President of Armenia: The so called "diplomatic correctness" in this case is simply detrimental for the security of this region

I am glad to welcome you to the Presidential Palace, welcome you to Armenia.  OSCE is a very important organization for Armenia not only because this Organization has in its framework several institutions - the Minsk Group, the High-level Planning Group, the OSCE Chairman-in-Office Personal Representative - all of them dealing with the Nagorno Karabakh problem, but also because the OSCE principles and the
comprehensive concept of security is fully shared by our country. It is very important that in the framework of this Organization, we agreed that security of one country cannot be ensured at the expense of security of another country. We fully implement our commitments.  However, recently an event has taken place, which makes us to seriously reconsider some of our approaches. As you know, in Azerbaijan pardon was immediately granted to a creature which committed a horrendous crime; unfortunately, in our view this event was not the last one.  Everything started when in 2007 the OSCE Minsk Group presented its proposal for the settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. Many would remember how Azerbaijan rejected the document; then it made a declarative statement that the document in general was acceptable, but afterwards it was trying to give its own interpretations to the principles enshrined in the document. You remember how they were trying to interpret the right of self-determination. You remember how they were trying to interpret the term "referendum." And then a spectacle started which was meant to gain time, to accumulate huge amount of weaponry so that at the opportune moment the Nagorno Karabakh conflict could be solved through the military means.

In our view, pardoning a murderer was not a step to raise Aliev's authority at home - it was an attempt to test the response of the international community to Azerbaijan's outrageous moves. Cannot be any other way because in Azerbaijan and among its leadership, there are, I believe, many people who could soberly see the consequences of such a move. And that testing of the international community's patience, as I said, has started long ago: when Azeris started to violate the CFT treaty obligations, nobody responded to those blatant violations; when Azeri president publicly instructed his Academia to write a history for Azerbaijan where Armenians must not
be mentioned at all, nobody paid attention; when Aliev stated publicly that Yerevan and the entire territory of Armenia is the Azeri soil, nobody reacted to that; when Aliev declared publicly that their number one enemy is the Armenian nation world-wide and that the enemy must be destroyed, again there was no retort. In response to all our warnings, all requests we have made to the Co-chairs, to the rest of the world that it was a beginning of a very dangerous process we were receiving improper responses that Aliev's statements were for domestic consumption. Such a differentiation between the domestic and external audiences simply cannot be - a person cannot think one way in the morning, and another in the evening; one way on Monday, and another way on Thursday. Seeing such a lenience toward these statements, Aliev took up actions. The first one took place during the regional visit of the US Secretary of State: subversive actions were instigated not only on the line of contact but also at the Armenian-Azerbaijani border. And again the response was a weak one. And unfortunately, this is not the end of it.

You know, I went through the war, that's why I don't want a new war. I personally felt on my own skin what the effects of the war, its
impact. And I am confident that anyone concerned with security in our region, doesn't want a war. However, desiring is not enough -
actions are needed and that actions must start when you call spade a spade. The so called "diplomatic correctness" in this case is simply
detrimental for the security of this region.

Recently, in Armenia a sarcastic joke appeared. It sounds like this: after these events, the international X organization calls upon Armenia and Azerbaijan not to axe each other in sleep. And this is not a joke to cheer you up, this is our people's attitude towards those international organizations which are trying to introduce parity between the victim and the perpetrator; between the guilty and the innocent. It is extremely bad. I ask you, I urge your governments and our Organization to deal with this issue.

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Israeli parliament votes to bring back the death penalty, but only for Palestinians

Israeli parliament votes to bring back the death penalty, but only for Palestinians

