Any solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh issue must be acceptable to the people of Armenia, the people of Artsakh, and the people of Azerbaijan: Prime Minister's Spokesperson

I read the statements made by Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev in the Khatai region the day before, and I must say that his continuous attempts to delve into the chasms of history are indeed comical. This was stated today, on July 7, by the press secretary of the Prime Minister of Armenia, Mane Gevorgyan, on her Facebook page.

She specifically mentioned: “I read the statements made by Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev in the Khatai region the day before, and I must say that his continuous attempts to delve into the chasms of history are indeed comical. He claims that there is no mention of Armenians in the Kurakchay Treaty signed in the early 1800s.”

“We naively believed that Mr. Aliyev is familiar with the most popular works of ancient historiography, such as Herodotus's histories, Xenophon's 'Anabasis,' Strabo's 'Geography,' as well as the works of Pliny the Elder, Plutarch, Cassius, Appian, Tacitus, Ammianus Marcellinus, and Arab authors Baladhuri, Al-Masudi, and notable European travelers like Rubruck and Marco Polo, which contain substantial material about the biblical land of Armenia and its indigenous Armenian people.

If Mr. Aliyev does not trust the aforementioned authors, at least he should read the works of Ottoman writers from the 16th to 19th centuries—like Ibrahim Pevcevi, Mustafa Nayima, Rashid, Ismail Asim Efendi, Suleiman Izghii, Katib Chelebi, Ahmed Cevdet Pasha, Evliya Celebi—some of whom not only provided abundant information about the realm of Armenia but also traveled through Armenia-Ermenistan and interacted with its Armenian-Christian inhabitants.

Otherwise, speaking about the presence or absence of Armenians in any 19th-century document would only put him in a poor position. Armenians and Armenia have been referenced in historiographical works, historical documents, and maps since ancient times.

We thought that Mr. Aliyev’s knowledge would allow him to be well aware of the Armenian monuments built in Artsakh during the early Middle Ages, such as Amaras, Dadivank, and the 13th-century Gandzasar, which, by the way, was the spiritual center of the Khamsa principalities established by Armenians in Artsakh during the first half of the 18th century and recognized as an ally of Iran by a special decree of Persian Shah Nadir.

And it is not Prime Minister Pashinyan who asserts that Artsakh is part of Armenia, but rather Amaras, Dadivank, and Gandzasar themselves, with their Armenians inscriptions. Mr. Aliyev tries to insist that at the Munich Conference, Prime Minister Pashinyan portrayed a king who had no common ground with the Armenian people. At least he should be embarrassed by those authors. It is true that they wrote nothing about Azerbaijan, but they are not to blame for the fact that no such country existed in what is now Azerbaijan until 1918. If he refers to Iranian Atropatene, which still exists in its place in northwestern Iran, then it has no connection to the country he governs.

If he is struggling even in this regard, he could consult modern Iranian historians, who would enrich Mr. Aliyev’s knowledge.

Regarding the negotiations on the Nagorno-Karabakh issue, Mr. Aliyev’s recent statement clearly mentions the reason for the problem's lack of resolution: the complete disregard for the rights of the people of Artsakh. So how should the citizens of Artsakh respond to this? Naturally, they must defend their rights, and as long as Azerbaijan does not recognize this right, negotiations cannot be effective, including the right of the Armenian population of Artsakh to participate fully in negotiations concerning their own rights.

Ultimately, Prime Minister Pashinyan has proposed a clear formula to make the negotiation process effective: Any solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh issue must be acceptable to the people of Armenia, the people of Artsakh, and the people of Azerbaijan. This formula is acknowledged by the international community, but Mr. Aliyev refuses to accept it, insisting that the resolution of the issue must be acceptable only to the Azerbaijani people. And does he accuse us of being in a fascist state? And why does he constantly insist that the Nagorno-Karabakh issue has a military solution? Our response is the same: if the issue has a military solution, then the citizens of Artsakh have already resolved it a long time ago. Mr. Aliyev accuses the Co-Chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group, Armenia, and historical justice for the lack of resolution, while in reality, he should only blame himself for long having deviated from constructive discussions.”