RA Minister of Foreign Affairs Ararat Mirzoyan answered the questions received from the media.

Question: "In Yerevan, they understand that it is necessary to convince the Armenians of Karabakh to meet with the representatives of Azerbaijan." How will you react to this statement by the Russian Foreign Minister? Does Yerevan continue to insist that there be an international mechanism for the Baku-Stepanakert dialogue, or was the Russian Foreign Minister talking about the meeting without it?

Answer: The position of the Armenian side regarding the need to address the rights and security issues of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh in the context of achieving long-term peace in the region has remained the same. We have repeatedly emphasized that these issues should be addressed through the Baku-Stepanakert dialogue, and the effectiveness of this dialogue can be guaranteed only through international involvement and an effective mechanism.

 

Question: After the trilateral negotiations of the foreign ministers of Armenia, Russia, and Azerbaijan in Moscow, it is understood from the words of the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov that the topic of the rights of the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh was connected to the case of the protection of the rights of national minorities in Armenia during the negotiations. How does official Yerevan interpret this statement?

Answer: The problem of addressing the rights and security issues of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh has always been the cornerstone of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, and during the negotiations with Azerbaijan on July 25 in Moscow and in other capitals before that, the Armenian side raised and continues to raise the issue of ensuring the rights and security of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh.

It is, in fact, also recorded in the tripartite statement of November 9, 2020, where the concepts of Nagorno-Karabakh, the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, and the line of contact with Nagorno-Karabakh are specifically mentioned. The seventh point of the same tripartite declaration also stipulates the return of refugees to the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh and neighboring regions, which has yet to be implemented by Azerbaijan so far. We are discussing Hadrut, Shushi, Martakert, Askeran, Shahumyan, and Getashen regions here.

Of course, the Armenian side also records the rights of the Armenians who were forcibly displaced from different settlements of Azerbaijan in 1988-1991, mainly from Baku, Kirovabad, Sumgait, and other places, and before that also from the Autonomous Republic of Nakhichevan, the issues raised by them.

However, the problem of ensuring the rights and security of the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh, the region's indigenous people, is a completely different issue in its profound content and without any parallels. It cannot be related to other rights, including the rights of "citizens living in the Republic of Armenia" (in the words of the Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation), stipulated by international obligations and fully provided by the Republic of Armenia. According to that, during the last tripartite meeting in Moscow, there was no discussion and, even more, no agreement beyond this logic.

Question: The Azerbaijani side, referring to the statement of the President of the European Council, Charles Michel, following the tripartite meeting held in Brussels on July 15, claims that an agreement has been reached to ensure the transportation of cargo to Nagorno-Karabakh by other means. How would you interpret these statements?

Answer: Armenia, Russia, and Azerbaijan still reached an agreement on the Lachin Corridor with the tripartite statement of November 9, 2020, and the leaders' signatures of the three countries are available under this agreement.

We reaffirm our principled position that the illegal blockade of the Lachin Corridor should be lifted, and the regime established by the tripartite declaration of November 9 should be restored. The Republic of Armenia has no jurisdiction and cannot discuss issues related to other ways of transporting goods to Nagorno-Karabakh.

It is noteworthy that the international partners, in their public statements, also emphasized that there is no alternative to the removal of the blockade of the Lachin Corridor and that various references to other roads cannot be considered as an alternative to the removal of the siege of the Lachin Corridor, which is Azerbaijan's direct obligation.

In this regard, it is optional to remind again about the legally binding decisions of the UN International Court of Justice of February 22 and July 6, 2023, which implicitly reaffirm our stated position.