Tweet
TIGRAN TOROSYAN: "BAKU DOES NOT DARE TO RECOGNIZE THE REALITIES"
ArmRadio.am
15.08.2006 10:45
REGNUM: Mr. Torosyan, recently an extraordinary convention of the
Republican Party of Armenia (RPA) took place. What conclusions can
be drawn, what developments are expected, and has the process of
increasing the membership of the RPA already been accomplished?
TOROSYAN: I think during the convention it became clear to everybody
that one should not draw extraordinary conclusions. As for the process
of increasing the membership, I believe, this is a continuous process
for any party. If there are people who wish to be admitted to the
party, naturally the process of replenishment will go on.
REGNUM: According to your forecast how many percent of votes will the
Republican Party collect in the upcoming parliamentary elections of
2007 ?
TOROSYAN: I think it is not worth doing forecasts about the elections
today.
As a matter of fact, I am surprised that some people have already
started to "distribute" parliamentary seats. Our approach is formulated
in an absolutely clear manner. We have repeatedly made it public. In
the course of the elections we will try not only to maintain our
positions, but also to consolidate them as much as possible. One can
notice that the estimates of Serge Sarkisyan (Minister of Defense,
who was recently elected as a member Council of RPA - REGNUM) are
also within the framework of this formula.
REGNUM: However, what will be the distribution of powers in the
new parliament?
TOROSYAN: The most important thing is that the elections meet the
international standards. It is not important who else apart from us
will hold places in the new parliament. We will follow the formula that
I spoke about. The RPA is ready to cooperate with all the political
powers that will enter the parliament after the elections of 2007
both on specific issues that may come up, as well as on broader range
of issues. What the image will be in general -- will be determined
by the nation. I will just say that not all experts' predictions on
Armenia turn into reality. And understandably so, because sometimes
there is significant lack of experience and knowledge for conducting
such studies. As for forecasting by politicians, those are not really
forecasts, but are rather wishful thinking.
REGNUM: Does the Republican Party consider during the forthcoming
elections the possibility of entering any alliance with another
political party? Is such a scenario being discussed?
TOROSYAN: Such an option is not being discussed yet. Each party should
always be ready to campaign on its own. However if the processes
develop in such a scenario, that entering into pre-electoral bloc
with some political power will be convenient, naturally this issue
will be considered. I would like to emphasize once again that this
issue is not on the agenda of the party yet.
REGNUM: If the Republican Party accomplishes all the tasks and
achieves its planned aims, who will be nominated as candidate to the
presidential elections of 2008?
TOROSYAN: I think it will be correct to speak about the presidential
elections after the parliamentary elections.
REGNUM: Many politicians do not exclude the candidacy of the Minister
of Defense Serge Sarkisyan.
TOROSYAN: I know. I am also familiar with his response to that
question.
REGNUM: Do you consider his nomination possible?
TOROSYAN: I am confident that after the parliamentary elections
the Republican Party will certainly discuss this issue and express
its position.
REGNUM: Mr. Torosyan, how efficient do you consider the South Caucasian
Parliamentary Initiative? What can this structure contribute to
Armenia? There is an opinion that such initiatives are doomed to
failure from the very beginning.
TOROSYAN: First of all, we should understand the purpose of the
initiative itself. And the purpose, I believe, is both positive and
important: it is the establishment of contacts between representatives
of parliaments of three South Caucasian countries. This is indeed
very important. In the future such meetings and contacts can "break
the ice" in the relations between these countries. Of course it is
meaningless to anticipate serious results from such meetings at this
point because of one reason: the Azerbaijanis are restrained by the
the official position of Baku, which is the following: relations,
cooperation with Armenia in any area on any issue, including on the
inter-parliamentary level is possible only after settlement of the
Nagorno Karabakh conflict. Our position is absolutely opposite to
this. I believe any reasonable person will prefer Armenia's position
given its constructive nature.
