All Quiet on the Karabakh Front

ALL QUIET ON THE KARABAKH FRONT

Are you serious about preparing for war?

My dear neighbours, nothing will come out of it, except for innocent victims. Why? It’s quite clear: for you Karabakh is a territory, whereas for us it is a sacred homeland. The motivations for war are absolutely different, and the psychological tuning of soldiers is also different…

An excerpt from the letter of Sos Sargsyan, people’s artist of the USSR and Armenia, great humanist, sent to the Azerbaijani intellectuals

November 2011

On 1 January 2016 in a quite difficult time the Federal Republic of Germany assumed the chairmanship of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) – the on-going crisis in the eastern part of Ukraine, migrant-related problems in the European Union, in particular in Germany, a number of bloody terrorist acts in the heart of Europe and the Syria crisis undermined the confidence and security in Europe. As stated by the German foreign minister the motto of the German chairmanship of the OSCE in 2016 will be “to renew the dialogue and restore trust and security”. On the eve of his OSCE chairmanship, on 13 January 2016 while presenting the strategy of the chairmanship to the OSCE Permanent Council the German foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier declared that the OSCE is needed as a platform for dialogue and confidence-building of Europe in the organization. In the perspective Germany, the OSCE chairman-in-office will focus on strengthening the possibilities of the organization itself in the course of the full cycle of the conflict - from its prevention with follow-up monitoring of its dynamic through post-conflict observation. Regarding the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict the minister expressed trouble over “the situation on the line of conflict and on the border between Armenia and Azerbaijan”. “The de-escalation remains a priority. We support the initiative of establishing a mechanism to investigate the violations of the ceasefire regime”, the German MFA said.

The utmost attention will be paid to the conflict in Ukraine. Gernot Erler, Special Representative of the Federal Government of Germany for the OSCE Chairmanship in 2016 declared thereon at the OSCE PA session on 26 February 2016. In particular he also mentioned that the OSCE will attempt to solve the problems in Nagorno-Karabakh, Transdniester and South Caucasus and will activate its work there. A convincing confirmation of the seriousness of the German chairmanship intentions will undoubtedly become the parliamentary seminar organized by the German Bundestag, which is anticipated to be held on 16-17 April 2016, in Leinsweiler, Rheinland-Pfalz. The seminar is entitled “Possibilities for the OSCE PA and Its Members to Make an Inclusive Contribution to the OSCE Efforts in Addressing Conflicts, in Particular Regarding Protracted Conflicts”.

The seminar will be attended by the OSCE PA delegates from Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Cyprus, Moldova Russia, Romania, Turkey and Ukraine, OSCE PA Vice-Presidents, and OSCE PA special representative on South Caucasus Kristian Vigenin and Special Representative on OSCE border issues Ignacio Sanchez Amor.

Undoubtedly the holding of the seminar became possible due to the tireless efforts of Doris Barnett, brilliant politician, head of the German delegation to the OSCE PA and OSCE PA Treasurer.

