Tweet
Parliamentary hearing yield their results
By Karine Mangasarian
Yerkir
July 15, 2005
In March the National Assembly's permanent committee on external
relations organized parliamentary hearings on the issue of Nagorno
Karabagh. Today, in the context of activation of the negotiation
process, those hearing emerge as more important. We asked the head
of the committee on external relations Armen Rustamian to comment on
the results of the hearings.
A.R. As we promised, we will prepare summary materials of the hearings
that will be published. The publication will contain two chapters. The
first chapter will present the reports and speeches heard during the
two days of the hearings in the National Assembly. The second chapter
will contain all the documents related to Nagorno Karabagh adopted by
international organizations. The committee on external relations will
convene in September and will discuss the conclusions. The conclusions
will be divided into two groups. The first one will include the
statements containing the main conceptual elements reflected in the
speeches. This can be the foundation for a conceptual approach to
parliamentary diplomacy. In this way we will have a concept on the
issue of Nagorno Karabagh. The second part will contain proposals
as to coordination of our activities in this sphere to ensure that
they are comprehensive and that Azerbaijan' propaganda mechanisms
are taken into consideration and
properly countered. Naturally, these proposals will be directed
to the executive branch as well because the goal that we set for
ourselves was to ensure that all of us have a well coordinated and
unified position on this issue.
Q: Several statements and reports were recently made by various
intentional organizations on the issue of Nagorno Karabagh. To what
extent do the positions taken in those statements coincide with the
positions that will be presented in the concluding statements you
mentioned? A: The hearings have already yielded their results. After
the hearings, we had an opportunity to have discussions on the
Karabagh issue with two important organizations. We have already
managed to incorporate the main ideas raised at the hearings into those
documents. For instance, the joint session of parliamentary cooperation
between Armenia and the European Union and the statement adopted at
that session, the recent OSCE parliamentary summit. I think we have
made good progress in this regard. When the materials are published we
will have a unified document that can be used by our officials, members
of Armenian delegations that will be dealing with the Karabagh issue.
Q: OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs are visiting Armenia this week. What
are your expectations from their visit? A: Our position in the Minsk
Process has been formulated a long time ago and I am sure that this
visit will not bring anything new in this respect. It is too early
to evaluate the proposals that are being discussed now since no such
proposals have been officially made so far. Many crucial questions
might be discussed, certain details of the package can be discussed
before the whole package is presented - it's too early to evaluate
this. The package should be evaluated as a whole once the interrelation
between its components and different options for resolution are taken
into consideration.
Q: Why is this issue so actively discussed? A: I think the reason is
that some of the ideas have been previously agreed upon. And when an
idea is agreed upon it speeds up the negotiation process. This might
be the idea of a new referendum. It can have different solutions;
different methods for its implementation can be used. This is the
process on which the mediators can present a proposal. But I don't
think this will happen in near future.
The Azeri side is more active. Azerbaijan is preparing for elections
and in the pre-election period the issue of Karabagh and any such
visits are used for internal manipulations to gain political profit
and make an impression of being ready for negotiations. Because the
political forces that will reject negotiations will not be perceived
well by the international organizations.
By Karine Mangasarian
Yerkir
July 15, 2005
In March the National Assembly's permanent committee on external
relations organized parliamentary hearings on the issue of Nagorno
Karabagh. Today, in the context of activation of the negotiation
process, those hearing emerge as more important. We asked the head
of the committee on external relations Armen Rustamian to comment on
the results of the hearings.
A.R. As we promised, we will prepare summary materials of the hearings
that will be published. The publication will contain two chapters. The
first chapter will present the reports and speeches heard during the
two days of the hearings in the National Assembly. The second chapter
will contain all the documents related to Nagorno Karabagh adopted by
international organizations. The committee on external relations will
convene in September and will discuss the conclusions. The conclusions
will be divided into two groups. The first one will include the
statements containing the main conceptual elements reflected in the
speeches. This can be the foundation for a conceptual approach to
parliamentary diplomacy. In this way we will have a concept on the
issue of Nagorno Karabagh. The second part will contain proposals
as to coordination of our activities in this sphere to ensure that
they are comprehensive and that Azerbaijan' propaganda mechanisms
are taken into consideration and
properly countered. Naturally, these proposals will be directed
to the executive branch as well because the goal that we set for
ourselves was to ensure that all of us have a well coordinated and
unified position on this issue.
Q: Several statements and reports were recently made by various
intentional organizations on the issue of Nagorno Karabagh. To what
extent do the positions taken in those statements coincide with the
positions that will be presented in the concluding statements you
mentioned? A: The hearings have already yielded their results. After
the hearings, we had an opportunity to have discussions on the
Karabagh issue with two important organizations. We have already
managed to incorporate the main ideas raised at the hearings into those
documents. For instance, the joint session of parliamentary cooperation
between Armenia and the European Union and the statement adopted at
that session, the recent OSCE parliamentary summit. I think we have
made good progress in this regard. When the materials are published we
will have a unified document that can be used by our officials, members
of Armenian delegations that will be dealing with the Karabagh issue.
Q: OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs are visiting Armenia this week. What
are your expectations from their visit? A: Our position in the Minsk
Process has been formulated a long time ago and I am sure that this
visit will not bring anything new in this respect. It is too early
to evaluate the proposals that are being discussed now since no such
proposals have been officially made so far. Many crucial questions
might be discussed, certain details of the package can be discussed
before the whole package is presented - it's too early to evaluate
this. The package should be evaluated as a whole once the interrelation
between its components and different options for resolution are taken
into consideration.
Q: Why is this issue so actively discussed? A: I think the reason is
that some of the ideas have been previously agreed upon. And when an
idea is agreed upon it speeds up the negotiation process. This might
be the idea of a new referendum. It can have different solutions;
different methods for its implementation can be used. This is the
process on which the mediators can present a proposal. But I don't
think this will happen in near future.
The Azeri side is more active. Azerbaijan is preparing for elections
and in the pre-election period the issue of Karabagh and any such
visits are used for internal manipulations to gain political profit
and make an impression of being ready for negotiations. Because the
political forces that will reject negotiations will not be perceived
well by the international organizations.