Hague court ruling on Kosovo through perspective of Karabakh conflict settlement

PanARMENIAN.Net - On July 20, former RA parliamentary speaker Karapet Rubinyan left the Armenian National Movement (ANM), explaining reasons behind his resignation in a letter to the newly-elected ANM administration. Some of the reasons cited were “forged elections into movement administration, lack of future vision and defeatist moods in a struggle against current authorities, expressed by movement leader at recent session.” Referring to reasons of Rubinyan's withdrawal from the party, Chairman of the newly elected board of the Armenian National Movement (ANM) Aram Manukyan said that Rubinyan’s accusations concerning falsification of the ANM board election during the party’s 16th congress are baseless. “The system of our party’s board election is so transparent that falsifications are impossible,” Manukyan told a press conference on July 21.

On July 17, Yerevan hosted the second congress of Armenakan-Ramkavar Azatakan party with participation of 100 delegates. Leader of the party Hakob Avetikyan submitted a report on the activity of the party’s republican board during a year. Referring to the economic and political situation in Armenia, Hakob Avetikyan noted that Armenakan-Ramkavar Azatakan party can be a balancing force among opposition and pro-governmental blocs of Armenia.

On July 17, the Heads of Delegation of the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chair countries released a statement. Below are comments of Armenian politicians on it. Secretary of the Republican Party of Armenia parliamentary group Eduard Sharmazanov said that the statement is an obvious case when the Azerbaijani leadership’s bellicose statements are not left without response. “This proves that the Azerbaijani leadership’s bellicose statements intended for the internal use lead the country into a deadlock. Meanwhile, a “yellow card” was given to Azerbaijan in Almaty on July 17,” concluded Sharmazanov.

“The expectations for the meeting were quite different. Baku expected “a schedule of withdrawal of Armenian troops from Karabakh” to be signed, political analyst Levon Melik-Shahnazaryan told a PanARMENIAN.Net reporter on July 18. According to him, Yerevan expected a regular fruitless meeting. Both sides were wrong, said Melik-Shahnazaryan.

Deputy Director of Caucasus Institute Sergey Minasyan said that the ministerial meeting in Almaty has registered a number of important factors in the Karabakh process. “The OSCE Minsk Group underscored that the talks should continue on the basis of the current status quo, with the principles of Helsinki Final Act being equal. The statement disillusioned the Azerbaijani leadership regarding any kind of unilateral concessions by Armenia,” Sergey Minasyan told a PanARMENIAN.Net reporter. “Moreover, Azerbaijan was reminded of inadmissibility of blackmail and resumption of hostilities,” he said.

On July 19, Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian said that the five-sided meeting between the heads of delegations of the OSCE Minsk Group Co-chair counties and Armenian and Azerbaijan Foreign Ministers in Almaty was useful, although Baku’s destructive behavior hampered signature of a five-sided statement. Nalbandian also attached importance to the fact that selective approach to the principles fixed in the statements is inadmissible.

On July 19, Board chairman of the Center on Globalization and Regional Cooperation Stepan Grigoryan said that it’s obvious that the interest towards the Nagorno Karabakh conflict has grown, what can be proved by recent statements issued by Presidents and Foreign Ministers of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chair countries. “The latest statement in Almaty reads that the sides should resolve the conflict through peaceful means and none of the co-chair countries will speed up the process artificially,” said Grigoryan.

The same day, member of Heritage parliamentary group Armen Martirosyan said that the statement by the Foreign Ministers of the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chair countries in Almaty was addressed not only to Azerbaijan, but also to Armenia, as mediators always try to balance the situation. Being a regular one, the statement cannot have any impact on the conflict resolution, Martirosyan told a PanARMENIAN.Net reporter.

Meanwhile, member of Prosperous Armenia parliamentary group Naira Zohrabyan said that the aforementioned statement contains a certain message for Azerbaijan, suggesting that some offers should not be withdrawn from the discussed document’s text to be presented as main issues of the negotiation process. “It is high time that the statements of the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairmen have certain addressees - so that speaking about the incident near Chaylu settlement, they mention the side responsible for it,” Zohrabyan told a PanARMENIAN.Net reporter.

On July 20, Member of Prosperous Armenia parliamentary group Vardan Bostanjyan told a press conference that in reality Azerbaijan is a project, and not a state created in 1918. Answering a question on possibility of hostilities resumption by Azerbaijan, he said that Azerbaijan will not unleash a war against NKR. “However, if it happens, the Armenian troops will reach the Caspian Sea, what we wanted to do in the mean time, but were not allowed,” said Bostanjyan.

