Yervant1 Posted December 11, 2024 Report Share Posted December 11, 2024 Azatutyun.am Fresh Turkish-Armenian Talks Revealed Դեկտեմբեր 10, 2024 Shoghik Galstian Armenia - The newly renovated Margara border crossing with Turkey, July 30, 2024. Turkish and Armenian officials met last month to explore the possibility of restoring a rail link between their countries as part of attempts to normalize bilateral relations, Armenia’s deputy parliament speaker Ruben Rubinian said on Tuesday. Rubinian told RFE/RL’s Armenian Service that the meeting took place on the Armenian-Turkish border “in a positive and constructive atmosphere.” It focused on “technical requirements” for restoring the railway that has not functioned since 1993, he said without giving details. Neither Ankara nor Yerevan had reported the meeting earlier. Negotiators from the two sides led by Rubinian and Turkish diplomat Serdar Kilic agreed to “assess” the feasibility of restoring the rail link when they met on the border in July. They also “reconfirmed the agreements reached at their previous meetings,” according to identical Turkish and Armenia readouts of that meeting. One of those agreements reached in July 2022 called for the opening of the border for Armenian and Turkish diplomatic passport holders as well as citizens of third countries. The Turkish side remains reluctant to do that. Ankara has for decades made the opening of the Turkish-Armenian border and establishment of diplomatic relations with Yerevan conditional on a resolution of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict acceptable to Azerbaijan. Turkish leaders stuck to this condition even after the start of normalization talks with the current Armenian government in early 2022. Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan expressed in October “cautious optimism” about prospects for the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations. He expressed hope that the two neighboring nations will soon boast “new tangible achievements” in the normalization process. On Sunday, the chairman of the Turkish parliament committee on foreign relations, Fuat Oktay, added his voice to Baku’s demands for a change of Armenia’s constitution and the opening of a land corridor that would connect Azerbaijan to its Nakhichevan exclave as well as Turkey through a strategic Armenian region. Ruben Safrastian, a leading Armenian expert on Turkey, said on Tuesday that Ankara would take real steps to normalize relations with Yerevan only after the signing of an Armenian-Azerbaijani treaty. Even in that case, he said, the Turks would link a full normalization to the opening of the “Zangezur corridor” sought by Baku. https://www.azatutyun.am/a/33235020.html?fbclid=IwY2xjawHGIQVleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHaC3xYLgsXwAk_gl7I2SL0AsnuvFxe-f50JsvIdpMlDCb5C4wc1TtPchUw_aem_gOyBdrzYDqHDFPo620Ppng Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yervant1 Posted December 13, 2024 Report Share Posted December 13, 2024 Armenpress.am Military14:36, 12 December 2024 2025 Armenia-Italy Defense Cooperation Plan signed in Yerevan Read the article in: العربيةEspañolفارسیFrançaisՀայերենქართულიРусский简体中文 1 minute read YEREVAN, DECEMBER 12, ARMENPRESS. The regular Armenia-Italy defense consultations were held Thursday in Yerevan, led by Armenian Ministry of Defense Head of the Department of Defense Policy and International Cooperation Levon Ayvazyan and Italian Armed Forces General Staff Head of International Cooperation Department Colonel Mattia Zuzzi. The 2024 cooperation and next year’s actions were discussed. The sides lauded the enhancing course of cooperation. Ayvazyan presented to his partners the ongoing military reforms. The sides exchanged ideas around regional and international issues. As a result of the consultations, the sides signed the 2025 Armenia-Italy Defense Cooperation Plan, which encompasses several areas, such as exchange of experience, training and military education. Published by Armenpress, original at https://armenpress.am/en/article/1207297?fbclid=IwY2xjawHIgudleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHQRlJS8US8nn-K95eL_n70gfTjuSFS4iRaIE9Z6QFHeZndiR_IsHIho1VQ_aem_Fs67UQqepMfwmh2emkRZeg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yervant1 Posted December 14, 2024 Report Share Posted December 14, 2024 Dec 13 2024 India, Iran, and Armenia Working to Connect with Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey to Boost Tourism India, Iran, and Armenia convened in New Delhi for the second round of trilateral consultations, reaffirming their commitment to enhancing connectivity, trade, tourism, and cultural exchanges. Building upon the outcomes of their previous meeting in Yerevan in April 2023, the three nations focused on advancing regional cooperation and fostering people-to-people ties. The discussions underscored the importance of infrastructure projects, multilateral engagement, and shared cultural initiatives to strengthen the economic and cultural bonds between the participating countries. Central to these deliberations was the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC) and the pivotal role of Chabahar Port in connecting the region. Key Outcomes of the Consultations 1. Focus on Connectivity Initiatives The trilateral consultations emphasized the need to enhance connectivity through: International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC): The INSTC remains a key initiative for improving regional trade routes, reducing shipping costs, and boosting economic ties among participating nations. Chabahar Port: As a strategic gateway, Chabahar Port plays a vital role in facilitating access to Central Asia and the Caucasus, supporting both trade and tourism development. 2. Armenia’s Crossroads of Peace Project The Armenian delegation highlighted its Crossroads of Peace project, a transport initiative aimed at fostering connectivity between Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Iran, and Turkey. This project seeks to: Strengthen regional ties through improved transportation networks. Promote peace and stability by enhancing economic interdependence among neighboring countries. 3. Tourism and Cultural Exchanges Tourism and cultural exchanges were at the forefront of discussions, with all three nations recognizing the potential of their shared history and cultural heritage to boost regional tourism. Initiatives discussed included: Joint Tourism Campaigns: Promoting shared itineraries that include historical sites, cultural events, and eco-tourism destinations across the three countries. Heritage Preservation: Collaborative efforts to safeguard cultural landmarks and promote them as tourism attractions. People-to-People Ties: Strengthening connections through cultural events, educational exchanges, and collaborative arts projects. 4. Trade and Economic Growth The trilateral meeting also explored strategies to: Increase Trade Volume: Leverage the INSTC and Chabahar Port to boost exports and imports between the three nations. Facilitate Investments: Encourage private-sector participation in regional infrastructure and tourism projects. Streamline Customs Procedures: Reduce bureaucratic barriers to facilitate smoother trade flows. Delegations and Leadership The Indian delegation was led by J.P. Singh, Joint Secretary at the Ministry of External Affairs. Hashem Ashjaآ’ Zadeh, Director General of South Asia Division in Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, represented Iran, while Anahit Karapetyan, Head of Asia-Pacific Department in Armenia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, led the Armenian delegation. The discussions reflected a shared commitment to advancing regional collaboration under the trilateral format. The three sides agreed to convene the next round of consultations in Iran, underscoring their intention to maintain momentum in these efforts. Significance of Chabahar Port Chabahar Port emerged as a focal point during the consultations. As a strategic hub for regional trade and connectivity, it offers: Access to Central Asia: Connecting Indian goods to Central Asian markets through a shorter and more efficient route. Support for Afghanistan: Providing an alternative trade route that bypasses Pakistan, facilitating the flow of goods to and from Afghanistan. Enhanced Tourism Potential: The port serves as a gateway for cruise tourism and eco-tourism in the region. The port’s development is integral to strengthening the INSTC and expanding its role in global trade networks. Armenia’s Crossroads of Peace Initiative Armenia’s Crossroads of Peace transport project was another key highlight of the consultations. This initiative seeks to: Connect Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Iran, and Turkey through integrated transport networks. Promote economic collaboration and reduce regional tensions by fostering shared infrastructure. Create opportunities for tourism by connecting diverse cultural and natural attractions in the region. This ambitious project aligns with the broader goals of the trilateral consultations, offering new avenues for connectivity and cooperation. Tourism Development and Cultural Collaboration Tourism was recognized as a vital area for collaboration, with each nation showcasing its unique offerings: India: The rich cultural and historical heritage of India, including its UNESCO World Heritage Sites, remains a significant draw for international tourists. Iran: With its ancient history, vibrant bazaars, and breathtaking landscapes, Iran has tremendous potential to attract travelers from across the globe. Armenia: Known for its monasteries, mountains, and rich traditions, Armenia’s tourism sector is poised for growth, particularly through regional partnerships. Proposed Initiatives Cultural Festivals: Jointly hosted events celebrating the art, music, and cuisine of the three countries. Tourism Infrastructure: Collaborative development of hotels, transportation, and guided tours to cater to international travelers. Marketing Campaigns: Promoting the region as a cohesive travel destination under a shared branding strategy. Commitment to Continued Collaboration The consultations concluded with a reaffirmation of the participating nations’ commitment to strengthening their partnership. The delegates agreed to: Host the Next Round in Iran: The next trilateral consultations will be held at a mutually agreed date, continuing the dialogue on connectivity, trade, and cultural exchange. Expand Multilateral Engagements: Enhance cooperation in multilateral fora to address shared challenges and opportunities. Prioritize Regional Stability: Use initiatives like the INSTC and Crossroads of Peace to foster economic and political stability in the region. Challenges and Opportunities Challenges Geopolitical Tensions: Regional disputes, particularly between Armenia and Azerbaijan, pose challenges to seamless connectivity projects. Infrastructure Gaps: Significant investments are required to upgrade transport and tourism infrastructure. Cultural Sensitivities: Balancing diverse cultural values while promoting unified tourism initiatives. Opportunities Economic Growth: Enhanced connectivity can unlock trade potential, boosting GDPs