The Russo-Turkish Treaty (Treaty of Moscow) of 16 March 1921 was a record of the consequences of seizure of the Republic of Armenia, partition of its territory and deprivation of its independence through the aggression of the Turks and Russians. This is stated in the statement issued by the Sasna Tsrer (Daredevils of Sassoun) Party.
The statement particularly reads as follows:
“The ‘regional architecture’ shaped under the Treaty of Kars — concluded under and for legitimizing the Treaty of Moscow on 13 October 1921 — was called for ruling out the rebirth of Armenian statehood and the Armenian entity.
This 'architecture' became the foundation on which the system of governance for colonizing the state-shaped remnant of the Republic of Armenia (deprived of its rights) — Soviet Armenia, as well as for keeping wide layers of Armenians under the influence of the Russian Empire, was built.
In essence, the Treaty of Moscow of 16 March 1921, along with the Treaty of Kars of 13 October 1921 (deriving from the Treaty of Moscow) is a certificate on ultimate deprivation of the homeland of Armenians and exclusion of Armenian Statehood. Thus, revising the 'regional architecture' shaped through those treaties must become the starting point for shaping the State that we have today.
These treaties are acts that contradict international law and have no legal force in reality. However, international legal acts on the existence of Armenia as an entity, its territory and borders, including and first and foremost the Treaty of Sevres of 10 August 1920 and Woodrow Wilson’s Arbitrary Verdict, are legitimate international legal acts and must serve as a ground and pave the way for the ultimate decolonization and deoccupation of Armenia.
This process has already begun with the demise of the former USSR and the establishment of the Armenian jurisdiction over a part of Artsakh.
The incorporation of Artsakh within the composition of the Republic of Armenia as a province and the solution to the issue of Nakhichevan, which has turned into a platzdarm for military aggression against the Republic of Armenia, are also goals that have to be accomplished in the context of the international legal and political evaluations of those unlawful treaties and the processes deriving from those treaties, and this will enshrine the subsequent phase of decomposition of the anti-Armenian ‘architecture’ in the region.
At the same time, in this context, fulfillment of the legal acts on the fact that Armenia is an entity, its territory and borders, will generate a sufficient international legal resource for ensuring our national security and the functioning of the State.
We are certain that only by the specified national strategy will there be an opportunity to lay the foundation for a new, pro-Armenian ‘architecture’ in the region in line with the international legal acts on the fact that Armenia is an entity, its territory and borders."