Alas, this is the reality. Unfortunately, the international community,
which recently has been quite often reflecting on the conflicts
and particularly on the necessity to settle the Karabakh issue as
soon as possible, however, is not willing to see the main problems
that hinder the settlement. And in my opinion the most important
obstacles are the deepening of war propaganda as well as hate speech
in Azerbaijan. Notwithstanding wishes of some people (some consider
2006 to be a window, some -- a door, or others consider 2007 and 2008
pre-electoral years) independently from all the above mentioned,
as long as the propaganda in Azerbaijan continues, it impossible
to anticipate any resolution. Today it became obvious that the
settlement of this issue is possible only by applying the principle
of self-determination of peoples. However, I think the President of
Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev is not ready for settlement of the issue
grounding on this principle, although behind closed doors he does
not deny that this very principle seems to him as the only way of
resolution.
Therefore, if the president of Azerbaijan is not ready to settle
the issue on this basis, it means he must prepare his nation not
for the resolution of the conflict, but through lies and vociferous
statements, he prepares them for the illusion that the resolution is
possible only by military means. I must say that the latter option
is also impossible; once everyone was convinced of this, including
Azerbaijanis. I don't think it will make sense to convince ourselves of
the same once again. However, neither Armenia nor Nagorno Karabakh wish
at all to prove - as to where the ways of confrontation and war lead...
REGNUM: It seems that the negotiations on peaceful settlement of
the Nagorno Karabakh conflict within the framework of the OSCE Minsk
Group have failed.
Do you think it is possible to transfer this issue into another
format, particularly to parliamentary structures, for instance, to the
Parliamentary Assembly of NATO or Parliamentary Assembly of the OSCE?
TOROSYAN: It's absolutely impossible. Especially bearing in mind
the fact that some of those parliamentary institutions have a formal
character, they are not so to say real parliamentary institutions. If
one scrutinizes their regulations, style of work and mechanisms,
one will see that they are not parliamentary institutions. Those are
places where people simply come together, meet, present some reports,
express opinions and that's it. These meetings do not have any
practical implications. This is on the one hand. On the other hand,
in order to solve such complicated problems, significant experience,
knowledge as well as insight are required. It seems to many persons
that in reality conflicts are very simple and easy to resolve. At
the same time, many of them have an opportunity to grasp that in real
life it is a complicated problem.
I am sure that serious parliamentary institutions won't have the
temptation to get involved, since they understand that conflict
resolution is a long process in parliamentary institutions, sometimes
it is very difficult to conduct such processes, because, as a rule,
their members change quite often.
As regards the "failure" of Karabakh negotiations within the framework
of the OSCE Minsk Group, frankly speaking, I would not assess the
current situation in such way. The current situation is not different
from, at least last year's situation. The principles of the resolution
are well known and formulated, including the principle of respecting
the right of self-determination. The only difference in comparison
with the last year is that a year ago no one knew about the gist of
the principles. Today they are known and publicly debated. Before some
principles of negotiations became public, everything was happening
behind closed doors, and neither Ilham Aliyev nor Elmar Mamedyarov
deemed it necessary to deny the fact of their existence. Nevertheless,
today when many people are aware of the principles, they are trying
to reject these principles or some of the principles. Here is the
difference.
Today I am sure as much as I was last year, that when it will be
time to make the principles completely public and formulate the
document, Azerbaijanis will go back on their word. It has happened
repeatedly. The Azerbaijani side has always demonstrated a double-faced
policy. A conduct, which is demonstrated behind closed doors when
no one sees them, especially someone from their own society, and a
conduct outside these rooms and under the sight of others.
These two behaviors essentially differ from each other very often.
REGNUM: Can the principle of returning territories to Azerbaijan,
which are found in the proposals of the co-chairmen and which represent
actually a security belt around Nagorno Karabakh, create a wave of
mass protest in Armenia?
Will it lead to a serious discontent, won't it?
TOROSYAN: As long as the document does not have a holistic
appearance, naturally there is not a final form and extent of the
compromise. There is no sense to talk about something that doesn't
have a final form. Theoretically there can be a discontent caused by
the comprehensive resolution of the problem.
Practically, I think no one doubts that in the course of the settlement
of the conflict a compromise has to be reached for sure. What its
content will be, and in what proportions, is a different question. What
is important today is that the right of self-determination of peoples
has been recognized for the first time as a principle of conflict
settlement. This is becoming an irrefutable fact and is enshrined in
several documents. The application of this principle will result in the
recognition of independence of the Republic of Nagorno Karabakh. So the
issue of territories is directly intertwined with this circumstance.
