Serzh Sargsyan: New Dividing Lines In The Caucasus Are Dangerous

[Yervant1]

SERZH SARGSYAN: NEW DIVIDING LINES IN THE CAUCASUS ARE DANGEROUS

 

armradio.am

11.11.2008 15:33

 

The President of Armenia, Mr. Serzh Sargsyan, gave an interview to the

German Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. The full text of the interview

is presented below:

 

Question: Mr. President, last week in Moscow you came to an agreement

with the President of Azerbaijan on the settlement of the Karabakh

conflict, a conflict which has long kept strained the relations

between the two countries. How will it develop today?

 

Answer: It was important for us that we signed a document,

which rules out the military solution to the conflict. Sure,

this was just a declaration, while we would be very glad to have a

treaty. Nevertheless, I don't want to undermine the importance of the

document. I'm glad that we signed a document with Azerbaijan, which

accepts all principles of conflict resolution of international law,

and not only the principle of territorial integrity. I positively

assess the fact that despite the recent sharp criticism of the

effectiveness of the Minsk Group activity, the document emphasizes

the role of the Co-Chair countries - Russia, the United States and

France - as mediators.

 

Question: Are you ready to withdraw your troops from the seven regions

adjunct to Nagorno Karabakh as required?

 

Answer: The core issue of the conflict is the status of Nagorno

Karabakh.

 

Azerbaijan should recognize the right of the people of Nagorno

Karabakh to self-determination. The solution of this main issue may

be followed by the solution of other issues. For us the control of

those territories is not an end in itself. It is aimed at ensuring

the security of Karabakh. Today we need to negotiate the principles

of settlement, which may be followed by the main peace treaty. We

still have a long way to pass.

 

Question: You are from Karabakh. Can Karabakh remain as an autonomous

region within Azerbaijan?

 

Answer: The question is about creating conditions that would allow

ensuring the further safe development of the population. History has

shown that it is impossible within Azerbaijan. We have never thought

that Karabakh can remain within Azerbaijan in any status.

 

Question: You visited Brussels recently. Can the EU be useful in

solving the conflict?

 

Answer: Europe should clearly indicate if one of the parties deviates

from the way and distorts the peaceful nature of the process. Besides,

if any international organization stresses the importance of one

principle of conflict resolution, it encourages the actions of

that country in that direction and demonstrates a non-constructive

approach. The United States and several European countries applied

the principle of the right of peoples to self-determination in case

of Kosovo, but when Russia did the same, it was rejected by the United

States and Europe.

 

Question: But you have not recognized the independence of South

Ossetia and Abkhazia, either.

 

Answer: You are right. As it is known we have not recognized the

independence of Kosovo, either. We have no right to recognize the

independence of those countries until we recognize the independence

of Nagorno Karabakh. Our people will not understand the step. Now you

will ask me why, in that case, we do not recognize the independence

of Karabakh. We think that the recognition of independence is the

last step. We are not that strong to unilaterally recognize the

independence of Karabakh and consider the process completed.

 

Question: What were the geopolitical consequences of the Georgian

war for Armenia?

 

Answer: The events showed how vulnerable the region is. Georgia is

extremely important to us, since 70% of our trade passes through

that country.

 

Simultaneously, we are strategic partners with Russia. It was important

for us to coordinate these two responsibilities, which I think, we

managed to do. Georgia and Armenia have different approaches towards

different principled issues; however, we managed to avoid that all,

which could be viewed as hostility. And despite the numerous changes

in the region as a result of the war, I can say the Armenian-Georgian

and the Armenian-Russian relations did not suffers because of it.

 

Question: You are also a member of NATO's partnership program. Does

it mean that the lesson drawn from the war is that the Alliance should

stay away from the Caucasus?

 

Answer: I would not approve your choice of words. In that case the

development of our relations with NATO would be impossible. We consider

that the cooperation with the Alliance is a component of our security

system. On the other hand, we do not aspire to join NATO. Drawing

new dividing lines in the region could be very dangerous. This was

the lesson learnt from the Georgia war

 

Question: Should your neighbors suspend their efforts of joining NATO?