across the region. Tourism Synergies: Joint marketing and infrastructure development can position the region as a unique destination. Geostrategic Importance: Initiatives like the INSTC strengthen the region’s role in global trade networks. The India-Iran-Armenia Trilateral Consultations represent a significant step toward enhancing connectivity, trade, tourism, and cultural exchanges among the three nations. With strategic projects like Chabahar Port and Crossroads of Peace, the consultations highlight the potential for regional cooperation to drive economic growth and foster stronger ties. As the three nations prepare for the next round of consultations in Iran, the shared vision of building a more connected and prosperous region remains at the forefront of their efforts. These initiatives promise to transform the region into a hub for trade, tourism, and cultural collaboration, offering immense opportunities for all stakeholders involved. https://www.travelandtourworld.com/news/article/india-iran-and-armenia-working-to-connect-with-azerbaijan-georgia-and-turkey-to-boost-tourism/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yervant1 Posted December 17, 2024 Report Share Posted December 17, 2024 CAPX Dec 16 2024 We must not allow Armenia to become another Syria By Dr David A Grigorian The events of the past week have shown what non-state actors, supported by aggressive states, can do. The terrorist group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and a plethora of Turkish-backed militias shocked the world by taking over Syria’s largest cities in a matter of days and forcing its dictator, Bashar al-Assad, to flee. There is no love lost between al-Assad and his people, or the international community for that matter. His bloody crackdown on opposition protests have led to the deaths of an estimated 500,000 civilians, while millions more left the country during more intense stages of Syria’s civil war and now live in refugee camps across the region. Yet, those who have just come to replace him are no saints either. They are a mosaic of groups, many of which were battle-hardened by fighting the US and coalition forces in Iraq and Syria until a few years ago. Some of whom may have been responsible for killings of tens of thousands of civilians and for the genocide of Yezidis and women in particular. By any measure, this is not an ideal scenario. Any reasonable human being should squirm at the mere thought of what this could mean for millions of those who remain trapped in the country, especially the religious and ethnic minorities. Syria falling into an abyss of jihadist-control mayhem will inevitably mean more deaths and further destruction of the nation’s ancient archaeological sites. However, if there is any bright light in all of this doom and gloom, it is the possible independence of the Kurdish-controlled areas in the North-East of Syria. The Kurds – the largest stateless people on earth – already have de jure autonomy in Iraq, in the form of Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) and have been governing themselves as a de facto state within Syria following the breakup of the civil war there. The world’s powers agreed to grant the Kurds that vision as part of the Treaty of Sevres in 1920, by allotting a significant portion of the South-East of what is today’s Turkey as a Kurdish autonomous state. Yet the Kurds have been abandoned then and several times since. This could be the right time to dust off that vision and go back to a more just and sustainable regional architecture. Another nation has been left hanging by the international community. Armenia was promised an independent state, encompassing large chunks of historic Armenia, as part of the Treaty of Sevres and the US President Woodrow Wilson Arbitral Award. But the victorious allies allowed Turkey’s Ataturk and Soviet Russia’s Lenin to partition Armenia following an occupation by the Red Army in late 1920. Soon after that, the Western world forgot about its commitments to Armenia as it got busy fighting Nazi Germany and needed the Soviet Union to help out. Unfortunately, today a series of wars in the region have once again diverted the attention of the global community from what is taking place in Armenia. Armenia is about to be overrun by an Azerbaijan that make no secret of its territorial ambitions and calls parts of Armenia ‘Western Azerbaijan’. It attacked Armenian-controlled Nagorno-Karabakh in 2020 and forced 120,000 of its citizens to flee in 2023, both results of massive military operations. Between 1,500-2,000 Syrian opposition fighters – the same ones that sent al-Assad packing just days ago – took part in the (Russia- and Turkey-approved) Azerbaijani aggression of 2020, where international observers documented countless human rights violations and war crimes. The people of Armenia do not want to put up with the consequences of another episode of Azerbaijani aggression, this time in Armenia proper. The world should do all in its power to prevent the same malign actors returning to destroy what is left of the country. However, there is an important wrinkle that the liberal elites in Western countries conveniently ignore, courtesy of Vladimir Putin’s propaganda of recent years. Armenia has a leadership that will be happy to lose the war as soon as it starts. This is what has happened since 2020, every time Azerbaijan attacked and claimed more of Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh. Placed in power by Russia and acquiescing to Turkey as a source for external support for him to remain in power (his domestic approval rating is in single digits, if one factors out government and security apparatus), Armenia’s Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has destroyed the Armenian army and its defences. Recent propaganda by the regime that defence acquisitions have been made from India and France are to be taken with a pinch of salt. The plan that Azerbaijan has been threatening Armenia with for a while now will in all likelihood involve attacking Armenia’s capital Yerevan in a blitzkrieg. Sadly, nothing stands in the way of that in Armenia. Pashinyan will not order the remnants of his army to fight back. Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev has undoubtedly been emboldened by the success of his rebel allies in Syria. Western powers must help ensure that his aggression is contained, to prevent Armenia from becoming another Syria. The way to do this is to support those leaders in Armenia that would take matters into their own hands and push back against the regional bullies by effective use of strategic deterrence and defence partnership. The alternative is chaos. https://capx.co/we-must-not-allow-armenia-to-become-another-syria/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yervant1 Posted December 19, 2024 Report Share Posted December 19, 2024 Asbarez.com So-Called ‘Zangezur Corridor’ is a Red Line for Yerevan by Asbarez Staff December 18, 2024 in Armenia, Artsakh, Featured Story, Latest, News, Top Stories A military post along the Armenia-Azerbaijan border Azerbaijan’s scheme to connect to Nakhichevan via a land “corridor” through Armenia is a red line for Yerevan “that cannot be crossed.” “There are red line which simply cannot be crossed,” Deputy Prime Minister Mher Grigoryan told journalists on Wednesday, referring to the Azerbaijani scheme, which is commonly known as the “Zangezur Corridor.” “The Republic of Armenia is willing and ready to unblock the communications under very simple, but dogmatic rules – sovereignty and equality jurisdiction,” Grigoryan said, emphasizing that there will be no “Zangezur Corridor.” Meanwhile, Turkey’s parliament speaker Numan Kutulmus said his country supports Azerbaijan “in every way” in the “Zangezur Corridor” issue, expressing hope that the scheme will come to fruition soon. Kurtulmus said the “corridor” will not only benefit Turkey and Azerbaijan, but also all the countries in the region. The Turkish parliament speaker said he hopes that the”Zangezur corridor” will become “a corridor of peace.” https://asbarez.com/so-called-zangezur-corridor-is-a-red-line-for-yerevan/?fbclid=IwY2xjawHQqwxleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHQeIytxRbHVUoRVlBITl5yMmom9M6M2waJJu6kNE1zPO0Je4WhqqLpEqBQ_aem_BQi_tuZ2bYKsbsbcu50_Ag Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yervant1 Posted December 20, 2024 Report Share Posted December 20, 2024 Armenpress.am Politics19:00, 19 December 2024 If Azerbaijan doesn’t have intentions to attack Armenia the likelihood of escalation in the region is zero – PM Pashinyan responds to Aliyev Read the article in: العربيةEspañolفارسیFrançaisՀայերենქართულიРусскийTürkçe简体中文 YEREVAN, DECEMBER 19, ARMENPRESS. Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan has given an interview to Armenpress. Below is the Q&A. Armenpress: Mr. Prime Minister, in an interview with a Russian media outlet, the Azerbaijani President confirmed that 15 of the 17 articles of the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace treaty have been agreed upon, and one of the unresolved issues pertains to the non-deployment of third countries’ forces along the border, and the other to the withdrawal of lawsuits against each other in international courts. What is the stance of the Republic of Armenia in this regard? Prime Minister Pashinyan: We continue to be constructively engaged in the discussions around the peace treaty with Azerbaijan, and we have conveyed proposals on the two outstanding articles of the peace treaty to Azerbaijan for more than a month now, and we haven’t yet had a response. We propose the article about the non-deployment of the forces of third countries to cover the delimitated parts of the Armenia-Azerbaijan border, and this is logical, because in those parts the risk of escalation is significantly decreasing if not minimizing. Therefore, after the complete delimitation, there won’t be the need for the presence of a third force in any part of the Armenia-Azerbaijan border, and the Republic of Armenia is proposing this logic. Regarding the withdrawal of lawsuits filed against each other, when a peace treaty is signed this is logical, thus, the idea is acceptable for us. There are two nuances here: one of them is that there must be an understandable prospect for bilaterally resolving the individual humanitarian issues currently under discussion in international courts, and secondly, it must be clear that after withdrawing the disputes in international platforms regarding other issues the sides shall not put forward the same issues in the bilateral relations agenda and make them a source of lasting escalations. Armenpress: What do you mean? Prime Minister Pashinyan: I mean that not only shall we abandon the resolution of disputes in international courts, but the disputes themselves. We are ready to take that path. At this phase we are searching for solutions also in terms of individual humanitarian matters. Armenpress: In the same interview, the Azerbaijani President once again voiced the matter of the change of Armenian Constitution, once again claiming that it contains territorial demands against Azerbaijan. Prime Minister Pashinyan: I’ve had several occasions to address