In reality, a “non-aggression pact” is nothing but a new version of the petulant demands that Yerevan made even before the 44-day war: Azerbaijan is supposed to pledge not to use force, and 20% of the territory will remain under occupation. Today Azerbaijan has liberated its territories by military means. But Armenia has not officially renounced its claims to Azerbaijani lands.
On the surface, Pashinyan sort of made a statement like that. And he even signed a declaration in Prague, where he recognized the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. But are these statements enough?
First of all, Nikol Pashinyan has failed to prove himself as a reliable partner who can be taken at his word. Suffice it to recall how, after the signing of the documents in Prague, he wished a happy “independence day” to the illegal junta in Khankendi and organized a farce called “presidential elections” there. He signed the trilateral agreement, pledging to grant Azerbaijan the “Zangezur corridor”, but then he threw tantrums and refused to even listen to the “corridor logic”. Finally, contrary to the trilateral declaration, he maintained a 10,000-strong military grouping in Karabakh, smuggled mines and personnel for rotation… Is Azerbaijan now supposed to believe that if Pashinyan promised not to attack, he will not attack?
Moreover, all non-aggression pacts, peace and other treaties make sense if the border is defined. And even if we agree that careful demarcation and delimitation is a long process, territorial integrity must be recognized, at least in general terms. And here Pashinyan’s statement alone is not enough. The Armenian constitution, or rather the preamble to this constitution, refers to the declaration of independence, which mentions the decision of the Supreme Soviet of the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic on “miatsum”.
Just to clarify, these are the “fundamental” documents of the state. And on their basis, Armenia has already produced a vast number of documents, including those seemingly having legal force, where claims to Azerbaijani lands, including Karabakh, are spelled out in black and white.
Everywhere and in everything Armenia declared, “We do not recognize the transformation of Soviet administrative borders into state borders and do not consider Karabakh to be part of Azerbaijan.” Even after the outbreak of the 44-day war, Armenia repeated this delusional “precept” repeatedly in its ludicrous lawsuits in international courts. Armenian officials accused Azerbaijan of “attacking” the unrecognized “Republic of Artsakh”. Even after the 44-day Patriotic War, Armenian Deputy Prime Minister Mher Grigoryan contrived to make reservations to CIS agreements and claimed that Armenia did not recognize Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan.
Today, Armenian military tribunals are trying officers accused of “abandoning combat positions” and improperly performing their duties during the 44-day war. This is despite the fact that the fighting took place on the territory of Azerbaijan. But Armenia believes that it was “Azerbaijan’s attack on Karabakh”.
All these papers are considered legally binding documents in Armenia. These are not social media posts or interviews of independent political analysts, but state documents on paper bearing the national coat of arms.
Speaking of the coat of arms. It too features a territorial claim, to the lands of Türkiye, namely, Ağrı Dağı (Mount Ararat in Armenian).
In this context, a slight change in rhetoric is too little to believe in the peacefulness of the current Armenian authorities and their willingness to renounce their territorial claims against Azerbaijan. If these territorial claims were put on paper, then their renunciation should also be formalized following all the rules. Whether the constitution and declaration of independence will have to be changed for this purpose, how many laws and by-laws will have to be revised and amended is Yerevan’s problem. But no peace treaty will be signed without this work. Most importantly, the borders will not be considered recognized.
And the recognition of borders can only be mutual. If Armenia does not recognize Azerbaijan within its borders recognized by the international community, Azerbaijan is free from the obligation to respect Armenia’s borders. Especially if Armenia has not yet decided where the borders of the country are.
If instead of this extensive, hard and unpopular work Nikol Pashinyan is trying to impose some kind of “non-aggression pact” on Azerbaijan, it is nothing more than cheap political buffoonery. This sort of tricks of the trade do not fly in diplomacy.
Fuad Akhundov
Translated from Minval.az
