{"id":25871,"date":"2021-01-15T12:59:21","date_gmt":"2021-01-15T12:59:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/media.am\/?p=25871"},"modified":"2021-01-17T14:10:39","modified_gmt":"2021-01-17T14:10:39","slug":"pashinyans-article-and-popovs-reaction-who-was-right-after-all","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/media.am\/en\/verified\/2021\/01\/15\/25871\/","title":{"rendered":"Pashinyan\u2019s Article And Popov\u2019s Reaction: Who Was Right After All?"},"content":{"rendered":"

On January 4, Nikol Pashinyan’s <\/span>article<\/span><\/a> “The Origin of the 44-Day War” was published, where the Prime Minister referred to the Artsakh negotiation process, trying to explain the reason for the origin of the war. The article mentioned that the Russian proposals envisage the return of 7 territories to Azerbaijan, without touching upon the status of Nagorno Karabakh in any way.<\/span><\/p>\n

“The already well-known Russian proposals, which envisage the return of 7 territories to Azerbaijan by the 5 + 2 resolution, the return of refugees, and the deployment of Russian peacekeepers, were born in 2013 and were finally finalized in 2015. “The package of proposals did not address the issue of Nagorno Karabakh’s status in any way, it bypassed that issue,” Pashinyan wrote.<\/span><\/p>\n

Days later, on January 13, the Russian Co-Chair of the OSCE Minsk Group Igor Popov referred to this part of the article in his interview, <\/span>refuting<\/span><\/a> the Prime Minister. “The allegations that Russia offered to return the seven regions” just like that and forget about the status “do not correspond to reality.”<\/span><\/p>\n

Later, RA Foreign Minister Ara Ayvazyan <\/span>responded<\/span><\/a> to Popov. “The Prime Minister said something. Popov commented. He took what the Prime Minister wrote out of context, the Prime Minister said something else. “<\/span><\/p>\n

The Artsakh negotiation process was conducted based on the principle of secrecy.<\/span><\/p>\n

Some excerpts were published through unofficial channels by journalists, current or former officials and others (<\/span>1<\/span><\/a> 2<\/span><\/a> 3<\/span><\/a>). After all, we tried to understand whether there was an issue of the status of Nagorno Karabakh in the Russian proposals for the settlement of the Karabakh conflict or not, and which officials’ words are more truthful.<\/span><\/p>\n

Russian proposals or “Lavrov plan”<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Lavrov’s so-called “plan” or “document” was discussed at the end of 2015 and the beginning of 2016. Sergey Lavrov himself has denied the existence of “Lavrov’s plan” several times.<\/span><\/p>\n

In <\/span>2016<\/span><\/a>, “There is no Lavrov document. There are a number of documents, about five, prepared by the Co-Chairs at different stages of the negotiations when it came to drawing up the basic principles of the settlement.”<\/span><\/p>\n

In <\/span>2017<\/span><\/a>, “I have repeatedly stated publicly that there is no ‘Lavrov plan.’ The ideas discussed now are based on the proposals developed by the three OSCE Minsk Group co-chair countries.”<\/span><\/p>\n

At the same time, official Moscow has <\/span>stated<\/span><\/a> on various occasions that the talks are based on the well-known principles voiced in the joint statements of the Presidents of Russia, the United States and France on the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.<\/span><\/p>\n

“As a co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group, our position has been repeatedly stated in joint statements by the top leadership of Russia, the United States and France. It is based on the basic principles of the Helsinki Final Act.”<\/span><\/p>\n

What are the principles of the Helsinki Final Act?<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

During the presidency of Robert Kocharyan (1998-2008) the Co-Chairs presented to the conflicting parties three projects: “<\/span>Common State<\/span><\/a>,” “<\/span>Key Wes<\/span><\/a>t,” “<\/span>Madrid Principles<\/span><\/a>.”<\/span><\/p>\n

The latter <\/span>was presented<\/span><\/a> to the parties in Madrid in November 2007 as a basis for negotiations. Later all the parties to the conflict (Armenia, Nagorno-Karabakh, Azerbaijan) agreed to accept it. This document set out three principles of the <\/span>Helsinki Accords<\/span><\/a>:<\/span><\/p>\n