that topic, and I find it necessary to emphasize that if this is a sincere concern expressed by Azerbaijan, all grounds exist to consider these concerns dispelled. Why? Because the allegations that the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia contains territorial demands against Azerbaijan are based on the argument that the preamble of our Constitution contains a general reference to the Declaration of Independence, which in turn mentions Nagorno-Karabakh. In its 26 September 2024 ruling, the Constitutional Court of Armenia recorded that the reference to the Declaration of Independence in the preamble of the Constitution relates exclusively to those articles of the declaration that have gained literal stipulation in the articles of the Constitution. There is neither direct nor indirect mention of Nagorno-Karabakh in any article of the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia. If we were to accept the content of the Constitution the way Azerbaijan interprets it, then a question would arise, why didn’t Karabakh participate in the 1995 Constitutional Referendum, why didn’t polling stations open there and why didn’t the people vote on the Constitution. The same can be said about the subsequent presidential and parliamentary elections in Armenia. Besides, if the Azerbaijani interpretation of the Armenian Constitution were to be accurate, then the recognition of our brothers and sisters from Karabakh as refugees by Armenia would have been impossible. Armenpress: You had said that Armenia has concerns that the Constitution of Azerbaijan itself contains territorial demands against Armenia. Prime Minister Pashinyan: Indeed, and this concern is based on the fact that the preamble of the Azerbaijani Constitution contains a reference to the Constitutional Act adopted by the Azerbaijani Parliament on 18 October 1991. In turn, the Constitutional Act refers to the Declaration of Independence of the First Republic of Azerbaijan adopted on 28 May 1918, which records that the First Republic of Azerbaijan includes Eastern and Southern Transcaucasia. In November 1919, the Republic of Azerbaijan presented to the Entente its administrative map, according to which, Azerbaijan included the entirety of the provinces of Syunik and Vayots Dzor of Armenia, as well as parts of the provinces of Ararat, Armavir, Gegharkunik, Tavush, Lori and Shirak of Armenia, some 60 percent of the territory of the Republic of Armenia. Thus, the Constitution of Azerbaijan contains territorial demands against the Republic of Armenia. But we are not raising an issue of changing the Constitution of Azerbaijan for two reasons, first of all such an issue would bring the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace process into a deadlock, and secondly, the agreed-upon part of the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace treaty contains an article which stipulates that the parties cannot refer to their internal legislation to justify the failure of implementation of the peace treaty. Another article of the agreed-upon part of the peace treaty says that the parties recognize each other’s territorial integrity, do not have territorial demands against each other and are bound to not make such demands in the future. Armenpress: You mean that the concerns about the Constitution must not be the reason for not signing the peace treaty, but that the signing of the peace treaty itself will dispel these concerns? Prime Minister Pashinyan: Definitely. And if we approach the matter from the viewpoint of the legislation of the Republic of Armenia, by our laws the peace treaty must be ratified in the National Assembly after the signing. Before that, the government must submit the treaty to the Constitutional Court to verify its compliance with the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia. If the Constitutional Court decides that the text of the peace treaty does not comply with the Constitution, although such a development is less likely after the 26 September 2024 decision, it would turn out that Azerbaijan’s arguments in this matter were correct and Armenia would have to make a choice between some articles of the Constitution and the peace treaty. But if the Constitutional Court decided that the text of the peace treaty complies with the Constitution of Armenia, it will pass the ratification process in our parliament. And according to paragraph 3 of article 5 of the Armenian Constitution, in case of conflict between the norms of international treaties ratified by the Republic of Armenia and those of laws, the norms of international treaties shall apply. Thus, after ratification in parliament, the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace treaty will gain superior legal force against laws and other normative legal acts of Armenia, and the topic of territorial demands will be closed forever. The same would happen in Azerbaijan. Meaning, it is the signing of the peace treaty that will practically dispel the concerns of both Armenia and Azerbaijan, including in relation to the constitutions. Armenpress: And what is Armenia's stance over the idea to disband the OSCE Minsk Group? Prime Minister Pashinyan: Constructive. We understand the stance that if there is no conflict what's the meaning of the existence of a format dealing with the conflict resolution. But we also want to be convinced that Azerbaijan is approaching this issue in this same logic, and for instance, that its motive under developing the narrative of the so-called Western Azerbaijan isn't about engaging in aggressive policy against the territory of the Republic of Armenia. Armenpress: But Azerbaijan says that by doing so it is not making any territorial demands against Armenia, and that it is a matter of the refugees' right to return and is calling upon the government of Armenia to respond to this right. Prime Minister Pashinyan: It is obvious that official Baku, with its narrative of the so-called Western Azerbaijan, wants to materialize its territorial demands against the Republic of Armenia, which, as I showed above, is recorded in Azerbaijan’s constitution. If that’s not the case, and if we are wrong in our perceptions, then by saying Western Azerbaijan one must understand the regions of Gazakh, Tovuz, Aghstafa, Gadabay, Dashkesan, Kelbajar, Lachin, Kubatlu and Zangelan of the Republic of Azerbaijan. Therefore, the return of the people there is the internal matter of Azerbaijan, and the government of Armenia has nothing to do or discuss here, besides the matters that it is already discussing with Azerbaijan. I mean the establishment of normal relations that would ensure, among others, the security of Azerbaijan’s western and Armenia’s eastern borders. Armenpress: Azerbaijan is accusing Armenia of acquiring non-defensive weapons and says that Armenia will not withstand an arms race with it. Prime Minister Pashinyan: Armenia is not engaged in an arms race with any country, we are acquiring armaments exclusively for defending Armenia’s borders and territorial integrity, meaning for defensive goals, and our goals are transparent. We are told that defensive weapons must be bought for defensive purposes. But it is impossible to organize defense only with defensive weapons. For instance, if Armenia were to have highly modern anti-air and electronic warfare measures, how would it defend itself in case of a land attack? Of course with artillery, of course with missiles, of course with other strike measures. Azerbaijan is also acquiring non-defensive weapons, does it mean that they are engaged in revanchist policy? Armenpress: Azerbaijan is overall attempting to make the arms acquisition of Armenia a topic on the agenda. Prime Minister Pashinyan: According to all international norms, the Republic of Armenia has the right to have armed forces and an obligation to protect its own citizens, including from possible foreign threats. The army reforms are our legitimate right. Is this a threat for Azerbaijan? No. Because we have clearly recognized and recognize the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Azerbaijan in the territory of the Soviet Azerbaijan and we expect that Azerbaijan, like us, without leaving room for misinterpretations, will recognize the territorial integrity of the Republic of Armenia, in accordance with our agreements, and will refrain from the policy of threats. Threatening statements are made from Azerbaijan to the Republic of Armenia practically every day. In such conditions our reaction even gets internal criticism, because we say that we don’t even have an objective to militarily return the over 200 square kilometers of our sovereign territory that is currently under occupation, because the institutional solutions reached in the delimitation issue enable us to resolve this issue in a peaceful, negotiated way. In this context we even offered Azerbaijan to create a bilateral mechanism of mutual arms control. But Azerbaijan hasn’t responded so far, while the difference of the military budgets of Armenia and Azerbaijan is threefold, in Azerbaijan’s favor. Accusing us of acquiring armaments in such conditions is not fair, to say the least. Armenpress: And how would you assess the risk of renewed escalation in the region? Prime Minister Pashinyan: I can guarantee that Armenia has no intention, goals or plans to attack or engage in any provocative actions against Azerbaijan, and that it will not take that path. If Azerbaijan also doesn’t have intentions to attack Armenia, then the likelihood of escalation in the region is zero. Mr. Prime Minister, will the delimitation process go on? If yes, in which section? Prime Minister Pashinyan: The regulations of the delimitation commissions are ratified in both Armenia and Azerbaijan, which means that the delimitation process must continue. I think the delimitation commissions will meet soon to discuss in which section the delimitation shall continue. We are ready for constructive work in this matter as well. Armenpress: And what about the issue of regional connections. Azerbaijan continues to develop its narrative of a so-called corridor. Prime Minister Pashinyan: We assess that we have found a solution on how to reopen railway connection for it to be fully acceptable for both Armenia and Azerbaijan. And we have conveyed the offer of this solution in a written form to Azerbaijan and we are waiting for their positive response. When this reaction happens, it will be necessary to swiftly sign an agreement and start the construction of the railway. Published by Armenpress, original at https://armenpress.am/en/article/1207904?fbclid=IwY2xjawHRteNleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHStF6-Q7JoGhBjLJWjKlXjAi_tYISkfd4Qfku9manUdnpOkGVbMmXLyhSA_aem_FS-iFyjuu4IDL9_-nBvmHA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MosJan Posted December 20, 2024 Author Report Share Posted December 20, 2024 🥵 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yervant1 Posted December 22, 2024 Report Share Posted December 22, 2024 commonspace.eu Dec 21 2204 Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan discusses the prospects of a peace treaty with Azerbaijan In an interview with Armenpress Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan