Nikol Pashinyan Reveals Details about the Negotiation Legacy Received on the Nagorno-Karabakh Issue

The acting Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan provided details about the negotiation process regarding the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict that the current government inherited in 2018. According to Armenpress, Pashinyan emphasized that in 2018, when they came to power, the negotiations for the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict were in a failed state and there was a pre-war situation.

“On April 17, 2018, Serzh Sargsyan, who at that moment had been the top official dealing with the Nagorno-Karabakh issue for the last ten years, stated that the negotiations were stalled and did not provide grounds for optimism. He mentioned that we should no longer hope that Azerbaijan would act in a peaceful manner and would not try to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh issue through war. This means that by 2018, we faced a situation where negotiations were failed and a pre-war situation existed. So, what did we do? We tried in every possible way to get the negotiation process out of the deadlock by proposing constructive frameworks and did our utmost to ensure that Armenia was maximally prepared for war. But it turns out that during the war in September 2020, Azerbaijan was preparing for 16 years, while Armenia prepared for 2 years. And this is the truth, and this truth has been in front of all of you,” said Pashinyan.

He noted that the negotiation process regarding the Karabakh issue had continuously failed. “We are being blamed, and they say, ‘You did not give Azerbaijan hope that they will get what they want through negotiations.’ This is a quote from a well-known individual. The question is, did Azerbaijan give us hope during the negotiation process that the Karabakh issue would be resolved in the way that the Armenian people envision? Azerbaijan continuously stated that it considers Karabakh its territory, that the 7 regions must be returned to it, and if not, it will resolve the issue militarily. Azerbaijan also announced that it is spending billions of dollars on acquiring weapons and ammunition. An Armenian negotiator once said, ‘Well, we had to give Azerbaijan hope that they would get what they want through negotiations.’ I said what Azerbaijan wanted to get. Now it has turned out that the negotiation tactic of Serzh Sargsyan and Robert Kocharian was to give Azerbaijan hope that it would get all of this through negotiations. And I will tell you, they achieved that goal, because in the 2018 negotiation situation, even what Serzh Sargsyan considered acceptable was, in fact, a validation of Azerbaijan's hopes of obtaining the 7 regions and Karabakh through negotiations. And his predecessor admits that the tactic was to give hope that Azerbaijan would get what it wanted,” Pashinyan elaborated.

He raised the question: let them then say what hope was given to them. “If the negotiating side says that we must give hope to the opposite side, it is logical that the opposite side should also give us hope. What hope did Azerbaijan give us? It only gave hope for one thing. The only option where this logic of hope could work was that it was discussed that Meghri would be exchanged for Karabakh. So is that the hope? And I believe that those people must be held accountable for their statements. Tell the public what hope you offered Azerbaijan during the negotiations, and what hope Azerbaijan gave you. And they must show this through public statements and documents,” said Nikol Pashinyan.

The acting Prime Minister also added that in 2018 there was no negotiating combination that could be considered somewhat acceptable from his side. “I did not see such an option. That was the culmination of hopes given to Azerbaijan back then,” he said.

According to Armenpress, Nikol Pashinyan also addressed statements regarding the remaining Armenian-controlled territory in the Lachin and Kelbajar regions. “According to the logic of the negotiations table in 2018, nothing remained under our control. Moreover, Armenia was constantly giving hope, while Azerbaijan wanted more, and the more it wanted, the more hope it had to be given. And the only way to ensure peace was considered to give more hope. Very well, we could have given hope for another 30 years, we could have postponed it for another 30 years, but the time comes when the opposite side says we must move from words to action. And it is very important that these hopes not only became Azerbaijan's expectations from Armenia, but also from the international community and mediators. This is the situation we inherited concerning the Karabakh issue. And this is provable through documents,” Pashinyan stated.

He noted that the only component that could have had a comforting role was the theme of the interim status of Karabakh. “However, Azerbaijan and the mediators, in fact, established since 2016 that there would be no interim status. In January 2016, it was essentially presented to Armenia that it had to abandon the idea of an interim status. Armenia, of course, rejected this, after which the April war began in April 2016, followed by proposals in the summer of 2016 where the concept of an interim status did not exist. After that, a negotiation process occurred, the outcome of which was that the Armenian side essentially agreed to hand over the Kelbajar and Lachin regions, proposing to return the logic of an interim status, which Azerbaijan rejected. Do you understand? In the negotiation process, two sides are formed, one of which must continually have its hopes raised, and the second side must give more and more hope to the opposite side. And when everything is given hope, the time comes for action,” Pashinyan said.

He also spoke about what should have happened next, even if the interim status of Karabakh was accepted. “First, there is a very important feature that in 1998, the Kocharian-Sargsyan duo carried out a change of power with the logic that the Karabakh issue should not be solved in phases, but should be resolved as a package. In 2018, on the negotiating table was a document titled ‘About the First Phase of the Resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict and Subsequent Steps.’ They played a political trick so that it would not seem that they avoided that political commitment made in 1998; there is a sentence written that this solution is package-based and is included. This sentence was crafted at the request of the Armenian side. But here’s another issue: Even if this agreement was signed, what would happen? Would it come into effect? No, because it is written that these actions are carried out after the governments of Armenia and Azerbaijan resolve the remaining issues through interstate negotiations. In other words, a purely phased version was negotiated. It is stated that the final status must be determined through a referendum ensuring the free expression of will of the entire population of Nagorno-Karabakh. I recently raised the question: what does the entire population of Nagorno-Karabakh mean? And the team of Serzh Sargsyan had to admit that this included Azerbaijanis who had left Nagorno-Karabakh, and to be considered part of the population of Nagorno-Karabakh, they had to reside in Karabakh. Those 40,000 Azerbaijanis who were supposed to live in Nagorno-Karabakh, where should they live? Of course, they should have lived where they previously resided. 40,000 Azerbaijanis exited in 1988. Now how many of those who left and their descendants are alive? Do not doubt that Azerbaijan would say they are now 120,000. It is stressed that the supposed referendum must take place within the agreed timeline between the sides. The Azerbaijani side stated that my position is that this referendum should not take place for the next 100 years. This document also states that a nationwide referendum is to take place, reflecting the free expression of will of the entire population of Nagorno-Karabakh. That is, there is a people, and there is a population. The population is the inhabitants of Karabakh, which according to the version negotiated by the Kocharian-Sargsyan duo, consists of Armenians and Azerbaijanis. But the concept of a nationwide people? Which people is being referred to? Here, a very fundamentally important thing happens. Azerbaijan states that according to its Constitution, any referendum on the status of any territory can take place only within the framework of the entire Azerbaijan. And thus, this is the hope provided by Kocharian,” he said.

The acting Prime Minister emphasized that he presented the entire chain, stressing that what he said is written on paper.