Chairman of the RA NA Standing Committee on Financial-Credit, Budgetary and Economic Affairs, member of the ruling Republican Party of Armenia Gagik Minasyan said that the meeting on the sidelines of an informal meeting of OSCE Foreign Ministers in Almaty can be considered summarization of the results of an important period, which lasted for 1-2 years. “Time is on Armenia’s side; moreover, the international community gradually comes to conclusions, which proceed from norms of the international law. Thus, I attach importance to statements made by Foreign Ministers of the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chair countries,” noted Minasyan.

Armenia is ready to use St. Petersburg suggestions as basis for negotiations; it’s now Azerbaijan’s turn to decide on its position, Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan stated. As Armenian leader pointed out at the July 21 meeting with Armenian Diaspora youth, members of Miasin movement and Return Home program, “Suggestions were put forward at St. Petersburg meeting, with Armenia and Azerbaijan expected to express their positions. Negotiations will be resumed upon Azerbaijan’s accepting OSCE MG’s suggestions.”

Referring to the Armenian-Turkish normalization, Sargsyan said that Armenia demonstrated political will towards normalization of ties with Turkey and expects Turkey to undertake a return step. “The whole world urges Turkey to demonstrate political will in ratifying Protocols, however Ankara turns a deaf ear, calling on Armenia to show political will,” Serzh Sargsyan noted during the meeting. “Despite Turkish authorities’ statements, Armenia is ready to accept any expression of friendship,” the Armenian leader concluded.

On July 21, Director of the Armenian Genocide Museum-Institute, historian Hayk Demoyan said that resumption of the Armenian-Turkish Protocols ratification is impossible in the near future. “Currently it is preferential for Turkey not to open the border with Armenia against the background of aggravated Kurdish problem,” Demoyan told a press conference in Yerevan. “Currently, I do not see any prerequisites for the border opening,” concluded Demoyan.

The ruling of the International Court of Justice on Kosovo has become another heatedly debated topic in Armenia. On July 22, Secretary of Republican Party of Armenia parliamentary group Eduard Sharmazanov said that the ruling of the International Court of Justice on lawfulness of Kosovo's secession from Serbia will have a positive impact on international recognition of NKR's independence. The ruling indicates that the people's right to self-determination gradually prevails over the principle of territorial integrity, Sharmazanov told a PanARMENIAN.Net reporter.

Head of Heritage parliamentary group Stepan Safaryan said that the ruling of the International Court of Justice may have a positive impact on recognition of NKR’s independence. Nobody will be able to explain why such decision is applicable to Kosovo, but not to Karabakh, Safaryan told a PanARMENIAN.Net reporter. According to him, Armenia should apply to the International Court of Justice to solve the NKR conflict.

On July 23, Head of the Modus Vivendi Centre Ara Papian said that it was absolutely within the law for the highest tribunal of the United Nations – the International Court of Justice (ICJ) – to conclude that “the unilateral declaration of independence of Kosovo does not violate international law. It was within the law first of all because the right to direct one’s own political affairs, through the establishment of self-determination, is included in the UN Charter [Article 1(2)] as one of the main goals of the organization, Papian told a PanARMENIAN.Net reporter. According to him, international law does not consist of any criterion by which the right to independence is reserved for, say, Serbs, Georgians or Caucasian Tatars, but that very right is denied to Albanians, Megrelians or the Talysh. “International law is not up for auction in the 21st century. International law is not for sale as an oil derrick,” concluded Papian.

On July 23, ARFD parliamentary group leader Vahan Hovhannesyan told a press conference in Yerevan that he welcomes the resolution of International Court of Justice on Kosovo's independence, believing it to be a new tool in Armenia’s struggle for recognition of NKR independence. Charactering world court resolution as a just verdict, the ARFD parliamentary group leader said: “Formation of a new state through secession from another does not run counter to international law.”

The ruling of the International Court of Justice on Kosovo independence is unprecedented. For the first time, the International court simultaneously covered two principles: territorial integrity and people’s right to self-determination, ruling that a declaration of independence does not violate any UN resolution or international law, stated Armenian Deputy Foreign Minister Shavarsh Kocharyan. “People’s right to self-determination is one of UN goals, with territorial integrity being a principle used to attain the goal. With a right to self-determination, territorial integrity is of secondary importance, which was suggested by the Hague court ruling,” Shavarsh Kocharyan specified.