be the solution to a problem.

The assertion that as a result of the use of force even Nagorno Karabakh does not exist, does not speak about the constructiveness of Azerbaijan. Needless to say that this, of course, corresponds neither to the de-facto reality, the most important part of which is the existence of Artsakh Armenians in Artsakh and the presence of Russian peacekeeping forces to ensure their security, nor the November 9 trilateral declaration, which stopped the war and clearly defines the existence of Nagorno Karabakh.

The same can be said about the statements of the Azerbaijani authorities on the non-existence of the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs. First of all, no one has suspended it or can suspend the international mandate of the Co-chairs to contribute to the political settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict without the relevant decision of the international institute defining it. In that case, it is incomprehensible that if the parties really want to negotiate sincerely, to find mutually acceptable solutions, to achieve a stable, comprehensive peace, then why should not those talks take place in the OSCE Minsk Group Co-chairs’ format? A format which has the clear support of the international community and not to using its experience and potential is simply not logical and reasonable.

Question – Ilham Aliyev claims that the Armenian side is delaying the process of unblocking the region. What can you say about this?

Answer – We have always stated that we are interested in opening all the transport and economic infrastructures in the region. This is evidenced by the trilateral statements adopted by the Russian mediation on January 11 and November 26, as well as the agreements reached in Brussels.

I would like to emphasize that Armenia has been involved in the discussions in good faith, the process would have been much smoother if there were no statements by Azerbaijan about extraterritorial corridor, which have nothing to do with the trilateral declaration of November 9, as well as with the commitments assumed by the statements I mentioned.

As for Azerbaijan’s efforts to draw parallels between the Lachin corridor and the regional transport routes to be unblocked, they obviously cannot have the same status, at least arising from the provisions of the trilateral declaration signed on November 9, 2020, which clearly define the status of the Lachin corridor. Moreover, Nagorno Karabakh and the Nakhichevan Autonomous Republic have different statuses, different neighborhoods, different security environments. Accordingly, their relations with Armenia and Azerbaijan cannot be identical.

I would like to emphasize again that the November 9 declaration envisages unblocking of all infrastructures in the region, while Azerbaijan is delaying in taking steps in this direction. We are ready for unblocking the region within the framework of the agreements on the preservation of the sovereignty of the countries and jurisdiction over roads, and the recent talks between the Deputy Prime Ministers of the two countries in Moscow followed this logic.”