Show news feed

YEREVAN. – Armenian Presidential Chief of Staff, Master of International Law and Diplomacy Vigen Sargsyan specifically wrote the following in his Facebook account: 

“I read with surprise Armenia’s former FM Vartan Oskanian’s evaluations on the situation created around the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh problem.  

The author builds the entire text on assumptions, and then he offers the reader to accept as fact his conclusion that ‘the Karabakh peace process is at an impasse.’ 

I am also surprised why the author thinks no one understands whom the ‘language’ of the Los Cabos statement is addressed to, when he himself writes ‘it is clearly Azerbaijan which jeopardizes the delicate peace.’ 

It is also bizarre that Mr. Oskanian does not ‘recall a time when the impasse was this much profound.’ History has shown that, sometimes, seemingly unsolvable problems were solved much easier and faster than some conflicts.

Armenia, as a conscientious negotiator, is doing everything to reach a mutual concession. The state’s leader has clearly noted the axis around which an acceptable solution for Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh can be built. That is to say, Armenia wishes to do everything so that the process does not meet an impasse.    

The author writes it is apparent that there is no document which forms a basis for negotiations among all sides. But is it not true that the [OSCE Minsk Group] Co-Chairing countries stated for the first time that the Nagorno-Karabakh’s final status must be decided through legally binding free expression?    

He himself notes that the documents proposed by the mediators were twice unacceptable for the Azerbaijani side.

Speaking about the impasse, Mr. Oskanian notes that the reason for this is ‘the increase of unsettled problems.’ But Los Cabos’ ‘harsh’ statement clearly says: ‘The achieved progress must become an opportunity for ending the activities toward the formation of a comprehensive framework for peace.”       

Mr. Oskanian believes [US Secretary of State] Madam [Hilary] Clinton left Armenia empty-handed, because ‘Armenia could not have added anything new to what was already accepted in Kazan [, Russia].’ [But] Armenia accepted nothing in Kazan. 

The primary tone of Mr. Oskanian’s view is political, not politological. [And] The objective is but one: to give a signal to [First President and opposition Armenian National Congress leader] Levon Ter-Petrosyan, toward a readiness to cooperate with him.”

This text available in   Հայերեն
Partner news