Category: 2022

ArmInfo.The dominant parliamentary faction Civil Contract has thwarted the opposition’s attempt to convene a special meting of Armenia’s Parliament on Wednesday, to discuss a draft statement on the ratification of the so-called Shushi  Declaration by the Azerbaijani and Turkish Parliaments. The draft was  introduced by the Armenia opposition faction. 

Armenia’s Parliament was to hold a special meeting on the initiative  of the Armenia opposition faction, on Wednesday, to discuss the  Shushi Declaration. The opposition faction proposed that the RA  National Assembly issue a statement condemning the ratification of  the Shushi  Declaration and “expressing deep concern over the  ratification by the  Azerbaijani and Turkish Parliaments of the  declaration the  Azerbaijani and Turkish presidents signed in the  Azerbaijan-occupied  Shushi on June 15, 2021.” Back on June 15 and  17, 2021, Armenia’s foreign office issued relevant statements.  According to Mr Arsenyan, the statements contained all the key points  incorporated in the opposition-proposed draft. He believes the  Parliament’s position must be identical to that of the foreign  office.  In their 2021-2026 programme of action Armenia’s authorities  declared a policy of long-lasting peace and stability and are  implementing their foreign policy in line with the programme, with a  view of causing no harm to the declared policy. 

The opposition-proposed document reads that despite the assurances   that the Shushi Declaration is not aimed at a third party, its   content is obviously against the Armenian people.  “It sets the   strategic goals of the two nations that carried out a 44-day   aggression against the Republic of Artsakh, against Artsakh’s  self-determination, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the   Republic of Armenia, and the rights of the Armenian people, which   survived a genocide and was scattered throughout the world,” Mr   Tevanyan said. 

The wordings concerning the “Zangezur corridor” contained in the  declaration are evidence that Turkey and Azerbaijan are reaching   public agreements on implementation of joint expansionist programmes.   The authors of the statement also condemn the Azerbaijani-Turkish  agreement on struggling against international recognition of the   Armenian Genocide by distorting the essence of the problem and   turning it into a subject of historical research. 

“The Shushi Declaration is not based on the UN Charter or the   OSCE-approved security principles. Rather, it is based on the ‘ethnic   security’ approach, which is in conflict with the fundamental   international legal norms. According to the Vienna Convention on the   Law of Treaties of 1969, all the international treaties that are in   conflict with the imperative international legal norms are not   legitimate. The provocative and destructive Shushi Declaration is   unacceptable to the Republic of Armenia. It is a serious challenge to  regional and global security, which does not contribute to our   region’s peaceful development, is in conflict with normalization of   Armenian-Turkish relations without preconditions and arouses serious   doubts about official Ankara’s real intentions,” the draft statement   reads.

ArmInfo.It is necessary to demand from officials who talk about new processes without naming any guarantees – security guarantees. Armenian Ombudsman Arman Tatoyan  stated this on February 23 during a press conference on the occasion  of the completion of the mission.

In his opinion, certain officials, who voice such statements either  guided by political interests, or they do not at all realize what  they are talking about.  Tatoyan has repeatedly focused on the fact  that the Azerbaijani authorities continue to pursue a policy of  hatred and enmity towards Armenia and its people, and the voiced  statements about the “peace agenda” are false. In this context, the  Ombudsman urged not to lose vigilance. “We must have guarantees of  our rights, and not cause serious problems to arise due to our gross  mistakes, the solution of which will become unrealistic,” he said.

As an example, the Ombudsman recalled his calls for the withdrawal of  the Azerbaijani armed forces from the territories adjacent to  settlements and roads. In contrast, according to him, certain  officials legitimize the presence of the latter on the sovereign  territory of the country with their statements, exacerbate problems,  and then talk about the need to find other mechanisms to resolve the  situation.

“We don’t have time, time works against us. We must act very  quickly,” Arman Tatoyan emphasized. 

ArmInfo.Three factions of the National Assembly of Artsakh issued a statement in connection with the visit of Azerbaijani deputies to Armenia. 

“Against the backdrop of deteriorating relations between the  parliaments of Armenia and Artsakh, the Prime Minister of the  Republic of Armenia is organizing a warm welcome for the Azerbaijani  MPs. Yesterday Nikol Pashinyan met with the Azerbaijani MPs who  arrived in Armenia within the framework of the Euronest Parliamentary  Assembly, and today these MPs thanked the Prime Minister RA Minister  for the warm welcome.

It is alarming that there is no information that real issues of  concern to the general public of the Republic of Artsakh were  discussed at this meeting: security, the return of Armenian prisoners  of war, the destruction of cultural property in the occupied  territories, the deterioration of human rights. In the current  situation, we consider it especially important to resume cooperation  between the legislative bodies of the two Armenian states through an  inter-parliamentary commission, where topical issues will be  discussed. Taking into account the events in our region, we call on  the Speakers of the National Assemblies of Artsakh and the Republic  of Armenia to urgently organize a meeting of the inter-parliamentary  commission,” the statement of the three factions of the National  Assembly of the NKR – “Justice”, “ARF-D” and “Democratic Party of  Artsakh” reads. 

