KARBAKH CONFLICT NOT NEGOTIATED?

A1+
12-07-2005

We had a conversation on the Karabakh conflict settlement with chairman
of the NA for foreign affairs Armen Rustamyan.

-How do you assess the package that was recently issued by the
Co-Chairs, according to which Armenia will return 5 Azeri regions
under the condition of conduction a referendum in 10-15 years?

-First, I think it’s premature to give any precise assessment, since
the matter concerns the whole package while a summed up estimation
can be given only in case of awareness of all its constituents.
Certainly, it’s good if we find a compromise, since the principal
task now is to find the correct format of concessions. During the
recent hearings we highlighted several important points. First,
the status of Nagorno Karabakh should be determined on the basis of
the right of self-determination, the security guarantees should be
absolute. It means that with receiving the status Karabakh should
receive security at international level.

-What do you think about conduction of a referendum?

-Positively. Taking into account that one referendum has been
already held I do not think that conduction of another referendum
would conflict with our position. The second referendum will mean
recognition of the right of self-determination.

-Is Armenia empowered to take any decisions in the negotiation
process if it has not recognized Karabakh’s independence de jure yet?
-Certainly, Armenia does not have ultimate right to make decisions.
Armenia can represent Karabakh in the structure, where NKR was not
represented due to its being unrecognized. It is natural and logical.
Armenia can act for Karabakh if the matter concerns the latter’s
joining Armenia. In this case Karabakh’s participation is not
necessary. If Azerbaijan agrees on Karabakh’s joining Armenia the
issue can be settled in two ways – declaration of independence or
unification. The Key West negotiations were held with this logic.
Later the conflict was stated as one between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
It lasted for rather along time and now we face the task to change
the erroneous opinion on the international community.

-Don’t you think that the incumbent authorities provoked this erroneous
opinion by separating Karabakh from the negotiation process?

-First, Karabakh was not separated, second, the process can hardly
be stated as negotiations. The current developments can be called
consultations, while negotiations imply participation of all the
parties to conflict. First of all the conflicting parties should
recognize each other as such. If now Azerbaijan does not recognize
Karabakh the process will be doomed to failure. It will mean that
Azerbaijan refuses from talks.

-The armistice was concluded with the participation of Karabakh,
wasn’t it?

– Yes, due to this very reason we say that the logic should be
preserved. No negotiation process is possible without the participation
of Karabakh.

-What but negotiations can be called the meetings in Key West and
other Kocharyan-Aliyev meetings?

-Those were consultations at a high level with the purpose to find a
solution for the Karabakh conflict. Negotiations can lead to peaceful
agreement and they will start when the parties sit at the bargaining
table.