 

Answer: I cannot speak on behalf of other countries. Over the past

ten years we have been aspiring to implement a balanced policy that

would correspond to the interests of the United States, Russia and

NATO. Deriving benefits from the discrepancy of those forces could

be tempting, but at the same time, it is very dangerous.

 

Question: Recently you invited the Turkish President to Armenia to

watch a football match. The whole world welcomed your initiative. Today

the Turks propose establishing a commission of historians to probe

into the Armenian Genocide of 1915. Would it be beneficial?

 

Answer: I see absolutely no necessity of it. We do not think

that we would manage to reach something this way. We wish to

establish diplomatic relations between the two countries without

any preconditions, open the border. Then we will be able to solve

the questions between the neighbor countries on the level of an

intergovernmental process. We do not view the recognition of the

Armenian Genocide by Turkey as precondition for the establishment

of relations. We want it, but not at any cost. European countries

did not establish commissions of historians for developing normal

relations. Such a step would mean an attempt to mislead the

international community.

 

Question: Could Armenia become a transit energy route to Europe

like Georgia?

 

Answer: I don't think we should aspire to substitute someone. But

it's certain that we want to have developed infrastructures, create

alternative routes of supply. We would like our communication

with Azerbaijan and Turkey to be reopened. We want to construct a

north-south railway, which will later link Armenia to Iran. The more

developed and diverse our infrastructures are, the more attractive

and safer Armenia will be.

 

 

 

[Nané]

Question: Recently you invited the Turkish President to Armenia to

watch a football match. The whole world welcomed your initiative. Today

the Turks propose establishing a commission of historians to probe

into the Armenian Genocide of 1915. Would it be beneficial?

 

Answer: I see absolutely no necessity of it. We do not think

that we would manage to reach something this way. We wish to

establish diplomatic relations between the two countries without

any preconditions, open the border. Then we will be able to solve

the questions between the neighbor countries on the level of an

intergovernmental process. We do not view the recognition of the

Armenian Genocide by Turkey as precondition for the establishment

of relations. We want it, but not at any cost.

 

Wow, is his wording becoming more and more lenient with time or is it just my interpretation?

[Yervant1]

Wow, is his wording becoming more and more lenient with time or is it just my interpretation?

He is talking about the relations, that he wants it but not at any cost meaning not at the cost of the Genocide denial.

This is how I understood it.

[Nané]

He is talking about the relations, that he wants it but not at any cost meaning not at the cost of the Genocide denial.

This is how I understood it.

 

 

This is how I undestood it "We want [Genocide recognition], but not at any cost."

[Yervant1]

This is how I undestood it "We want [Genocide recognition], but not at any cost."

Here is a part of an article that Aratta posted in another thread.

 

http://hyeforum.com/index.php?showtopic=17...st&p=251650

 

Earlier on Monday, Armenian President Serzh Sarkisian described Turkey's proposal to form a commission of historians to investigate the veracity of the Armenian Genocide as unnecessary.

 

"It [the commission] is absolutely not necessary. We do not think that anything can be achieved with it. We want to establish diplomatic relations between the two countries, open the borders without any preconditions; afterward, through an intergovernmental process, we can discuss all issues pertaining to the neighboring countries. We do not consider the recognition of the Genocide by Turkey as a precondition to establish relations. We desire the latter, but not at any cost. In the past the European countries too have not established historical commissions in order to develop normal relations. Such an initiative could also mean an attempt to mislead the international public, especially when it is a years-long process," Sarkisian said said in an interview published Monday in the German Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung daily.

[Nané]

Here is a part of an article that Aratta posted in another thread.

 

http://hyeforum.com/index.php?showtopic=17...st&p=251650

 

Earlier on Monday, Armenian President Serzh Sarkisian described Turkey's proposal to form a commission of historians to investigate the veracity of the Armenian Genocide as unnecessary.

