Tweet
RA FM: SPECULATIONS ON TOPIC OF MEGHRI IS A CHEAP TRICK
arminfo
2008-02-13 12:56:00
ArmInfo. The version of the territorial exchange of Karabakh to Meghri
is no more than a proposal, put in requisition by American political
expert Paul Goble, RA Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan told "Shant"
TV channel.
The minister said that Paul Goble's plan was presented in early 1990s
and remained in circulation till 2000. 'I will speak in details for
our compatriots to understand the situation. Let's start with what
Levon Ter-Petrosyan (RA first President, now presidential contender
-ed.) is doing now - this is a cheap trick. There is no matter of
confidentiality, it is just incorrect. These are speculations. I
have no such estimations in my vocabulary, however, this is immoral
in fact. These are speculations on one of the most important issues
for us, especially when it is associated with October 27 events
(terrorist act in the Armenian parliament in October, 1999 - ed.)',
V. Oskanyan said. He expressed opinion that the present situation
gives grounds to think that L. Ter-Petrosyan will stick at nothing:
'If he could speculate in this issue, I am sure that he will stick
at nothing to fulfill his political programme, that is, to become
the president of Armenia. I would like to be mistaken in this matter,
but I think that we shall still make sure of what I have told'. RA FM
categorically denied the version that such a document (about Meghri
exchange) had ever been on the table of negotiations. 'I bindingly
claim that three documents were officially or semi-officially presented
by OSCE MG co-chairmen during Robert Kocharyan's presidency: a document
about the 'common state' in 1998, the 'key-west document> in 2001 and
the one being presently on the table of negotiations. There is no word
'Meghri' there', V. Oskanyan said. He recalled that two documents,
"package" and "stage-by-stage" versions, were presented in a period,
preceding to R. Kocharyan's coming to the power, i.e. during
L. Ter-Petrosyan's presidency.
'What L. Ter-Petrosyan claims at the meetings, saying that 'this is
a version of Meghri's surrender', is Paul Goble's plan and it has
never been on the table of negotiations', the minister emphasized. At
the same time, he said that Goble's proposal has always been in
circulation. V. Oskanyan added that in 1994, this proposal was
discussed with Levon Ter-Petrosyan. The discussion was held with
no third-party present. There were only people from Ter-Petrosyan's
circle present. V. Oskanyan himself took the post of RA deputy Foreign
Minister at that time. 'L. Ter- Petrosyan expressed his opinion
regarding this plan. He said that Goble's plan was a good version
for Armenia, if the northern part of Nakhchivan is added to it ',
Oskanyan said. Responding to the commentator's question, the minister
said that this was just discussion of Goble's plan in circulation:
'However, I would not consider myself a moral man if I claimed that
L. Ter-Petrosyan wanted to give Meghri to Azerbaijan. It would be
absurd and incorrect. L. Ter-Petrosyan would not do that. However,
an opinion was nevertheless expressed and the issue was discussed'.
As V. Oskanyan said, the document L. Ter-Petrosyan is talking about,
contains the above-indicated idea. However, the point is that such
a document has never been officially presented. "I have now many
documents of such content in my table, however, none of them is
official and the OSCE MG co-chairs are unaware of them. Such proposals
were multiply received over the past years.
At the same time, the minister expressed hope that though
speculations on the topic of Meghri have began now, the document
was in someone's hands long ago: 'Now, when the people's passions
have been heated, they thought that the moment has come. Therefore,
I consider this immoral'. Having touched upon the document, not
signed by L. Ter-Petrosyan, about the package version of settlement,
which envisages a status of autonomy for the NKR in AR structure,
the minister emphasized that though the document was unsigned,
Ter-Petrosyan's share of guilt is that there were such formulations in
this document. 'I cannot blame Levon Ter-Petrosyan for an intention
to give Karabakh because he did not sign the document and did not
present it for the people's discussion. We can blame him for 'phasing',
that is, a readiness to give the territories of the security belt
without specifying the NKR status', the minister said and added that
though Ter-Petrosyan did not sign up the 'stage-by-stage' version,
however, he submitted it to the people's approval in his interview
and article. 'It means that he agreed with the document and considered
the negotiations completed, moreover, he thought this way right. The
negotiations are headed by the people's elect, and when there is a
discrepancy between the president's and the people's opinion, the
president's resignation is a logical consequence', V. Oskanyan said.
arminfo
2008-02-13 12:56:00
ArmInfo. The version of the territorial exchange of Karabakh to Meghri
is no more than a proposal, put in requisition by American political
expert Paul Goble, RA Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan told "Shant"
TV channel.