srael’s parliament approved a bill on Monday that would allow the execution of Palestinians convicted on terror charges for deadly attacks, a move that has been criticized as discriminatory and immediately drew a court challenge. Sixty-two lawmakers, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, voted in favor and 48 against the bill, championed by far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir. There was one abstention and the rest of the lawmakers were not present. Ben Gvir in the run-up to the vote had worn a lapel pin in the shape of a noose, symbolising his support for the legislation. “We made history!!! We promised. We delivered,” he posted on X after the vote. The bill would make the death penalty the default punishment for Palestinians in the Israeli-occupied West Bank found guilty of intentionally carrying out deadly attacks deemed “acts of terrorism” by an Israeli military court. The bill says that the sentence may be reduced to life imprisonment under “special circumstances.” Palestinians in the West Bank are automatically tried in Israeli military courts. Meanwhile, under the bill, in Israeli criminal courts anyone “who intentionally causes the death of a person with the aim of harming an Israeli citizen or resident out of an intention to put an end to the existence of the State of Israel shall be sentenced to death or life imprisonment.” Criminal courts try Israeli nationals, including Palestinian citizens and residents of east Jerusalem. The bill sets the execution method as hanging, adding that it should be carried out within 90 days of the sentencing, with a possible postponement of up to 180 days. - ‘Parallel tracks’ - The bill appears to conflict with Israel’s Basic Laws, which prohibit arbitrary discrimination, and shortly after it was passed, a leading human rights group announced that it had filed a petition with the Supreme Court demanding the legislation’s annulment. “The law creates two parallel tracks, both designed to apply to Palestinians,” the Association for Civil Rights in Israel said in a statement. “In military courts — which have jurisdiction over West Bank Palestinians — it establishes a near-mandatory death sentence,” the rights group said. In civilian courts, the law’s stipulation that defendants must have acted “with the aim of negating the existence” of Israel “structurally excludes Jewish perpetrators,” the group added. The association argued the law should be annulled on both jurisdictional and constitutional grounds. During the debate in parliament, opposition lawmaker and former deputy Mossad director, Ram Ben Barak, expressed outrage at the legislation. “Do you understand what it means that there is one law for Arabs in Judea and Samaria, and a different law for the general public for which the State of Israel is responsible?” he asked fellow parliamentarians, using the Israeli name for the West Bank. “It says that Hamas has defeated us. It has defeated us because we have lost all our values.” - ‘Discriminatory application’ - Lawmaker Limor Son Har-Melech from Ben Gvir’s party, who years ago survived an attack by Palestinian militants in which her husband was killed, urged fellow parliamentarians to approve the bill. “For years, we endured a cruel cycle of terror, imprisonment, release in reckless deals, and the return of these human monsters to murder Jews again ... And today, my friends, this cycle has come full circle.” The Palestinian Authority condemned the law’s adoption, saying that “Israel has no sovereignty over Palestinian land.” “This law once again reveals the nature of the Israeli colonial system, which seeks to legitimize extrajudicial killing under legislative cover,” it added. In February, Amnesty International had urged Israeli lawmakers to reject the legislation, citing its “discriminatory application against Palestinians.” On Sunday, Britain, France, Germany and Italy expressed “deep concern” over the bill, which they said risked “undermining Israel’s commitments with regards to democratic principles.” While the death penalty exists for a small number of crimes in Israel, it has become a de facto abolitionist country — the Nazi Holocaust perpetrator Adolf Eichmann was the last person to be executed in 1962. Israel has occupied the West Bank since 1967 and violence there has soared since Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attack on Israel triggered the Gaza war. (read more by clicking the image above).

Popular

Editor's choice
Interview
Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Today, commonspace.eu starts a new regular weekly series. THURSDAY INTERVIEW, conducted by Lauri Nikulainen, will host  persons who are thinkers, opinion shapers, and implementors in their countries and spheres. We start the series with an interview with Murad Muradov, a leading person in Azerbaijan's think tank community. He is also the first co-chair of the Action Committee for a new Armenian-Azerbaijani Dialogue. Last September he made history by being the first Azerbaijani civil society activist to visit Armenia after the 44 day war, and the start of the peace process. Speaking about this visit Murad Muradov said: "My experience was largely positive. My negative expectations luckily didn’t play out. The discussions were respectful, the panel format bringing together experts from Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Turkey was particularly valuable during the NATO Rose-Roth Seminar in Yerevan, and media coverage, while varied in tone, remained largely constructive. Some media outlets though attempted to represent me as more of a government mouthpiece than an independent expert, which was totally misleading.  Overall, I see these initiatives as important steps in rebuilding trust and normalising professional engagement. The fact that soon a larger Azerbaijani civil society visits to Armenia followed, reinforces the sense that this process is moving in the right direction." (click the image to read the interview in full)