 

"It [the commission] is absolutely not necessary. We do not think that anything can be achieved with it. We want to establish diplomatic relations between the two countries, open the borders without any preconditions; afterward, through an intergovernmental process, we can discuss all issues pertaining to the neighboring countries. We do not consider the recognition of the Genocide by Turkey as a precondition to establish relations. We desire the latter, but not at any cost. In the past the European countries too have not established historical commissions in order to develop normal relations. Such an initiative could also mean an attempt to mislead the international public, especially when it is a years-long process," Sarkisian said said in an interview published Monday in the German Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung daily.

 

OK. That makes more sense. Thank you.

[Yervant1]

SARGSYAN OPPOSES ONE-SIDED CONCESSIONS

 

TRT

Nov 17 2008

Turkey

 

Armenian president touched on Karabakh issue.

 

Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan said one-sided concession is out

of question regarding the Karabakh issue with Azerbaijan.

 

Speaking to Armenian state channel, Sargsyan described the comments

of some political powers in the country as distorting the truth.

 

The Armenian leader said the issue could only be solved if the Armenian

people in Karabakh are given the right to determine their own future.

 

Sargsyan further underlined that they will not make any concessions

on the land frontier between Armenia and Upper Karabakh and an

international guarantee over Karabakh people.

 

Upon a question regarding the agreement signed with Azerbaijani

President Ä°lham Aliyev under the host of Russian President Dimitri

Medvedev on November 2 in Moscow, Sargsyan said this was the only

document in which Azerbaijan undertook some responsibility for the

solution of the issue through political negotiations.

 

Claiming that the occupier administration in Karabakh should also

be a party in negotiations, Sargsyan said the solution could not be

reached otherwise.

 

 

[Yervant1]

Commentary

Obama's Election Forces Turkey

To Rethink its Demands from Armenia

 

By Harut Sassounian

Publisher, The California Courier

Turkey has blockaded Armenia for the last 15 years with the vain hope that

this would force Armenian leaders to make concessions to Ankara on several

fronts: Abandon the pursuit of genocide recognition, acknowledge Turkey's

territorial integrity, and accept Azerbaijan's jurisdiction over Artsakh (Karabagh).

In return, Turkey offered to lift the blockade and establish diplomatic

relations with Armenia.

Armenia steadfastly rejected these unacceptable Turkish demands, despite the

economic hardships its people endured as a result of the joint blockades

imposed by Turkey and Azerbaijan.

Frustrated with the growing number of countries acknowledging the Armenian

Genocide in recent years, the Turkish government embarked on a new scheme to

try and split Armenia from the Diaspora, hoping to undermine their joint efforts

for the international acknowledgment of the Armenian Genocide.

In recent months, because of the convergence of several factors -- internal

turmoil in Armenia following the presidential elections and increasing

pressure on Yerevan by Western countries and Russia to reconcile with Turkey --

Armenia's newly elected President offered to accept the Turkish proposal to

establish a joint historical commission on the Genocide, but only after Turkey would

lift its blockade and establish diplomatic relations with Yerevan.

Shortly after Pres. Serzh Sargsyan's declaration, the Russian-Georgian war

briefly disrupted the transport of goods between Black Sea ports and Armenia,

making the Armenian government more eager to seek opening of the Turkish

border, which would serve as an alternate supply route. Moreover, Armenia expressed

an interest in joining the "Caucasus Stability and Cooperation Platform,"

which was proposed by Pres. Abdullah Gul ostensibly to create a closer

relationship between Russia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia and Turkey. Pres. Gul's

initiative would indirectly help Armenia to counter Azerbaijan's attempts to isolate

and exclude Yerevan from all regional projects.

Turkey enthusiastically welcomed Armenia's cooperative gestures. As a

result, Pres. Gul accepted Pres. Sargsyan's invitation to come to Yerevan - the

first such visit by a Turkish leader - to watch a soccer match between the

national teams of the two countries. The visit brought worldwide accolades to the

Turkish president and raised Turkey's international stature at a time when the

country was desperately seeking the votes of U.N. members to win a coveted

Security Council seat.

