I am proud to have fought for Karabakh, Armenian president says
Public Television of Armenia, Yerevan
28 Jun 04
If Nagornyy Karabakh takes part in peace talks as a third party, this
would give an impetus to the negotiations, Armenian President Robert
Kocharyan said at a press conference at the Council of Europe on 23
June. Kocharyan put the blame for starting the Karabakh war on
Azerbaijan and said he was proud to have fought in this war. The
Armenian president also urged Turkey to put aside sensitive issues and
to establish relations based on a pragmatic approach. The following is
the text of the news conference as broadcast by Armenian Public TV on
28 June; subheadings have been inserted editorially:
[Estelle Steiner, captioned, in English] Ladies and Gentlemen! Welcome
to this afternoon’s press conference with Mr Robert Kocharyan,
president of the Republic of Armenia.
[Robert Kocharyan, captioned, in Russian] I would not like to waste
time on an introductory speech and would want to spend more time on
the interactive part of our meeting.
Karabakh’s independence valid
[Questioner in Russian] Afat Yaqubova, Azerbaijani Lider TV. Mr
Kocharyan, Mr President, on what kind of international basis did
Nagornyy Karabakh hold a referendum and declare its independence? As
we all know, the Soviet republics were recognized within the borders
with which they entered the Soviet Union. Is there any document, an
international document? And did Azerbaijanis, who in 1988 constituted
30 per cent of the population of Nagornyy Karabakh, take part in this
referendum? Thank you.
[Robert Kocharyan] By the way, the Armenians of Baku, Sumqayit and
Ganca did not take part in the referendum on Azerbaijan’s independence
either. But this does not mean that Azerbaijan gained its independence
illegally. Regarding the law which you asked about, I just regret that
you do not know that. Because there was a law which was in force in
the Soviet Union on the withdrawal of Soviet republics. This law very
clearly outlined the rights of autonomous republics within those
republics. There was such a law which was adopted in 1988-89, or maybe
earlier. You can look at this law and you will see that the referendum
had a valid legal basis. The legal basis of the existence of the
Nagornyy Karabakh Republic [NKR] is undeniable today. This inspires
confidence that this is a just case which corresponds to all
international norms.
[Afat Yaqubova] Then you also recognize the Dniester region, Abkhazia
and Chechnya as independent, weren’t they also autonomous?
[Robert Kocharyan] You know, I am not a specialist on these conflicts
and do not think there is a need to generalize all these conflicts and
compare them. Each conflict has its own history as has every
state. Drawing parallels is absolutely not right. There are conflicts
which are similar in general. There are conflicts which are completely
different. Therefore, this generalization would be incorrect. I am
interested in Karabakh as a problem and in its settlement.
Azerbaijan to blame for Karabakh war
[Afat Yaqubova] My second question is do you think that after you made
accusations against Azerbaijan in your speech here in the Assembly
[the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe] you can sit at
the negotiating table, hold peace talks and hope to receive
satisfactory answers from the Azerbaijani side?
[Robert Kocharyan] I would suggest that you just have a look at all
the speeches of the former and current Azerbaijani presidents, the
tone of those speeches, opinions voiced about Armenia and ask the
Azerbaijani president the same question.
[Second questioner in French] Armenia, which claims to be a victim of
injustice, has been occupying 20 per cent of Azerbaijan’s territory
for 10 years and has driven Azerbaijanis from their land [sentence
interrupted to allow Kocharyan to speak] –
[Robert Kocharyan] First of all, how did this all start? Why did the
hostilities start in Nagornyy Karabakh? The scheme is very simple – a
referendum was held in Nagornyy Karabakh and a war started to seize
the territories which are believed in Azerbaijan to belong to them,
and naturally there was a response. What we have today is the result
of the war which neither we nor the Karabakh people started. It is
naive to think that 140,000-150,000 Karabakh Armenians could be the
initiators of the hostilities against Azerbaijan. It was not like
that. You started with confidence that the issue would be resolved in
your favour, taking into consideration your larger numbers and
resources. The result was what we have now. As for who bears
responsibility, you should look for those responsible in your country,
not in Karabakh or Armenia. This is the reality. I know this not by
hearsay, I was there, in Karabakh, all the time and I know very well
how this all happened. So, the end of your question was about
responsibility, I am simply redirecting it.
Armenian-Turkish relations
[Questioner in French] Mr President, I would like to ask three
questions. Just now you spoke about the problem of the border with
Turkey; is there a border problem between Armenia and Turkey, that’s
the first question? You also said that you would like to have dialogue
with Turkey, how is it possible to have a dialogue when you talk about
genocide, while Turkey rejects this term? And the third question,
about the NATO summit in Istanbul: why are you not taking part?
