Internet Press Conference with Tigran Torosyan

Aydin Kerimov, “Novoye Vremya” newspaper-www.novoye-vremya.com (Armenia)

1. Mr. Torosyan, do you think war is possible in the present conditions? Please comment on your answer.

-No, Armenia and NKR will not start a war, and Azerbaijan cannot hope for being successful in war in the foreseeable future. As it is known, the one who intends to fight, does not publicly announce about it every day.

2. What do you think the specificity of the work of the Armenian and Georgian Parliaments is?

-I do not quite understand your question. But the main specificity of the Parliaments of these two countries is that the Parliamentary majority is 85 – 90%.

Natig Javadli, “Bizim Yol” newspaper-www.bizimyol.az (Azerbaijan)

1. Mr.Torosyan, don’t you think that the Karabakh problem will be resolved if the two nations are led by authorities who are truly elected by the people?

-Certainly the quality of elections is of great importance to any country. Elections, however, are no panacea, but rather a mirror that reflects the situation or the problem. That is why achievements in various aspects, for example, the formation of a full-fledged civil society, a multi-party political system, a fair and independent judicial system and so on, are required for the solution of complex issues. All this cannot happen overnight or in a short period of time. Moreover, I am convinced that in the foreseeable future ethnic conflicts may be solved only compulsorily.  

2. The local and foreign statistics suggests that the economy of Armenia is dependent on the Russian economy. How can you call Armenia a sovereign state?

Answer-

3. On the eve of the Istanbul Summit in 1999 a shooting incident took place in the Armenian Parliament. Can such an incident be repeated at the Kazan meeting, just theoretically?

-I do not think that the events that happened in the RA Parliament in 1999 had to do with the Karabakh conflict. Moreover, drawing such parallels is inappropriate and improper. 

Anna Bartkulashvili, freelance journalist (Azerbaijan)

1. How will the upcoming Presidential elections to be held in France, Russia and the USA influence the resolution of the Karabakh conflict?

-They won’t, just as it happened with the results of the 2008 elections. However, the situation has abruptly changed after the war in August 2008.

2. Do you think the probable change of power in Armenia may influence the position of Yerevan on the Karabakh conflict? How?

-The resolution of the Karabakh conflict depends not on individuals, but on the compliance of this resolution on international law.

Tarana Kyazimova, “Turan” news agency-www.contact.az (Azerbaijan)

-Is the emergence of more reliable mechanisms for preventing the Karabakh conflict passing into a hotter phase?

-Theoretically there are such mechanisms the regulations of which suggest limitations, for example, on conventional arms. However, very often these same organizations are extremely loyal to the violations of such norms. Azerbaijan, Armenia and NKR have signed a ceasefire agreement that is often breached. Moreover, even though there is the principle of non-use or threat of force among the three Basic Principles for the resolution of the Karabakh conflict, the Co-Chairs of the Minsk Group react to the violation of this principle in an abstract and non-specific way. That is why it is not very likely that the situation will change in the near future. 

Sona Kyurkchyan, “Hetq” online newspaper-www.hetq.am (Armenia)

-Does the Azerbaijan’s affiliation with the Non-Aligned Movement  mean that programs of cooperation between Azerbaijan and NATO and programs for the European integration of Azerbaijan (for example, the Eastern Partnership program) will be launched?

-I have to remind once again of my article, published in the 168 Zham (168 Hours) newspaper on June 9, and ask you to read it.

