The Statement of November 9 Is Already Violated: Ruben Rubinyan

International pressure and attention on the issue of the closure of the Lachin Corridor is increasing, and we must continue to raise this pressure, said Ruben Rubinyan, the Vice President of the Parliament (Civil Contract party), in an interview with Azatutyun.

He also responded to criticisms directed at the government regarding not engaging in negotiations with Azerbaijan on this issue.

Below is an excerpt from the interview:

- You are not negotiating directly with those who close the corridor, the first argument.

- I do not agree with that argument because, in fact, the statement of November 9 is at least very clear, written in black and white, saying the following: a) The Lachin Corridor remains under the control of the Russian peacekeeping forces. Pay attention: if the Russian peacekeeping forces in Nagorno-Karabakh engage in peacekeeping in the classical sense, meaning they stand between the two conflicting parties — Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan — then in the Lachin Corridor, which is not only a road but also an area 5 kilometers wide, they exercise direct control over that area. According to the November 9 statement, neither Nagorno-Karabakh nor the Republic of Armenia have any jurisdiction or control functions in the Lachin Corridor.

Secondly, Azerbaijan also has no jurisdiction in the Lachin Corridor but has one obligation: to ensure the safe passage of people, vehicles, and goods from Armenia to Nagorno-Karabakh and vice versa, which means not to take any actions that would endanger that free movement. Naturally, Azerbaijan has violated this point, and now the question arises: well, if it is written black and white what should be done, meaning there is already an agreement, what is there to negotiate? The statement of November 9 has already been violated, and that violation must be restored.

- That agreement has been violated, and the signature of Armenia is also on that agreement. It is not that it applies to one point and not to another.

- Yes, but negotiation implies that the parties talk about the reciprocal steps that can be taken to achieve a certain situation. We have a situation where the status of the Lachin Corridor, the parameters of its operation have already been negotiated in the November 9 statement, meaning for example, according to those critics, if we start renegotiating the actual November 9 statement, because that means negotiating the situation, where is the guarantee that the newly renegotiated agreement will not be violated two days later? In other words, we also deal with Azerbaijan's contractual capacity here.

- So you mean, negotiating once, Yerevan will be subjected to that blackmail, and it can be repeated endlessly.

- I am not going into details now, I am saying that what needed to be negotiated has already been negotiated, and as a result, the November 9 statement was accepted. In other words, is there not a fixed fact that according to the November 9 statement the Lachin Corridor should be under the control of Russian peacekeepers, and it should be open? Now that is not the case.

- Azerbaijan says: it was not written there that the Armenian side should transfer "weapons, explosives, let us take measures to prevent that".

- Firstly, the Republic of Armenia has no military in Nagorno-Karabakh and has not transferred weapons and explosives. Secondly, it is also not written in the November 9 statement that such a thing cannot happen, meaning even if the RA did so, it still was not addressed in the November 9 statement. And if we talk about a blockade, well, what, weapons were transported through the gas pipeline that was damaged and they are not letting [gas] be in Karabakh?