Sometimes, it is articulated that once, Nagorno Karabakh had already
conducted a referendum. But a question is raised - within what
borders? Those who insist that once there has been a referendum, and
in fact been held and no one doubts its lawfulness from political
and legal point of view, have to not forget that if we insist on
that referendum, it means that we insist also on the borders in
which it has been held. Do the people insist on these borders in
the same manner as they insist on the recognition of results of this
referendum? These two factors are interrelated. Why did I bring this
fact as an example? Because there can not be separate questions in
the course of the resolution of the conflict. And it's impossible to
resolve territorial issues leaving the other issues aside. They are
interlinked with numerous ties directly and indirectly.
REGNUM: So, should a new referendum be held in Nagorno Karabakh?
TOROSYAN: It is the international community that proposes to hold
a referendum. I have no doubts related to how the people of Nagorno
Karabakh will express themselves during another referendum. However,
as I have already noted, there is also another question, i.e. the
borders. And those who insist on the recognition of the previous
referendum have to consider that they suggest relinquishing all the
adjacent areas. The referendum was conducted in the territories of
former autonomous region of Nagorno Karabakh and Shahumyan.
REGNUM: In this case, within what borders does the new referendum
is to be held and does it make sense to hold it, if a timeframe of
10-15 years is being anticipated?
TOROSYAN: Such a term of holding a referendum, in 10-15 years, is not
reflected anywhere. This is another Azerbaijani provocation. There
isn't such a document that says 10-15 years, and there are no reasons
to speak about such a timeframe. It doesn't make sense to speak about a
hypothetical timeframe. It has to be linked to certain actions. Apart
from that, the borders within which the referendum will be held have
to be indicated. Furthermore, it should be clearly stipulated, that
independently from the position of Azerbaijan, after the referendum,
the international community must recognize its results. We know from
our experience that Azerbaijan is ready to renounce any agreement,
any commitment or viewpoint at any time. They are even ready to lie
without batting an eye. Therefore, the international community has to
be the guarantor of the recognition of results of the referendum. At
the same time, if 2-3 years are required for holding the referendum,
then it is necessary to define the modalities of the interim status
of Nagorno Karabakh. So there are numerous issues that have to be
necessarily resolved in order to bring the document to its final
shape and prepare it for signing.
I hope that in the meanwhile the Republic of Nagorno Karabakh
also will take part in the negotiations. Furthermore, it is very
important that the document is signed also by the authorities of
Nagorno Karabakh, since they are a fully internationally recognized
party to the conflict.
REGNUM: There is much talk about the possibility of deploying
peacekeeping forces in the area of Karabakh conflict. How effective
will such a decision be and what will it give to the conflicting
parties and to the region as a whole? In fact, it has been ten
years that in the area of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict the regime of
ceasefire is maintained by the efforts of the parties themselves,
not the peacekeepers.
TOROSYAN: I repeat myself, but it is a delusion to separate any issue
from the general context and to begin deliberations around it. Each
sub item is linked with a great number of other sub items. To tell the
truth, there is one core issue of paramount importance -- it is the
status of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic. However, all other issues
are connected with each other, and to discuss them separately is,
at least, meaningless waste of time.
REGNUM: Taking into account the forthcoming parliamentary and
presidential elections, do you think that till 2008-09 nothing will
change in the process of conflict settlement and the status quo will
be maintained?
TOROSYAN: Probably, your question is connected with the approach of the
co-chairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group, that settlement of conflicts is
frozen during elections. I think that it to be a wrong approach. Yes,
certainly, this issue has a great political articulation. But what do
the co-chairmen mean? Do they mean that while coming to any decision,
for example, a tide of discontent may arise in Armenia or Nagorno
Karabakh in 2007 or 2008? Discontent may arise at any moment --
in the pre-electoral, electoral, or post electoral period - in case
the decision is unacceptable for the population. And what if it is
acceptable? Either way, the elections are absolutely not important.