The perception of the personal responsibility of each of the participants in the upcoming forum is first and foremost dictated by the utmost complexity of the current international situation in the world, and in particular in the area of the OSCE and Greater Middle East. It was the desire to familiarize my colleagues with the essence of the Nagorno- Karabakh conflict that prompted me to highlight the crucial events of the last three decades based on indisputable documents. This being said I had a quite clear-cut goal. I hope together with my OSCE PA colleagues to comprehend the possible ways to utilize the rich experience of the peaceful settlement of disputable issues. I mean in particular the ways to settle the dispute between France and Germany regarding Alsace and Lotharingia. Or the settlement of the conflict that took place between the German-speaking community of the autonomous region of South Tyrol and the Italian authorities which pursued a policy of forcible Italianization, in particular during the rule of the Mussolini fascist regime. South Tyrol strived to break the ties with Italy and once again reunite with Austria. Naturally I see the ultimate goal of the upcoming seminar in Leinsweiler (with regard to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict) in elaborating recommendations for the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs, who for around 20 years have been leading the process of the peaceful resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. In order to make it clear for the OSCE PA colleagues and the public at large, first of all I would like to remind individual historical facts that preceded the hectic events that took place in Nagorno-Karabakh in the late 1980s and early 1990s. So, on 23 November 1977 a document entitled “Conclusion of the Presidium of the Council of Ministers of the USSR on the Findings of Considering the Appeals of Workers Demanding to Join Nagorno- Karabakh the Armenian SSR”, which read as follows: “As a consequence of a number of circumstances several decades ago Nagorno-Karabakh was artificially attached to Azerbaijan. Having said this the historical past of the region, its ethnic composition, the desire of the people and economic interests were not taken into consideration. Decades passed, and the question of Karabakh is being addressed. The instances of hostility between the two neighbouring peoples, which are linked with centuries-old friendship, give rise to trouble. Nagorno-Karabakh (Artsakh in Armenian) needs to be joined with the Armenian SSR, and then everything will be legal. (ПААФ ИМЛ, ф.1, оп.25, д.42. Письма из Арм. ССР, Груз. Трудящихся. Протокол заседания, Москва, 23 ноября 1977 г., № 61, 11-4133).

It is believed that this document adopted by the government of the USSR long before its sunset provides exhaustive explanations for the later events, which will be considered in details. At the outset we would like to focus on an extremely significant factor, namely all the 1988-1991 decisions passed by the supreme bodies of the Nagorno- Karabakh Autonomous Region (Oblast), were in full conformity with the then operating Constitution of the USSR.

So, on 20 February 1988 the extraordinary session of the Council of Deputies of the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region (NKAR) of the 20th convocation “On Applying to the Supreme Councils of the Azerbaijan SSR and Armenian SSR on Transferring NKAR from the Azerbaijan SSR to the Armenian SSR”.

In full conformity with the requirements of the USSR Constitution it was written, in particular, “… to ask the Supreme Council of the Azerbaijan SSR and Armenian SSR to deeply realize the aspirations of the inhabitants of Nagorno-Karabakh and decide on transferring NKAR from Azerbaijan SSR to Armenian SSR, and at the same time apply to the Council of the Union (one of the chambers of the USSR Supreme Council, which pursuant to the USSR Constitution, was responsible for deciding on similar matters – A.G.) on a positive solution of the transfer of NKAR from Azerbaijan SSR to Armenian SSR”. Later on 15 June 1988 the Armenian SSR Supreme Council made a decree “On the Decision of the Extraordinary Session to Apply to the Supreme Councils of the Azerbaijan SSR and Armenian SSR on the Transfer of NKAR from the Azerbaijan SSR to the Armenian SSR”, wherein it read : “The Supreme Council of the Armenian SSR Decides:

1. Having comprehensively studied the decision of 20 February 1988 of the extraordinary session of the regional Council of People’s Deputies of the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region of the Azerbaijan SSR and given the tense situation in Nagorno- Karabakh and surrounding areas, as well as the will of the Armenian population of NKAR and Armenian SSR, guided by Article 70 of the USSR Constitution on the right to self-determination of peoples give consent for the Nagorno- Karabakh Autonomous Region to join the Armenian SSR.

2. Request the USSR Supreme Council to consider and approve the transfer of the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region from the Azerbaijan SSR to Armenian SSR”.

