On January 26, the Foreign Minister held Annual Press Conference, summarizing the foreign policy for 2014, where more than 50 media representatives were accredited.

In his speech, Minister Nalbandian, particularly, said,

"In 2014 Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Armenia, based on the foreign policy guidelines and assignments outlined by the President of Armenia, continued its activities aimed at the strengthening of the country's external security component, maintenance of external favorable conditions and guaranties for the development of the country; increase of the number of Armenia’s friends on various continents, deepening of the engagement in the international organizations and processes; development of cooperation with friendly and partner countries; enhancement of Armenia’s reputation and position at the international arena; protection of the interests of the Republic and its citizens abroad; preservation of the Armenian cultural heritage, and implementation of initiatives towards the creation of positive agenda and those in line with our interests.

The most significant event was successful completion of the process of Armenia’s joining the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), which reflects Armenia’s strategic interests, creates new opportunities for the economic development of the state.

In 2014 together with the Co-Chair states of the OSCE Minsk Group, Armenia continued joint efforts towards the exceptionally peaceful resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh issue.

On the 20th anniversary of the establishment of the cease-fire in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, bellicose rhetoric voiced by Azerbaijan, numerous flagrant violations of cease-fire regime, periodically recurring subversive acts along the borders between Armenia and Azerbaijan and the Line of Contact between Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan gained new impetus, that together with destructive behavior by Baku, statements that distort the essence of the negotiation process, rejection of the mediators’ proposals, did not enable to reach a progress both in reaching of an agreement over the basic principles of the settlement, and in realizing the calls of the international community on confidence-building measures.

In August, September and October the Co-Chair states, first Russia’s President in Sochi, then the USA Secretary of State in New Port, and France’s President in Paris organized Summit meetings with the Heads of Armenia and Azerbaijan aimed at ease of tension, prevention of further escalation of the conflict, and creation of favorable conditions to move forward the process of conflict settlement.

Shooting down of the helicopter of NKR Defense Army during a training flight, keeping the area of helicopter shooting under fire for 10 days, Azerbaijan’s criminal behavior of violating international humanitarian law considerably added to the tension, which received an appropriate reaction of the international community.

Armenian diplomacy continued to exert efforts to prevent further escalation of situation and to draw international community’s attention to adventurous policy pursued by Azerbaijan.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Armenia’s diplomatic missions together with Diaspora structures have continued exerting consistent effort towards the organization of events dedicated to the Centennial of the Armenian Genocide both in Armenia and abroad, pursuing the implementation of the Armenia’s President’s assignments and instructions.

Continuous work towards the international recognition and condemnation of the Armenian Genocide, towards prevention of crimes against humanity was carried out.

The year was marked by further strengthening and deepening of allied strategic relations with the Russian Federation. During periodic meetings of top leaders of the two states agreements of strategic importance were reached.

Friendly cooperation with the United States of America gained consistent development, visa facilitation agreement was reached.

The European direction continued to be one of the priorities on the foreign policy agenda. Continuous steps were undertaken both with European structures, and in bilateral framework through the deepening of multifaceted ties with the European states. Presidents of France and Greece paid state visits to Armenia.

Considerable work was carried out towards strengthening of friendly, mutually beneficial relations with neighbouring states – Georgia and Iran.

Armenia’s principled stance on the normalization of the Armenian-Turkish relations without preconditions continued to be supported by the international community. The Foreign Minister of Armenia attended the inauguration ceremony of the President of Turkey, handed him the official invitation of the Armenian President to pay visit to Yerevan on April 24, 2015.

Great attention was drawn to the on-going cooperation within the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), development of bilateral relations with CIS member-states.

Armenia continued works towards deepening of cooperation with dynamically developing states of Asia-Pacific region, namely, China, India and Japan. Interim Office of the Embassy of Japan was opened in Yerevan, and will start operating as Embassy of Japan from the turn of 2015.

The year was marked by the development of collaboration with traditionally friendly Arab states. Security of Syrian Armenians, preservation of Armenian cultural and historic heritage in Syria, assistance to the Syrian Armenians, who suffered from the consequences of events in Kessab, ensuring appropriate reaction of the international community to the situation in Kessab remained amongst priority agenda issues.

From different international platforms Armenia raised the importance of the issues of violation of rights of ethnic and religious minorities by the extremists in the North of Iraq, and the Middle East, in general, as well as coordination of the international community’s efforts to protect them.

The geography of diplomatic ties continued to expand. In this context steps were undertaken towards the development of relations with a number of Latin American states.

Within the Collective Security Treaty Organization, which constitutes the most important component of Armenia’s security, Armenia continued being an initiator and an active member.

Partnership with North Atlantic Treaty Organization developed continuously.

Armenia continued to deepen its engagement within the UN. Great attention was attached to the efficient participation of Armenia in on-going cooperation in the frameworks of the Council of Europe, OSCE, International Organization of La Francophonie, other international and regional structures. Armenia was elected as Vice-President of the UNESCO Committee for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict.

