- JAMnews
- Yerevan
Azerbaijan is trying to start another war
“Azerbaijan is trying to legitimize a large-scale attack on Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia“, said Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan. During the government meeting, he commented on the latest escalation in Nagorno-Karabakh and presented in detail his position on controversial issues in Armenian-Azerbaijani relations. In particular, the prime minister spoke about possible solutions to the NK issue, the possibilities of reducing tension in general and the signing a peace treaty with Azerbaijan.
- Will Armenia and Azerbaijan sign a peace treaty despite disagreements?
- Enclaves – islands of Armenian-Azerbaijani confrontation
- Refugees from Nagorno-Karabakh share stories about their life in Armenian villages
According to Pashinyan, both before and after the 2020 Karabakh war Azerbaijan has been trying to find imaginary justifications, accusing Armenia of destructive actions to justify military actions and attacks on Armenia and NK.
Pashinyan gave examples of such behavior: Azerbaijan presents “comments and suggestions, ascribes some promises to Armenia”, then accuses Armenia of not responding, as well as of a destructive response or refusal to fulfil the agreements.
“It is clear that Azerbaijan is trying to legitimize a large-scale attack on Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia”, the prime minister stressed.
Armenia reports tensions in Nagorno-Karabakh – statement of the Security Council of Armenia, position of the command of the Russian peacekeeping forces stationed in NK, as well as a comment by a political scientist here
Pashinyan confirmed that on February 24 the Azerbaijani armed forces occupied new territories in NK. According to the prime minister, it all started with the violation of the agreements by the Azerbaijani side:
“In order to relieve tension in the region, an agreement was reached on a mirror withdrawal of [Armenian and Azerbaijani] positions from the Parukh-Khramort sector. The guarantor of this agreement was the Russian peacekeeping contingent. Several Armenian positions were withdrawn, and Russian peacekeepers were stationed in the indicated area. But before their eyes, the Azerbaijanis invaded a territory in the zone of responsibility of the peacekeepers”.
According to Pashinyan, the Armenian side expects Russia to take concrete steps to ensure the withdrawal of Azerbaijani troops from the zone of responsibility of the peacekeepers and the restoration of the status quo, recorded in the November 9, 2020 statement.
“We expect that the actions of the representatives of the peacekeeping corps during the invasion and after it, or their possible inaction, will be duly investigated”, the prime minister stressed.
Pashinyan also said that the Azerbaijani Armed Forces in the same zone of responsibility of peacekeepers continue to intimidate and threaten the population of nearby villages:
“This is happening in front of the peacekeepers. From the loudspeakers, people are called to leave their homes or get evicted by force. Obviously, this is a demand for ethnic cleansing”.
Pashinyan believes that the Azerbaijani side’s statement about the “obligation to withdraw the Defense Army from Nagorno-Karabakh” is a loose interpretation of the tripartite statement that ended the 2020 war. According to Pashinyan, this is another evidence of the “Nagorno-Karabakh without Armenians” policy pursued by Baku:
“Earlier statements by the President of Azerbaijan prove that this position put forward by Baku is imaginary. On November 26, 2021, at a trilateral meeting mediated by the President of the Russian Federation, he himself publicly stated that almost all the provisions of the tripartite statement of November 9, 2020 have been implemented, except for the point on the opening of communications”.
According to the Prime Minister of Armenia, the withdrawal of the Nagorno-Karabakh Defense Army means the relocation of Armenians from here:
“The Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh need protection, otherwise they will become victims of genocide”.
To minimize or eliminate conflict situations on the line of contact, Pashinyan once again suggested to:
“Designate, fix the line of contact in Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as the obligation of the parties not to cross this line of contact, remove all military positions along it, create a demilitarized zone and consolidate the agreements with specific guarantees”.
When it comes to the Armenian-Azerbaijani peace agenda, the likelihood of a direct dialogue or another military escalation is very low, political scientist Edgar Vardanyan believes
According to the prime minister, Azerbaijan most often uses the theme of signing a peace treaty to escalate the escalation in the region.
Pashinyan denied the claims of the Azerbaijani side that Armenia did not respond to Azerbaijan’s five-point proposal:
“It was handed over to us by the co-chairing country of the OSCE Minsk Group, we passed back the answer through the countries co-chairing the OSCE Minsk Group. In addition, we publicly stated that there is nothing in Azerbaijan’s proposals that is unacceptable to us”.
On March 21, Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan stated that “there is nothing unacceptable in the proposals submitted by Azerbaijan on March 10, noting, however, that these proposals would not affect all issues of the Armenian-Azerbaijani agenda”.
According to the Prime Minister, Azerbaijan believes that it has not received an answer, since in the context of the settlement of Armenian-Azerbaijani relations, Yerevan also speaks of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict:
“Realizing that the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh is and will increasingly appear on the international agenda, Azerbaijan is trying not to resolve the issue, but to close it. Its actions in Parukha [a village in the zone of responsibility of the peacekeepers, where the latest military escalation began] are also aimed at this”.