Will the Nagorno Karabakh issue remain in the same form till 2009? If
the approaches do not change by that time, of course it will remain
in the same form till 2009. And there are a number of preconditions
in order to change these approaches. Firstly, the international
community that says that the two countries as well as NK should prepare
their respective populations for peaceful resolution must have clear
criterion for the evaluation of the preparatory work. If the countries
move in the opposite direction, the international community should
give its unequivocal evaluation, which will be followed by certain
steps. Only in this case will the Azerbaijani side really understand
that it is required to move in the direction of peace.
There is a good option for resolution which can be helpful also for
Azerbaijan. As I have already said Baku does not have enough courage
to recognize the realties. Moreover, the Azerbaijani side is afraid
that once those realities are confirmed, it will lose the dearest
thing for them, namely petrodollars.
Therefore they need help. The international community can do so. It
can simply recognize the independence of the Nagorno Karabakh
Republic... of course simultaneously presenting certain demands
to Nagorno Karabakh. Azerbaijan will have no choice, apart from
reconciling with it. In such a case the leadership of Azerbaijan will
be relived from the burden making this decisive step themselves. I
believe this is the possibility of the resolution. It would be
advisable for the international community to think about such an
option of resolution. If they truly accept that, in the course of
the resolution of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict the principle of
self-determination must be applied, this can easily be done even
without Azerbaijan. Once it is fixed several times that Azerbaijan is
not ready or resolution of the conflict and is taking steps in the
opposite direction, it will be possible to organize a referendum,
as well as to recognize the Nagorno Karabakh Republic, and to take
all the other subsequent steps. There is nothing impossibe in this.
REGNUM: In this case, why has the international community not yet
recognized the independence of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic?
TOROSYAN: Probably, some time is needed to deeply understanding and
doing that. After all, 17 years have passed if we don't count the
year 1988, since the international community has admitted that the
principle of the self-determination has to be applied as a basis for
the resolution. If it is necessary for the resolution of the problem,
to wait another 17 years, I think both in Armenia and in Nagorno
Karabakh, people have the necessary patience and will wait for that
day. And, one should not doubt that this day will come.
ArmRadio.am
15.08.2006 10:45
REGNUM: Mr. Torosyan, recently an extraordinary convention of the
Republican Party of Armenia (RPA) took place. What conclusions can
be drawn, what developments are expected, and has the process of
increasing the membership of the RPA already been accomplished?
TOROSYAN: I think during the convention it became clear to everybody
that one should not draw extraordinary conclusions. As for the process
of increasing the membership, I believe, this is a continuous process
for any party. If there are people who wish to be admitted to the
party, naturally the process of replenishment will go on.
REGNUM: According to your forecast how many percent of votes will the
Republican Party collect in the upcoming parliamentary elections of
2007 ?
TOROSYAN: I think it is not worth doing forecasts about the elections
today.
As a matter of fact, I am surprised that some people have already
started to "distribute" parliamentary seats. Our approach is formulated
in an absolutely clear manner. We have repeatedly made it public. In
the course of the elections we will try not only to maintain our
positions, but also to consolidate them as much as possible. One can
notice that the estimates of Serge Sarkisyan (Minister of Defense,
who was recently elected as a member Council of RPA - REGNUM) are
also within the framework of this formula.
REGNUM: However, what will be the distribution of powers in the
new parliament?
TOROSYAN: The most important thing is that the elections meet the
international standards. It is not important who else apart from us
will hold places in the new parliament. We will follow the formula that
I spoke about. The RPA is ready to cooperate with all the political
powers that will enter the parliament after the elections of 2007
both on specific issues that may come up, as well as on broader range
of issues. What the image will be in general -- will be determined
by the nation. I will just say that not all experts' predictions on
Armenia turn into reality. And understandably so, because sometimes
there is significant lack of experience and knowledge for conducting
such studies. As for forecasting by politicians, those are not really
forecasts, but are rather wishful thinking.
REGNUM: Does the Republican Party consider during the forthcoming
elections the possibility of entering any alliance with another
political party? Is such a scenario being discussed?
