Hasmik Harutyunyan (Armenpress news agency):

– Mr. Minister, my question is about the Madrid principles. In Kazan when the mediators presented the document, Azerbaijan rejected it. So can we say that by this the Madrid principles became a past history, and whether there are any new principles for the conflict settlement based on which the negotiations are conducted? Thank You.

Edward Nalbandian:

– The Basic Principles presented by the three Co-Chairs remain on the negotiation table. The Co-Chair countries have repeatedly called on the sides to accelerate achieving the agreement on the Basic Principles. They are based on the principles of non-use or threat of force, equal rights and self-determination of peoples and territorial integrity. The Joint statement on the Nagorno-Karabakh issue made in 2013 by the Presidents of the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chair Countries - Russia, the United States and France, in the framework of G8 summit in Enniskillen, which is the last year’s most important document on the issue, calls for reaffirming the commitment to those principles.

As you know, Armenia, unlike Azerbaijan, immediately reaffirmed its commitment to the principles presented in the statement.

It is something else that Azerbaijan makes futile efforts to neglect both those principles and the calls made by the Co-Chairs. A vivid example for this can be observed in the annual report of the activities of Azerbaijan Foreign Ministry for 2013, which was presented to the press a couple of days ago: there is not a single word about Enniskillen statement in that report. There is the impression that Azerbaijan pretends that last year’s most important document on Nagorno-Karabakh adopted by the countries with an international mandate for mediation doesn’t exist at all.

Despite all that, of course you know, that the negotiations continue because there is no alternative to the negotiations. Tomorrow I am leaving for Paris where I will have a meeting with the three Co-Chairs, and on the next day there is a scheduled meeting with the Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Mamediarov.

Hovhannes Kosyan (Interfax News Agency):

– Mr. Minister, recently there were some opinions in circulation that there is some tension in the relations of Armenia with Georgia and Iran. How would you comment on this? This is the first question. And the second: recently a proposal was made to rename the Republic of Armenia into a “Republic of Eastern Armenia”. What is your reaction to this?

Edward Nalbandian:

– Regarding our neighbors – Georgia and Iran, in 2013 Armenia has furthered friendly neighborhood cooperation with those countries. Despite the fact that 2013 was a year of presidential elections in Armenia, as well as in Iran and Georgia, rather intensive reciprocal visits took place.

You know, that the Georgian Prime Minister Ivanishvili made one of his first visits to Armenia and this visit was exhaustive, meaningful and effective. A meeting between the Heads of Parliament of Armenia and Georgia also took place. There were several visits on ministerial level.

The Armenian Foreign Minister visited Tbilisi and the Georgian Foreign Minister also arrived to Yerevan. There were a number of meetings between the Foreign Ministers in the framework of international organizations and conferences as well. Defense Ministers have paid reciprocal visits as well as Energy and Culture Ministers, etc. The Armenian Foreign and Energy Ministers were present at the inauguration of the newly elected President Margvelashvili in Tbilisi where meetings took place with the President and the Prime Minister. President Margvelashvili also has the invitation of the President of Armenia and we expect that the visit of the newly elected Georgian President will soon take place.

As for Iran, despite the elections the year was eventful. The President of Armenia met with the newly elected President Rouhani in Tehran and participated in his inauguration ceremony. Iranian Foreign Minister visited Armenia, I visited Tehran. A number of meetings took place between the Foreign Ministers in the framework of international forums and conferences.

Armenian Minister of Energy, who is also the Armenian Co-Chairman of the Intergovernmental commission visited Iran, his counterpart came to Armenia. Soon, in a couple of weeks the session of the Intergovernmental commission will be held. An official visit of the Armenian Foreign Minister to Tehran is scheduled. This list can be continued.

So some hearsay as if there are any problems or tensions is baseless. Maybe those people have some problems with perception.

Concerning the statement by Mr. Ashotyan, I can say that it is his personal opinion. Everyone can have a personal opinion. No such question has been or is being discussed in the Government.

Aram Araratyan (Mediamax):

– If it is possible, I have two questions. First, recently there is some criticism that Armenia is in isolation or that by visiting this or that remote country we are pushing Turkey and Azerbaijan to operate more actively in those countries. How would you comment on this? And the second question: next year we will commemorate the 100th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide. In this context do you expect any activities from Turkey, or do you see any signals? Did you speak to Davutoglu during your meeting, but anyway, do you feel that there could or could not be any change of their position? Thank you.

Edward Nalbandian:

– I always treat criticism with respect and attention. Expressing different opinions is a very positive process and we should have a respect towards this. But of course, it’s not always the case that the critics are right.