According to Pashinyan, the aggravation in NK “has an obvious tendency to continue”, as Azerbaijan intends to expel all Armenians from Nagorno-Karabakh:
“If we are wrong, then let Azerbaijan show a concrete interest in discussing the rights and security guarantees of the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh. This is a question that is raised not only by Armenia, but by the entire international community”.
The prime minister once again announced the readiness of the Armenian side to sign a peace agreement with Azerbaijan:
“A meeting with the head of the European Council Charles Michel and the President of Azerbaijan is scheduled for April 6 in Brussels. I hope to discuss and agree with the President of Azerbaijan during this meeting all issues related to the start of peace negotiations”.
Pashinyan-Aliyev meeting in Brussels was held at the initiative of Charles Michel, head of the European Council. Here is what we know so far
Pashinyan says that Azerbaijan also distorts the 9th paragraph of the November 9 statement, which refers to the unblocking of communications in the region. In particular, this concerns the road connecting the western regions of Azerbaijan with Nakhichevan.
Armenia proposes to reconstruct the Yeraskh-Julfa-Ordubad-Meghri-Horadiz railway, restore or build a new highway, where border and customs control posts will operate:
“Azerbaijan both accepts and does not accept our position. They say that they agree with any legal regime on this road, but the same regime should apply in the Lachin corridor [the only land road connecting NK to Armenia]. In support of this position, reference is made to the statement of November 9”.
The prime minister emphasizes that the tripartite statement does not mention any “corridor” through the territory of Armenia:
“The parallels between Nagorno-Karabakh and Nakhichevan are strange for several reasons. Firstly, Nakhichevan has a land connection with Azerbaijan through Iran and Turkey, an air connection through Iran, Turkey and Armenia.
Nagorno-Karabakh has only a land connection with Armenia, only through the Lachin corridor. The control of the Lachin corridor by Azerbaijan means one thing: the expulsion of Armenians from Nagorno-Karabakh”.
According to Pashinyan, comparing the Lachin corridor with a road that will pass through the territory of Armenia is unacceptable.
He claims that the Armenian side is ready to build a railway as part of its proposals, but considers it necessary to sign an agreement with Azerbaijan:
“Why? Because we see a very specific risk: Armenia will build a highway and a railway, and Azerbaijan will refuse to open the border.” It turns out that neither Armenia, nor Azerbaijan, nor third countries will be able to use the infrastructure that requires investments of several hundred million dollars”.
The Prime Minister suggests that Azerbaijan de jure fix the agreements on the opening of the railway reached in Brussels in December 2021, agree on its parameters and begin construction. According to him, this can be done in one package – along with the highway․
Armenia, Azerbaijan and unblocking of transport routes – what was discussed in Sochi and what to expect from the upcoming meeting in Moscow
Pashinyan recalled the agreement reached on November 26, 2021 during a meeting with the President of Azerbaijan in Sochi.
A tripartite statement was also signed there, which reads:
“We agreed to take steps to increase the level of stability and security on the Azerbaijani-Armenian border and work towards the creation of a bilateral commission for the delimitation of the state border between the Republic of Azerbaijan and the Republic of Armenia with its subsequent demarcation with the advisory assistance of the Russian Federation at the request of the parties”.
Therefore, Pashinyan emphasizes, the demarcation of the border should be preceded by “steps aimed at increasing the level of stability and security on the border”.
Here is everything we know so far about the President of Russia, Azerbaijan and Prime Minister of Armenia’s trilateral meeting in Sochi, as well as expert commentary on the latest trilateral statement that was signed there
According to the Prime Minister of Armenia, Azerbaijan did not make any proposals on this issue and did not accept “any of the formulas on the withdrawal of troops” proposed by Armenia:
“What does it mean? In fact, this means that Azerbaijan is trying to maintain tension on the border, the possibility of resuming hostilities in the process of demarcation in order to present territorial claims against Armenia and resort to military provocations if these demands are not met. This is approach is unacceptable”.
Pashinyan stressed the need to launch a mechanism for international border monitoring:
“We offered several options, including Azerbaijan. Any of these options that Azerbaijan will accept will be acceptable for us”.
How can Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh be saved? Experts believe that it is necessary to carry out a fundamental political assessment of the current situation and form a new political agenda, but this will take time
Armenia expects a “proper investigation and targeted assessment” of Azerbaijan’s actions in Nagorno-Karabakh from the international community, Pashinyan said:
“The Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh is being intimidated every day – literally, including through “gas terror” [referring to gas cuts during March] aimed at expelling people from their homes and homeland”.
“By its actions and statements, Azerbaijan proves that it is reponsible for blowing up pipeline in Karabakh” – Pashinyan’s statement about the alleged gas pipeline explosion
The Prime Minister stressed that Armenia offers concrete and “logical solutions” to the issue of border demarcation, opening of regional communications and ending the military escalation in Nagorno-Karabakh. He is convinced that “there are no grounds or justifications” for accusing the Armenian side of refusing to fulfill the agreements.