It is noteworthy that on 13 June 1988 a “Decision of the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the Azerbaijan SSR on the Application of the NKAR Council of People’s Deputies on the transfer of the region from the Azerbaijan SSR to the Armenian SSR” was taken, wherein there is no phrase on the illegality of the application of the Council of People’s Deputies of NKAR. The text of this decision of the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the Azerbaijan SSR is full of sadly famous slogans. You might judge how the decision looks like: “Having comprehensively studied the request of the deputies of the Council of the People’s Deputies of the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region on Transferring NKAR from the Azerbaijan SSR to the Armenian SSR, the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the Azerbaijan SSR deems it unacceptable, since its implementation would run counter to the interests of the Azerbaijani and Armenian population of the republic, would not comply with strengthening the friendship of all the peoples of our country and goals of the perestroika. The Presidium of the Supreme Council is strongly convinced that in response to the appeal of the Secretary General of the CPSU CC comrade Gorbachev M.S. the Azerbaijani and Armenian peoples will do their utmost to maintain and strengthen the friendship and fraternity, contribute significantly to the revolutionary renovation of the socialist society”. At that time few people paid attention to the ominous meaning of the following lines of the decision: “… deems it unacceptable, since its implementation would run counter to the interests of the Azerbaijani and Armenian population of the republic”. One should focus on the word republic, and not Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region, i.e. with this the Supreme Council of the Azerbaijan SSR made us understand that in case NKAR seceded from Azerbaijan, around 450 thousand Armenians, who at that time lived in different regions of the Azerbaijan SSR could become hostages in the hands of Azerbaijani authorities.

Actually the leadership of that country directly hinted at the possibility of the recurrence of pogroms and slaughter of the Armenian population, as happened in Sumgait on 28-29 February 1988 and other Armenian populated areas of the Azerbaijan SSR.

The population of NKAR did not yield to the open threats and blackmail of the Azerbaijani authorities. Moreover, on 12 July 1988 the eighth session of the Council of people’s deputies of NKAR of the 20th convocation took a decision “On Proclaiming the secession of the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region from the Azerbaijan SSR”. In response to this decision with the connivance, to say nothing of the direct incitement of the Azerbaijani authorities a new bloody drama took place: in 1988-1989 mass pogroms of the Armenian population took place in Kirovabad, Nakhichevan, Shamkhor, Khanlar, Kazakh, Sheki and Mingechauri. As to the number of victims, continuity and scale of the pogroms, there had been nothing similar in the Soviet reality. These were the first shoots of the escapades of the revived Islamist extremism on the soil of extreme manifestations of anti-Armenian nationalist confrontation. The impunity for the earlier grave crimes both in Sumgait and the afore-mentioned cities gave rise to new pogroms (massacres). Thus, on 11-20 January 1990 riots based on ethnicity started in Baku, which were accompanied by violence towards the Armenian population, plunder, killings, arsons and destruction of the property belonging to Armenians. According to the Azerbaijani Interior Ministry reports, which could hardly reflect the reality, on 19 January 60 Armenians were killed in Baku, around 200 wounded and 13,000 citizens of Armenian origin were deported from. The USSR president M.S. Gorbachev was waiting all those days, and only on 19 January he signed a decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the USSR “On Introducing Emergency Situation in the City of Baku”.

