Pashinyan: there will be no more genocidal threat to Armenians, specifically in Nagorno-Karabakh.
26.09.2019,
10:45
During his working visit to New York, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and his spouse Anna Hakobyan visited Columbia University in New York and met with university faculty and student circles.
YEREVAN, September 26. /ARKA/. During his working visit to New York, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and his spouse Anna Hakobyan visited Columbia University in New York and met with university faculty and student circles.
Addressing the audience Pashinyan said: Unfortunately, the South Caucasus remains to be a volatile region marked by a number of security risks. Unresolved Nagorno-Karabakh conflict poses a security challenge to our nation and serves as serious impediment for regional development.
The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is among the most difficult and protracted ones in the world. It starts with Soviet Union when an Armenian region with more than 90 percent of Armenian population was assigned by an arbitrary decision of the Communist party to Azerbaijan.
It lived with the Soviet Union for 70 years manifested by systematic and violent discrimination against the Armenian population who formulated their bid for self-determination and human rights in 1988, even before the fall of the Berlin Wall.
It survived the Soviet Union and turned into a large scale war in the beginning of the 1990s, which threatened the very existence of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh who were subjected to mass atrocities. Since 1994 when a ceasefire agreement was signed between Nagorno-Karabakh, Azerbaijan and Armenia, the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process became an indispensable part of regional politics. There can be many hypotheses as to why it was not possible to resolve the conflict for more than two decades, the lack of functional democracy has been among them. It seemed that there was a vicious cycle wherein the people of the region were often denied human rights in the name of conflict-induced national security.
Likewise, conflict transformation seemed to be unachievable because of the low level of human rights protection and democracy. In Armenia, we broke this vicious cycle. On many occasions, I have been asked to what extent democratic transition of Armenia may bring new opportunities for conflict resolution.
Of course, Armenia does not represent the entire region and thus we cannot refer to the overall change in the region. Thus, let me highlight only the current reality from strictly Armenian perspective. The current Armenian authorities do not derive their legitimacy and identity from the conflict perceptions and do not use conflict to cling on power, to limit human rights or justify their violations.
Armenia has supported democratic aspirations of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh who most recently elected their local authorities in free and fair elections. Peace cannot come as conspiracy between clans or exclusive elites. We need leaderships which are both accountable to their people and can gather strong support for peace in their respective societies. Peace should be about people and for people and can come only through the people.
With this in mind, we try to advance NK peace process with the following important steps. First, with my Azerbaijani colleague we were able to agree on necessity of observing and strengthening ceasefire. Second, we agreed that we need to prepare populations for peace. Third, I unilaterally declared that we should find a peaceful settlement acceptable for peoples of Nagorno-Karabakh, Azerbaijan and Armenia. I made clear that the will of the people on all sides matters.
Why is it important to ascertain this seemingly obvious idea? Without acknowledging and humanizing other side and their needs it would be difficult to explain the rationale behind any compromise. Indeed, my declaration was unilateral but in order for it to be acceptable for the Armenian people, it requires exactly the same declaration and approach from Azerbaijan. So far the leadership of Azerbaijan refrained from committing itself to finding a solution acceptable for all. Instead, we continue hearing explicit or implicit war threats.
Azerbaijan also refuses any dialogue with the people of Nagorno-Karabakh and their representatives and tries to impede any interaction of the people living in the conflict area with the world. Under these circumstances, it should not come as a surprise to Azerbaijan that the people of Nagorno-Karabakh strongly rely on Armenia as the only guarantor of their survival and development. Let us be clear, there will be no more genocidal threat to Armenians, specifically in Nagorno-Karabakh.
I hope that Azerbaijan will approach the expression of will of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh in the upcoming state elections not as a threat but opportunity to engage with newly elected authorities. It is our view that the international community should continue to support the peace efforts of the Co-Chairmanship of the OSCE Minsk Group, namely France, Russia and the US, especially by sending clear message on inadmissibility of the use of force.
It is important that within the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairmanship the US, Russia and France closely cooperate with each other. This is good news both for our region and for the world as it indicates that great powers are able not merely to compete but also to cooperate with each other at least in one particular region of the world.
Unfortunately, not all regional players have been showing the same degree of responsibility. Turkey continues to be a source of instability and tension in our region. I can be critical on many issues of domestic and foreign policy, but I should acknowledge that the previous Governments of Armenia made very strong efforts to establish relations with Turkey both in the beginning of the 1990s and in 2008-2009.
They agreed to establish diplomatic relations with Turkey without preconditions despite the difficult and tragic past. However, these efforts remained unappreciated, rejected and even manipulated by Turkey, who signed but refused to ratify the Zurich Protocols.
Today, 104 years after the Armenia Genocide, Turkey continues its hostile policy towards the Armenians by closing its land borders, politically and militarily supporting Azerbaijan against Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh, and most appallingly, by justifying the Armenian Genocide. We are a people of the region and we have been living here from ancestral times, we survived the Genocide and finally we are building a democratic, peaceful and viable nation. This is reality that Turkey should accept by ceasing to be the eternal security threat to Armenia and the Armenian people.
The equal rights and self-determination of peoples are one of the principles of international law put forward by the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs for the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. When it comes to this principle, somehow there is a tendency to rightly emphasis self-determination and wrongly to forget about the equal rights of peoples. Peoples who live in one region side by side are destined to recognize each other as legitimate equals. This means rejection of any idea of domination, subjugation or destruction of other people.