[Robert Kocharyan] The first part of your question is particularly
interesting. Is there a border problem? There is no such problem at
all since this border is locked and it is closed not by us but by the
Turkish side. If you can call it a problem, of course, there is the
problem of closed borders which I think is simply not normal.
The second question is also interesting. How is it possible to
cooperate with Armenia if Armenia speaks about genocide? Do you mean
we should not speak about genocide? Let us then persuade the Jews not
to speak about the Holocaust. Therefore, our approach is very
clear. There is a practical policy and this practical policy and
discussions of the issues connected with our past should be held on
different planes. You know, it is we who should set the recognition of
the genocide as a precondition for establishing relations with
Turkey. It is we who incurred losses. We have managed to pass over
this barrier, which was not easy for us. We say – we are ready to
cooperate without preconditions. But everything is upside down. I do
not think that there is a common sense. I think there is emotional
perception of the situation which should be transformed into sound
pragmatism.
As concerns my participation in Istanbul, I am indeed not
participating in the NATO summit simply because we have no diplomatic
relations with Turkey, although I took part in the OSCE summit. Our
foreign minister is taking part in the summit. The question is not
about our relations with NATO. Our relations with NATO are developing
normally. I do not think it is correct for the Armenian president to
participate in a summit in a country with which there are no
diplomatic relations, with which the borders are closed. Bearing in
mind the current situation and the level of our relations, I think the
most effective approach is to put aside the problems which are
perceived emotionally by either side, to discuss them in a different
way, to establish real contacts, to develop trade, to make this border
breathe and not to be perceived by the other side as a wall between
our countries. This is a sensitive issue. Many in Armenia disregard
this border. But we do not set the reconsideration of the border issue
as a precondition for our relations. Let us put aside this all and, I
will repeat, start building our relations on a very pragmatic basis.
Proud to have fought for Karabakh
[Third questioner in Russian] The Azerbaijani bureau of Radio Liberty,
Fuad Qulubayli. My question is you said in the Parliamentary Assembly
that you are proud of the fact that you took part in the hostilities
in Karabakh and you are proud of the results of these hostilities. Is
it not strange for the pres ident of a democratic country to
acknowledge these separatist actions against a neighbouring country,
another sovereign country? Thank you.
[Robert Kocharyan] You know, I can enumerate many presidents of very
democratic countries who took part in wars and hostilities, who are
proud of this and people appreciate them for this. Therefore, I think
that in this context your argument is not convincing. I really lived
through the most difficult times and shouldered the responsibility, I
was not a rank-and-file fighter, but occupied very serious posts in
Karabakh. I am really proud of this part of my biography.
Karabakh should take part in talks
[Fourth questioner in Russian] Zulfiyya Aliyeva, Azadliq newspaper,
Azerbaijan. Mr Kocharyan, I think you lied to the Council of Europe
when you said here that autonomous republics also became independent
after the collapse of the Soviet Union, because after the collapse of
the former Soviet Union, it was not autonomous republics but
individual republics, including Azerbaijan, Armenia and other
countries, that became independent.
My question is, i.e. one question to you and another to [Armenian
Foreign Minister Vardan] Oskanyan, the world community has not so far
recognized independence of Nagornyy Karabakh, but you said here that
Nagornyy Karabakh is an independent state. Could this mean that you
ignore the opinion of the international community?
[Robert Kocharyan] I really regret that you are not aware of that very
law which was in force at that time, on the basis of which Karabakh
gained its legal independence. On the other hand, independence is a
category which does not need to be confirmed somewhere or to be
approved. There are countries which struggled for many years for their
independence and finally gained it. In modern history, there is East
Timor, for many years many people did not believe, there is Eritrea,
we can cite lots of other examples. If you look at the map of Europe,
of the former Soviet Union you will see what happened, how many new
states there are today on this political map. I can give even more
examples. You should not think that if today the NKR has not been
recognized, this means that it will never be recognized.
[Zulfiyya Aliyeva] You did not answer the question. Does this mean
that you ignore the opinion of the international community?
[Robert Kocharyan] You know, I did not answer this question because it
was put incorrectly. We would have ignored it if we were not taking an
active part in the settlement. We are taking an active part in the
settlement and, moreover, we said yes to the mediators’ latest two
proposals, but Azerbaijan said no. Does this mean that Azerbaijan
ignores the international community if it said no to the mediators’
proposals? We do not give such qualifications.
I think that Karabakh must be a party to the talks. This could really
give an impetus to the talks. Do you know why Azerbaijan rejects this?
You think that Karabakh’s participation would mean indirect
recognition of Nagornyy Karabakh’s independence. This complex is
hindering this process all the time. Get rid of it. It exists all the
same, it does not matter whether you want this or not, the NKR
exists. If it takes part in the negotiations, if there are direct
contacts, it will be easier to find a solution for those districts,
for the refugees and other very complicated and sensitive issues. Get
rid of this complex. Good-bye.