Already then for any serious politician it was quite obvious that the Armenian population of Azerbaijan was being subjected to deadly dangers. In the background of these bloody events the USSR law “On the Procedure for Secession from a Soviet Republic” passed on 3 April 1990 acquires a totally different meaning. E.g. Article 1 of the law says: “The procedure for settling issues related to the secession of a Union republic from the USSR under Article 72 of an SSR Constitution shall be defined by this law”. I would like to draw attention to Article 3 of this law, which reads as follows: “In a Union republic with autonomous republics, autonomous oblasts and autonomous okrugs, the referendum for each autonomy shall be held separately. The peoples of the autonomous republics and autonomous entities shall be reserved the right to an independent solution of the issue of either staying in the USSR or seceding from a Union republic, and also its state and legal status”. This USSR law entered into force upon promulgation – on 6 April 1990 (Izvestiya newspaper). In this regard the USSR law “On the Division of Powers between the USSR and Federation subjects”, passed on 26 April 1990 is of special attention. Article 1 of this law reads as follows: “Autonomous republics, autonomous entities join Union republics based on the free self-determination of peoples, enjoy full state power on their territory outside of the limits of powers delegated by them under the competence of the USSR and Union republics. The relations of autonomous republics and autonomous entities with Union republics they are in are defined by agreements and treaties, concluded within the framework of the USSR Constitution, constitutions of Union and autonomous republics and this law”. Under Article 3 “The territorial disputes between Union republics, Union republics and autonomous republics, autonomous entities, regarding which no agreement between them has been reached, may be transferred for the decision of the Council of Nationalities of the USSR Supreme Council upon mutual consent”. Let me refer to Article 6 in order to enable to fully understand the impeccability of the proclamation of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic from a legal angle. “The exclusive competence of the USSR in the name of the highest bodies of state power and government shall be … 2) the change of the status of the existing autonomous republics, autonomous oblasts and autonomous okrugs; 3) settlement of disputes between Union republics, between Union and autonomous republics, autonomous entities in case they apply to the USSR bodies”. Thus the arguments of individual Azerbaijani colleagues that are still being voiced and refer to the Republic of Azerbaijan law of 26 November 1991 “On Abolition of the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region (Oblast) of the Republic of Azerbaijan” NKAR, as it was, did not exist, since it was dissolved, at the outset are deprived of any legal grounds. Moreover they lack legal force, since they fully contravene the USSR law of 26 April 1990 “On Division of Powers Between the USSR and Federation Subjects”. Let me refer to an excerpt from Article 8 of the afore-mentioned USSR law: “Within the joint competence of the USSR and Union republics the following shall be transferred to the highest bodies of authority and governance of the USSR: 1)… 2) definition of the common grounds of the legal status of autonomous republics, autonomous entities, as well as national administrative and territorial units; division of powers between Union and autonomous republics, autonomous entities”.

Excerpts from these USSR laws, which became the legal grounds for proclaiming the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, are not referred to accidentally. I will address it later. However first of all I would like to draw attention to the radical changes that took place in the state structure of the Azerbaijan SSR over that period. On 30 August 1991 at the extraordinary session of the Supreme Council of the Azerbaijan SSR the “Declaration of the Supreme Council of the Azerbaijan SSR on Restoration of State Independence of the Republic of Azerbaijan” and “Decision of the Supreme Council of the Republic of Azerbaijan on Declaration on Restoration of the State Independence of the Republic of Azerbaijan” were adopted. With the adoption of these documents Azerbaijan actually declared its secession from the USSR. Then, using its right provided for in the USSR law of 3 April 1990 “On the Procedure for Settling Issues Related to the Secession of Union Republics from the USSR”, a joint session of the Nagorno-Karabakh Oblast and Shahumyan Regional Council of Deputies was held together with the deputies of Councils of all levels, which, stating the proclamation of “the state independence of 1918-1920” by the Republic of Azerbaijan, given the policy of apartheid and discrimination pursued by Azerbaijan that had created an atmosphere of hatred and intolerance towards the Armenian people, which had led to armed clashes, loss of human lives and mass deportations of the inhabitants of peaceful Armenian villages; based on the operating Constitution and USSR laws, giving the peoples of autonomous entities and national communities the right to independently decide on their state and legal status in the event of the secession of a Union republic from the USSR;

Proclaim: the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic within the borders of the current Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region (Oblast) and contiguous Shahumyan region, short for “NKR”.

Here it is crucial to focus on the fact of the full conformity of the joint decision of the bodies of the Nagorno- Karabakh and Shahumyan region rule of the people with the provisions of the Constitutional Act (which was adopted one and a half months later) “On the State Independence of the Republic of Azerbaijan”, which was approved by the Supreme Council of the Republic of Azerbaijan on 18 October 1991. Article 16 of this document reads as follows: ” In conformity with the recognized norms of international law the Republic of Azerbaijan builds its relations with other states based on the principles of the sovereign equality of states, non-use of force or threat of use of force, settlement of disputes by peaceful means, non-interference in the internal affairs of other states, respect for fundamental human rights and freedoms, equality of peoples and their right to self-determination, cooperation between states, voluntary implementation of international legal obligations”.