TOROSYAN: Such an option is not being discussed yet. Each party should
always be ready to campaign on its own. However if the processes
develop in such a scenario, that entering into pre-electoral bloc
with some political power will be convenient, naturally this issue
will be considered. I would like to emphasize once again that this
issue is not on the agenda of the party yet.
REGNUM: If the Republican Party accomplishes all the tasks and
achieves its planned aims, who will be nominated as candidate to the
presidential elections of 2008?
TOROSYAN: I think it will be correct to speak about the presidential
elections after the parliamentary elections.
REGNUM: Many politicians do not exclude the candidacy of the Minister
of Defense Serge Sarkisyan.
TOROSYAN: I know. I am also familiar with his response to that
question.
REGNUM: Do you consider his nomination possible?
TOROSYAN: I am confident that after the parliamentary elections
the Republican Party will certainly discuss this issue and express
its position.
REGNUM: Mr. Torosyan, how efficient do you consider the South Caucasian
Parliamentary Initiative? What can this structure contribute to
Armenia? There is an opinion that such initiatives are doomed to
failure from the very beginning.
TOROSYAN: First of all, we should understand the purpose of the
initiative itself. And the purpose, I believe, is both positive and
important: it is the establishment of contacts between representatives
of parliaments of three South Caucasian countries. This is indeed
very important. In the future such meetings and contacts can "break
the ice" in the relations between these countries. Of course it is
meaningless to anticipate serious results from such meetings at this
point because of one reason: the Azerbaijanis are restrained by the
the official position of Baku, which is the following: relations,
cooperation with Armenia in any area on any issue, including on the
inter-parliamentary level is possible only after settlement of the
Nagorno Karabakh conflict. Our position is absolutely opposite to
this. I believe any reasonable person will prefer Armenia's position
given its constructive nature.
Alas, this is the reality. Unfortunately, the international community,
which recently has been quite often reflecting on the conflicts
and particularly on the necessity to settle the Karabakh issue as
soon as possible, however, is not willing to see the main problems
that hinder the settlement. And in my opinion the most important
obstacles are the deepening of war propaganda as well as hate speech
in Azerbaijan. Notwithstanding wishes of some people (some consider
2006 to be a window, some -- a door, or others consider 2007 and 2008
pre-electoral years) independently from all the above mentioned,
as long as the propaganda in Azerbaijan continues, it impossible
to anticipate any resolution. Today it became obvious that the
settlement of this issue is possible only by applying the principle
of self-determination of peoples. However, I think the President of
Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev is not ready for settlement of the issue
grounding on this principle, although behind closed doors he does
not deny that this very principle seems to him as the only way of
resolution.
Therefore, if the president of Azerbaijan is not ready to settle
the issue on this basis, it means he must prepare his nation not
for the resolution of the conflict, but through lies and vociferous
statements, he prepares them for the illusion that the resolution is
possible only by military means. I must say that the latter option
is also impossible; once everyone was convinced of this, including
Azerbaijanis. I don't think it will make sense to convince ourselves of
the same once again. However, neither Armenia nor Nagorno Karabakh wish
at all to prove - as to where the ways of confrontation and war lead...
REGNUM: It seems that the negotiations on peaceful settlement of
the Nagorno Karabakh conflict within the framework of the OSCE Minsk
Group have failed.
Do you think it is possible to transfer this issue into another
format, particularly to parliamentary structures, for instance, to the
Parliamentary Assembly of NATO or Parliamentary Assembly of the OSCE?
TOROSYAN: It's absolutely impossible. Especially bearing in mind
the fact that some of those parliamentary institutions have a formal
character, they are not so to say real parliamentary institutions. If
one scrutinizes their regulations, style of work and mechanisms,
one will see that they are not parliamentary institutions. Those are
places where people simply come together, meet, present some reports,
express opinions and that's it. These meetings do not have any
practical implications. This is on the one hand. On the other hand,
in order to solve such complicated problems, significant experience,
knowledge as well as insight are required. It seems to many persons
that in reality conflicts are very simple and easy to resolve. At
the same time, many of them have an opportunity to grasp that in real
life it is a complicated problem.
