BAKU, Azerbaijan, April 16. The preparations for another political fraud are underway in Armenia. Revanchist circles are preparing public opinion for the notion that Armenia is not obliged to make any amendments to the constitution. Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, addressing the parliament, already states: Our constitutional court has decided that there are no territorial claims to neighboring countries in the Armenian constitution, and if Azerbaijan is concerned about it, we should first sign a peace treaty and then discuss the constitution. A few hours pass, and the Armenian Prime Minister seems to be backing up: yes, the reference to the Declaration of Independence, where the claims to Karabakh are prescribed, we would like to add on our behalf, will have to be removed after all. So Yerevan has two positions again. The policy follows the principle described in an old Azerbaijani proverb: “It's either a horseshoe or a nail”. Depending on the situation. Representatives of the “chattering class” also stirred up. In particular, Alexander Iskandaryan, the well-known head of the Caucasus Institute, decided to discuss this topic in a conversation with a Nezavisimaya Gazeta correspondent. He stated without a shadow of doubt: “Baku is hardly seriously concerned about the reference in the preamble to the Declaration of Independence, created in 1990 and immediately recognized as illegal by the USSR. Rather, it is one of the ways of Azerbaijan's pressure on Armenia”.
So, what is really happening - is it Azerbaijan's desire to “put pressure on Armenia” or Armenia's cunning plan to leave behind a possible field for new aggression?
So, let us tell you in order. In 1989, the Supreme Council of Armenia adopted a decision on “miazum”, i.e., “reunification” of Azerbaijani Karabakh with the Armenian SSR. This decision was immediately called illegal by the Union authorities. The USSR Constitution expressly prohibited any change of the territory of the Union republics without the consent of its authorities. That is, NKAO had the right to reunite with Armenia only with the consent of Azerbaijan, and Azerbaijan did not give its consent. In 1990, the Declaration of Independence of Armenia appeared, which included a reference to that obviously illegal decision of the Supreme Soviet of the Armenian SSR.
Then, the reference to the Declaration of Independence of Armenia is included in the Constitution of Armenia, adopted in 1995. It remains there after the amendments to the Constitution in 2005 and 2015.
Let us now recall: since 1994, Armenia has been occupying 20 percent of Azerbaijan's territory. It is looking for all possible loopholes to somehow legitimize the results of the military occupation. Against this background, the adoption of a constitution with a preamble that refers to the Declaration of Independence, and in this Declaration, to the decision of the Supreme Council on “ miatsum” - is no longer a territorial claim, but an attempt to legitimize the occupation by enshrining it in the constitution. In legal language, it is called annexation. It represents an open challenge to international law.
Moreover, the case was not limited to one reference in the Constitution. Armenia creates an occupation junta in Azerbaijani lands, finances it from the Armenian state budget, and deploys its troops there.
In addition, Armenia uses maps where its borders include the Azerbaijani territories occupied at the time. At least once Armenia managed to shove such maps into the statistical documents of the EAEU.
Later, however, the EAEU leadership had to apologize and correct the maps. Moreover, the exact same map of Armenia with the inclusion of Azerbaijani occupied lands could be seen on the propaganda materials of Pashinyan's “Civil Contract” on the hot traces of the “kebab revolution”. Moreover, one should not forget Pashinyan's phrase “Karabagh is Armenia, and that's it!
Theoretically, one could imagine that after the Iron Fist strike, Armenia drew conclusions. However, in 2021, early parliamentary elections were held in this country, and Nikol Pashinyan's bloc, the Civil Pact, promised in its program to retake the cities of Shusha and Hadrut! Moreover, in the same year, 2021, the Armenian Parliament approved the program of the government headed by Nikol Pashinyan, which states in black and white that the Karabakh issue should be solved through “separation for salvation”. Let us remind: at this time, Khankendi, Aghdara, and Khojavand are under the control of Russian peacekeeping forces, the occupation junta in Karabakh continues to operate, and Armenia keeps its troops there in violation of all agreements. In other words, the “miatsum” not only retains legal force but remains an action guide. Yerevan did not draw any conclusions from the defeat of Armenia in the 44-day Second War. In 2022, in Prague, Pashinyan signed documents recognizing Azerbaijan's territorial integrity. Nevertheless, in September 2023, Armenia organizes “presidential elections” in Khankendi, and Nikol Pashinyan congratulates the top brass of the occupation junta on “Artsakh's independence day”. In other words, Armenia once again had two positions - one to appease the international community and for appearances' sake, and the other, the real one.
Moreover, there are at least serious reasons to believe that even after the anti-terrorist raids, plans for revenge continue to be made in Yerevan. In any case, the structures of the overthrown junta are still in place and operating here, and this cannot take place without the official authorities' encouragement or at least tacit consent. Recently, the “National Assembly of Artsakh” adopted amendments to the “constitution”, ensuring the continuity of “state institutions”. “Deputy” Metakse Hakobyan announced that the new wording will allow “state institutions” to find solutions in force majeure situations without the risk of being recognized as illegal.
Let's summarize the results. Over the past years, we have heard a lot of seemingly promising statements from Yerevan, which were forgotten in the Armenian capital before they could be properly disseminated by journalists and commented on by politicians. The Armenian authorities' hints and promises to advance negotiations, recognize Azerbaijan's territorial integrity, amend the constitution, etc., meant nothing at best. In the worst case, they were used as a cover for the preparation of armed provocations and revenge. That is what we see today. But at the same time, we are offered to take the word of the Yerevan bonzes as if this provocative constitutional norm is a “tribute to history” and we should not pay attention to it at all. And most importantly, they expect us to believe it. We are ready to believe, but not in words, but only in concrete deeds, for example, the dissolution of the OSCE Minsk Group and the adoption of a new constitution of Armenia....
Fuad Akhundov
political scientist