Friday, December 9 2016 14:21

ArmInfo.The four-day military offensive in April was the culmination of longstanding policy pursued by Baku, Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian said in his speech delivered at the 23rd OSCE Ministerial Council in  Hamburg.   The Armenian Foreign Ministry quotes Edward Nalbandian as saying,  "The large scale military offensive of Azerbaijan against  Nagorno-Karabakh in April was the most dangerous escalation of the  conflict since 1994 when trilateral cease-fire agreement was signed  without time limitations between Azerbaijan, Nagorno-Karabakh and  Armenia. The Azerbaijani aggression was accompanied by gross  violations of the international humanitarian law in an apparent  attempt to terrorize the people of Nagorno-Karabakh. When many OSCE  participating States have been condemning in strongest terms the  brutalities committed by DAESH, most of them could not even imagine  that the same kind of despicable crimes could be committed in the  OSCE area, by an OSCE participating State. The images of those  atrocities, including the beheadings, were circulated in the  Azerbaijani media in a self-congratulatory manner. The perpetrators  were publicly decorated by the authorities."

He noted that these inhumane brutalities reminded the horrors of the  past. "This year marks the 25th anniversary of the deportation of the  population of 24 Armenian villages from Nagorno-Karabakh and its  surroundings. The deportation and massacres of Armenians in Sumgait,  Baku, Kirovabad preceded it and followed in Shahumian and Mardakert  regions of Nagorno-Karabakh. The atrocities against civilians in  April vividly demonstrated that nothing has been changed in  Azerbaijani approaches. This once again reconfirms that the  aspiration of people of Nagorno-Karabakh for self- determination was  right then and it remains right now," he said.

"Many factors clearly demonstrate that Azerbaijan has long before  embarked on the path of hostilities and we have been constantly  reminding about them, including at the Ministerial Council level.  First, instead of preparing the population to peace, as the Co-Chairs  of the Minsk group have been calling for, Baku has for years fueled  anti-Armenian propaganda. The books of the renowned Azerbaijani  novelist were burnt on the streets of Baku just for speaking the  truth about Armenian massacres and calling for reconciliation. It's  not just the books, but the bridges between the people that  Azerbaijan has been intentionally and constantly burning. "Where they  burn books, they will ultimately burn people". So many times the  words of German classic proved to be true. The 2016 report of the  European Commission Against Racism and Intolerance states: "Political  leaders, educational institutions and media have continued using hate  speech against Armenians; an entire generation of Azerbaijanis has  now grown up listening to this hateful rhetoric. On the eve of the  Hamburg Ministerial the leadership of Azerbaijan repeated its claim  alleging that not just Nagorno- Karabakh but the territories of the  Republic of Armenia, including its capital are native Azerbaijani  lands and one day they will return there. What is this if not a  territorial claim against the neighboring OSCE participating State in  a sheer defiance to our joint commitments and values that lay in the  foundation of this Organization?

Second, the skyrocketing accumulation of heavy weaponry in gross  violation of international arms control agreements have been pointing  to Azerbaijan's inclination to the military solution. According to  the international reports in 2015 Azerbaijan was the largest importer  of major weapons in Europe.

Third, the rejection to establish confidence building measures  proposed by the Co-Chairs, such as the mechanism for investigating  the cease-fire violations and the expansion of the OSCE monitoring  capacities shows that Azerbaijan has been striving to limit the  international permanent presence in the conflict zone to keep its  hands free for military operations. Here, in the OSCE, this should be  known better than elsewhere, since proposals on these CSBMs have been  consistently blocked by Azerbaijan once they required the OSCE  consensus for allocating appropriate funds.

