Wednesday, October 17 2018 13:01

ArmInfo. There can be no  question of any return of territories - this is 100%. The Spokesman  for the NKR head David Babayan said this in an interview with ArmInfo  correspondent in response to the statement by the US Ambassador to RA  Richard Mills regarding "the return of the occupied territories." 

According to him, the statements of Mills must be divided into two  components. First, according to Babayan, most likely, this statement  is personal in nature, since there is no other explanation for this.  According to the Spokesman for the head of Artsakh, such precedents  have already been, for example, Matthew Bryza (former US ambassador  to Azerbaijan). "He also needs to live somehow. There are various  scenarios for his further employment," he said.

Secondly, according to Spokesman for President of Artsakh, this  statement by Mills is very strange. He recalled that it was  repeatedly stated and emphasized that the co-chair countries are not  judges, there is no coercion to incline one or another solution, they  only carry out the mediation mission. "Who decides that the  settlement does not alternative and involves the return of  territories? And why, for example, the US Ambassador to Azerbaijan  does not make such a statement? The emphasis of our approaches and  positions cannot be forced on one or another settlement option. I  want to stress once again that we do not have "occupied territories",  because initially we did not raise the question of the seizure of any  territories, we had one goal- to reunite with mother-Armenia, "he  said, and in this context he reminded that the Nagorno- Karabakh  Republic was formed as a result of union of the North Artsakh and the  Nagorno-Karabakh autonomous region.

Babayan once again emphasized that today there can be no talk of  territories, there can only be a question of borders, which in itself  is a broader concept. "If you want to resolve the issue of borders,  no one will hinder you. But I would like to emphasize once again that  there can be no return to the past, either in terms of status or in  terms of territories. This is a question of the safety of people  living in this territory ", Babayan said.  To clarify, does this mean  that the official Stepanakert opposes the Madrid principles, the  Spokesman for the President of Artsakh stated that the NKR is not a  participant in these processes, although it was repeatedly stressed  that without its participation a complete and comprehensive solution  to the conflict is impossible. "We should be involved in all stages  of the negotiations. Only in this case can we give a political and  legal assessment to the processes around the settlement. And what  does this ambiguous formula for the ambassador" land for peace "mean,  only peace can be in exchange for peace, and no more.  There can be  no question of the return of territories, this is100%. It is a  question of our security. To denude our defense in exchange for the  empty promises of terrorists - are we that crazy? ", Babayan  concluded.  To recall, Richard Mills who is terminating his  diplomatic mission in Armenia in an interview to EVN touching upon  the Karabakh settlement made a remarkable statement.  In particular,  touching the options to settle the conflict the U.S. Ambassador  focused on the need to return ''occupied territories''. Although he's  hoping that the transition will generate more discussion on what  Armenia's options are and what Armenia is prepared to accept, he's  been struck by how little discussion there was about what would have  been or is an acceptable solution and compromise. "What I did hear  was a little disturbing because it appeared to be a step back from  where we were," he said. "I was surprised when I first got here and  found out that most Armenians I met were adamantly opposed to the  return of the occupied territories as part of a negotiation  settlement." He noted that return of land was one of the core  principles of the Madrid Principles. "It has long been my  government's understanding of why the occupied territories were  originally seized; they would be land for a peace option," he said.  "So I was very surprised that there was no support for that anymore." 

He said he understands how events like the 2016 April War make this  even more difficult for the Armenian people, but "the harsh reality  is that any settlement is going to require the return of some portion  of the occupied territories." He went on to note that the status quo  is no longer in Armenia's favor - from closed borders to the strain  on the country's material and human resources to corruption risks  associated with the conflict.  "Corruption didn't grow because there  are evil people here," he said. "The ground was pretty fertile for it  because you have closed borders and a very small economy, so it's  very easy to control markets." He also added that when a country is  at war, it's easy to pushback on those that "might be offering  criticism on certain aspects of society, when we're at war, people  are dying, you have to be a patriot..."