discussed a number of critical aspects of the pending peace treaty with Azerbaijan. In his view, the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace treaty would gain superior legal force over Armenian laws and the topic of territorial demands would be closed forever. Prime Minister Pashinyan stated that the same would happen in Azerbaijan meaning that the signing of the peace treaty would practically dispel the concerns of both Armenia and Azerbaijan particularly in relation to their respective constitutions. The Prime Minister also noted that Armenia was not engaged in an arms race with any country but was acquiring armaments exclusively for defending Armenia’s borders and territorial integrity. The following is the text of the interview: Armenpress: Mr. Prime Minister, in an interview with a Russian media outlet, the Azerbaijani President confirmed that 15 of the 17 articles of the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace treaty have been agreed upon, and one of the unresolved issues pertains to the non-deployment of third countries’ forces along the border, and the other to the withdrawal of lawsuits against each other in international courts. What is the stance of the Republic of Armenia in this regard? Prime Minister Pashinyan: We continue to be constructively engaged in the discussions around the peace treaty with Azerbaijan, and we have conveyed proposals on the two outstanding articles of the peace treaty to Azerbaijan for more than a month now, and we haven’t yet had a response. We propose the article about the non-deployment of the forces of third countries to cover the delimitated parts of the Armenia-Azerbaijan border, and this is logical, because in those parts the risk of escalation is significantly decreasing if not minimizing. Therefore, after the complete delimitation, there won’t be the need for the presence of a third force in any part of the Armenia-Azerbaijan border, and the Republic of Armenia is proposing this logic. Regarding the withdrawal of lawsuits filed against each other, when a peace treaty is signed this is logical, thus, the idea is acceptable for us. There are two nuances here: one of them is that there must be an understandable prospect for bilaterally resolving the individual humanitarian issues currently under discussion in international courts, and secondly, it must be clear that after withdrawing the disputes in international platforms regarding other issues the sides shall not put forward the same issues in the bilateral relations agenda and make them a source of lasting escalations. Armenpress: What do you mean? Prime Minister Pashinyan: I mean that not only shall we abandon the resolution of disputes in international courts, but the disputes themselves. We are ready to take that path. At this phase we are searching for solutions also in terms of individual humanitarian matters. Armenpress: In the same interview, the Azerbaijani President once again voiced the matter of the change of Armenian Constitution, once again claiming that it contains territorial demands against Azerbaijan. Prime Minister Pashinyan: I’ve had several occasions to address that topic, and I find it necessary to emphasize that if this is a sincere concern expressed by Azerbaijan, all grounds exist to consider these concerns dispelled. Why? Because the allegations that the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia contains territorial demands against Azerbaijan are based on the argument that the preamble of our Constitution contains a general reference to the Declaration of Independence, which in turn mentions Nagorno-Karabakh. In its 26 September 2024 ruling, the Constitutional Court of Armenia recorded that the reference to the Declaration of Independence in the preamble of the Constitution relates exclusively to those articles of the declaration that have gained literal stipulation in the articles of the Constitution. There is neither direct nor indirect mention of Nagorno-Karabakh in any article of the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia. If we were to accept the content of the Constitution the way Azerbaijan interprets it, then a question would arise, why didn’t Karabakh participate in the 1995 Constitutional Referendum, why didn’t polling stations open there and why didn’t the people vote on the Constitution. The same can be said about the subsequent presidential and parliamentary elections in Armenia. Besides, if the Azerbaijani interpretation of the Armenian Constitution were to be accurate, then the recognition of our brothers and sisters from Karabakh as refugees by Armenia would have been impossible. Armenpress: You had said that Armenia has concerns that the Constitution of Azerbaijan itself contains territorial demands against Armenia. Prime Minister Pashinyan: Indeed, and this concern is based on the fact that the preamble of the Azerbaijani Constitution contains a reference to the Constitutional Act adopted by the Azerbaijani Parliament on 18 October 1991. In turn, the Constitutional Act refers to the Declaration of Independence of the First Republic of Azerbaijan adopted on 28 May 1918, which records that the First Republic of Azerbaijan includes Eastern and Southern Transcaucasia. In November 1919, the Republic of Azerbaijan presented to the Entente its administrative map, according to which, Azerbaijan included the entirety of the provinces of Syunik and Vayots Dzor of Armenia, as well as parts of the provinces of Ararat, Armavir, Gegharkunik, Tavush, Lori and Shirak of Armenia, some 60 percent of the territory of the Republic of Armenia. Thus, the Constitution of Azerbaijan contains territorial demands against the Republic of Armenia. But we are not raising an issue of changing the Constitution of Azerbaijan for two reasons, first of all such an issue would bring the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace process into a deadlock, and secondly, the agreed-upon part of the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace treaty contains an article which stipulates that the parties cannot refer to their internal legislation to justify the failure of implementation of the peace treaty. Another article of the agreed-upon part of the peace treaty says that the parties recognize each other’s territorial integrity, do not have territorial demands against each other and are bound to not make such demands in the future. Armenpress: You mean that the concerns about the Constitution must not be the reason for not signing the peace treaty, but that the signing of the peace treaty itself will dispel these concerns? Prime Minister Pashinyan: Definitely. And if we approach the matter from the viewpoint of the legislation of the Republic of Armenia, by our laws the peace treaty must be ratified in the National Assembly after the signing. Before that, the government must submit the treaty to the Constitutional Court to verify its compliance with the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia. If the Constitutional Court decides that the text of the peace treaty does not comply with the Constitution, although such a development is less likely after the 26 September 2024 decision, it would turn out that Azerbaijan’s arguments in this matter were correct and Armenia would have to make a choice between some articles of the Constitution and the peace treaty. But if the Constitutional Court decided that the text of the peace treaty complies with the Constitution of Armenia, it will pass the ratification process in our parliament. And according to paragraph 3 of article 5 of the Armenian Constitution, in case of conflict between the norms of international treaties ratified by the Republic of Armenia and those of laws, the norms of international treaties shall apply. Thus, after ratification in parliament, the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace treaty will gain superior legal force against laws and other normative legal acts of Armenia, and the topic of territorial demands will be closed forever. The same would happen in Azerbaijan. Meaning, it is the signing of the peace treaty that will practically dispel the concerns of both Armenia and Azerbaijan, including in relation to the constitutions. Armenpress: And what is Armenia's stance over the idea to disband the OSCE Minsk Group? Prime Minister Pashinyan: Constructive. We understand the stance that if there is no conflict what's the meaning of the existence of a format dealing with the conflict resolution. But we also want to be convinced that Azerbaijan is approaching this issue in this same logic, and for instance, that its motive under developing the narrative of the so-called Western Azerbaijan isn't about engaging in aggressive policy against the territory of the Republic of Armenia. Armenpress: But Azerbaijan says that by doing so it is not making any territorial demands against Armenia, and that it is a matter of the refugees' right to return and is calling upon the government of Armenia to respond to this right. Sign up for our Caucasus Concise newsletter! Prime Minister Pashinyan: It is obvious that official Baku, with its narrative of the so-called Western Azerbaijan, wants to materialize its territorial demands against the Republic of Armenia, which, as I showed above, is recorded in Azerbaijan’s constitution. If that’s not the case, and if we are wrong in our perceptions, then by saying Western Azerbaijan one must understand the regions of Gazakh, Tovuz, Aghstafa, Gadabay, Dashkesan, Kelbajar, Lachin, Kubatlu and Zangelan of the Republic of Azerbaijan. Therefore, the return of the people there is the internal matter of Azerbaijan, and the government of Armenia has nothing to do or discuss here, besides the matters that it is already discussing with Azerbaijan. I mean the establishment of normal relations that would ensure, among others, the security of Azerbaijan’s western and Armenia’s eastern borders. Armenpress: Azerbaijan is accusing Armenia of acquiring non-defensive weapons and says that Armenia will not withstand an arms race with it. Prime Minister Pashinyan: Armenia is not engaged in an arms race with any country, we are acquiring armaments exclusively for defending Armenia’s borders and territorial integrity, meaning for defensive goals, and our goals are transparent. We are told that defensive weapons must be bought for defensive purposes. But it is impossible to organize defense only with defensive weapons. For instance, if Armenia were to have highly modern anti-air and electronic warfare measures, how would it defend itself in case of a land attack? Of course with artillery, of course with missiles, of course with other strike measures. Azerbaijan is also acquiring non-defensive weapons, does it mean that they are engaged in revanchist policy? Armenpress: Azerbaijan is overall attempting to make the arms acquisition of Armenia a topic on the agenda. Prime Minister Pashinyan: According to all international norms, the Republic of Armenia has the right to have armed forces and an obligation to protect its own citizens, including from possible foreign threats. The army reforms are our legitimate right. Is this a threat for Azerbaijan? No. Because we have clearly recognized and recognize