The leadership of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic deemed it expedient to hold a referendum on 10 December 1991 “On Proclaiming Independence”. The ballot paper included a question: “Do you agree the proclaimed Nagorno-Karabakh Republic to be an independent state, independently defining the forms of cooperation with other states and commonwealth?”. Further the possible answers were written – Yes and No, offering to delete the one, which might be undesirable. 132,328 voters with the right to vote were on voter lists. The results of the referendum were as follows: Yes – 108,615 or 99,89% of those who voted, No- 24 or 0,02% of those who voted.

Over the 25 years since the proclamation of the independence of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic our European colleagues might have questions: was there another way out of the dangerous situation in which the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic and surrounding territories found themselves? Was there another settlement of the conflict, e.g. as it was the case with South Tyrol? In order to answer them, let us once again rely on facts. May we mention that following the bloody pogroms of the Armenian population held in a number of Azerbaijani cities and villages in 1988-1989, that took the lives of hundreds of peaceful Armenians, citizens of Azerbaijan, the situation dramatically deteriorated in Nagorno-Karabakh. This was the reason for the decision of the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the USSR of 12 January 1989 “On Introducing a Special Form of Governance in NKAR”. On the same day the decree of the Presidium of the USSR Supreme Council “On Introducing a Special Form of Governance in the Nagorno- Karabakh Autonomous Region of the Azerbaijan SSR” was signed.

However this decision-making did not mitigate the tensions in the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic and around it. Moreover, the situation became even tenser. This is why a year later, on 15 January 1990 a decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the USSR “On Declaring a State of Emergency in the Nagorno- Karabakh Autonomous Region (Oblast) and Some Other Regions” was signed. In order to make it clear to inexperienced readers, in particular colleagues in the OSCE PA, what is meant, I will refer to the then documents.

With a view of having a full picture of the real state of things in the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic and around it, suffice it to refer to excerpts from the cipher text sent to the USSR Interior Ministry by the head of the Department of the Interior of NKAO general V. Kovalev and head of the USSR Interior Ministry investigative staff V. Krivopuskov, December 1990. In particular it read: “…. On the part of Azeris there has been increased theft of animals, belonging both to individual people and the public, from Armenian villages. In 1988 and 1989 682 cows and 990 sheep were stolen from Armenians, and there were robberies. Over 10 months in 1990 1252 cattle and 2150 goats and sheep were stolen. 23 cases of armed attacks on Armenian populated areas took place, a large number of Armenian houses were fired on. Among the Azeris who attacked there were people in militia and special troops uniforms, armed with machine guns. These facts were noted on 26 October 1190 during the attack on the Armenian village of Janyatagh, and on 2 November 1990: in the forest of the Ghazanchi they attacked a group of Armenians who were working there.

At the same time the militia (police) personnel of Armenian nationality does not have forces and means to prevent the attacks, counter cases of armed robbery and theft of cattle. It is common knowledge that as instructed by the USSR Interior Ministry implemented by the Azerbaijani Interior Ministry, since autumn 1989 all machine guns have been confiscated from the Armenian militiamen (policemen) in NKAR”. (V. Krivopuskov. Rebellious Karabakh. Diary of a USSR Interior Ministry officer. 2nd edition. Moscow 2007, pp. 124-125). These testimonies of Russian officers were later confirmed and significantly supplemented by hundreds of documentary materials, including video tapes. Moreover there are undeniable evidences that during 1989 the so-called democratic opposition, in particular the Azerbaijani National Front, formed in July together with pan-Turkic organizations, like the Musavat nationalist party, People’s Democratic Party of Turan, the Grey Wolves terrorist right-wing extremist and neo-fascist organization, etc. launched a hectic activity throughout Azerbaijan and inflated extremism and anti-Armenian mood. All this made the Armenian population of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic realize that the only true way to save from physical extermination was the proclamation of independence. Such are the historical realities of the time.

