Tatul_– You have followed the entire process of the Karabakh conflict negotiations and you know about the processes connected thereto. Do you think that the announcement of OSCE MG co-chair countries’ presidents in Deauville may support the execution of the peace agreement on Karabakh conflict as the Ambassador of France to Armenia Henri Reynaud has said?

– There have been thousands of statements like that. Personally I don’t believe that it will be possible to crack the negotiations because there are disagreements between the parties and it will be difficult to agree upon those issues.

-Let’s remember the following phrase: “Postponing the settlement in the future will question the parties’ commitment to reach agreement”.

– It contains an element of threatening but there have been such announcements before too. This is the fourth announcement. The first announcement at the highest level was made in 1997 in Denver. This announcement was done to make the parties hurry but as this issue concerns the vital interests of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Karabakh, the problem cannot be solved through petitioning only.

– Can this statement be a pressure before the meeting of the presidents of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Russia in Kazan on June 25? May the parties be pressed on to sign a document?

– The document that is on the table contains a lot of disputable provisions. The parties have never been so far from the settlement. I think that Russia will not press on the parties to solve the problem because it is not in Russia’s interests to offend either of the parties. I believe all parties are interested in peace. The problem is that according to the rules of which of the parties the problem will be solved.

– The foreign minister of Turkey Davutoglu has said concerning this announcement that there will be improvement in the issue of Karabakh conflict settlement during the meeting in Kazan.

– Turkey is a member of Minsk Group and officially they are informed of the details of the negotiations and this is one of the series of announcements on part of Turkey. As a rule I do not believe any announcements of officials and I believe only the logic of the processes. As for the logic, it shows that we are far from settlement.

– You said that Armenia and Azerbaijan have never been so far from settlement than now. However, the logic of the negotiations shows that the parties have always been far from settlement.

– Today the document with Madrid principles is on the table, which consists of approximately 15 provisions. Even if the parties agree on this document or the new document, which is stipulated by the co-chairmen, it does not mean yet that we are close to settlement. This document with those 15 provisions should be made a comprehensive document because this paper does not contain the details. The provision on holding a referendum in the future does not provide the dates and there can be even 100 points under each of those 15 provisions. Even if the parties agree upon 99% of the document, any disagreement over one point may fail the entire process. The parties have not come to agreement even upon the basic issues. If Azerbaijan agrees that Karabakh has the right for referendum for the purpose of self-determination, a document may be signed in Kazan. Azerbaijan writes that the Armenian party should go out of the “occupied” territories. The issue of Nagorno Karabakh has brought a lot of pain to the three societies. I don’t think the presidents may dare to sign the documents and be able to keep the power because it is a very big risk for them. One more important thing, if the parties get closer to the settlement, the national TV channels in Armenia, Karabakh and Azerbaijan would teach peace.

– The conflict of Karabakh is universal and does not have a solution for either of these three societies. Does it mean that the conflict is a problem that cannot be solved?

– Everything has a solution. Two people are quarrelling for one orange. The mediators of the conflict find out that one of these two people needs the internal part of the orange and the other one wants the external part. The orange should not be split mechanically but the problem should be treated with creative solutions. In 1999 there was even an issue of exchanging with territories, there was also the version of Key-West, which was another solution with exchange of territories. Before that there had been the idea of a common state.

– Do you think it is possible to have a solution like the EU? I mean if there are no borders there is no conflict for borders either. Is it possible to transform to a new level of consciousness?

– O, I don’t think so. I think our life will not allow us seeing societies with such possible solution.

– The political powers think that the announcements of Deauville are pro-Armenian and they also think that there are some threats addressed to Azerbaijan.

– The worst announcement can be presented as the best achievement, and the best announcement can be presented as a failure too. Such announcements do not work when the balance is not kept.

– It is clear that no document will be signed on June 25 and even if something is done, it will be a declarative thing. I mean the situation will not change after June 25. Who does the time support to?

– Time supports those who can use the time correctly. It is never late to make time work for your needs. Time works for Azerbaijan because during the recent years their GDP is more than Armenia’s GDP by five times. From the prospective of demography Azerbaijan is advanced too. However, on the other hand the international community sees that for more than 20 years Azerbaijan lives without Karabakh and the surrounding territories. If we can live like that 20 years, it means we can live like that 200 years too.

– The international community has got used to seeing Armenia in international blockade. If we could live like that during 20 years, we can live like that during 200 years.

– The topic of blockade is very sensitive. Yes, we are in blockade but there is no other way for us. Armenia has done maximum compromises in connection with the issues of Karabakh and Armenia-Turkey relations. All the presidents have expressed agreement to give 6,5 regions to Azerbaijan that was defeated in the war. Isn’t it enough? This is a great compromise. We have done some of the demands developed by Turkey but the border is not open. What should we do? Should we make more compromises? The price will be too much for raising the blockade.

– Do you think the resumption of war is possible?

– There are two factors that now stop the war from resumption. The first one is the relation of forces; maybe Azerbaijan’s economy is more advanced but from the strategic point of view our positions are much better through the entire line of conflict even if we have one tank against ten. Second, peaceful negotiations; such negotiations can last 1000 years. The Azeris understand this too. Bad peace is better than good war.

The interview was published in 168 Zham on June 14, 2011

20 years of blockade and Karabakh negotiations