Armenia Not Recognized as Occupier by UN Security Council Resolutions, Claims Aghazaryan Distorts Facts

On December 2, MP of the 'Civil Contract' faction, Hovik Aghazaryan, stated in the National Assembly that Armenia became an occupier according to UN resolutions after signing the ceasefire agreement in May 1994. Civilnet reports on this controversy.

During an extraordinary session of the Parliament on December 2, the Assembly discussed a proposal from the 'Armenia' faction to respond to the statement made by the Azerbaijani parliament, which was ultimately rejected.

Aghazaryan, speaking from the podium, declared it a major mistake for Armenia to have signed the ceasefire agreement in 1994. “Do not spread those Azerbaijani narratives. It was the people of Artsakh who were fighting against Azerbaijan, standing up for their rights,” Aghazaryan emphasized.

According to him, tens of thousands of Armenians went to protect their brothers in Artsakh, but Armenia was not fighting against Azerbaijan. “Our mistake was that some high-ranking Armenian officials, for the purpose of distributing the spoils, claimed they saved the world and Artsakh and signed that document, which led to various decisions and resulted in Armenia being classified as an occupier by UN resolutions,” he said, adding that they are now learning from that mistake.

When mentioning UN decisions, Aghazaryan seemingly refers to the four well-known resolutions of the UN Security Council that have been repeatedly exploited by Azerbaijani authorities. However, Aghazaryan distorts both the content of these UN resolutions and the timeline of events.

It should be noted that the four UN Security Council resolutions were adopted in 1993, while the ceasefire agreement was signed in May 1994. Thus, Armenia's signing of the ceasefire could not have caused these UN resolutions since they were adopted nearly a year earlier.

What was noted in the UN Security Council resolutions.

In 1993, while active military operations were underway in Karabakh and Armenian forces had also gained control over adjacent territories, the UN Security Council adopted four resolutions. However, none of these four resolutions state that Armenia is an occupier.

The first resolution, 822, was adopted in April 1993, expressing concern over the deterioration of relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Concern was also raised about the “escalation of armed hostilities and, in particular, the recent incursions by Armenian forces into the Kelbajar region of Azerbaijan.” There is no mention of Armenia being an occupier, and responsibility for the Kelbajar incursion was placed on the local Armenian forces.

The next resolution, 853, adopted in July 1993, called upon the Armenian government to continue exerting its influence to ensure that Azerbaijan fulfills the requirements of resolutions 822 and this resolution, as well as to accept the proposals of the OSCE Minsk Group. Thus, the Security Council speaks of the influence of the Armenian government over the Artsakh people, and again, there is no accusation directed towards Armenia or any mention of it being an occupier.

The following resolution, 874, adopted in October 1993, again does not address Armenia specifically and calls for “steps to withdraw armed forces from recently occupied territories (without any specification) and to eliminate obstacles to transport and communications.”

The last resolution, 884, was adopted in November 1993, urging the Armenian government to use its influence “to ensure the implementation of the requirements of resolutions 822, 853, and 874 by the Armenian people of the Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan and to ensure that the involved forces are not provided with resources to continue their armed campaign.”

In summary, none of the four adopted resolutions state that Armenia is an occupier. Instead, they speak solely about Armenia's influence over the local Armenian people in Nagorno-Karabakh.

Thus, Hovik Aghazaryan distorts the facts by claiming that Armenia's signing of the ceasefire agreement led to the adoption of UN Security Council resolutions. He also misrepresents the content of the resolutions.