Thank you. But No thank you! Armenian Foreign Minister Nalbandian tells European institutions they have no mandate to discuss the Karabakh conflict.

Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian has snubbed attempts by European structures to get involved in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement process and has reminded them that they have no mandate to do so.

The Armenian news portal news.am reported that speaking at the meeting of the Standing Committee of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe being held in Yerevan, Nalbandian thanked the European institutions for their interest and assistance to the settlement of the Karabakh conflict but reminded his guests that the conflict has not been formally discussed in the Council or Europe, or in the Committee of Ministers."These structures have no mandate, but we are grateful for their interest and the interest of other international organizations to the OSCE Minsk Group activities aimed at finding a peaceful settlement on the basis of the proposals made by co-chairs and other member states of the organization. This format is very important and effective," he said.

Edward Nalbandian recalled that a number of declarations on the level of the co-chairs of the Minsk Group and OSCE Ministerial Council were adopted on Karabakh: "There is no other conflict in the world which would be raised to such a high political level." Minister Nalbandian reiterated that Armenia welcomes and supports the mentioned statements and is ready to participate in the settlement of the conflict based on these statements. Foreign Minister said that the Armenian side has never demanded that the international community must support their positions exclusively.

"We expect the support of the international community which is expressed in statements. Such a support can help in finding a peaceful settlement. A similar approach Armenia expects from Azerbaijan," he said.

Asked about the extent of compromise, Minister Nalbandian said that Yerevan's position is fully consonant with the position of the international community. The Minister stressed Armenia's readiness for confidence-building measures."Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh are committed to maintaining the ceasefire, creation of mechanisms to investigate incidents, and withdrawal of snipers. Azerbaijan rejects all such approaches," news.am quotes the Minister as saying.

Commonspace.eu political editor said in a comment:

"For a long time Armenia has indicated that it is comfortable with the format of the OSCE Minsk Process as the mechanism for resolving the Karabakh conflict. Over the last few months however Armenian politicians and diplomats seems to be taking the issue one step further, insisting that discussions of the Karabakh conflict can only take place in the format of the OSCE Minsk Process. It has for example refused to participate in the meetings of an ad-hoc committee of PACE that was established to look at the issue. This new Armenian approach is not sustainable, and may even be counter productive. It increases perceptiuon that the Minsk process is biased towards Armenia, and perhaps even worse, given that the process has not yielded any results in the twenty years that it has been established, it increases the perceptiion that Armenia is happy with a process that is stalled.

Some observers of the negotiations attribute some blame to the diplomats of the three OSCE Minsk Group co-chair countries, since they have allowed a situation whereby both sides now give diametrically opposed versions of why the negotiations are stalled. The Minsk Group silence and secrecy is therefore now adding to an already complex and difficult situation."

 

source: commonspace.eu with news.am

photo: Foreign Minister Nalbandian addressing the PACE Standing Committee in Yerevan on 31 May 2013 (picture courtesy of the Armenian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.)

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Landmines present to the European Union both a contradiction and a dilemma

Landmines present to the European Union both a contradiction and a dilemma

Finland’s decision to buy one million landmines creates a serious contradiction in the policy of the European Union, and is symbolic of a bigger dilemma facing European countries as they get used to the need to acquire “hard” power to face an increasing threat from Russia. Finland is seeking to acquire one million anti-personnel mines at a cost of 100 million euros. Finland, together with Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia last year abandoned the Ottawa agreement, the international framework that bans the use of anti-personnel mines, which the EU had been instrumental in establishing and supporting. All five countries cite the threat from Moscow as the reason. Colonel Riku Mikkonen of the Army Command told Finland’s national news agency STT that officials are now gathering information from suppliers regarding the deal, the AFP news agency reports. Helsinki would like domestic manufacturers to supply the mines, with contracts signed by the end of 2027 and production up and running by 2028. “It would be useful in many ways if Finnish companies produced the anti-personnel mines in Finland,” Mikkonen said. About half a dozen Finnish firms qualify, he told STT. “However, at this stage, buying the mines from abroad is not totally ruled out,” he added. LANDMINES PROVIDE THE EU WITH BOTH A CONTRADICTION, AND A DILEMMA Eliminating landmine contamination worldwide is one of the EU’s main soft power postures, and it basks in its record as the biggest funder of anti-landmine action in the world. But the fact that 5 of its 27 member states  have now left the Ottawa Treaty dents the EU moral high ground. It is a contradiction that is too big and important to be ignored. It also presents the European Union with a deeper dilemma. The threat from Russia is changing what the EU has stood for decades, namely a force for good able to mobilise its considerable soft power for the greater good of humanity. How the Union will implement this change will define its future. In the meantime landmines have not become any less lethal, benign, or unimportant. They remain in many parts of the world a major threat to life, an impediment to prosperity, and a potential trigger to further conflict. The 22 EU members states that still adhere to the Ottawa treaty must regroup, and be more assertive in their quest against anti-personnel land mines. All the reasons why they supported the Ottawa treaty in the first place still exist. The message must be clear: NO TO LANDMINES!
Editor's choice
News
Pashinyan says that he wants peace treaty with Azerbaijan by 2031

Pashinyan says that he wants peace treaty with Azerbaijan by 2031

Armenia should sign and ratify a peace treaty with Azerbaijan before 2031, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said. He described the objective as the top priority for his administration. Earlier, the Armenian prime minister also spoke about a possible land-swap with Azerbaijan Armenia and Azerbaijan should agree to establish a clear, conventional border without enclaves or exclaves, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said. Armenia controls three Azeri enclaves inside its borders while Baku controls one Armenian enclave – those could be subject to a land swap, Pashinyan announced.

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)