the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Azerbaijan in the territory of the Soviet Azerbaijan and we expect that Azerbaijan, like us, without leaving room for misinterpretations, will recognize the territorial integrity of the Republic of Armenia, in accordance with our agreements, and will refrain from the policy of threats. Threatening statements are made from Azerbaijan to the Republic of Armenia practically every day. In such conditions our reaction even gets internal criticism, because we say that we don’t even have an objective to militarily return the over 200 square kilometers of our sovereign territory that is currently under occupation, because the institutional solutions reached in the delimitation issue enable us to resolve this issue in a peaceful, negotiated way. In this context we even offered Azerbaijan to create a bilateral mechanism of mutual arms control. But Azerbaijan hasn’t responded so far, while the difference of the military budgets of Armenia and Azerbaijan is threefold, in Azerbaijan’s favor. Accusing us of acquiring armaments in such conditions is not fair, to say the least. Armenpress: And how would you assess the risk of renewed escalation in the region? Prime Minister Pashinyan: I can guarantee that Armenia has no intention, goals or plans to attack or engage in any provocative actions against Azerbaijan, and that it will not take that path. If Azerbaijan also doesn’t have intentions to attack Armenia, then the likelihood of escalation in the region is zero. Armenpress: Mr. Prime Minister, will the delimitation process go on? If yes, in which section? Prime Minister Pashinyan: The regulations of the delimitation commissions are ratified in both Armenia and Azerbaijan, which means that the delimitation process must continue. I think the delimitation commissions will meet soon to discuss in which section the delimitation shall continue. We are ready for constructive work in this matter as well. Armenpress: And what about the issue of regional connections. Azerbaijan continues to develop its narrative of a so-called corridor. Prime Minister Pashinyan: We assess that we have found a solution on how to reopen railway connection for it to be fully acceptable for both Armenia and Azerbaijan. And we have conveyed the offer of this solution in a written form to Azerbaijan and we are waiting for their positive response. When this reaction happens, it will be necessary to swiftly sign an agreement and start the construction of the railway. Source: commonspace.eu and Armenpress https://www.commonspace.eu/index.php/interview/armenian-prime-minister-nikol-pashinyan-discusses-prospects-peace-treaty-azerbaijan-0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yervant1 Posted December 23, 2024 Report Share Posted December 23, 2024 MEHR News Agency, Iran Dec 22 2024 Armenia ready to develop nuclear coop. with Russia TEHRAN, Dec. 22 (MNA) – Armenian Deputy Prime Minister Mher Grigoryan has said that his country is ready to develop cooperation with Russia in the field of peaceful nuclear industry. Grigoryan made this statement at the 23rd meeting of the Intergovernmental Commission on Economic Cooperation between Armenia and Russia, held in Moscow on December 19," Armenpress reported. In this context, the issue of launching the second power unit of the Armenian NPP in 2026 and extending its operation until 2036 is a priority for Armenia," the Deputy PM said."I would like to express our readiness to develop cooperation with Russia in the field of the peaceful use of atomic energy. In this context, I consider the signing of a declaration on strategic partnership in the field of nuclear medicine to be important," Grigoryan noted. Touching upon the issue of external energy supplies, the Deputy Prime Minister of Armenia mentioned that the volume of gasoline imports from Russia to Armenia during the first 11 months of the current year amounted to 145 thousand tons, diesel fuel to 139 thousand tons, and natural gas to 1.9 billion cubic meters. SD/ https://en.mehrnews.com/news/225847/Armenia-ready-to-develop-nuclear-coop-with-Russia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MosJan Posted December 23, 2024 Author Report Share Posted December 23, 2024 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yervant1 Posted December 24, 2024 Report Share Posted December 24, 2024 Azatutyun.am Former Armenian Presidents Blast Pashinian’s Fresh ‘Lies On Karabakh’ Դեկտեմբեր 23, 2024 Shoghik Galstian Armenia- Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian and former Presidents Serzh Sarkisian, Robert Kocharian and Levon Ter-Petrosian. Armenia’s three former presidents on Monday again accused Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian of lying to try to absolve himself of blame for the fall of Nagorno-Karabakh following his renewed claims about past peace proposals made by the United States, Russia and France. In a Facebook post, Pashinian claimed that all peace plans drafted by the three mediating powers from 1994 onwards were about “returning Nagorno-Karabakh to Azerbaijan.” He said that his “big mistake” was not to make this clear to Armenians after coming to power in 2018. The offices of former Presidents Levon Ter-Petrosian, Robert Kocharian and Serzh Sarkisian unanimously countered that Pashinian continues to distort the history of the Armenian-Azerbaijani negotiation process that had for decades been mediated by the U.S., Russian and French co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group. “He uses every opportunity, every speech to try to clear his guilt for the destruction of Artsakh,” Levon Zurabian, the deputy chairman of Ter-Petrosian’s Armenian National Congress party, told RFE/RL’s Armenian Service. “The blood of our fallen soldiers is on his hands and the loss of all of Artsakh is also on him,” said Zurabian. “This guilt, this responsibility will haunt him for the rest of his life.” Armenia - Levon Zurabian, vice-chairman of the Armenian National Congress party, is interviewed by RFE/RL, Yerevan, January 25, 2024. “Every [settlement] variant that had been put on the table since 1991 … was much better than the situation we have now,” said Artur Khachatrian, a senior member of the Hayastan alliance led by Kocharian. Khachatrian repeated opposition claims that Pashinian precipitated the 2020 war with Azerbaijan with his erratic policies and reckless statements on the Karabakh conflict. Most of the Karabakh peace proposals were based on so-called Madrid Principles which the U.S., Russian and French mediators originally put forward 2007. This framework agreement, repeatedly modified in the following decade, upheld the Karabakh Armenians’ right to self-determination while calling for their withdrawal from Azerbaijani districts around Karabakh occupied in the early 1990s. Pashinian has repeatedly criticized the Madrid Principles since the 2020 war. In particular, he claimed in 2021 that the mediating powers sought a “surrender of lands” to Azerbaijan and offered the Armenian side nothing in return. Armenia -- Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian (R) meets with the co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group in Yerevan, February 20, 2019. The Russian Foreign Ministry bluntly denied the claim at the time. It argued that the proposed deal stipulated that Karabakh’s internationally recognized status would be determined through a future referendum and envisaged firm security guarantees for its ethnic Armenian population. Armenian opposition leaders say that Pashinian made the disastrous war inevitable by rejecting the last version of the Madrid Principles. In 2021, Serzh Sarkisian publicized the secretly recorded audio of a 2019 meeting during which Pashinian said he opposes that peace plan because it would not immediately formalize Karabakh’s secession from Azerbaijan. The premier said he is ready to “play the fool or look a bit insane” in order to avoid such a settlement. The opposition also holds him responsible for Armenia’s defeat in the six-week war and Azerbaijan’s recapture of Karabakh in September 2023. Pashinian has put the blame on ex-Presidents Sarkisian and Kocharian. https://www.azatutyun.am/a/33250460.html?fbclid=IwY2xjawHXPihleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHbu5Gl9RCUvjCG6Wq9B8XzbNkpjcCpYoxvXY6ejByJCWaL0jkdUbVpRIjQ_aem_A0-qEKHDsiO7kkEjNvbnYA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yervant1 Posted December 26, 2024 Report Share Posted December 26, 2024 OC Media Dec 25 2024 Pashinyan challenges former presidents to debate on Nagorno-Karabakh negotiations by Arshaluys Barseghyan On Monday, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan proposed a live debate with three former Armenian Presidents to discuss the decades-long negotiation process with Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh. All three refused Pashinyan’s invitation. Pashinyan invited the former presidents — Levon Ter-Petrosyan, Robert Kocharyan, and Serzh Sargsyan — claiming on Facebook that since the 1994 Russian-mediated ceasefire between Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Nagorno-Karabakh, the negotiation process was always about returning Nagorno-Karabakh to Azerbaijan. Debates about the ceasefire and subsequent negotiations have been a mainstay in Armenian politics, with politicians regularly trading blame about the failure of talks and the eventual surrender of Nagorno-Karabakh in 2023. As he was Prime Minister at the time, Pashinyan has been particularly singled out for criticism. ‘The negotiation process had no other content. Talks about other content were introduced in the Republic of Armenia exclusively to solve domestic political problems’, Pashinyan alleged in his post. He further wrote that he had made a ‘big mistake’ after becoming familiarised with the content of the negotiations in 2018, the year he came to power through the Velvet Revolution, noting that he did not admit such facts to himself due to ‘patriotism’. He added that this was why he has not previously explained such facts to the Armenian people. Following Pashinyan’s invitation, all three former presidents, one after another, rejected the offer. ‘It would be extremely beneficial for our state and society if Nikol Pashinyan first and foremost debates with Nikol Pashinyan. As a result, I am sure both sides of the debate will fairly justify the other to be a liar’, Ter-Petrosyan’s spokesperson, Arman Musinyan, wrote on Facebook. In turn, Bagrat Mikoyan, the head of the Kocharyan’s office, suggested in a statement posted on Kocharyan’s official Facebook page that ‘a controversial topic is necessary for a debate’. ‘It is an indisputable historical fact, that the surrender of the sovereign territories of Artsakh and Armenia is the personal “achievement” of the current prime minister and it is obvious to all reasonable people’, Mikoyan wrote. Sargsyan’s office told PastInfo that it was ‘pointless to argue about the obvious’, and blamed Pashinyan for doing ‘everything to fail the negotiation process’. ‘If he really wants to debate, we advise him to engage in a debate with the presidents of the [OSCE Minsk Group] co-chairing countries — Russia, the US, and France — who, between 2009 and 2013, five times announced the negotiation format and the principles on which the Nagorno-Karabakh issue should have been resolved’. Pashinyan continues to push for debate Following the rejections, Pashiyan made four other posts on Facebook, further reiterating his offer and responding to the refusals. On Monday evening, Pashinyan posted a video on Facebook in which he called on them to ‘think once again and take advantage of this opportunity for a face-to-face debate’. He added that this was actually ‘a moment of truth’, noting that the proposed debate should have ‘the utmost importance in helping the people reach a final and indisputable conclusion’ about what happened since Armenia’s independence and who is guilty of what. On Tuesday afternoon, Pashinyan again posted on Facebook, urging the three former presidents to engage with him. ‘And if you argue, let's put the arguments face to face in front of the people and not produce tongue twisters in diplomatic language, with the hope and faith that still most people do not know that language’, he wrote. After receiving negative responses from the former presidents, Pashinyan addressed his audience with a question: ‘Do I understand correctly that the three presidents are finally and irrevocably refusing public debate?’ This was followed by yet another post in which Pashinyan reiterated his position that the negotiations ‘could only have one outcome — the actual return of Nagorno-Karabakh to Azerbaijan’. Pashinyan also noted that, hereafter, whatever the three former presidents or their representatives say on this issue ‘holds no value now’, and again extended an offer to debate if the former presidents changed their mind. On Tuesday evening, former Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian ‘[threw] down the gauntlet’, asking Pashinyan for a debate on the condition that after losing, Pashinyan would ‘promise’ to the nation to change his policy on the Nagorno-Karabakh issue. This is not the first time Pashinyan has made statements on the Nagorno-Karabakh negotiations, statements that Armenian fact-checkers have said do not correspond to reality. In December 2023, Pashinyan stated that his government ‘wanted to bring our understanding of [Nagorno-Karabakh] self-determination into line with the understanding of the international community about self-determination’. Pashinyan was referring to the Lisbon Summit of 1996, which resulted in a declaration that the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict should include the recognition of the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and the high autonomy of Nagorno-Karabakh within it.However, the section was vetoed by Ter-Petrosyan and did not end up in the final adoption of the text. Nonetheless, the OSCE Chairman-in-Office, Swiss Foreign Minister Flavio Cotti, issued a statement, attached as an annex to the final document, that supported the notion of autonomy within Azerbaijan. For ease of reading, we choose not to use qualifiers such as ‘de facto’, ‘unrecognised’, or ‘partially recognised’ when discussing institutions or political positions within Abkhazia, Nagorno-Karabakh, and South Ossetia. This does not imply a position on their status. https://oc-media.org/pashinyan-challenges-former-presidents-to-debate-on-nagorno-karabakh-negotiations/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MosJan Posted December 26, 2024 Author Report Share Posted December 26, 2024 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yervant1 Posted December 27, 2024 Report Share Posted December 27, 2024 Azatutyun.am Pashinian To Blame For Karabakh Debacle, Insists Ter-Petrosian Դեկտեմբեր 26, 2024 Ruzanna Stepanian Armenia - Former President Levon Ter-Petrosian holds a press-conference in Yerevan, June 10, 2021. Former President Ter-Petrosian has blamed Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian for the fall of Nagorno-Karabakh in response to the latter’s critical claims about the former Armenian governments’ policies on the conflict with Azerbaijan. Pashinian claimed on Monday that all peace plans drafted by international mediators from 1994 onwards and considered by his predecessors were about “returning Nagorno-Karabakh to Azerbaijan.” He said that his “big mistake” was not to make this clear to Armenians after coming to power in 2018. The offices of Ter-Petrosian and two other former presidents, Robert Kocharian and Serzh Sarkisian, unanimously countered that Pashinian continues to distort the history of the Armenian-Azerbaijani negotiation process that was decades been mediated by the United States, Russia and France. They said he keeps trying to absolve himself of blame for the 2020 war in Karabakh and Azerbaijan’s subsequent takeover of the Armenian-populated region. Pashinian responded by challenging the three ex-presidents to a televised debate on the issue. They all scoffed at the proposal. “What should I debate with you when the subject of the debate, the millennia-old Armenian Artsakh, no longer exists due to your adventurism and you have no choice but to make desperate efforts to divert our people’s attention from this bitter reality?” Ter-Petrosian told Pashinian in a statement publicized late on Wednesday. “Make as much noise as you want. This reality is already a historical fact that can no longer be erased,” he said. Armenia - Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian and former Presidents Serzh Sarkisian, Robert Kocharian and Levon Ter-Petrosian. Ter-Petrosian also challenged Pashinian to publicize all peace plans drafted by the U.S., Russian and French co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group along with Yerevan’s official responses to them. “That would be a real debate based on facts. And if you don't do that, you will prove once again that you are running away from the truth and are busy cowardly dodging historical responsibility,” added the 79-year-old ex-president who led Armenia to independence in 1991. Neither Pashinian nor his press office responded to Ter-Petrosian as of Thursday evening. The premier is also facing similar calls from some opposition and public figures. Most of the Karabakh peace proposals were based on so-called Madrid Principles which the U.S., Russian and French mediators originally put forward 2007. This framework agreement, repeatedly modified in the following decade, upheld the Karabakh Armenians’ right to self-determination while calling for their withdrawal from Azerbaijani districts around Karabakh occupied in the early 1990s. Karabakh’s internationally recognized status would be determined through a future referendum. “Nikol is lying when he says that Armenian diplomacy had spoken about incorporating Nagorno-Karabakh into Azerbaijan,” said Levon Zurabian, the deputy chairman of Ter-Petrosian’s Armenian National Congress party. “On the contrary, Armenian diplomacy had spoken only about not incorporating Nagorno-Karabakh into Azerbaijan.” “If what Nikol Pashinian says were true, the conflict would have already been ended in 1992,” Zurabian told RFE/RL’s Armenian Service on Thursday. Armenia - Former Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian, February 25, 2017. Vartan Oskanian, who served as Armenia’s foreign minister in the Kocharian administration from 1998-2008, likewise accused Pashinian of lying about the U.S.-Russian-French peace plans. “I can show our people that he lies, he deceives them and that he does all this to atone for his sins and justify his mistakes,” Oskanian said on Tuesday night. He challenged Pashinian to debate with him in place of the ex-presidents. The premier did not respond to the proposal. Armenian opposition leaders say that Pashinian made the 2020 war inevitable by rejecting the last version of the Madrid Principles drafted in 2019. In 2021, Serzh Sarkisian publicized the secretly recorded audio of a 2019 meeting during which Pashinian said he is ready to “play the fool or look a bit insane” in order to avoid such a settlement. The opposition also holds him responsible for Armenia’s defeat in the six-week war and Azerbaijan’s recapture of Karabakh in September 2023. Pashinian has put the blame on ex-Presidents Sarkisian and Kocharian. https://www.azatutyun.am/a/33253879.html?fbclid=IwY2xjawHbG7NleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHW9GLHqQveEs7OgTH-gyuluPY0tCYCVVPc5XbX9MHwH5lhv1Ar5OYdwVjA_aem_NJccF116o9YLQ9ZHbnSbKw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MosJan Posted December 27, 2024 Author Report Share Posted December 27, 2024 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yervant1 Posted December 28, 2024 Report Share Posted December 28, 2024 OC Media Dec 27 2024 Pashinyan and Lukashenka argue during EAEU session by Arshaluys Barseghyan Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Belarusian President Aliaksandr Lukashenka got into an argument during yesterday’s Supreme Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) Council session, with Pashinyan announcing that Armenia would also attend next year’s meeting, set to be held in Minsk in May, remotely. It was the latest public display of tension between Armenia and Belarus. Pashinyan attended the Thursday EAEU session held in Saint Petersburg remotely after testing positive for COVID-19. The dispute began when, during the meeting, Lukashenka joked that they perceived Pashinyan as a ‘new and younger’ member of the organisation because Pashinyan had shaved his beard. He also reproached those preferring to attend the meeting remotely, underscoring that it did not concern Pashinyan’s physical absence on the same day. In response, Pashinyan stated that the Armenian delegation would participate in the next meeting of the Supreme EAEU Council in Minsk in May 2025 remotely. Belarus will chair the economic union, consisting of Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Russia, for the next year, taking over from Armenia, which chaired the union over 2024. ‘What’s your problem? Is it far to Minsk? Is there nobody to give you a ride? We will organise the transportation for your delegation if needed’, Lukashenka said. Pashinyan responded that he had already made ‘a public statement on this matter, and this statement remains in force’, adding that he did not consider the EAEU ‘the right format to discuss these issues’. ‘You raised this issue, and I should have responded immediately so there was no misunderstanding’, he added. Lukashenka said that they would ‘consider [Pashinyan’s] statement’, to which Pashinyan responded that his statement was ‘not a subject to consideration. It is already a decision’. In turn, Lukashenka hinted that technical issues might hinder organising the remote participation of the Armenian delegation — ‘Maybe there will be no TV so that you can speak remotely’. ‘No problem,’ Pashinyan said, adding ‘I understand, maybe TV has also become a problem for you, we approach it with understanding’. Following the meeting, Pashinyan posted a video of the dispute, suggesting that the Armenian delegation ‘will participate remotely or will not participate in the EAEU sessions in Belarus’. An increasingly tense relationship Ties between Armenia and Belarus have been in freefall since June, when Pashinyan said that no Armenian officials would