Fourth, in their militarist stance and bellicose rhetoric Azerbaijani  leadership has never shied away to claim that war is a viable option.  The more one goes deeply in extreme statements and uncompromising  positions, the more one becomes hostage of own rhetoric. At the end  of the day the words can act. The threat of use of force has been  going hand-in-hand with increasingly dangerous escalation on the line  of contact with Nagorno-Karabakh and border with Armenia through more  frequent ceasefire violations, use of heavy weaponry and incursions.  Armenia and Nagorno- Karabakh have always exerted efforts together  with the Co-Chairs for the exclusively peaceful settlement to the  conflict. Both Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh have always been against  the use of force. This is the fundamental difference between the  Armenian and Azerbaijani positions. In response to the condemnation  by the Co-Chair countries of the threat or use of force the  leadership of Azerbaijan keeps claiming that the international law is  void and it is only possible to solve the issues through force. This  was once again repeated before Hamburg meeting. On the eve of the  OSCE Ministerial the bellicose rhetoric of Azerbaijan was accompanied  by large scale military exercises involving 60 thousand troops,  almost entire personnel of the armed forces, more than 150 tanks, 700  rocket and artillery systems and more than 50 units of military  aviation, in gross violation of the OSCE Vienna document.

Fifth, the maximalist and uncompromising stance at the negotiation  table, rejection of the proposals of the Co-Chair countries even at  their final stages, like at Kazan summit in 2011, almost constant  profanation of the Co-Chairs' efforts and the attempts to do  mediation shopping in other formats have been illustrative of  Azerbaijan's intentions to derail the negotiations and buy time to  continue its military buildup. It does not come as a surprise that  the Co-Chairs in their public statements called on Baku to reverse  this stance. It is our conviction that April aggression was so far  the culmination of Azerbaijan's destructive policy but not the end.  Baku has been carefully hiding its military casualties of April  aggression in an attempt to justify huge price of its adventurism but  certainly it cannot hide the fact that together with human losses the  peace process became its casualty. The Co-Chair countries organized  two summits with the participation of the Presidents of Armenia and  Azerbaijan in May in Vienna and in June in St. Petersburg to address  the consequences of April aggression and create conditions conducive  for the advancement of the peace process," Minister Nalbandian  stressed.

"It is imperative to implement what was particularly emphasized and  agreed upon in the framework of these Summits on exclusively peaceful  settlement of the conflict, full adherence to the 1994-1995  trilateral ceasefire agreements, which do not have time limitations,  creation of mechanism for the investigation of ceasefire violations,  expansion of the team of the Personal Representative of the OSCE  Chairperson-in-Office," he said.

Edward Nalbandian pointed out that Armenia has agreed to proceed on  this basis. "These agreements have yet to be honored by Azerbaijan.  From the very beginning Baku refused to implement the agreement on  the investigative mechanism. As for the expansion of the capacities  of the PR CiO's office, Baku tries not only to curtail the  implementation of the proposal but even impede mission's current  activities in the conflict zone in violation of its OSCE mandate and  further complicate the work of the monitors by attempting to keep  them as far from the conflict zone as possible and diminishing their  ability of rapid reaction. Strengthening of capacities of the Office  of PR CiO does not mean mere arithmetical increase of its staff, but  rather deployment along the Line of Contact and increase of frequency  and efficiency of its monitoring activities on the ground. When it  comes to the security of the people residing in the conflict area  there is no place for petty bargaining," he emphasized.

The Armenian minister added that the use of force against the right  of people of Nagorno-Karabakh to self-determination created this  conflict. "Continued threat to use force with its materialization in  April seriously undermined the peace process and heavily contributed  to the sustention of status quo. Thus, going beyond status quo first  of all requires renouncing the threat or use of force," he said.   

"When Azerbaijan stubbornly refuses to implement the agreements  reached in Vienna, St.  Petersburg or elsewhere before, it undermines  not just those agreements; it damages the peace process as a whole,  since it contributes to eliminating the slightest hopes that anything  agreed with Baku could ever be implemented. In the current  circumstances of lack of trust and confidence the Co-Chair countries  have to even more assertively pursue Azerbaijan to comply with its  commitments. The implementation of the agreements in a good faith and  without preconditions may open the door for starting to rebuild the  trust - an essential prerequisite for a durable settlement - based on  three principles of international law - non use of force or threat of  use of force, equal rights and self-determination of people,  territorial integrity, which together with the elements for conflict  resolution were consistently proposed by the Co-Chair countries as an  integrated and indivisible whole," Minister Nalbandian said.