Tweet
FORMER PARLIAMENTARY CHAIR SUGGESTS REFRAINING FROM 'PARADIGM OF HAGGLING' ON KARABAKH
epress.am
09.08.2011 15:04
In the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement process, a so-called
paradigm of haggling is applied which assumes that all issues must
be resolved through agreement, said former National Assembly chair
and current independent MP Tigran Torosyan in a press briefing in
Yerevan today.
According to him, it's clear that an irresolvable discrepancy in
Nagorno-Karabakh's status exists among the viewpoints of Armenia,
Azerbaijan and Nagorno-Karabakh itself.
"This problem has its solution, which is the following: when a
situation is unsolvable through this paradigm, you have to try those
paradigms which allow the problem to be solved. This is the legal
paradigm, that is, the norms of international law, which undoubtedly
say one thing: to contrast territorial integrity with the right to
self-determination is meaningless. Consequently, there has to be a
change in strategy and in the paradigm of haggling," he said.
In the deputy's opinion, the time has come for the Armenian parties
to put forth a full concept on conflict settlement, which will truly
be a proactive policy:
"This is the way to ensure the conflict's resolution because,
unfortunately, today we have an additional obstacle: in our region, two
powerful states have conflicting interests, which is why none of the
mediators won't want to see the conflict resolved in the foreseeable
future - because it goes against its interests. But this doesn't
mean that we have to consider those parties our enemy; finally,
each is pursuing its interests. Rather, countering interests with
international law, I believe the Armenian parties can achieve success."
Torosyan then offered his proposal for resolution of the conflict:
"What to do? First, those representatives in Armenia who are engaged in
[conflict] settlement not only should declare that the conflict will
be resolved on grounds of the right to self-determination - these
statements are no longer influential. Rather, they have to raise the
arguments as to why, how, it has to be presented well, how the war
began, who began the war, what course did it take. There has to be an
expert panel that will work on this issue professionally. Naturally,
politicians make political statements and adopt political decisions.
Those documents have to be prepared by experts on the basis of which
they will approve a decision and make statements. Otherwise, we might
find ourselves - and sometimes we do - in not so pleasant situations.
The entire world has to know that the Republic of Armenia's position
is built on fundamental pillars. Simply statements, that NKR will
no longer be part of Azerbaijan's territory, are no longer suitable
- their time has passed. If we work hard, NKR will return to the
negotiating process. On the issue of territorial integrity, Armenia
and Azerbaijan can sit down and talk. But to whom does the right
to self-determination refer, Armenia or Azerbaijan? This is obvious
nonsense even for non-experts. There's a very serious omission here,
which leads to this stalemate. The self-determining party has to
come and sit beside the table. This is what international law says,"
Torosyan concluded.
epress.am
09.08.2011 15:04
In the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement process, a so-called
paradigm of haggling is applied which assumes that all issues must
be resolved through agreement, said former National Assembly chair
and current independent MP Tigran Torosyan in a press briefing in
Yerevan today.
According to him, it's clear that an irresolvable discrepancy in
Nagorno-Karabakh's status exists among the viewpoints of Armenia,
Azerbaijan and Nagorno-Karabakh itself.
"This problem has its solution, which is the following: when a
situation is unsolvable through this paradigm, you have to try those
paradigms which allow the problem to be solved. This is the legal
paradigm, that is, the norms of international law, which undoubtedly
say one thing: to contrast territorial integrity with the right to
self-determination is meaningless. Consequently, there has to be a
change in strategy and in the paradigm of haggling," he said.
In the deputy's opinion, the time has come for the Armenian parties
to put forth a full concept on conflict settlement, which will truly
be a proactive policy:
"This is the way to ensure the conflict's resolution because,
unfortunately, today we have an additional obstacle: in our region, two
powerful states have conflicting interests, which is why none of the
mediators won't want to see the conflict resolved in the foreseeable
future - because it goes against its interests. But this doesn't
mean that we have to consider those parties our enemy; finally,
each is pursuing its interests. Rather, countering interests with
international law, I believe the Armenian parties can achieve success."
Torosyan then offered his proposal for resolution of the conflict:
"What to do? First, those representatives in Armenia who are engaged in
[conflict] settlement not only should declare that the conflict will
be resolved on grounds of the right to self-determination - these
statements are no longer influential. Rather, they have to raise the
arguments as to why, how, it has to be presented well, how the war
began, who began the war, what course did it take. There has to be an
expert panel that will work on this issue professionally. Naturally,
politicians make political statements and adopt political decisions.
Those documents have to be prepared by experts on the basis of which
they will approve a decision and make statements. Otherwise, we might
find ourselves - and sometimes we do - in not so pleasant situations.
The entire world has to know that the Republic of Armenia's position
is built on fundamental pillars. Simply statements, that NKR will
no longer be part of Azerbaijan's territory, are no longer suitable
- their time has passed. If we work hard, NKR will return to the
negotiating process. On the issue of territorial integrity, Armenia
and Azerbaijan can sit down and talk. But to whom does the right
to self-determination refer, Armenia or Azerbaijan? This is obvious
nonsense even for non-experts. There's a very serious omission here,
which leads to this stalemate. The self-determining party has to
come and sit beside the table. This is what international law says,"
Torosyan concluded.