Rauf Mirkadirov, “Zerkalo” newspaper-www.zerkalo.az (Azerbaijan)

-This question is also counted on your knowledge of someone who was one of the top officials in Armenia in the recent past. How much does the “reset” in the mutual relations between the incumbent President Serzh Sargsyan and the leader of the ANC, ex-President Levon Ter-Petrosyan we have been witnessing recently suggest the prospect of the possible conclusion of an agreement on the resolution of the Nagorno Karabakh problem? Taking into consideration the circumstances of Ter-Petrosyan’s resignation in 1998, some political scientists assert that the ex-President may become the only ally of Serzh Sargsyan’s in case he signs a peace agreement…

-I do not agree to the evaluation that there was a reset in the relations between the power and ANC. The new quality of these relations can be accounted for the fact that the current political situation and the alignment of forces meet the interests of both the power and ANC. However, the logic of the developments does not secure a prospect, and in autumn we may see a new turn in the relations between the power and ANC. Even if the Basic Principles are agreed on and signed, there will be no final decision within this framework. That is why it is not very reasonable to draw up the list of who will be for and who will be against.

Sona Kyurkchyan, “Hetq” online newspaper-www.hetq.am (Armenia)

-Mr. Torosyan, how will the recent announcement on Azerbaijan’s joining the Non-Aligned Movement be reflected on the Karabakh resolution and the foreign policy of Azerbaijan at large?  

-You can read about this in my article I mentioned earlier.

Rauf Mirkadirov, “Zerkalo” newspaper-www.zerkao.az (Azerbaijan)

1.We would like to know if anyone in Armenia believes that it will be possible to force Azerbaijan to sign a binding agreement on the non-use of force, without a similar binding agreement on the resolution of the conflict? Naturally I mean not the jingoists, but serious politicians and experts.

-Both Azerbaijan and Armenia have already made such a commitment as UNO and OSCE members without any additional document. However, I believe that someone will force Azerbaijan to fulfill its obligations. This is true not only for the non-use of force, but also the nation’s right to self-determination that is of the highest status in international law – erga omnes.  

2. Mr. Torosyan, you occupied one of the three highest state positions in Armenia. That is why I would like to ask you how much Russia impacts on the formation of the foreign policy of Armenia, if a top official of another state –Russia, to be more exact, announces Armenia “the only advanced post of Russia in South Caucasus?” Especially if we take into account that the Russian ruling duo that is falling apart in front of our eyes – President Dmitri Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin have, mildly speaking, diverging positions on the mutual relations with the West and the policy Russia should lead in the post-Soviet space…  

-Your example is true for the time period when the post of the RA National Assembly Speaker was occupied by a different person. Surely, Russia has a great influence on the policy of Armenia. However, all the three states in our region have unfortunately been unable to determine and realize an independent foreign policy so far. I would like to remind that only during last May Azerbaijan made an abrupt turn towards Russia, this has to do both NABUCCO and military and political issues. Hence, the influence of Russia on Azerbaijan is also tangible and it is going to deepen gradually.  

3. I closely read your article, published by Regnum News Agency. I do not think that you are so naïve as to believe in a forced resolution for the final legal status of Nagorno Karabakh, by the way, independent of who gains from it, at least in the near future. But then it appears that you are, in essence, calling to maintain the status quo. Is Armenia satisfied with the current state of affairs? Once the RA incumbent Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Shavarsh Kocharyan, at the time the coordinator of the Parliamentary opposition, answered a journalist’s question by saying that Armenia had learned to live in blockade conditions. Are you satisfied with Armenia living in the conditions of blockade, too, in hostility with its neighbors for a long time already, until the international community matures to force Armenia or Azerbaijan to accept the variant of the status quo of  Nagorno Karabakh, beneficial to the opposite party?

-Firstly, I agree with you that today a forced resolution is impossible, and today major corrections should take place, and my article mentions this. As for the final resolution of the conflict, I would like to remind that in fact all conflicts of the kind (from Eastern Timor to Kosovo) were resolved only by pressure put on one of the sides by the international community. As for maintaining the status quo, certainly it would have been excellent if tomorrow Azerbaijan, Armenia and NKR solved this issue by themselves within the framework of international law. However, as you well understand, this is not going to happen: the mediators have their own interests and unfortunately, the interests of the two of them often clash. I would like to remind that the five-day war in August 2008 was a result of such a clash (of the interests of the USA and Russia). I would not like to have the status quo broken at this cost. Such a breach will be meaningful only when there is a normal resolution. I do not think that the breach of the status quo is an end in itself, and Armenians and Azerbaijanis must pay their lives for it. Certainly it would have been desirable to have peace and well-being reigning in the region, but when the neighbors offer a blockade instead of peace, imposing capitulation, I think that any nation with some self-respect will find a way to overcome the difficulties entailed by the blockade.   

