Nagorno-Karabakh’s involvement in peace talks essential for progress – lawmaker
Interview by Tigranuhi Martirosyan
To promote a progress in the peace process over Nagorno-Karabakh, it is highly important to involve the country in the negotiations, says Davit Melkumyan, a member of the country’s National Assembly (opposition Democracy faction)
In an interview with Tert.am, Melkumyan shared his comments on the recent trilateral presidential summit in St Petersburg, agreeing that Armenia is making every possible step towards returning the country to the negotiating table.
What is you opinion on the Sargsyan-Aliyev meeting held by Russian President Vladimir Putin’s mediation? Opinions widely vary in the expert and political circles, some saying that it was just a meeting for a meeting and others describing it as a step forward. What is your personal view?
Let me note, first of all, that the fact of the meeting is positive as it is. It is appreciable that the sides reiterated the willingness to reach a peaceful settlement. I am very little informed of the details as the meeting was held behind closed doors. But I would really like to underline that the joint presidential statement, reflecting a commitment to abide by the agreements reached in Vienna, was positive and important.
It is commendable to see the sides reiterate their willingness.
Here is where we see the skepticism as to the meeting’s effective outcome. No new decision was practically adopted.
I repeat, these are just opinions not supported by facts. And the facts have remained behind closed doors. Neither did we initially have great expectations. To promote a step forward, we need to ensure Artsakh’s participation in the peace talks. I don’t think it would be possible to reach a serious agreement or sign any document at all without Karabakh’s participation.
Mr Melkumyan, Armenia’s foreign minister gave an interview with a rather positive note after the meeting. There was an impression that [Edward] Nalbandian made hints of possible changes in Azerbaijan’s attitude towards mutual concessions. Did you observe such nuances, or do you still think Azerbaijan hasn’t changed its stance?
It isn’t really easy to admit that Azerbaijan might have changed its policies. That country’s posture has but inspired non-confidence over the past years. What’s even more, Azerbaijan has been using every possible occasion to cheat others. Hence I cannot possibly believe in that country’s statements or have any confidence about the temporary policy change. Unless we have international guarantees that Azerbaijan will refrain from violating the ceasefire, or the side responsible for the violations will be held accountable at all, we cannot possible have any trust. I trust only our soldier and our army, because the Defense Army has been and remains the only security guarantor of Artsakh.
But no gunshots were heard [along the Line of Contact] in the run-up to this meeting, as was normally the case ahead of all the previous talks.
Yes, the tension has been down for quite a long time. But hours before the meeting, the Azerbaijani president gave an interview with negative accentuations, sticking to his positions of an aggressor.
You said a progress in the Nagorno-Karabakh settlement process would be hardly achievable unless Karabakh itself is a negotiating party. The widely circulating opinion ahead of the St Petersburg meeting was that Armenia should insist on Nagorno-Karabakh’s return to the negotiating table as a precondition; otherwise it shouldn’t join the meeting as long as the demand isn’t accepted etc. Are radical steps acceptable for resolving a problem as this?
Undoubtedly, it is highly important to invest every possible effort in returning Artsakh to the negotiating table. I don’t think Armenia fails to take adequate steps to resolve the issue. This process is time-consuming. I am confident Armenia is using all its resources to return Artsakh to the process.