I briefed on the visits for last year, you can see it in detail in our annual report on our website. But if we look through the visits since 2008, we can see that around 40 Heads of State or Government have visited Armenia. The President of Armenia has paid more than 100 foreign visits. 120 Foreign Ministers and Heads of international organizations have visited Armenia. The Foreign Ministers of Armenia has made more than 200 visits abroad. Approximately 500 international agreements have been signed. 15 new embassies were established.

Does this mean isolation?

Surely, I have heard those opinions that there is no need to visit some country because it can provoke a third country to activate its relations with that visited country. But I would recommend studying the already existing intensity, extent and level of relations between that third country and the one visited, before making such critical statements.

On the one hand, they say that we are in isolation, on the other hand they stress there is no need to visit many different countries and to establish embassies.

One thing is clear, diplomacy is implemented through negotiations, meetings, arrangements, agreements, establishment of diplomatic missions.

At one point they criticize that relations with a particular country have deteriorated, then at another point they make an alarm that too close relations have developed. I have even heard some people say why we visit unimportant countries. It is an absurd approach. One shouldn’t look at the world through the hole of a needle.

As I said I follow the criticisms with attention but those you mentioned are contradicting themselves, and lack logic.

As for the 100th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide or whether we have discussed it with the Turkish Foreign Minister, this issue was mentioned during our meeting. This is all I can say. In the context of Armenian-Turkish regulation process, I must state that the Turkish position has not changed so far.

The Foreign Minister of Turkey came and repeated everything he had said four years ago. That’s why, in fact, the process, steps aimed at the normalization of relations were suspended.

I told Davutoglu that I had answered four years ago, and now you have returned and repeat the same. Do you want us to lose another four years? We will wait until Turkey is be ready to normalize relations with Armenia without any preconditions. This position of ours is supported by the international community.

Public Radio of Armenia:

– Mr. Minister, yesterday your Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrov announced that there are new proposals on Nagorno-Karabakh issue. Are these proposals being discussed in the framework of the OSCE Minsk Group, and have they been presented to you? And the second question, do you follow the construction of the new building of the Foreign Ministry and have you seen if it’s more comfortable than the current building?

Edward Nalbandian:

– I think Russian Foreign Minister’s words are presented in a slightly incorrect way, maybe because of the translation. He said “есть наработки”, in other words it’s about formulations.
Why do we meet? Last year there were four-five meetings between the Foreign Ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan. And you know that after the presidential meeting in Vienna, the Foreign Ministers were instructed to advance negotiations and try to find an understanding on basic principles. So how should we come to understanding? Is it possible without the so called “наработка”-s? This is just a working process. We don’t talk about new principles.

Concerning the new building we have not only followed attentively, but we also participated in the pre-planning stage and we observe how it is proceeding according to the construction pace. And what requirements and needs does the Foreign Ministry have for the new building? We look forward to it to be more functional and comfortable. The Ministry is closely following that process.

Nairi Hokhikyan (Kentron TV):

– Mr. Minister, starting from 1 January 2014 foreign citizens who enter the Russian Federation without entrance visa can stay there 90 days within the period of 180 days. In fact this means that foreign citizens cannot leave and return Russia at once. So the question is whether in case of entering the Customs Union there will be exceptions for Armenian citizens? Thank you.

Edward Nalbandian:

– All states have the right to adopt their own procedures on visa regime. The one you mentioned is a procedure adopted by Russia and we should respect it. You are asking what exceptions can be for Armenia in the context of accession to the Customs Union. Customs Union has to do with trade, economy and customs procedures. I don’t exclude that in the future we can have negotiations on this issue. I don’t exclude that other developments are possible in the future.


Emma Gabrielyan (Aravot Daily):

– Mr. Nalbandian, my question is a little bit out of the time frames: Although you are summarizing the year of 2013, you have been the Foreign Minister for 6 years already. In this period the process of normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations started, as well as the process of Association with the EU, which wasn’t signed eventually. From the perspective of these 6 years which is Your and the Foreign Ministry’s most important achievement?

Edward Nalbandian:

– In general the important achievement of diplomacy is the increase of the number of friends of a country, expanding of the geography of relations, and in this context I just presented numbers. I think in this context we have some a progress.

But you know that during those 6 years I haven’t used the opportunity to boast that we did this or that. I mean one should modestly and calmly move forward, without exclaiming before jumping.

As on one occasion I had mentioned, diplomacy is like an iceberg and only the top of the iceberg is seen. But if it is turned upside down that diplomacy will collapse.


