Azerbaijan, Baku, May 26 / Trend /
Trend commentator Elmira Tariverdiyeva
Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian's another European tour with the false performance has been held in Great Britain this time.
Nalbandian emotionally spoke about the fact that Azerbaijan is itself against the liberation of its occupied territories and refugees' return to their ancestral lands. His phrase that Baku prevents the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement can be considered this way.
According to Nalbandian, Armenia is ready to adopt six points of updated Madrid principles. It is not clear why it does not do this as this document is awaiting for Yerevan's approval for several years. If Yerevan adopts six above-mentioned points, why does not it accept Baku's proposal to begin working on a comprehensive peace agreement?
Nalbandian heartily argued with audience that Azerbaijan does not want to resolve the conflict, even though Baku has repeatedly stated that it is ready to begin working on a comprehensive peace agreement. Does not Armenian Foreign Minister know that the biggest obstacle to a settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is Armenian troops in the Azerbaijani occupied territories?
If Armenia is ready to adopt six main principles proposed by the OSCE Minsk Group in connection with the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, it would be nice if Yerevan started from the most important condition - the withdrawal of its troops from the occupied lands.
Armenia has repeatedly stated that it agreed with the position of mediators. The OSCE Minsk Group co-chairing countries insist that the status quo must be changed.
Six points proposed by the OSCE Minsk Group, are the following: returning the occupied territories surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh to Azerbaijan; providing Nagorno-Karabakh with an interim status and ensuring the guarantees of security and self-determination, ensuring the right of all internally displaced persons and refugees to return home, opening the corridor between Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh, determining the legal status of Nagorno-Karabakh in the future on the basis of a legally binding will; international security guarantees, including peacekeeping operations.
But Azerbaijan is adopting all these six principles as a basis for holding the negotiations. Baku repeatedly stated about this. Even an uneducated person understands that these principles really correspond to Azerbaijan's interests as opposed to Armenia. The status quo seems to fully meet its interests.
Do the inconsistencies arise as a result of this? What are Nalbandian's statements about the readiness to adopt six principles for the conflict settlement intended for? Most likely, this rhetoric is intended for the Armenian public. Perhaps, the Armenian authorities are trying to convey to his people that there is no way out for Yerevan and the country will have to make some concessions.
By the way, it is easier for the authorities to do this today than before the presidential elections. Yerevan's decision can not affect the election result. It is necessary to save the country's economy. Moreover, the international institutions' pressure on Yerevan does not weaken.
Why does not Yerevan start moving in the direction required for the conflict settlement without making angry accusations towards Baku? Or is it another circus of lies for the international community?
Alas, there are more questions than answers, but the real change in Yerevan's position will become apparent only when the last soldier of the Armenian occupation troops leaves the territory of Azerbaijan.