visit Belarus while Lukashenka was in power, due to Lukashenka’s support for Azerbaijan during the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War of 2020. Previously in May, amidst the continuing crises between CSTO–Armenia, Pashinyan told parliament that at least two CSTO members, likely referring to Belarus and Russia, participated in preparing for war against Armenia in 2020, with the goal of destroying Armenia’s statehood. In June, Politico published a report based on leaked documents detailing the alleged supply of advanced military hardware from Belarus to Azerbaijan between 2018 and 2022. During this period, Azerbaijan launched the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War, after which it finalised its military victory when Nagorno-Karabakh surrendered in September 2023. Several other major clashes took place on the Azerbaijan–Armenia border in 2021 and 2022, during which Azerbaijan gained control over 150 square kilometres of territory inside Armenia, according to Yerevan. Speaking in November 2022, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev appeared to gloat over the country’s ties to other CSTO members, stating that ‘the number of our friends in this organisation is higher than those of Armenia’. In August 2024, Lukashenka questioned Armenia’s foreign policy in an interview with Russian TV channel Rossiya, saying ‘Who needs Armenians besides us? No one’. In response, a group of protesters threw vegetables and eggs at the Belarusian Embassy in Armenia, calling on them to ‘get out of Armenia’. According to Russian presidential aide Yuri Ushakov, Armenia ‘requested’ Thursday’s Supreme EAEU Council session to be held in Russia. Pashinyan commented earlier in December that it would be ‘inappropriate’ to hold the EAEU session in Armenia because not all members are ‘desirable’ for Armenia — a reference to Belarus and Lukashenka. https://oc-media.org/pashinyan-and-lukashenka-argue-during-eaeu-session/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MosJan Posted December 28, 2024 Author Report Share Posted December 28, 2024 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MosJan Posted December 30, 2024 Author Report Share Posted December 30, 2024 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MosJan Posted December 30, 2024 Author Report Share Posted December 30, 2024 համբալապատում Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yervant1 Posted December 31, 2024 Report Share Posted December 31, 2024 The Moscow Times Dec 30 2024 Former Armenian Defense Minister Arrested in Moscow A former Armenian defense minister was arrested in Moscow at Yerevan’s request, Russian state media reported Monday, citing Russian law enforcement authorities. According to an unnamed police official quoted by the TASS news agency, Arshak Karapetyan was arrested after Armenian authorities placed him on an international wanted list on “several charges.” The official added that a court decision on Karapetyan’s extradition to Armenia is expected soon, but did not provide further details. Karapetyan is wanted in Armenia on charges of illegal participation in business activities and abuse of power. He briefly served as Armenia’s defense minister in 2021 before stepping down three months later. Before returning to Armenian politics in 2016, Karapetyan spent five years in Moscow, where he served as vice president of Gazprombank and later as CEO of a Gazprom subsidiary. He has extensive business ties in Russia, including partnerships with Samvel Karapetyan, an Armenian-born Russian billionaire. Despite sharing a surname, the two men are not related. https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2024/12/30/former-armenian-defense-minister-arrested-in-moscow-a87486 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yervant1 Posted December 31, 2024 Report Share Posted December 31, 2024 CommonSpace.eu Dec 30 2024 Opinion: Azerbaijan’s Demands and Armenia’s Dilemmas: Will 2025 Finally Bring Peace? 30 December 2024 Onnik James Krikorian As the South Caucasus enters 2025, uncertainty surrounds the year ahead. Even as 2024 ended, Georgia was still embroiled in over a month of daily protests following controversial parliamentary elections and as has been the case every year since independence in 1991, a deal between Armenia and Azerbaijan to normalise relations remains elusive. That is particularly unfortunate given that 2024 marked the 30th anniversary of the 1994 ceasefire agreement. November also marked another anniversary – the fourth since another trilateral ceasefire statement ostensibly ended the second war in 2020. Though 2024 did not see any new outbreak of fighting, hopes that the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Azerbaijan the same month could yield a breakthrough were dashed again. Yerevan didn’t attend the event, apparently because no deal to release some Armenian detainees still held by Azerbaijan was forthcoming. Even the outgoing Biden administration in the United States, eager to facilitate a peace agreement before president-elect Donald Trump’s takes over on 20 January, couldn’t speed up the process. Some believe that Baku was anyway more focused on delaying an agreement until the new administration is in place. Yerevan had hoped that one could have been signed even if some points remain unresolved. Though 2024 was relatively stable on the Armenia-Azerbaijan, now with 12.7 km demarcated, others seem more wary. For many in Armenia, the danger of a new escalation remains a possibility while Azerbaijan seeks to use its stronger position to solicit more concessions. Meanwhile, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan will use the year ahead to prepare for new parliamentary elections by June 2026. The situation is further complicated by Pashinyan's need for an agreement before that vote given his post-2020 “peace agenda” promised in 2021. Still, just before the year ended, both Yerevan and Baku confirmed that 15 of 17 points in the draft Agreement on Peace and Establishment of Interstate Relations had been fully agreed. However, two outstanding points on dropping any mutual legal actions and prohibiting the deployment of third country forces remained. For Azerbaijan, this specifically means the European Union Mission in Armenia (EUMA). The mission’s first two-year term will be up for renewal in February. Pashinyan has instead proposed to withdraw EUMA only from those parts of the border that have been demarcated. But there are other demands too. Most notably, Azerbaijan demands that Armenia removes a controversial preamble from the its constitution referencing the 1990 declaration on the unification of Soviet Armenia and Mountainous Karabakh so as to prevent territorial claims in the future. Baku also seeks the dissolution of the now defunct OSCE Minsk Group, hitherto internationally mandated to mediate between the sides prior to 2020. Yerevan says it is not against such a move but only after an agreement is signed. It anyway seems unlikely that the format, co-chaired by France, Russia, and US, can function while the war between Ukraine and Russia continues. As for the constitution, Pashinyan many times criticised the 1990 declaration since 2023 and since coming to power in 2018 has made constitutional reform a priority. So much so, in fact, that he would not want to be seen to be instead kowtowing to Baku in doing so. Some in Pashinyan’s circle maintain the preamble will anyway be removed as part of larger constitutional changes likely to be put to referendum in 2027. Few also think he will agree to the early withdrawal of EUMA. Even as relations between the EU and Georgia sour, the European Union Monitoring Mission (EUMM) there was extended in December. Speaking at the Antalya Diplomacy Forum in Turkiye early last year, then EU Special Representative for the South Caucasus, Toivo Klaar, asserted EUMA would leave once an agreement is signed. EUMA can also deflect domestic criticism of further demarcation as the 2026 elections approach but it should be aware that its role is to contribute to building confidence between the sides as well as in border communities. Perhaps more to the point, Baku appears concerned that while both the OSCE Minsk Group and EUMA exist then either might potentially focus on the right to return of the Karabakh Armenians that fled from the formerly Soviet-era autonomous region within Azerbaijan in 2023. This could also explain why Baku raises the issue of the right of return for what it terms those Western Azerbaijanis that left Armenia in the late 1980s. Baku is eager to remind Yerevan that the right to return refers to all IDPs and refugees. In a 2021 podcast, researcher and analyst Emil Sanamyan stated that in the late 1980s, Azerbaijan made the continued existence of ethnic Armenians within its borders contingent on whether any ethnic Azerbaijanis remained in Armenia. Armenia’s demilitarisation is just as controversial. Though it is unlikely that Yerevan could fight another war anytime soon, Azerbaijan notes that revanchist forces opposed to Pashinyan still exist inside Armenia and some groups in the diaspora. Analysts in Yerevan argue, however, that new weapon purchases from France and mainly India are necessary to replenish an arsenal depleted by the 2020 war in order to deter another incursion by Azerbaijan as seen in 2022. Instead, in lieu of any agreement in the next 12 months, Pashinyan maintains that any outstanding issues can be resolved after signing what has already been agreed. This also includes that critical overland route from Azerbaijan through Armenia to Nakhchivan that almost everyone wants but disagrees on how. But with Aliyev having already declared 2025 as the Year of Constitution and Sovereignty, it looks likely they will still remain an obstacle. It would certainly be better if that isn't the case, but it would also be wise to manage expectations until demonstrated otherwise. source: Onnik James Krikorian is a journalist, photojournalist, and consultant from the U.K. who has covered the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict since 1994. The views expressed in opinion pieces and commentaries do not necessarily reflect the position of commonspace.eu or its partners https://www.commonspace.eu/opinion/opinion-azerbaijans-demands-and-armenias-dilemmas-will-2025-finally-bring-peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yervant1 Posted December 31, 2024 Report Share Posted December 31, 2024 Armenpress.am Russia19:23, 30 December 2024 Armenian Border Guard Troops assume full control of Agarak checkpoint on Armenia-Iran border Read the article in: العربيةEspañolفارسیFrançaisՀայերենРусский简体中文 YEREVAN, DECEMBER 30, ARMENPRESS. Starting today, the Border Guard Troops of the Republic of Armenia are only responsible for border control at the Agarak checkpoint on the Armenia-Iran state border, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan announced on Facebook on Monday. "Since Armenia’s independence in 1991, border control at the Agarak checkpoint has been carried out by the Border Guard Troops of the Russian Federation. I would like to express my gratitude to them for their dedicated service. Best wishes to our border guards, who have now taken