Former Parliamentary Chair Suggests Refraining from ‘Paradigm of Haggling’ on Karabakh

In the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement process, a so-called paradigm of haggling is applied which assumes that all issues must be resolved through agreement, said former National Assembly chair and current independent MP Tigran Torosyan in a press briefing in Yerevan today.

 

According to him, it’s clear that an irresolvable discrepancy in Nagorno-Karabakh’s status exists among the viewpoints of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Nagorno-Karabakh itself.

 

“This problem has its solution, which is the following: when a situation is unsolvable through this paradigm, you have to try those paradigms which allow the problem to be solved. This is the legal paradigm, that is, the norms of international law, which undoubtedly say one thing: to contrast territorial integrity with the right to self-determination is meaningless. Consequently, there has to be a change in strategy and in the paradigm of haggling,” he said.

 

In the deputy’s opinion, the time has come for the Armenian parties to put forth a full concept on conflict settlement, which will truly be a proactive policy:

 

“This is the way to ensure the conflict’s resolution because, unfortunately, today we have an additional obstacle: in our region, two powerful states have conflicting interests, which is why none of the mediators won’t want to see the conflict resolved in the foreseeable future — because it goes against its interests. But this doesn’t mean that we have to consider those parties our enemy; finally, each is pursuing its interests. Rather, countering interests with international law, I believe the Armenian parties can achieve success.”

 

Torosyan then offered his proposal for resolution of the conflict:

 

“What to do? First, those representatives in Armenia who are engaged in [conflict] settlement not only should declare that the conflict will be resolved on grounds of the right to self-determination — these statements are no longer influential. Rather, they have to raise the arguments as to why, how, it has to be presented well, how the war began, who began the war, what course did it take. There has to be an expert panel that will work on this issue professionally. Naturally, politicians make political statements and adopt political decisions. Those documents have to be prepared by experts on the basis of which they will approve a decision and make statements. Otherwise, we might find ourselves — and sometimes we do — in not so pleasant situations. The entire world has to know that the Republic of Armenia’s position is built on fundamental pillars. Simply statements, that NKR will no longer be part of Azerbaijan’s territory, are no longer suitable — their time has passed. If we work hard, NKR will return to the negotiating process. On the issue of territorial integrity, Armenia and Azerbaijan can sit down and talk. But to whom does the right to self-determination refer, Armenia or Azerbaijan? This is obvious nonsense even for non-experts. There’s a very serious omission here, which leads to this stalemate. The self-determining party has to come and sit beside the table. This is what international law says,” Torosyan concluded.