ArmInfo. The Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry began to “teach history” to the Russian Foreign Ministry, deciding that they know the history of the Russian  Federation better than one of the world’s superpowers itself. This  time they are consulting on the fact of describing the content of the  text of the Turkmenchay Treaty.

The Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry accused the Russian Foreign Ministry  of distorting the text of the Turkmenchay Agreement on the official  website of the Russian Foreign Ministry.

“On the day of the signing of the Declaration on Allied Cooperation  between the Republic of Azerbaijan and the Russian Federation, the  fact that the distorted information on the Treaty of Turkmenchay of  1828 was published on the official website of the Russian Foreign  Ministry is surprisingly sad and regrettable,” the statement of the  Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Azerbaijan reads.

So, Baku was touched by the presence of references to Armenia in the  text of the document. Thus, Baku assures that the _expression_ “Eastern  Armenia” is not mentioned in any way in the text of the above-  mentioned agreement and calls on the Russian Foreign Ministry to  correct the allegedly unreliable information.  It should be noted  that the historical and documentary department of the Russian Foreign  Ministry published a text with some historical details yesterday.  In  particular, it recalls that on February 22 (10), 1828, the  Turkmanchay peace treaty was signed between the Russian Empire and  Persia, which ended the second Russian-Persian war of 1826-1828.

The Treaty confirmed Russia’s pre-emptive right to keep a military  fleet in the Caspian Sea, as well as the freedom of navigation of  Russian merchant ships. The Erivan and Nakhichevan khanates (Eastern  Armenia) passed to the Russian Empire. The Iranian government  undertook not to interfere with the resettlement of Armenians in the  Armenian region established on the territory of these khanates, which  contributed to the unification of the Armenian people within the  Russian Empire.  The parties exchanged missions at the level of  envoys and established consular relations. Simultaneously with the  agreement, the “Trade Act” was signed, according to which Russian  merchants received the right to free trade throughout Iran.  The  Turkmenchay Peace was a major success for Russian diplomacy. It  contributed to the strengthening of Russia’s influence in the Middle  East and became the basis of Russian-Persian relations until 1917.   The Russian poet and diplomat A.S. Griboyedov, who at that time  served as editor of the conference minutes, played an important role  in developing the terms of the Treaty. He made some important  clarifications in the text of the peace treaty – in particular, in  the part that concerned the conditions for the resettlement and  amnesty of the population of the border regions. Griboyedov also  compiled and edited the final text of the draft treaty. In October  1828 he was appointed Minister Plenipotentiary in Tabriz. On February  11 (January 30), 1829, an outstanding Russian diplomat tragically  died at his official post during a provoked attack on the Russian  mission in Tehran by a fanatical mob.

ArmInfo. There are no particular analogies in the situation between the recognition of  Donbass and Artsakh by Russia. In any case, I personally do not see  them.  Political scientist Stepan Danielyan expressed a similar  opinion to ArmInfo.

” The issue of the independence of Artsakh, its reorganization,  should have been resolved even before the truce of 1994 is reached,  at most even after that.  The issue of the independence of Artsakh,  its recognition, should have been resolved before the 1994 truce was  reached, at most even after that. However, we missed the very real  opportunities that existed at that time to achieve this recognition.  And after the 44-day war, a completely different geopolitical reality  has formed in our region. And the essence of the Artsakh issue has  been transformed into completely different realities,” he stressed.

The political scientist connects the last circumstance with the loss  of actual control over Artsakh by Armenia. This is primarily due to  Yerevan’s loss of functions to ensure the security of Artsakh. And  taking into account the provision of this security by Moscow, the  geopolitical processes around Artsakh today are controlled by the  Russian Federation, and not by Armenia.  In this light, Danielyan  noted that the very absence of any clear  reaction from Yerevan to  Moscow’s recognition of the DPR and LPR is not surprising, since the  leadership of Armenia has long been simply unable to respond to  certain international events. The political scientist also stressed  that the lack of reaction, the silence of the Armenian authorities is  due to the fact that the country has actually lost its own  sovereignty.

On February 21, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed decrees  recognizing the independence of the LPR and the DPR. In addition, the  Russian leader, the heads of the LPR and DPR Leonid Pasechnik and  Denis Pushilin signed an agreement on friendship, cooperation and  mutual assistance. According to Deputy Foreign Minister Andrei  Rudenko, the agreements signed with the DPR and LPR allow the  deployment of Russian military bases in the Donbass. However, this  has not yet been discussed. In turn, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov  said that the Russian authorities guarantee the security of the  Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics in accordance with the  agreements signed with them.