over this responsibility," Pashinyan has announced. Published by Armenpress, original at https://armenpress.am/en/article/1208686?fbclid=IwY2xjawHgPOZleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHV8Lbu7QcWBgkOYpZuji1GxUa8Wj5Ot4NlGHF5nksaEFTnUzc0iLMe390w_aem__mMttFsy7p2glTlZJknw7A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yervant1 Posted January 1 Report Share Posted January 1 JAM News Dec 31 2024 Opinion: Armenia must use its trump card on road unblocking issue JAMnews Yerevan “Today, the South Caucasus is deeply involved in global processes. Armenia must strive to be present in transport corridors like Beijing-London or North-South. At the same time, Armenia must do everything possible to preserve its territorial sovereignty and protect its national interests,” said Turkologist Ruben Safrastyan. In his pre-New Year interview, Safrastyan discussed potential scenarios for Armenia’s relations with Azerbaijan and Turkey. Under no circumstances, he stressed, should Yerevan agree to their demand to provide the so-called “Zangezur Corridor.” This refers to a road connecting Azerbaijan to its exclave of Nakhichevan and Turkey to Central Asian countries, effectively linking the “Turkic world.” Since 2020, Armenian authorities have stated their readiness to unblock all roads but categorically refuse to grant a “corridor,” explaining that the term implies a loss of control over their territory. “We must understand that we hold an important trump card that must be used. We have the road through Meghri [a city in the south], which I consider Armenia’s geopolitical gateway. Moreover, this gateway encompasses the entire Syunik region [southern Armenia]. And the key to it is in our hands. We will not hand this key to anyone,” Safrastyan declared. Opinion: ‘Unblocking communications in Caucasus carries risks’ ‘Yerevan sees risk of further escalation’: views on the Pashinyan-Aliyev remote dialogue Opinion: What awaits ex officials of former unrecognized Nagorno-Karabakh Republic in Baku prisons? Ruben Safrastyan, Turkologist South Caucasus becomes a battleground “Let’s try to understand the key trends shaping the processes currently unfolding in the South Caucasus, which hold strategic significance. The first trend is that the Caucasus is becoming a battleground for various power centers. The struggle between the West and Russia is intensifying here. The second is the weakening of Russia’s position in our region. The third trend is the involvement of the South Caucasus in global processes. Previously, this region was within Russia’s sphere of influence and was effectively excluded from global dynamics.. These are the three main trends. However, there are several others stemming from these, such as the growing activity of Turkey in our region.” Armenia must pursue subtle diplomacy, not neutrality “My approach is this: Armenia must stay out of the unfolding struggle between the West and Russia in the region. It is also important to maintain our allied, strategic relations—despite all the current complexities. Equally crucial is that we diversify our relationships with other countries. We need to pursue a differentiated foreign policy. I believe regionalization of our foreign policy is very important. By this, I mean resolving our relations with neighboring countries. Russia is our strategic ally. We are not abandoning this partnership. Armenia is also a member of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), and we are not rejecting this either, as it benefits us. We must conduct very subtle diplomacy and avoid neutrality because, at this stage, we cannot afford to be neutral.” Pashinyan's response to Putin'Armenia has passed the point of no return’ Russian President stated that “there was no external aggression against Armenia” to warrant a response from Russia and the CSTO. Baku seeks maximum concessions “Armenian-Azerbaijani relations have reached a point where only a few points of the peace treaty remain to be agreed upon. These negotiations must continue. However, in my view, Azerbaijan is pursuing a short-sighted policy. It is trying to exploit this moment to extract as many concessions as possible from Armenia. That’s their goal. They fail to realize that the sooner this treaty is signed, the better it will be for them as well.” Turkey aims to solidify its position “I consider Turkey’s position more strategic and forward-looking. Turkey says the sooner [the peace treaty is signed], the better. Why? Because for Turkey, it is crucial to formalize this new regional reality created by Russia’s weakening influence as quickly as possible. It’s a matter of vision. Turkey has a broader perspective. Why? Because Turkey is currently pursuing a policy aimed at strengthening its role on a global scale. A narrow regional focus is less important to them.. In this context, Turkey seeks to use the Armenian-Azerbaijani treaty to solidify its strengthened position and Russia’s weakened one. This will enable Turkey to advance its ambitions on a global level. Azerbaijan, on the other hand, has a narrower vision, focused on solving tactical issues. It simply wants to secure more concessions from Armenia. So, it’s a matter of perspective, scale, and the level of statehood.” Turkey's position on Armenia-Azerbaijan peace agreement: a view from Yerevan Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan believes that the “final step” for signing a peace treaty between Armenia and Azerbaijan will be the opening of the “Zangezur Corridor.” Political analyst Ara Poghosyan, however, notes that this is just one of several preconditions Armenia-Turkey relations will not be fully normalised “The opening of the Armenia-Turkey border won’t happen immediately. They have made it very clear—they will take certain steps towards normalizing relations only after the Armenia-Azerbaijan treaty is signed. I think Turkey will try to keep this trump card in its hands. Do you know why? Because, according to their calculations, the construction of the railway connecting Kars to Nakhchivan will be completed by 2029. Until then, Turkey will aim to retain leverage over Armenia. Relations will not be fully normalized. However, Turkey will take certain steps to use them as a means of pressure on Armenia. The main goal remains to secure an extraterritorial corridor.” Opinion from Yerevan: "Turkey's preconditions for Armenia are often voiced from Baku" Political commentator Hakob Badalyan’s remarks on the meeting between Pashinyan and Erdoğan and the process of normalizing Armenian-Turkish relations Iran aims to counter strengthening of Western and Turkish influence “Russian-Iranian relations are indeed significant. Essentially, we are witnessing two parallel processes. The first is strategic: both countries are under intense pressure from the West and are trying to forge closer ties. Of course, there are certain challenges, but their relationship has strengthened considerably. As I understand it, Iran’s concern regarding our region is to prevent the strengthening of Western or Turkish positions as Russia’s influence weakens here. In this context, Armenia plays a crucial role for Iran, as it seeks to counter the growing influence of the West and Turkey in the South Caucasus. It is no coincidence that Iran firmly supports the preservation of Armenia’s territorial integrity.” https://jam-news.net/opinion-armenia-must-use-its-trump-card-on-road-unblocking-issue/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yervant1 Posted January 4 Report Share Posted January 4 Azatutyun.am Russian Gold Sends Armenia-UAE Trade Skyrocketing Հունվար 03, 2025 Russia - An employee of Zoloto Severnogo Urala company holds cast bars of gold made near the town of Krasnoturyinsk, Severdlovsk Region, March 6, 2007. Armenia’s trade with the United Arab Emirates (UAE) grew more than fivefold, to almost $5 billion, in the first ten months of 2024 as the South Caucasus country seemed to become a major conduit for exports of Russian gold and diamonds to world markets. Government data shows that Armenian exports to the UAE accounted for over 98 percent of the trade volume, technically making the Gulf nation Armenia’s leading export market. Armenian goods and commodities accounted for a small percentage of that, however. The Armenian government’s Statistical Committee reported in January-October 2024 more than fivefold increases in both imports and exports of gold, diamonds and various jewelry items which totaled $6.8 billion and $7.4 billion respectively. Although Armenia has gold production, diamond-cutting and jewelry industries important for the domestic economy, their annual turnover could only generate a fraction of these figures, meaning that external factors were behind the astronomical rises. According to the committee, Russia’s exports to Armenia surged by $5.6 billion to nearly $8.3 billion in the same period. Armenian media outlets reported throughout the year sharp rises in shipments of Russian gold and, to a lesser extent, diamonds to Armenia and their subsequent re-exports, possibly after some processing, to third countries. UAE -- An aerial view of the Marina Beach in the Gulf emirate of Dubai, July 8, 2020 Citing the national customs service, the investigative publication Hetq.am said that Armenia imported about 66 tons of gold worth $4.4 billion already in the first half of 2024 and that almost all of it came from Russia. The latter cannot directly supply the precious metal to Western buyers due to sanctions imposed after its 2022 invasion of Ukraine. Armenia shipped nearly as much gold abroad during the same period, with the UAE absorbing around two-thirds of those exports and the rest of them mostly going to China. This explains why Armenian exports to China nearly tripled in January-October to almost $1 billion. In a recent article, Hetq.am identified more than a dozen Armenian firms involved in large-scale imports and re-exports of Russian gold. According to it, one of those firms is linked to the family of Khachatur Sukiasian, a wealthy businessman and parliamentarian representing Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian’s Civil Contract party. The lucrative trade operations appear to have also involved Russian diamonds likewise covered by U.S. and European Union sanctions. In 2023, Armenia reportedly exported (mainly to the UAE) 4.5 million carats of diamonds worth about $590 million, a volume by far exceeding the combined annual output of Armenian diamond-cutting firms. The Armenian customs service has still not released any diamond-related data for 2024. Armenian entrepreneurs have also taken advantage of the sanctions by re-exporting many Western-manufactured goods to Russia. This was the main driving force behind rapid economic growth registered in the country in 2022 and 2023. That growth moderated in 2024 and is projected to slow further this year. https://www.azatutyun.am/a/33262615.html?fbclid=IwY2xjawHlj5JleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHVNpHpJzMKAT1VwvsDYQn5XHDEqC7sTUUvoTo0W4P3EX2ke-Y_woWWVZ-Q_aem_XunGSStAiSZIvmvHBYNqRQ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MosJan Posted January 7 Author Report Share Posted January 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.