With the collapse of the USSR and withdrawal of USSR Interior Ministry troops from Nagorno-Karabakh on 19 December 1991 which was finalized on 27 December, the situation in the conflict zone turned into a large-scale war between Azerbaijan and the armed forces of the NKR self-defence forces. With the mediation of Russia, Kirgizstan and the CIS Inter-Parliamentary Assembly on 12 May 1994 large-scale military actions ended with signing a protocol in Bishkek, capital of Kirgizstan, which made into the history of settling the Karabakh conflict as the Bishkek protocol. Based on this protocol Azerbaijan, Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia achieved an agreement on ceasefire and establishment of long-term truce. Let us state that the Bishkek Protocol is a very important international document, wherein the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic is in the status of an equal subject of the negotiating process. Moreover, thereby the international community recognized that NKR is a party to the conflict. And, as the last 22 years have shown, it has been implementing the obligations assumed with full responsibility.

Regrettably over the last years the Azerbaijani side is silent regarding the fact that in case the Bishkek protocol were not signed its losses could have been tangible. And only due to the good will displayed by the delegations of Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia the bloodshed was stopped. In this regard the reply by the Armenian president Serzh Sargsyan to the question asked by Samed Seidov, leader of the Azeri delegation to PACE on 2 October 2013 in the PACE, who accused Armenia of “occupying 20% of Azerbaijan’s territory”, is quite noteworthy. Here are the words by the Armenian president: “And here I declare: if Azerbaijan starts military actions against the Republic of Artsakh, the Republic of Armenia will defend Artsakh by all possible means. No need to start military actions, and then complain of occupation. And now Azerbaijan threatens us by military actions. I am convinced that in case such actions start, in a couple of months the Azeris will complain of 25-30 percent, and not 20%. No need to start military actions”.

I would like to draw attention to the following fact. Recently from different rostrums the Azeri politicians refer to the need of implementing the four UN Security Council resolutions on Nagorno-Karabakh (822, 853, 874 and 884). All of them were adopted when the war in Karabakh was at its height – from 30 April to 12 November 1993. Having said that this is being presented in a subjective and biased manner to any audience, distorting the essence of the UN SC resolutions. The entire package of issues related to the UN SC resolutions on Nagorno Karabakh has been analyzed at a high and professional level by Vladimir Kazimirov (V. Kazimirov is ambassador, in 1992-1996 head of the Russian mediation mission, plenipotentiary representative of the Russian president for Nagorno-Karabakh, participant and co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group from Russia – A.G.) in an article entitled “Karabakh and UN Security Council Resolutions”, distributed on 14 November 2004 by the REGNUM federal information agency of Russia.

As a result of the consideration of the implementation of the UN SC resolutions on Karabakh the author sums up: “At the outset, as far back as in 1993-94, for a year Azerbaijan did not implement the main requirement of 4 resolutions – ceasefire, cessation of military operations and hostilities, did not wish to stop combat actions, continued to rely on the solution of the conflict by force. All this had a negative impact on the implementation of other requirements, including by other parties. It does not want to implement these resolutions today- cessation of hostilities, restoration of economic, transport and energy communications in the region, direct contacts with Nagorno-Karabakh and convening the OSCE Minsk conference. In other words actually Azerbaijan has not implemented and does not implement any of the requirements or calls of 4 UN SC resolutions. Baku’s demand to Ankara to maintain the blockade of Armenia, and the current arms rattling, regular calls of the Azerbaijani officials to settle the conflict by force do not comply with the implementation of the resolutions. - ARMENIA and NAGORNO-KARABAKH continue not to implement the requirements regarding the withdrawal of occupation forces from the regions of Azerbaijan beyond the borders of NK under the pretext of the need for a “package”, comprehensive solution. –ARMENIA has done little regarding the call to exert a restraining influence on NK, and now it is erroneously substitutes it in the negotiating process, which, again distorts the real configuration of the conflict in a different way”.