Efforts were exerted towards the development of ties with international economic structures and financial institutions, deepening of trade and economic cooperation with different states, search for new markets for the export of Armenian products, attraction of foreign investments. Sessions of inter-state committees on economic cooperation, business-forums, expos of Armenian products were initiated and organized.

Development of inter-parliamentary ties with different states, participation of Armenia’s Parliament in multilateral parliamentary frameworks enjoyed comprehensive support by the MFA; important place was attached to the works towards the expansion of decentralized cooperation.

MFA continued to coordinate Armenia’s governmental agencies foreign affairs. Great significance was placed on the initiatives by the Ministry of Diaspora in the strengthening of Homeland-Diaspora ties, presentation of the Armenian culture, preservation of Armenian cultural heritage abroad and to the efforts of RA Ministry of Culture towards the establishment and development of cultural cooperation with other countries.

Protection of rights of the Republic of Armenia’s citizens in different states, issues of assistance to the citizens caught in crisis situations were on the spotlight of the MFA.

In 2014 the President of the Republic of Armenia paid 21 foreign visits; Armenia hosted 5 Heads of States. The President of the National Assembly paid 5 official visits and 3 Heads of other countries’ parliaments visited Armenia. The Prime Minister paid 7 foreign visits, Armenia hosted 1 Head of the Government. Minister of Foreign Affairs of Armenia paid 34 foreign visits, Armenia hosted 11 Foreign Ministers and Heads of International organizations.

Works continued to be carried out to raise the international awareness on the positions of Armenian foreign policy, and to strengthen the image of our country."

Question (“Interfax” agency): Mister Minister, my question refers to the tragedy in Gyumri. We are under the impression that state bodies undertake incomplete steps or they do delay. Please, comment, why is it like it is, and why does such an impression emerge?

Edward Nalbandian: You are well aware, that on that same day, when that horrible, dreadful crime was committed, the President of the Republic held selectoral consultations with the Heads of law-enforcement bodies, outlined respective assignments and, in particular, stressed the importance of the disclosure of its details, identify those responsible and make them accountable by full force of law in the shortest time-frame.

Law-enforcement bodies provide respective information on activities and steps undertaken by them.

The Armenian side established proper cooperation with Russian colleagues. Contacts were established on the highest level. You are aware that the Presidents of Armenia and Russia had phone conversation. Contacts have been and are being established in the most active way on different levels. There is a full mutual understanding, that the investigation and the trial are to be open, transparent processes, and that those responsible must be held accountable by law.

Question (News.am news agency): Mister Minister, the authorities of Azerbaijan periodically state about their contribution in the international fight against terrorism, and at the same time level accusations against Armenia. How would you comment this?

Edward Nalbandian: Well, what should I say, you know, that mouth will not be sweet when you say "sweet."

First of all, I would like to use this opportunity and strongly condemn the killing, committed by the terrorists recently. I am talking about the citizen of Japan. Once again this approves, that the international community must unite and through joint efforts be much persistent in the fight against terrorism.

Terrorism is a threat for all and those, who directly or indirectly assist terrorists or use them for this or that reason, should be well aware that this may have a boomerang effect, and they might as well become the target of terrorism.

It is widely known, that during the Nagorno-Karabakh war the Azerbaijanis used mercenaries from Afghanistan and other places - mercenaries that had close links with notorious terrorist organizations. Names of some of those persons are mentioned in media as fighters of the so called “Islamic state”, when they are killed in Iraq, Syria and other places. The killing of notorious terrorist Haled Azeri was covered few months ago in media as the death of one of the chiefs of “Islamic state” fighters. That same Halid Azeri was glorified by the Azerbaijanis during Nagorno-Karabakh war. During those days he led the group known as Karabakh’s partizans. You remember that well.

Azerbaijani statements of such kind can not impress anybody, or increase confidence. Those attempts are in vain.

Question (Mediamax): Mister Minister, I have two questions. First, on the anniversary of the assassination of Hrant Dink a few days ago, Ahmet Davutoglu spoke about giving a new beginning to the Armenian-Turkish relations, buidling a joint future. How would you comment on this?

My second question, Ministry of Foreign Affairs is frequently being criticized, that it does not always react to the provocations by the Azerbaijani side. What would you say on that?

Edward Nalbandian: That raises a question… why does Davutoglu or any other high-level official in Turkey wait till the year 2015 to make a statement on Dink? Why not on the seventh anniversary of that terrific crime? On the sixth, fifth, fourth, third, second anniversary not a single statement was made? How could one explain that?! And then, eight years in a row the authorities of Turkey were not able or did not want to identify those responsible in Dink’s murder.

Now they speak of kind of a respect to Dinks’ memory, but at the same time support notorious Perincek, who along with the statements denying the Armenian genocide, came up with statements full of hatred against the Armenian people on the day of Dink’s murder.

