Pashinyan-Aliyev Munich talks ‘useless format’ to signal end to Karabakh conflict – analyst  

The Armenian and Azerbaijani leaders’ recent talks, on the sidelines of the 2020 Munich Security Conference, were a useless format in terms of pushing ahead with serious processes in the Nagorno-Karabakh (Artsakh) conflict settlement talks, according to an expert in international affairs.

“Such a format did not exist at all on the level of the former leaders. To the best of my understanding, the Armenian authorities previously made proposals of the kind, which were later rejected.

“I don’t think the format is useful given that the parties, by and large, voiced theses which have been raised for decades. And they practically did not say anything new at this meeting either; they did not discuss new ideas, approaches and thoughts, and hence the meeting itself cannot possibly have any effectiveness,” President and Founer of the Armenian Center for American Studies Suren Sargsyan told Tert.am.

Asked to comment on Nikol Pashinyan’s failure to react to certain remarks voiced by the President Ilham Aliyev, the expert agreed that many, in the Armenian prime minister’s place, could have talked over other issues and problems.

″I would have liked for instance, to hear about the Azerbaijani agreession, because this entire process in Nagorno-Karabakh resulted from such a conduct. The war, in general, broke out as a result of the Azerbaijani aggression, entailing in attempts to keep the people demanding a right to self-determination in Azerbaijan. And this is how the Artsakh liberation war practically began. The Artsakh people’s self-defense against agression received support also by the Republic of Amrenia and the Armenians across the globe. This was an extremely important factor that must be addressed by all means . I think it was possible to also talk about ‘seccession for salvation’, a well-known principle in international law,″ he said, insisting on the applicability of the mechanism.   

Asked whether the meeting signals any chances for a progress in the negotiations, the expert said he is unclear about the future processes (given that Armenia avoids using the term).

“Armenia uses ‘intensive debates’ or ‘dialogue’, which actually suggests that no negotiations are going on, at least as far as we are concerned. As for the prospects in the negotiation process, my firm belief is that the Artsakh conflict has no peaceful settlemet with the exception of cases when any of the [conflicting] sides abandons [the territorial claims on] Nagorno-Karabakh. Neither Armenia nor Azerbaijan will ever obviously do that. Azerbaijan wishes evertything right now, and we, naturally, cannot opt for any unilateral concession without the confidence that  Artsakh will have the status acceptable to its people,” he said.

Addressing the prime minister’s remark reiterating his earlier thesis that any settlement should be acceptable to “all the three sides” (and adding that he is the only state leader - not only in Armenia but also in the entire bilateral process - backing such a scenario), Sargsyan said, “I find the thesis really euphonious, ear-friendly and acceptable, but at the same time not applicable at all from the practical viewpoint,” he said, referring to the Azerbaijani leader’s call insisting on Artsakh’s "return" as the only acceptable solution for his country’s people.