Soon however, the Turkish scheme hit a series of snags. Armenia and Turkey

could not agree on the details -- subject matter, composition, and timing -- of

the proposed joint historical commission. Turkey, on the other hand, was in a

rush to set up the commission before the start of Barack Obama's presidency

on January 20, 2009, in order to discourage the incoming U.S. administration

from considering the acknowledgment of the Armenian Genocide.

Meanwhile, Armenian officials were reluctant to take action on the proposed

commission, until Turkey opened the border first and established diplomatic

relations with Armenia. The Turkish government apparently underestimated the

resolve of Armenia's leaders to stick by these two preconditions and misjudged

their determination to withstand Western pressures on this issue.

After these misjudgments, the Turks made matters worse by insisting that

Armenia agree to return to Azerbaijan a portion of the territories bordering

Artsakh, before Ankara would agree to lift the blockade. This unacceptable

condition threw out of the window any possibility of rapprochement between the two

countries in the immediate future.

Complicating matters further, two new incidents last week proved that

Turkish attempts to drive a wedge between Armenia and the Diaspora on the genocide

issue had failed. Pres. Sargsyan, in an interview with the German newspaper

Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, agreed with Diaspora leaders that the joint

historical commission was "absolutely unnecessary." He stated: "We do not think

that anything can be achieved by it. We want to establish diplomatic relations

between the two countries, open the borders without any preconditions, and

afterwards, through an intergovernmental process, we can discuss all issues

pertaining to the neighboring countries. We do not consider the recognition of the

Genocide by Turkey as a precondition to establishing relations. We desire the

latter, but not at any cost. In the past, European countries too did not

establish historical commissions in order to develop normal relations. Such an

initiative could also mean an attempt to mislead the international public,

especially when it is a multi-year process."

In another setback, the Turkish newspaper Zaman alleged that Armenia's

Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian had questioned the value of more countries

recognizing the Armenian Genocide, prompting him to issue a statement refuting the

Turkish report. "The recent news by the Turkish press ascribed to Armenian

officials about the international recognition of the Armenian Genocide is

distorted and presented upside down. I have stated many times and I want to repeat

again that Armenian officials have never expressed and will never express an

idea in favor of suspension of the process of international recognition of the

Armenian genocide. Moreover, Armenia cannot tolerate any expression of Armenian

Genocide denial," Mr. Nalbandian stated.

Significantly, these setbacks occurred at a time when Turkey's leaders are

expressing great anxiety over promises made by President-elect Obama to

recognize the Armenian Genocide. In fact, during his last week's trip to the United

States, Prime Minister Recep Erdogan repeatedly expressed his serious concern

about Mr. Obama's announced intentions on the genocide. In fact, Turkish and

American officials have advised Mr. Erdogan that Pres. Obama would most probably

acknowledge the Armenian Genocide and the Congress could pass a resolution on

this issue, unless Turkey immediately takes the bold step of lifting the

blockade and establishing diplomatic relations with Armenia.

Currently, the Turkish Prime Minister is in the process of gauging the

intentions of President-elect Obama on the Armenian Genocide by communicating with

his circle of close advisors. Should he determine that Mr. Obama is intent on

carrying out his campaign promises on this issue, Mr. Erdogan could then

quickly open the border and establish diplomatic relations with Armenia, in order

to preempt any official action by the U.S. President and/or the Congress.

However, should Mr. Erdogan discover that Pres. Obama is hesitant on keeping his

campaign promises, the Turkish side would then continue making stiff demands

from Armenia.

Under these circumstances, Armenia's leaders are in no particular rush. They

can patiently wait until they see what position the next U.S. President would

be taking on the Armenian Genocide. In any case, the Armenian side has

nothing to lose by waiting. On the contrary, by biding its time, the Armenian

government could well avoid making concessions on Artsakh and refuse to establish

the "unnecessary" historical commission, while getting Turkey to lift the

blockade.