The minister said that Paul Goble's plan was presented in early 1990s
and remained in circulation till 2000. 'I will speak in details for
our compatriots to understand the situation. Let's start with what
Levon Ter-Petrosyan (RA first President, now presidential contender
-ed.) is doing now - this is a cheap trick. There is no matter of
confidentiality, it is just incorrect. These are speculations. I
have no such estimations in my vocabulary, however, this is immoral
in fact. These are speculations on one of the most important issues
for us, especially when it is associated with October 27 events
(terrorist act in the Armenian parliament in October, 1999 - ed.)',
V. Oskanyan said. He expressed opinion that the present situation
gives grounds to think that L. Ter-Petrosyan will stick at nothing:
'If he could speculate in this issue, I am sure that he will stick
at nothing to fulfill his political programme, that is, to become
the president of Armenia. I would like to be mistaken in this matter,
but I think that we shall still make sure of what I have told'. RA FM
categorically denied the version that such a document (about Meghri
exchange) had ever been on the table of negotiations. 'I bindingly
claim that three documents were officially or semi-officially presented
by OSCE MG co-chairmen during Robert Kocharyan's presidency: a document
about the 'common state' in 1998, the 'key-west document> in 2001 and
the one being presently on the table of negotiations. There is no word
'Meghri' there', V. Oskanyan said. He recalled that two documents,
"package" and "stage-by-stage" versions, were presented in a period,
preceding to R. Kocharyan's coming to the power, i.e. during
L. Ter-Petrosyan's presidency.
'What L. Ter-Petrosyan claims at the meetings, saying that 'this is
a version of Meghri's surrender', is Paul Goble's plan and it has
never been on the table of negotiations', the minister emphasized. At
the same time, he said that Goble's proposal has always been in
circulation. V. Oskanyan added that in 1994, this proposal was
discussed with Levon Ter-Petrosyan. The discussion was held with
no third-party present. There were only people from Ter-Petrosyan's
circle present. V. Oskanyan himself took the post of RA deputy Foreign
Minister at that time. 'L. Ter- Petrosyan expressed his opinion
regarding this plan. He said that Goble's plan was a good version
for Armenia, if the northern part of Nakhchivan is added to it ',
Oskanyan said. Responding to the commentator's question, the minister
said that this was just discussion of Goble's plan in circulation:
'However, I would not consider myself a moral man if I claimed that
L. Ter-Petrosyan wanted to give Meghri to Azerbaijan. It would be
absurd and incorrect. L. Ter-Petrosyan would not do that. However,
an opinion was nevertheless expressed and the issue was discussed'.
As V. Oskanyan said, the document L. Ter-Petrosyan is talking about,
contains the above-indicated idea. However, the point is that such
a document has never been officially presented. "I have now many
documents of such content in my table, however, none of them is
official and the OSCE MG co-chairs are unaware of them. Such proposals
were multiply received over the past years.
At the same time, the minister expressed hope that though
speculations on the topic of Meghri have began now, the document
was in someone's hands long ago: 'Now, when the people's passions
have been heated, they thought that the moment has come. Therefore,
I consider this immoral'. Having touched upon the document, not
signed by L. Ter-Petrosyan, about the package version of settlement,
which envisages a status of autonomy for the NKR in AR structure,
the minister emphasized that though the document was unsigned,
Ter-Petrosyan's share of guilt is that there were such formulations in
this document. 'I cannot blame Levon Ter-Petrosyan for an intention
to give Karabakh because he did not sign the document and did not
present it for the people's discussion. We can blame him for 'phasing',
that is, a readiness to give the territories of the security belt
without specifying the NKR status', the minister said and added that
though Ter-Petrosyan did not sign up the 'stage-by-stage' version,
however, he submitted it to the people's approval in his interview
and article. 'It means that he agreed with the document and considered
the negotiations completed, moreover, he thought this way right. The
negotiations are headed by the people's elect, and when there is a
discrepancy between the president's and the people's opinion, the
president's resignation is a logical consequence', V. Oskanyan said.