Again and again while analyzing the history of the origin and development of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict over the last 28 years one cannot but be satisfied with the balanced assessment incorporated in the five joint statements of the presidents of Russia, United States and France.

It is noteworthy that the three great powers – co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group have elaborated common approaches on the settlement of the conflict. In all five joint statements of the presidents, adopted on 10 July 2009 in L’Aquila, 26 June 2010 in Muskoka, 26 May 2011 in Deauville, 19 June 2012 in Los Cabos and 18 June 2013 in Lough Erne, the basic principles of the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict are traced. On 19 June 2012 summing up the adopted joint statements earlier, presidents Barak Obama, Vladimir Putin and Francois Hollande stated in Los Cabos: “We urge the leaders to be guided by the principles of non-use of force or the threat of force, territorial integrity, and equal rights and self-determination of peoples, outlined in our countries' statements at L'Aquila in July 2009 and Muskoka in June 2010”. One should focus on the fact that on 18 June 2013 in Lough Erne the joint statement of the presidents there is a binding condition of the implementation of the statements adopted earlier, namely: “We continue to firmly believe that the elements outlined in the statements of our countries over the last four years must be the foundation of any fair and lasting settlement to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. These elements should be seen as an integrated whole, as any attempt to select some elements over others would make it impossible to achieve a balanced solution”.

It is obvious that with a sound reason it will be very difficult to find fault with any of the principles of the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, which lie in the foundations of the joint statements of the presidents of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chair countries. Against this background one can ask a question: so what are the expectations from the upcoming meeting in Leinsweiler? It is believed that the organizers of the seminar wish to thoughtfully familiarize the delegates from the countries, which appeared in the core of protracted conflicts, with the recent history of the conflict to whom Alsace and Lotharingia belonged, which were wisely settled by Germany and France; the history of South Tyrol, where currently peace and prosperity reign. This approach, the initiative of our German colleagues, which was supported by the OSCE PA president Ilkka Kanerva, is fully approved by us. Undoubtedly, based on the example of Germany, France, Italy and Austria we could start the difficult way of the peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. We believe that this noble task put forward by honourable Mrs. Barnett and her colleagues, and the realization thereof will serve as an example for exploring ways to implement the historic mission, put forward by the presidents of Russia, United States and France in their joint statement of 26 May 2011, in Deauville, which reads as follows: “We reiterate that only a negotiated settlement can lead to peace, stability, and reconciliation, opening opportunities for regional development and cooperation… We strongly urge the leaders of the sides to prepare their populations for peace, not war”.

In lieu of a post scriptum: On 17 March 2016 serviceman Artem Varderesyan was soldiering at the site of one of the military units of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic’s Defence Army deployed in the north-eastern direction. While looking at the other side of the line of contact of the Nagorno-Karabakhi and Azerbaijani armed forces through field-glasses, he might have seen the face of a young Azerbaijani soldier, who, like him, was soldiering. He could have thought that perhaps the guy had a sweetheart, relatives, sisters and brothers, parents… At 14:55 Artem Varderesyan, who was born in 1996, was shot dead by a sniper from the other side. In the evening of the same day entire Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh shared the deep grief of the loss with Artem’s family. Meanwhile, even being fully convinced that a revenge will be imminent, it does not mitigate, but rather exacerbates our pain, because there are no outsiders’ children for the fathers and mothers of soldiers. There is no outsider’s pain for the Armenian people, who with provision of the Almighty escaped the Genocide in the Ottoman Empire 101 years ago by miracle. There is no outsider’s misfortune for the Armenian people both in Armenia and elsewhere, as well as outsider’s loss. We never ask for whom the bell tolls, because the tragic history of our people has taught us: wherever the bell tolls, it tolls for us.

Meanwhile 18 March 2016 will be reflected in the reports of observers as : all quiet on the Karabakh front.

ARTASHES GEGHAMYAN

Member of the Armenian National Assembly

from the Republican Party

Head of the Armenian Parliamentary

Delegation to the OSCE PA

Chairman of the National Unity Party