Armenian PM and ex-president accuse each other of 'diplomatic fiasco'

JAMnews

Yerevan

Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has accused his predecessors of “a fiasco in diplomacy”, because of which over the past 20-25 years in the Nagorno-Karabakh issue the Armenian side has suffered one diplomatic failure after another.

The day before, former Armenian President Robert Kocharian said that the Armenian authorities did everything to bring the war in Karabakh closer – with their ‘thoughtless steps and statements’, and Yerevan left Baku no chance but to start a war.

During his Saturday video message, the Armenian prime minister made it clear that he was not going to resign, which the opposition has been demanding since the signing of the truce, and responded to the accusations of ex-President Kocharian.

Who is responsible for diplomatic failures in the NK issue?

Nikol Pashinyan said that after the failures in the second Karabakh war, everyone and everyone is trying to make the current authorities responsible for the mistakes made over the past 25 years:

“It came to the point that the man, due to whom Nagorno-Karabakh was withdrawn from the negotiation process, and the negotiations moved to the plane of Armenia-Azerbaijan relations [talking about ex-President of Armenia Robert Kocharyan – JAMnews], accuses us of the fact that the Karabakh the issue received the context of a territorial dispute as a result of our policy.

This issue received the context of a territorial dispute at a time when Armenia began to negotiate instead of Karabakh. And this fact, pay attention, happened more than 20 years ago.”

The current government, according to Pashinyan, is accused of the fact that the international community perceived the Azerbaijani aggression against Nagorno-Karabakh as an attempt by Baku to restore the territorial integrity of the country:

“And this accusation is voiced by a person during whose rule the international community documented accusing Armenia of occupying the territories of Azerbaijan, and he explained that there is nothing dangerous in this, there is nothing terrible in the word ‘occupied’.

The prime minister believes that the attitude of the international community to the Karabakh issue was not formed in 2020, but happened 25 years ago:

“The Karabakh issue began to be viewed as a territorial dispute, and this became a big problem. Armenia began to be perceived as an occupying country. And over the past 2.5 years, an attempt has been made to just get out of this vicious circle.”

Pashinyan believes that the failure of the previous authorities in diplomacy is also indicated by the fact that the international community did not condemn Baku’s actions during the military escalation in Karabakh in 2016:

“Diplomatic success lies in the adoption of the 2016 proposals? Thanks to which, in fact, the issue of Artsakh’s status was removed from the agenda? You claim that we have bad relations with Russia, and you have good ones. Then how did it happen that, at the suggestion of our strategic ally, this issue was removed from the agenda?

You are professional diplomats, how did you allow that, following the events of 2016, Azerbaijan was not punished? Yes, because you went and obediently agreed to what was offered to you. That is, they legitimized the right of Azerbaijan to wage war.”

Turkey’s participation in the second Karabakh war

During his speech, the Prime Minister of Armenia also touched upon the accusations against him in connection with the fact that Turkey became involved in the Karabakh issue. However, in his opinion, this is also a blunder of the previous authorities:

“Turkey became involved in the Karabakh issue as a result of ‘football diplomacy’ [this is the initiative of Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan in 2008, when he invited Turkish President Gul to Yerevan for a match between football teams of both countries – JAMnews]. And as a result of the failure of the Armenian ‘football diplomacy’ Turkey announced that it would not establish relations with Armenia as long as the territories of Azerbaijan remain occupied. That was 10 years ago.”

On the signed trilateral agreement on Karabakh

The war could be stopped only with the signing of a document similar to the statement of November 9, before the war or at its start, Pashinyan said: “And by the way, from the first day of the war, from the rostrum of the National Assembly, I said that I could stop the war right now, and I said at what cost. Why then did you not make statements? […] Now it turns out that everyone is in favor of land surrender according to the ‘5 + 2’ formula [areas around the NK territory]. So why wasn’t it done in 2016, in 2018? Then the war would have been averted, and the Karabakh issue would have been resolved, especially since after the April war you knew what was what”.

What ex-president Robert Kocharian said

Earlier on December 4, ex-President Robert Kocharian said in an interview with Channel Five that the Armenian leadership, with its careless actions and statements, did everything to bring the war in Karabakh closer:

“First of all, the negotiation process was deliberately stalled. With our mutually exclusive statements, we created a situation in which the co-chairs did not know what the Armenian side wanted. There was an impression that Armenia was doing everything for a dead end. And the war began at a time when no one doubted that the negotiations were being thwarted by the Armenian side”.

According to Kocharian, the Armenian government legitimized Azerbaijani aggression against Karabakh:

“The basis for the existence of Artsakh is the right to self-determination. But Yerevan, with its statements, has driven the issue into the field of territorial integrity [talks about Pashinyan’s statement: ‘Artsakh is Armenia, period’]. As a result, not a single country condemned Azerbaijan, which started the war.”

The ex-president considers the current prime minister of Armenia to be the direct culprit of all these mistakes.

Kocharian is convinced that if the war had started under his rule, there would have been no defeat, since those “gross mistakes that predetermined the outcome of this war” would not have been made.

Kocharian stated that “today the face of Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan symbolizes our shameful defeat in the war”:

“The defeated authorities, who signed the capitulation, must be replaced in the name of the people. Every time he [Pashinyan’s] live, every time he appears on the screen or posts on Facebook, he shows that we are a losing nation. Reminds the family of every victim who is to blame for their death. “

Despite all the accusations, Kocharian believes that in the current state it is not worth holding early parliamentary elections:

“We saw what happened as a result of the elections under the influence of euphoria [talks about the elections in December 2018 after the velvet revolution, of which Pashinyan was the leader]. And, already having this experience, one must understand that it takes time to organize elections in a calmer situation. It takes time – at least a year. “