«VOTING» UNDER OCCUPATION

Yet another show called Presidential and Parliamentary Elections in Nagorno-Karabakh was a resounding failure. Armenian authorities saw the futility and senselessness of attempts to internationally legitimise the illegitimate regime they created in Nagorno-Karabakh, which the world community recognizes as an integral part of the Republic of Azerbaijan.

Moreover, the so called elections have clearly revealed the criminal essence of the current Armenian state. For the sake of realizing its expansionist ambitions, Yerevan has shown its readiness to sacrifice even the lives of the compatriots living in Karabakh.

Cynical "elections"

The Armenian occupation regime in Nagorno-Karabakh dragged the Armenians living in this Azerbaijani region to the polls, despite the danger of the novel coronavirus infection. It is obvious that it was a vile and cynical act also because the leadership of the illegal political regime had to conduct two rounds of voting. Moreover, the second round took place on April 14, when coronavirus was officially confirmed in six cases. “Polling stations” were opened even in quarantined villages.

Armenian aggressors present "elections" periodically held in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan as evidence of the supposedly "high level of democracy" prevailing here. But if in previous years there were still marginal politicians in the world who agreed to visit these beautiful places at the invitation and expense of the occupant regime, and at the same time watch a “selective performance”, the show organized this year in the context of a pandemic did not have “international observers”.

Armenia has once again demonstrated that it is responsible for the occupation of Azerbaijani territories and the criminal policies carried out on them. The head of the illegal regime in Nagorno-Karabakh, Bako Sahakyan, admitted that the decision to hold "elections" in the so-called "NKR" during a pandemic was agreed with the top leadership of Armenia, which ignored the threat to the life and health of the Karabakh Armenians, deciding to hold "elections" in the "NKR". At the same time, in Armenia itself, for reasons of quarantine, a referendum on the removal of the current staff of the Constitutional Court was postponed.

Either way, the “winner” of the Armenian show in Karabakh, Araik Harutyunyan cynically declared that the “expression of will was a proof of his legitimacy”, although another candidate who passed into the second round refused to participate in elections.

But most importantly, what kind of legitimacy of the “winner” can be discussed in a priori illegitimate elections?!

World community condemns but does nothing

The international community has unanimously agreed on illegal “elections” in the internationally recognized territories of Azerbaijan occupied by Armenia. It is significant in this sense, first of all, the statement of the co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group. Immediately after the first round of “elections”, they stated that not one of the MG co-chairing countries and any other country would recognize Nagorno-Karabakh as an independent state. A document circulated by international mediators states that the results of the “elections” will in no way affect the final status of Nagorno-Karabakh and the ongoing negotiations aimed at achieving a lasting peaceful settlement of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict.

Many states and influential international organizations categorically rejected the so-called “elections” in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan and declared them illegitimate. In particular, NATO stated that the “elections” in Nagorno-Karabakh do not predetermine the final legal status of this Azerbaijani region, nor the results of ongoing negotiations. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation emphasized that the holding of the so-called “elections” in the occupied Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan contradicts the relevant resolutions of the UN Security Council, OIC and OSCE decisions providing for a peaceful settlement of the conflict on the basis of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Azerbaijan. Similar statements were also made by the Non-Aligned Movement, GUAM, Turkic Council, TurkPA, and the Council of Europe.

Particular attention should be paid to the assessment given by the European Union, which did not recognized the legal framework of the “elections”. Also, the EU confirmed that it cannot have any influence on determining the future status of Nagorno-Karabakh and the outcome of the ongoing negotiation process. At the same time, the EU recalled its strong support for the efforts of the OSCE Minsk Group to break the status quo, thereby again recognizing the full legitimacy of the key tendency of the negotiation process being mediated by the OSCE Minsk Group. This tendency, of course, is aimed at changing the situation in the conflict region due to the Armenian occupation of Azerbaijani territories.

At the same time, it is also obvious that condemning the actions of Armenia alone is not enough, and the aggressor should be forced to change the situation.

Peace or war?