I am sure that serious parliamentary institutions won't have the
temptation to get involved, since they understand that conflict
resolution is a long process in parliamentary institutions, sometimes
it is very difficult to conduct such processes, because, as a rule,
their members change quite often.
As regards the "failure" of Karabakh negotiations within the framework
of the OSCE Minsk Group, frankly speaking, I would not assess the
current situation in such way. The current situation is not different
from, at least last year's situation. The principles of the resolution
are well known and formulated, including the principle of respecting
the right of self-determination. The only difference in comparison
with the last year is that a year ago no one knew about the gist of
the principles. Today they are known and publicly debated. Before some
principles of negotiations became public, everything was happening
behind closed doors, and neither Ilham Aliyev nor Elmar Mamedyarov
deemed it necessary to deny the fact of their existence. Nevertheless,
today when many people are aware of the principles, they are trying
to reject these principles or some of the principles. Here is the
difference.
Today I am sure as much as I was last year, that when it will be
time to make the principles completely public and formulate the
document, Azerbaijanis will go back on their word. It has happened
repeatedly. The Azerbaijani side has always demonstrated a double-faced
policy. A conduct, which is demonstrated behind closed doors when
no one sees them, especially someone from their own society, and a
conduct outside these rooms and under the sight of others.
These two behaviors essentially differ from each other very often.
REGNUM: Can the principle of returning territories to Azerbaijan,
which are found in the proposals of the co-chairmen and which represent
actually a security belt around Nagorno Karabakh, create a wave of
mass protest in Armenia?
Will it lead to a serious discontent, won't it?
TOROSYAN: As long as the document does not have a holistic
appearance, naturally there is not a final form and extent of the
compromise. There is no sense to talk about something that doesn't
have a final form. Theoretically there can be a discontent caused by
the comprehensive resolution of the problem.
Practically, I think no one doubts that in the course of the settlement
of the conflict a compromise has to be reached for sure. What its
content will be, and in what proportions, is a different question. What
is important today is that the right of self-determination of peoples
has been recognized for the first time as a principle of conflict
settlement. This is becoming an irrefutable fact and is enshrined in
several documents. The application of this principle will result in the
recognition of independence of the Republic of Nagorno Karabakh. So the
issue of territories is directly intertwined with this circumstance.
Sometimes, it is articulated that once, Nagorno Karabakh had already
conducted a referendum. But a question is raised - within what
borders? Those who insist that once there has been a referendum, and
in fact been held and no one doubts its lawfulness from political
and legal point of view, have to not forget that if we insist on
that referendum, it means that we insist also on the borders in
which it has been held. Do the people insist on these borders in
the same manner as they insist on the recognition of results of this
referendum? These two factors are interrelated. Why did I bring this
fact as an example? Because there can not be separate questions in
the course of the resolution of the conflict. And it's impossible to
resolve territorial issues leaving the other issues aside. They are
interlinked with numerous ties directly and indirectly.
REGNUM: So, should a new referendum be held in Nagorno Karabakh?
TOROSYAN: It is the international community that proposes to hold
a referendum. I have no doubts related to how the people of Nagorno
Karabakh will express themselves during another referendum. However,
as I have already noted, there is also another question, i.e. the
borders. And those who insist on the recognition of the previous
referendum have to consider that they suggest relinquishing all the
adjacent areas. The referendum was conducted in the territories of
former autonomous region of Nagorno Karabakh and Shahumyan.
REGNUM: In this case, within what borders does the new referendum
is to be held and does it make sense to hold it, if a timeframe of
10-15 years is being anticipated?
TOROSYAN: Such a term of holding a referendum, in 10-15 years, is not
reflected anywhere. This is another Azerbaijani provocation. There
isn't such a document that says 10-15 years, and there are no reasons
to speak about such a timeframe. It doesn't make sense to speak about a
hypothetical timeframe. It has to be linked to certain actions. Apart
from that, the borders within which the referendum will be held have
to be indicated. Furthermore, it should be clearly stipulated, that
independently from the position of Azerbaijan, after the referendum,
the international community must recognize its results. We know from
our experience that Azerbaijan is ready to renounce any agreement,
any commitment or viewpoint at any time. They are even ready to lie
without batting an eye. Therefore, the international community has to
be the guarantor of the recognition of results of the referendum. At
the same time, if 2-3 years are required for holding the referendum,
then it is necessary to define the modalities of the interim status
of Nagorno Karabakh. So there are numerous issues that have to be
necessarily resolved in order to bring the document to its final
shape and prepare it for signing.
