Category: 2022

ArmInfo.The Ministry of Environment reacted to the information in the media about the spillage of  chemicals into the Araks River from the Agarak  copper-molybdenum plant in the Syunik region of the Republic of  Armenia.

The ministry assured that the problem is under strict control of the  department. On behalf of Minister Hakob Simidyan, specialists are  working on the spot, taking water samples from the river. “According  to the currently available information, the wastewater leaked along  the asphalt road and did not spill into the Araks River. At present,  the M2 road at the 381st km of the Yerevan-Meghri-customs post has  been cleared of wastewater containing chemicals,” the department said  in a statement. Relevant photos and video footage have also been  published.

It is noted that the Ministry of the Environment works with all  interested parties. “As for allegations in publications about causing  significant environmental damage by harming the fauna and flora of  the river and adjacent coastal areas, we urge our information  partners to refrain from such assessments while expert work is being  carried out,” the ministry said.

It should be reminded that GeoProMining Group of Companies, one of   the largest industrial investors in Armenia, has been operating in   the country for 15 years. The Armenian assets of the group consist of   the Sotk Gold Mine, the Ararat Gold Mining Plant and the Agarak    Copper-Molybdenum Combine.  Over 15 years of operation, the group  has  invested more than 400 million US dollars in the modernization  of its  Armenian enterprises. The amount of the Group’s social  investments in  the development of the regions where it operates  exceeds USD 10  million.  In September, Industrial Company managed by  GPM Group, acquired a 60%  stake in the flagship of the mining  industry in Armenia, the Zangezur  Copper-Molybdenum Combine,  transferring a 25% stake from its share to  the Armenian government.  

ArmInfo.Talking to reporters in Yerevan’s Liberty Square, Armenia’s former foreign minister Ara Aivazyan said no requirement of Artsakh’s lower status was laid down  when he was Armenia’s minister of foreign affairs. 

“If we act with prudence, we could ensure a minimum,” he said.  

The diplomat said that he agreed to the post of foreign minister  being sure Armenian diplomacy would succeed in reaching certain  agreements and ensure Armenia’s national interests. 

“I would not like to make assessments now, but I think much was done  and we managed to ensure certain accents by the international  community,” he said.  

Commenting on the developments during the last year, Mr Aivazyan  said: 

“It was not so when I was minister. You will recall the co-chairs  made several statements – on December 3, April 13, and the accents of  the statements were in full conformity with our national interests.”

According to him, peoples’ self-determination was among the  priorities. 

Mr Aivazyan is sure that after analyzing the situation one can see  the process would have never ended in war. 

“Can you see what is going on around us? The ongoing geopolitical  processes are involving not only Armenia and Azerbaijan. It is much  more serious. Armenia could appear the weakest state in the South  Caucasus, but much depends on Armenia’s position in the context of  the region’s geopolitical future,” Mr Aivazyan said. 

As to the Azerbaijan-proposed five points, he said:  “I am sure that  by diplomatic means we can ensure a minimum if we take reasonable  steps – even in this grave situation. We have human resources, former  foreign ministers with great experience. I think we must mobilize all  our national potential.” 

As regards withdrawal of troops on both sides, Mr Aivazyan is sure  that the process was a tactical blunder committed by the Armenian  side. He said that the issue was first raised on May 27, and he  resigned a few hours later.  “There was theorizing about border  delimitation and demarcation. I had a negative opinion. I think the  mutual withdrawal of troops was a tactical blunder on our part  because, you will recall, specifically addressed statements had been  issued before May 27. And the last statement by the U.S. Department  of State was a strong-worded one. It was preceded by statements by  France, the EU, Germany, Canada, India and Iran,” he said.  As to  whether effective solutions to the Artsakh problem could be found  through removal of Armenia’s Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and his  team, Mr Aivazyan is confident that the situation can be remedied by  diplomatic means. However, it is a long and hard process. 

“I say again, a geopolitical gamble is extremely dangerous to us  now,” he said. As regards the concerned over the so-called Zangezur  corridor, which could be a precondition for a peace agreement with  Azerbaijan, Mr Aivazyan said he is not involved in the negotiations. 

“At least, when I worked at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, no  document or idea was proposed to us. I only heard on regular  occasions that Azerbaijan was stating it had proposed peace,” he  said.  As to normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations, Mr Aivazyan  points out a need for a dialogue, but not by setting preconditions. 

If the regional and other nations are interested in peace and  stability, they should reject such categories as “winner” and  “loser.” “I do not see the forcing supporting Turkey and Azerbaijan  are thinking so,” he said.  

Asked if he is supporting the Armenian premier’s removal from power,  Mr Aivazyan said he stated his opinion by resigning from the post of foreign minister.  

Ara Aivazyan was appointed to the post on November 18, 2020, and  resigned on May 27, 2021.

ArmInfo.Turkey will not make a single step toward Armenia without getting even more in exchange, the expert in Turkic studies, Professor Ruben Safrastyan said in an  interview with ArmInfo.  

“I think we all need to admit this simple truth. The simple reason  for Ankara putting off its response to Armenia’s proposal for opening  the land border for holders of diplomatic passports is that Ankara is  awaiting something in exchange. This is Turkish diplomacy, with its  mode of action. And if we add the latest statements by Ilham Aliyev  and Mevlut Cavusoglu, we can understand that we should not hold any  special expectations about the announced meeting of the Special  Envoys in Vienna,” Mr Safrastyan said. 

He substantiates his forecast by Ankara’s cooperation with Azerbaijan  in negotiations with Armenia, with Baku not at all going to display a  constructive approach in its relations with Yerevan. One more factor  is Turkey’s desire to turn its preconditions to Armenia into a  problem of the negotiation process. 

According to Mr Safrastyan, the last-named fact means that Turkey is  viewing negotiations with Armenia as a means of pressuring Armenia  into further concessions rather than of normalizing relations with  Armenia. In this context, he does not expect any positive results at  the current stage of negotiations.  Ankara’s very desire to negotiate  with Yerevan without any mediators and not in a neutral state is  evidence of its intention to get more ways of pressuring Armenia. 

“Of course, all the background factors are of secondary importance.  It is not the venue of negotiations, but the Turkish negotiators’  readiness for being constructive that is important. Regrettably, I do  not yet see any constructive position on Turkey’s part. And Armenia  should remain committed to its principles that have anything in  common the Armenian Genocide and Artsakh,” Mr Safrastyan said.