Negotiations should focus on NKR-Azerbaijan border vs. territories
Handing over any NKR-controlled territory to Azerbaijan would first of all imply violation of the country's Constitution,which clearly states that those lands belong to Nagorno Karabakh. Besides, the withdrawal of NKR Defense Army from some of liberated territories would undermine the country's military and commercial security, said NKR ex-Foreign Minister Masis Mayilyan, Head of NKR Public Council on Foreign Policy and Security. The principles published do not contain a hint on returning Azeri-occupied NKR lands (over 1000 sq. km.) to Karabakh. "Negotiations should focus on NKR-Azerbaijan border vs. territories. Only after Azerbaijan's recognition of NKR should intergovernmental commission tackle the issue delimitating and demarcating the interstate border," Mayilyan noted.
The "interim status", according to the expert, is first of all an attempt to restrict NKR's sovereignty, questioning its independent status and depriving the state of its own security system. "NKR's recognition would imply recognition of independence which might create additional guarantees (including political-diplomatic) for Artsakh to maintain its independence. Land border between NKR and Armenia was established in May 1992 and broadened during 1993 military operations. It would be naïve to restrict that border to Armenia-NKR corridor. Very interestingly, the given principle is proposed to Armenians as concession," he said.
Masis Mayilyan is convinced that NKR's legal status is determined based on December 10, 1991 referendum, which has a legally binding effect, and confirmed by the Constitution dated December 10, 2006. "Besides, NKR people have 8 times indirectly expressed their will to live in an independent statehood, by voting for political parties and separates candidates' programs which stressed the importance of NKR's international recognition. Over the past 18 years, NKR citizens have 10 times voted for their country's independent status. As regards the return of refugees, the issue can be discussed by all three parties, after NKR's recognition by Azerbaijan. The wording all vs. Azerbaijani refugees is a positive moment. Although, it's unclear who and how should ensure the rights and guarantee the security of hundreds and thousands of people who may find themselves on the opposite side of border," NKR ex-Foreign Minister stressed.
The "interim status", according to the expert, is first of all an attempt to restrict NKR's sovereignty, questioning its independent status and depriving the state of its own security system. "NKR's recognition would imply recognition of independence which might create additional guarantees (including political-diplomatic) for Artsakh to maintain its independence. Land border between NKR and Armenia was established in May 1992 and broadened during 1993 military operations. It would be naïve to restrict that border to Armenia-NKR corridor. Very interestingly, the given principle is proposed to Armenians as concession," he said.
Masis Mayilyan is convinced that NKR's legal status is determined based on December 10, 1991 referendum, which has a legally binding effect, and confirmed by the Constitution dated December 10, 2006. "Besides, NKR people have 8 times indirectly expressed their will to live in an independent statehood, by voting for political parties and separates candidates' programs which stressed the importance of NKR's international recognition. Over the past 18 years, NKR citizens have 10 times voted for their country's independent status. As regards the return of refugees, the issue can be discussed by all three parties, after NKR's recognition by Azerbaijan. The wording all vs. Azerbaijani refugees is a positive moment. Although, it's unclear who and how should ensure the rights and guarantee the security of hundreds and thousands of people who may find themselves on the opposite side of border," NKR ex-Foreign Minister stressed.