I hope that in the meanwhile the Republic of Nagorno Karabakh
also will take part in the negotiations. Furthermore, it is very
important that the document is signed also by the authorities of
Nagorno Karabakh, since they are a fully internationally recognized
party to the conflict.
REGNUM: There is much talk about the possibility of deploying
peacekeeping forces in the area of Karabakh conflict. How effective
will such a decision be and what will it give to the conflicting
parties and to the region as a whole? In fact, it has been ten
years that in the area of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict the regime of
ceasefire is maintained by the efforts of the parties themselves,
not the peacekeepers.
TOROSYAN: I repeat myself, but it is a delusion to separate any issue
from the general context and to begin deliberations around it. Each
sub item is linked with a great number of other sub items. To tell the
truth, there is one core issue of paramount importance -- it is the
status of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic. However, all other issues
are connected with each other, and to discuss them separately is,
at least, meaningless waste of time.
REGNUM: Taking into account the forthcoming parliamentary and
presidential elections, do you think that till 2008-09 nothing will
change in the process of conflict settlement and the status quo will
be maintained?
TOROSYAN: Probably, your question is connected with the approach of the
co-chairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group, that settlement of conflicts is
frozen during elections. I think that it to be a wrong approach. Yes,
certainly, this issue has a great political articulation. But what do
the co-chairmen mean? Do they mean that while coming to any decision,
for example, a tide of discontent may arise in Armenia or Nagorno
Karabakh in 2007 or 2008? Discontent may arise at any moment --
in the pre-electoral, electoral, or post electoral period - in case
the decision is unacceptable for the population. And what if it is
acceptable? Either way, the elections are absolutely not important.
Will the Nagorno Karabakh issue remain in the same form till 2009? If
the approaches do not change by that time, of course it will remain
in the same form till 2009. And there are a number of preconditions
in order to change these approaches. Firstly, the international
community that says that the two countries as well as NK should prepare
their respective populations for peaceful resolution must have clear
criterion for the evaluation of the preparatory work. If the countries
move in the opposite direction, the international community should
give its unequivocal evaluation, which will be followed by certain
steps. Only in this case will the Azerbaijani side really understand
that it is required to move in the direction of peace.
There is a good option for resolution which can be helpful also for
Azerbaijan. As I have already said Baku does not have enough courage
to recognize the realties. Moreover, the Azerbaijani side is afraid
that once those realities are confirmed, it will lose the dearest
thing for them, namely petrodollars.
Therefore they need help. The international community can do so. It
can simply recognize the independence of the Nagorno Karabakh
Republic... of course simultaneously presenting certain demands
to Nagorno Karabakh. Azerbaijan will have no choice, apart from
reconciling with it. In such a case the leadership of Azerbaijan will
be relived from the burden making this decisive step themselves. I
believe this is the possibility of the resolution. It would be
advisable for the international community to think about such an
option of resolution. If they truly accept that, in the course of
the resolution of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict the principle of
self-determination must be applied, this can easily be done even
without Azerbaijan. Once it is fixed several times that Azerbaijan is
not ready or resolution of the conflict and is taking steps in the
opposite direction, it will be possible to organize a referendum,
as well as to recognize the Nagorno Karabakh Republic, and to take
all the other subsequent steps. There is nothing impossibe in this.
REGNUM: In this case, why has the international community not yet
recognized the independence of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic?
TOROSYAN: Probably, some time is needed to deeply understanding and
doing that. After all, 17 years have passed if we don't count the
year 1988, since the international community has admitted that the
principle of the self-determination has to be applied as a basis for
the resolution. If it is necessary for the resolution of the problem,
to wait another 17 years, I think both in Armenia and in Nagorno
Karabakh, people have the necessary patience and will wait for that
day. And, one should not doubt that this day will come.