News.am:

– Mr. Minister, please a few words about the Diplomatic Academy. To which extent is its existence justified? Does it provide qualified diplomats for the Foreign Ministry?

Edward Nalbandian:

– I don’t know why we didn’t refer to the Diplomatic School in our summary report. The Diplomatic School deserves to be mentioned and not only. The decision of the opening of the School 4 years ago is justified.

I think during these years Diplomatic School has already become an established institution.

More than 40 graduates of the Diplomatic School already work at the Foreign Ministry. I think 15 of them have already been posted to our diplomatic missions abroad.

During these 4 years 200-300 lecturers from 40 countries have taught at the School. A number of Foreign Ministers, Heads of different international organizations have delivered speeches there. Today there is a great demand of the School graduates not only at the Ministry, but also in our diplomatic missions abroad.

Soon the graduating examinations of 2013 students will take place. I have met them and there are promising young people among them.

We also expect to see new students, so the process is going on. I am sure that the young people who have graduated from the Diplomatic School and now work at Foreign Ministry can be good diplomats and can best protect the interests of our state and our people.

Radio Liberty:

First, you said that the Foreign Minister of Turkey repeated for you the words he had said 4 years ago, but you didn’t mention, would you please tell us what Mr. Davutoglu had repeated to you. And the second question: Taking into account the recent incidents on the border, when an Armenian soldier died, a kind of critical approach has emerged in the public, that soldiers are dying on the border, while we are carrying on negotiations with Azerbaijanis. How do you think the incidents on the border will affect the negotiation process? I am not talking about the statements, because many statements are being made, which will have an impact, but there are still casualties on the border, and we keep on negotiating. Thank you.

Edward Nalbandian:

Concerning the meeting with the Foreign Ministry of Turkey, I said that the issue is as of when Turkey will be ready for the normalization of the relations without preconditions. This means that the preconditions are continued by the Turkish side. They pretend that there are no preconditions, but in fact they are talking in the language of preconditions. Certainly, it is not possible to move on with this approach. Concerning the details, you know that announcements for the media are being made based on mutual arrangements. Usually such arrangements are not breached. There were already enough details in what I said.

Concerning the incident on the Line of contact, this is not the first time. Two days ago together we met with our Karabakhi colleague, Foreign Minister Mr. Mirzoyan, and in our press release about the meeting we clearly stated that such irresponsible steps are undermining the negotiation process.

Yesterday a meeting took place with Philippe Lefort, the EU Special Representative, and in the press release issued afterwards it was stated that such provocations create additional obstacles, undermine the negotiation process. You noticed that one of the Co-Chairs stated quite clearly in his tweet comment that such incidents harm the negotiation process. But the reality is that there is no alternative to the negotiation process. This is why we are continuing the negotiations.

As I answered to a the previous question, it is Azerbaijan which claims that the Co-Chairs, the international community have a different opinion.

The conflict resolution issue has been raised to the level of the Presidents of the United States, Russia and France. 5 statements have been adopted by them. Yet Azerbaijan pretends that whatever the Co-Chairs say does not concern them.

This is the only conflict in international relations on which 5 statements have been adopted on such a level. The principles and elements, elaborated as an integrated whole, are being presented in detail, on which basis the conflict should be settled.

Every time minutes after the statements made in L’Aquila, Muskoka, Deauville, Los Cabos, Enniskillen, Armenia announced that we are ready to move towards the settlement based on them. Minutes after the Enniskillen we made comments on that statement point-by-point and said that we share the approaches of the Co-Chairs, i.e. the approaches of the international community on the settlement of the issue.

Thus, our approach is in line with the approach of the Co-Chairs, the international community.

Azerbaijan turns upside down the approaches of the international community. In the report of the MFA of Azerbaijan for the year of 2013 the opinions of some structures are mentioned, which have no connection with the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh issue, but the Enniskillen statement is ignored. I don’t think that they have illusions concerning that, they just try to mislead their public opinion, their people, as if the international community supports them.

Gala TV:

Mr. Minister, recently the delegation headed by you was in Panama, Peru, Cuba. Don’t you consider it better to exert efforts towards our participation in the Geneva talks instead of that, because a very important issue is going to be discussed there – the Syrian conflict, which in the regional context is much more connected to Armenia, and there is an Armenian community there, which has very serious problems now. Meanwhile your delegation is going to Peru and Panama. Thank you.