The “election” showed once again that by ignoring the principles and norms of international law, the appeals and position of the world community, Armenia continues to demonstrate absolute reluctance to abandon the policy of occupation. This has a clear effect on the Armenian attitude to the plans for a peaceful settlement of the conflict developed by the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs, which explicitly assumes inevitable change in the status quo. In this sense, Yerevan’s reaction to the recent high-profile statement by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov about a document suggesting a phased settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is noteworthy.

Mr. Lavrov made it clear that the Madrid principles discussed in the framework of the negotiation process, the so-called Kazan document, as well as the document adopted in April 2019 in Moscow at a meeting of the Russian, Azerbaijani and Armenian foreign ministers with the participation of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs, suggest at the first stage the liberation of areas around Nagorno-Karabakh and the unblocking of transport, economic and other communications. Moreover, these measures are considered as the most important step towards the implementation of UN Security Council resolutions on Karabakh settlement.

In response, the Armenian Foreign Minister Zohrab Mnatsakanyan openly stated that approaches that provide for a phased solution are unacceptable for Armenia. He made it clear that the territories referred to in the statement are "a security zone and a line of defense" for Armenia. Therefore, Armenia will not make concessions and will not withdraw its troops from these lands.

In fact, refuting Lavrov, Mnatsakanyan also stated that since 2018, or since the “velvet-revolutionary” government came to power in Armenia, negotiations are limited only to discussions of assessments, approaches of the parties to individual elements. In other words, the head of the Armenian Foreign Ministry confirmed the refusal of Armenia to withdraw its troops from the occupied Azerbaijani lands and denied the discussion itself during the negotiations of a phased settlement plan.

Obviously, Mnatsakanyan’s statement also looked like a challenge for Lavrov, whose truthfulness was called into question by the Armenian side in such an obvious manner.

The Russian Foreign Ministry did not hesitate to respond and unequivocally confirmed that "among the elements for resolving the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is the return of the territories around Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as the determination of the final legal status of Nagorno-Karabakh by the will of the population." It was pointed out that the position of Russia as a country co-chairing the OSCE Minsk Group, which has been repeatedly voiced in joint statements by the top leaders of Russia, the US and France, is based on the fundamental principles of the Helsinki Final Act, including the principles of the non-use of force, territorial integrity and the right to self-determination.

Thus, discussions during the negotiations of a specific document providing for a phased change in the status quo does not raise any doubts. Moreover, Azerbaijan has repeatedly warned that there will be no negotiations for the sake of their simulation.

But what is behind such a miserable attempt by Armenian Foreign Minister to deny the obvious facts? Obviously, the first thing that comes to mind is the willingness of the Armenian side to ensure political order in the country. Lavrov’s statement, which exposed the Armenian side unexpectedly, left Mnatsakanyan no choice but to take the hit and to try to expose Lavrov as a liar and at the same time shield his own prime minister, who had been telling the Armenian public populist lies about the essence of the current stage of the Karabakh settlement for two years.

However, such a "velvet-revolutionary" initiative does not look promising for the peace process, depriving it of a positive perspective. According to Hikmet Hajiyev, head of the Foreign Policy Department of the Presidential Administration of Azerbaijan: “The statement by the Armenian Foreign Minister nullifies the negotiation process on the settlement of the conflict under the auspices of the OSCE Minsk Group. Such destructive statements from Yerevan inflict a serious blow on the negotiation process and violate the negotiations. If Armenia wants to leave the negotiation process with such statements, then it must openly recognize its position.”

This is nothing more than an appeal to Yerevan to throw off the mask and explain the existing situation: what exactly is the Armenian leadership, prime minister and foreign minister discussing with Azerbaijan, if not the only acceptable solution for a peaceful settlement, to end the occupation of its territories? The desire of the Armenian side to present, in return for the correct answer to this question, a categorical refusal to liberate Azerbaijani territories means one thing - the collapse of the peace process.

That is why the world community should not remain a silent spectator to the illegal Armenian occupation of Azerbaijani territories. With all due respect to the international community, which obviously deserves all praise for the rejection of the “elections in Nagorno-Karabakh”, Azerbaijan cannot and will never reconcile with the endless, inactive condemnation of the aggressor.