Armenia does not consider the peace treaty with Azerbaijan to be a capitulation

Speaker of the Armenian Parliament Alen Simonyan said that Yerevan’s decision to coordinate the draft peace treaty proposed to him could be unexpected for Azerbaijan. According to him, the Azerbaijani colleagues might have thought that the last two points in the document were so unacceptable to the Armenians that they would never agree with them, therefore, for their part, they made some concessions on other points. At the same time, he refused to consider the approval of the document as a capitulation.

“It has been repeatedly stated that all points apply to both sides. For example, if it says that the Armenian side should capitulate, it means that the Azerbaijani side should capitulate,” Simonyan insists.

On March 13, the authorities of Armenia and Azerbaijan announced the approval of the text of the peace treaty. Despite this, the document has not yet been published. At the same time, on March 24, Armenian Deputy Foreign Minister Paruyr Hovhannisyan said that Yerevan was ready to discuss the timing, location and other technical issues related to the signing of the peace treaty, but Baku remained silent.

“Unfortunately, based on past experience, I must say that when we take a step forward, complications, provocations, and sometimes even two steps back usually follow from the opposite side. This is not a new style of their work. On the other hand, let’s look at the international reaction: 58 countries and about 10 international organizations have already welcomed the completion of negotiations on the text of the peace agreement between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Many have emphasized Armenia’s important role in this process,” Hovhannisyan said.

In addition, he noted that the “false” statements of the Azerbaijani authorities about the shelling from Armenia are also their classic technique. From March 16 to March 21, such messages were received daily. According to Hovhannisyan, the European observers were convinced that in reality nothing like this happened.

At the same time, the diplomat stressed that even the signing of a peace treaty does not guarantee Yerevan complete security. However, the republic’s authorities expect that it will help reduce the risk of a renewed war. At the same time, he could not clearly answer the question of whether the peace treaty would be backed by any international guarantees. Instead, Hovhannisyan noted that all permanent members of the UN Security Council welcomed the news of the agreement on the text of the peace treaty.

At the same time, he said that the signing of the document would not necessarily lead to the withdrawal of European observers from Armenia. Hovhannisyan pointed out that Azerbaijan demands the removal of representatives of third forces from the border, but Yerevan believes that such a phrase can be applied to them (observers).

“You know, we can’t be completely sure of anything right now, but if we’re talking about outside forces, are European observers a force? This is an observation mission. In other words, logic dictates that there should be no such requirements, but, of course, it is very difficult to say for sure. When we say “force,” yes, we usually mean military presence. Now the question of to what extent this can be considered a force is the subject of discussion,” said the Deputy Foreign Minister of Armenia.

At the same time, Yerevan believes that the deepening of partnership with the EU, which is being discussed in parliament this week, may lead to an expansion of the role of European observers in the republic. If they are currently monitoring violations on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border, they can contribute to the development of law and order and democratic institutions in the future.

Hrant Mikaelyan, a researcher at the Caucasus Institute, told NG that in fact, Armenia did not agree on the text of the peace treaty, but on a list of conditions of Azerbaijan that Yerevan must satisfy. “This is a real surrender. This really came as a surprise to Baku, as negotiations have been underway so far with the indirect participation of Western countries,” Mikaelyan believes.

He also noted that usually the texts of such documents are not published in the event that they could harm the negotiation process. In this regard, Azerbaijan has nothing to fear, since if the locals don’t like something, they are unlikely to have the opportunity to prevent the ratification. But in Armenia, protest actions have been going on for five years.

“At the same time, Azerbaijan has put forward preconditions for signing a peace treaty in the form of the dissolution of the OSCE Minsk Group and constitutional amendments. This means that Baku will not achieve all its goals with this document,” Mikaelyan said.

In turn, the head of the South Caucasus Research Center, Farhad Mammadov, told NG that Azerbaijan wants to ensure that Armenia fulfills its obligations under the Constitution and the OSCE Minsk Group, as its security depends on it. “The Azerbaijani authorities offered Yerevan to include both points in the draft peace treaty. So, the text could say that some clauses of the agreement will not enter into force until Armenia changes its Basic Law. But the Armenian authorities refused such an offer, as they did not want the referendum to look like a demand from their neighbors. This is their right, but Baku’s position has not changed,” Mammadov explained.

He also pointed out that Azerbaijan was the initiator of the peace treaty and, when necessary, made concessions to the Armenian side. In particular, the topic of the so-called Zangezur corridor was excluded from the negotiations.