David Stepanyan, “Arminfo” news agency-www.arminfo.am (Armenia)

1. Most analysts are inclined to think that regardless of the continuous threats Aliyev has no chance to start a large-scale hostility against Nagorno Karabakh. Do you agree to such prognosis, and if so, then why not and due to what factors?

Answer-

2.The withdrawal of the Armenian troops is among the first principles for the Nagorno Karabakh conflict resolution. Does the power of Armenia and NKR currently have a possibility to realize this point, taking into account the strong resistance in the public and mainly among the top Armenian military?

-The realization of the present Basic Principles cannot lead to the resolution of the conflict. As I have already mentioned in my answers to the other questions of the journalists during this interview, the 6 elements in the Basic principles do not comply with the international law, and a comprehensive review of these elements is but needed. The mediators are trying to find a resolution to this conflict within the framework of the “bargaining” principle, which is wrong in its essence. This principle may be applied only after the establishment of the status quo of Nagorno Karabakh within the framework of international norms. 

3. The Basic Principles for the resolution presume the placement of peace-making forces in the region at the second stage. How possible do you think it is, if we are to take into account the firm position of Iran who is unwilling to see any foreign forces at its Northern borders? Also, to what extent does this come from the interests of the conflicting parties?

-I would like to remind that unlike many other conflicts in the case of the Karabakh conflict  the presence of international peace-making forces was not needed for either the ceasefire or the maintenance of the armistice for 14 years. If the Basic Principles are amended in compliance with international law, there will be no need for positioning any peace-making forces or for a suspended status for Karabakh. As you know the peace-making divisions of NATO were present in Kosovo in 2004, however the strategy of the resolution of the conflict was based on the principle of “first standards, then the status:” the armed clashes with new casualties and a new wave of refugees restarted.

4. Yesterday the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the RA Eduard Nalbandyan announced during the press conference with his Swedish colleague that the first stage of negotiations on the Karabakh conflict may be considered closed only after the Karabakh side joins the negotiation process and agrees to the principles of the resolution of the conflict. How concordant is this perspective with the basic principles of the resolution and does it have any chance of realization? 

-Unfortunately, there is no mention of NKR joining the negotiation process in the Basic Principles. In the stead of such an announcement, the Armenian party must refer to the Basic Principles, in particular, the principle of self-determination and demand the participation of the self-determined party, to start with. Armenia and Azerbaijan may discuss issues within the framework of the territorial integrity principle, for example, with regard to Artsvashen.

5. There is a certain degree of cautiousness towards the Basic principles of the Karabakh resolution. How well is it grounded?

-Such cautiousness has to do with the abstract and ambiguous wording of the 6 elements in the Basic principles.

Aydin Kerimov, “Novoye Vremya” newspaper-www.novoye-vremya.com (Azerbaijan)

-Who benefits more from the basic principles for the resolution of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict – Armenia or Azerbaijan?