New forms of dialogue, respect, reconciliation, and equality among people are needed in our region. Culture of dialogue, tolerance and compromise should prevail over all differences and against all odds in the South Caucasus.' -0-
Addressing the audience Pashinyan said: Unfortunately, the South Caucasus remains to be a volatile region marked by a number of security risks. Unresolved Nagorno-Karabakh conflict poses a security challenge to our nation and serves as serious impediment for regional development.
The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is among the most difficult and protracted ones in the world. It starts with Soviet Union when an Armenian region with more than 90 percent of Armenian population was assigned by an arbitrary decision of the Communist party to Azerbaijan.
It lived with the Soviet Union for 70 years manifested by systematic and violent discrimination against the Armenian population who formulated their bid for self-determination and human rights in 1988, even before the fall of the Berlin Wall.
It survived the Soviet Union and turned into a large scale war in the beginning of the 1990s, which threatened the very existence of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh who were subjected to mass atrocities. Since 1994 when a ceasefire agreement was signed between Nagorno-Karabakh, Azerbaijan and Armenia, the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process became an indispensable part of regional politics. There can be many hypotheses as to why it was not possible to resolve the conflict for more than two decades, the lack of functional democracy has been among them. It seemed that there was a vicious cycle wherein the people of the region were often denied human rights in the name of conflict-induced national security.
Likewise, conflict transformation seemed to be unachievable because of the low level of human rights protection and democracy. In Armenia, we broke this vicious cycle. On many occasions, I have been asked to what extent democratic transition of Armenia may bring new opportunities for conflict resolution.
Of course, Armenia does not represent the entire region and thus we cannot refer to the overall change in the region. Thus, let me highlight only the current reality from strictly Armenian perspective. The current Armenian authorities do not derive their legitimacy and identity from the conflict perceptions and do not use conflict to cling on power, to limit human rights or justify their violations.
Our moral commitments to human rights, democracy and nonviolence, which we undertook during Velvet Revolution before the entire Armenian people cannot be neglected for the people who live in the conflict area. The people of Nagorno-Karabakh are entitled to enjoy their human rights and determine their future as much as their compatriots in the Republic of Armenia or any other people in the world.
With this in mind, we try to advance NK peace process with the following important steps. First, with my Azerbaijani colleague we were able to agree on necessity of observing and strengthening ceasefire. Second, we agreed that we need to prepare populations for peace. Third, I unilaterally declared that we should find a peaceful settlement acceptable for peoples of Nagorno-Karabakh, Azerbaijan and Armenia. I made clear that the will of the people on all sides matters.
Why is it important to ascertain this seemingly obvious idea? Without acknowledging and humanizing other side and their needs it would be difficult to explain the rationale behind any compromise. Indeed, my declaration was unilateral but in order for it to be acceptable for the Armenian people, it requires exactly the same declaration and approach from Azerbaijan. So far the leadership of Azerbaijan refrained from committing itself to finding a solution acceptable for all. Instead, we continue hearing explicit or implicit war threats.
Azerbaijan also refuses any dialogue with the people of Nagorno-Karabakh and their representatives and tries to impede any interaction of the people living in the conflict area with the world. Under these circumstances, it should not come as a surprise to Azerbaijan that the people of Nagorno-Karabakh strongly rely on Armenia as the only guarantor of their survival and development. Let us be clear, there will be no more genocidal threat to Armenians, specifically in Nagorno-Karabakh.
I hope that Azerbaijan will approach the expression of will of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh in the upcoming state elections not as a threat but opportunity to engage with newly elected authorities. It is our view that the international community should continue to support the peace efforts of the Co-Chairmanship of the OSCE Minsk Group, namely France, Russia and the US, especially by sending clear message on inadmissibility of the use of force.
It is important that within the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairmanship the US, Russia and France closely cooperate with each other. This is good news both for our region and for the world as it indicates that great powers are able not merely to compete but also to cooperate with each other at least in one particular region of the world.
Unfortunately, not all regional players have been showing the same degree of responsibility. Turkey continues to be a source of instability and tension in our region. I can be critical on many issues of domestic and foreign policy, but I should acknowledge that the previous Governments of Armenia made very strong efforts to establish relations with Turkey both in the beginning of the 1990s and in 2008-2009.
They agreed to establish diplomatic relations with Turkey without preconditions despite the difficult and tragic past. However, these efforts remained unappreciated, rejected and even manipulated by Turkey, who signed but refused to ratify the Zurich Protocols.
Today, 104 years after the Armenia Genocide, Turkey continues its hostile policy towards the Armenians by closing its land borders, politically and militarily supporting Azerbaijan against Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh, and most appallingly, by justifying the Armenian Genocide. We are a people of the region and we have been living here from ancestral times, we survived the Genocide and finally we are building a democratic, peaceful and viable nation. This is reality that Turkey should accept by ceasing to be the eternal security threat to Armenia and the Armenian people.
The equal rights and self-determination of peoples are one of the principles of international law put forward by the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs for the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. When it comes to this principle, somehow there is a tendency to rightly emphasis self-determination and wrongly to forget about the equal rights of peoples. Peoples who live in one region side by side are destined to recognize each other as legitimate equals. This means rejection of any idea of domination, subjugation or destruction of other people.
New forms of dialogue, respect, reconciliation, and equality among people are needed in our region. Culture of dialogue, tolerance and compromise should prevail over all differences and against all odds in the South Caucasus.' -0-