Edward Nalbandian:

I will tell you the following: There were a number of inquiries to our representative at the UN on that issue, since the Geneva-2 conference has been organized with the invitation and under the auspices the UN Secretary-General. Our representative to the UN has replied about the invitees to that conference. He noted that the invited states are the permanent members of the UN Security Council, the members of G8 and G20, as well as the donor states.

The conference in Geneva takes place today. This is the beginning of a process which, in the expectations of the international community, the peoples of the Middle East and the people of Syria, can lead to solution of issues.

Concerning the visits to Latin American states, I would suggest you to look through what was adopted on Nagorno-Karabakh in these three Latin American states, and then only make your judgments. And perhaps after that you will come to the Foreign Ministry, and we will talk. There are some things, responding to which publicly would not be correct. We haven’t come here for a debate, but for a press conference, and whatever the Foreign Minister says, is an official position which also gets its reactions abroad.

The countries we visited are very important states. We intend to further activate our relations with the countries of Latin America. By further enlarging the geography of our relations, we are intending to visit those states where we have not been yet – to activate our ties with these states.

We have 3 missions in the Latin America yet – in Brazil, Mexico and Argentina. From these three countries we will try to cover the region, one of the most important regions in the world with a considerable weight in the international affairs.

I think that these visits were very important and, I can say, quite effective negotiations took place with my colleagues, which are quite promising for the further development of our relations with these states and the Latin American region.

There are no important and unimportant countries in the world. Last year, when I visited Indonesia, someone asked “why Indonesia”. Indonesia is a state with 250 million population… I shouldn’t now go into details. It is possible to look through the web to understand what Indonesia is. Incorrect statements about both big and small states are unacceptable. Imagine someone talking like that about us. How would you take that? We must try to develop our relations with all the states, and that is the aim of our diplomacy – enlarge the number of Armenia’s friends and partners.

Civilnet:

Mr. Nalbandian, You mentioned that the membership to the Customs Union is in our strategic and economic interests. I would like to ask why that decision was being kept in secret from the public until September 3, and whether you were aware of that decision, taking into account the circumstance that your deputy stated on the eve of September 3 that Armenia’s membership to the Customs Union is impossible.

Edward Nalbandian:

I do not think that Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs made such a statement on September 3. I am sure that he couldn’t say such a thing on September 3.

Nothing was being kept in secret. When these decisions ripened to such a degree that the decision of membership became possible, and it was possible to start the appropriate procedure, an appropriate statement was made by the Presidents of Armenia and Russia.

That didn’t mean membership yet, that meant that Armenia stated formally for the first time that it made a decision to join the Customs Union.

Armenia has stated many times that it wishes to join the Customs Union. If you look carefully through the interviews of the President of Armenia in the websites, you will see that whenever he was asked if Armenia wants to be a member of the Customs Union, the Armenian President answered ‘yes’.

That interview is still available on the web. But Armenia was not invited yet. This is how it was stated by our President.

It wasn’t clear on the professional, expert level, whether it is possible. When it was ripe, an appropriate decision was made. Stay assured that there was no need to keep secrets.

Concerning the working procedures – the documents, the formulations and so on, that is a natural negotiation process. If it is made through the press, then there would be no negotiations at all. At that time there would be no need for the negotiations, it would be possible to declare through the media what our position is, and what the other party’s position is. Can we expect positive outcomes from that?

Of course, not. The negotiation process is not conducted publicly not in order to keep some secrets, but because this is the order. All states negotiate in that way, there is a certain working procedure of the negotiation process.


Gazeta.ru:

A small question about Charles Aznavour. He is not only a chansonnier, but also a diplomat, moreover, not only in Switzerland but all over the world. In his last interview he said that yes, they hear the problems in Armenia, but do nothing. How do you assess him?

Edward Nalbandian:

Very highly, as the whole Armenian people does. It happens that a word is inserted here or there in the press, and then conclusions are being made. Charles Aznavour is a great person and he is not going to respond to every newspaper article, saying that he said something in this or that way. With Charles Aznavour, whom I not only love and respect as Charles Aznavour, but I personally know him for a very long time, and I approach him with a really deep respect. We travelled together many times, communicated and continue our very close relations not only as an Ambassador of Armenia, and not only as the world-famous Charles Aznavour, a great Armenian, but also as a person – very simple, very wise and warm person.

I think that all the expressions that he made during our meetings, our conversations, he certainly has very correct, very smart approaches, and both his statements and his actions must be treated with respect, and Charles Aznavour’s name should not be used for manipulations.

He is a great patriot, he is greatly and totally stands by Armenia’s side and supports the policy of the Republic of Armenia.