-The basic principles consist of the three principles of Helsinki Final Act and 6 elements. Unfortunately, all that is known about these elements today does not quite comply with the above-mentioned principles. The mediators certainly have their own interests and the effect of these interests on the wording of the six elements is but obvious. The greatest shortcoming of the negotiations is the deviation from the above-mentioned principles and norms. It is necessary to have negotiation results that comply with the norms of the international law and not the interests of Azerbaijan or Armenia. This would become possible if the Minsk Group Co-Chairs clearly and unambiguously answered the following question: what issues will be solved in compliance with the territorial integrity principle and what issues will be solved in compliance with the right to self-determination? If there is no answer to this question, a very good opportunity (which is being taken advantage of) for manipulations through various wording options persists. In order to fully answer your question, I should mention that the principle of territorial integrity, in accordance with international law, is applied to regulate relations between UNO and OSCE member-states. In our case this principle is applicable to the Armenian and Azerbaijani relations. The right to self-determination is applicable to the relations between Azerbaijan and NKR, and this right can be realized only by the people of NKR. This right is realized in one of the following forms: a) separation and joining another country, b) separation and declaration of independence, c) any other political status, selected by the self-determined people. I should remind that in 2008 in Baku B. Fassier mentioned that the Karabakh conflict consists of two conflicts – one is between Azerbaijan and Armenia, and the other is between Azerbaijan and NKR. That’s why the principle of territorial integrity is applied to the settlement of the first conflict, and the right to self-determination for the settlement of the second. But, unfortunately, the 6 elements do comply with neither the principles, not the simple logic, that is why the resolution of the conflict on the basis of these six elements is impossible, even if the Basic Principles are signed.

Tarana Kyazimova, “Turan” news agency-www.contact.az (Azerbaijan)

-Does the Armenian opposition have chances of coming to power and how good are they?

-Of course, there are such chances, however, in order to win it is necessary to be far superior to the power. Unfortunately, those oppositional parties that have already announced their intention to take part in the Parliamentary elections in 2012 have not yet demonstrated appropriate qualities. However, the main events will take place in autumn, and then there will already be a real possibility to assess the chances of the opposition for victory.  

Anna Bartkulashvili, freelance journalist (Azerbaijan)

-I would first of all like to express my gratitude for your participation in our project. According to the leader of the National Self-Determination Union Paruyr Hayrikyan, Armenia is a hostage in the hands of the Russian forces, and the Armenian party must make greater concessions than Azerbaijan in the Karabakh issue. How would you comment on such a statement?

-In fact I have no idea where you have taken this quote from, however, I will try to answer your question. First of all, if we are to analyze the developments in the recent few months, you will see that there is a great inclination for the North in the Azerbaijani policy.  This is true about both energy issues, especially in connection with the NABUCCO project, and military and political issues, for example, the renting of the Gabala Radiolocation Station, and the affiliation to the Non-Aligned Movement. As for concessions in the resolution of the Karabakh conflict, you can see at least three concessions already made by Armenia. The first has to do with the status quo of Nagorno Karabakh: of the three options provided by the international law, NKR chose independence rather than joining Armenia. The second concession has to do with the referendum on the status of NKR. Even though in December 1991 a referendum was held in Karabakh in full compliance with international rules, and by the way, with the participation of part of the Azerbaijani population of NKR (the rest of the Azerbaijanis boycotted the referendum at the urge of Baku), NKR is ready and willing to discuss the possibility of holding a new referendum. Thirdly, the Madrid principles include three main principles one which is the right to self-determination. However, only Armenia and Azerbaijan are involved in the negotiation process.  I think the absurd is obvious, for neither Azerbaijan nor Armenia is self-determining. It is also obvious that such issues cannot be solved without the involvement of the self-determined party. The concession here is that NKR has agreed that its interests will be temporarily be presented by the RA, however, now the official Stepanakert proclaims that any document developed without its participation will be inacceptable, and they will have to go back at the negation table. Now it is the turn of Azerbaijan to make concessions.

Aydin Kerimov, “Novoye Vremya” newspaper-www.novoye-vremya.com (Azerbaijan)

-How will the Deauville statement affect the Kazan meeting?

-Please see my article The Karabakh conflict: Deauville – Kazan – “Zurich 2?” (http://www.regnum.ru/news/1414859.html).

Tarana Kyazimova, “Turan” news agency”-www.contact.az (Azerbaijan)

-How tense is the internal political situation in Armenia today?

-In any country the internal political situation becomes tense in the pre-election period. For Armenia this period begins in autumn.