In the statements both of former and incumbent Prime Minister of Turkey one can find nothing new. The answer to them was given in my article, which was published in the French “Figaro” magazine.

The Turkish authorities during at least five or six years had a good opportunity to use the historic chance to ratify the Protocols by the way signed by Davutoglu himself and bring into life the process of reconciliation between the two peoples. Unfortunately, being incapable to get rid of their internal taboos, the Turkish authorities did not miss any opportunity to deny the Armenian Genocide and, to make, to put it mildly, unfriendly statements and actions against the Armenian people and Armenia, which further deepened the distrust.

On one occasion I gave Davutoglu an advice, that it is time to shift from philosophy to concrete, feasible steps. In a word, by throwing dust in someone’s eyes one can not move forward.

Referring to the second question, I will tell you just, that diplomatic reaction has different expressions. It could be in the form of public statement of Ministry of Foreign Affairs, by the Minister, high-level officials of the MFA or our diplomats abroad. The reaction can be expressed during a bilateral and multilateral diplomatic meetings. And when issues are pressing, then through phone conversations. It is an ongoing process, which does not necessarily require coverage always. I have not counted, do not have numbers, but I am confident that if one counts those over just recent months - there were dozens of them.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is taking every necessary step. Of course, the latter is perceived by some as making much noise here and there, by others - undertaking of respective persistent work. If it is about either making speeches or “putting money where the mouth is”, then I would choose the latter.

Question (Armenpress): Mister Minister, according to the Azerbaijani media, during the press conference with Aliyev, the German Chancellor supposedly stated that Russia and Armenia in some cases act in the same way regarding the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh issue, I would like to hear your comment on that, though there was no such an release on the official site of German Chancellor, and the Ambassador of Germany in an interview to “Armenpress” stated, that in such a case one should get information from German Chancellor’s official website. I would like to hear your comments.

Edward Nalbandian: You have already commented. Azerbaijanis indulge in wishful thinking. But, surely, Armenia’s stance on Karabakh is in line with that of Russia, as well as with France and United States, i.e. with the Co-Chairs. On numerous occasions we talked that over. In the case of Azerbaijan the reverse is true.

This is not something new, that the Azerbaijani media is distorting the statements made by different states. I do not remember a single meeting between the Co-Chairs and Foreign Ministers, when the essence of the negotiations, meetings was not distorted and turned upside down by the Azerbaijani media and propaganda.

Some unique feature, logic and imagination is characteristic of the Azerbaijani propaganda and, actions, in general; which is clear only to them. In any case, few if any, are able to grasp it. The placement of congratulatory and welcoming address on the glorification of the notorious murderer Safarov on Azerbaijan’s President site, from Baku’s first psychiatric hospital, came to my mind. That is to say, you do understand that only the Azerbaijani propaganda machine can do something like that.

Question (Pastinfo agency): You have just mentioned that Azerbaijan continues its bellicose, provocative rhetoric, actions, and Armenia continues its efforts to prevent further escalation of the situation and drawing international community's attention to Azerbaijani adventurous policy. Does it change anything according to you? And until when will the current situation last?

Edward Nalbandian: Would you propose that we do not continue our efforts towards a peaceful settlement? Azerbaijani leadership has led its country to a deadlock by its policy, and now tries getting out of that situation through hysterical actions. The more persecutions, violence increase against political opponents and representatives of the civil society and the more condemning statements on that are made by the international community, the more Azerbaijan tries to distract the attention and escalate situation in the conflict zone, that results also in human losses, not less, if I would say much more from the same Azerbaijani side. But for the Baku authorities human life is subordinated to domestic political interests. They treat their soldiers as computerized “virtual soldiers” and daily send hundred of young men to death.

Of course, this does not mean, that the efforts and actions of Armenia and the international community towards the exclusively peaceful settlement of the conflict should not be continued.

However, Azerbaijani leadership’s adequacy and ability to soberly assess the situation raises more and more doubts of the international community.
You referred to one of the press conferences of the Azerbaijani President. During that press conference he said that media in Azerbaijan is free, and his approval rating exceeds 90 per cent. I leave comments up to you, although the comments of the international community are known.

Question: Mister Minister, I would like to hear your stance… why did Armenia not attended Davos Economic Forum held days ago, and whether Armenia will attend Munich Security Conference on February 6? Just one clarification regarding the Line of Contact... Does Armenia appeal to CSTO on the shelling of Armenia’s populated areas by the Azerbaijani side?

Edward Nalbandian: Regarding Davos and Munich. Of course, the decisions to participate in international conferences is made based on our working schedule, and whether we attach importance to be there at that point. I can not say that Davos Forum is not an important gathering. It is one of the most important economic conferences. But this time we had no opportunity to ensure Armenia’s official participation in the conference.

We would be represented at Munich Conference on ministerial level.

As to whether we informed CSTO about the Azerbaijani provocations. We always promptly inform CSTO, OSCE, Council of Europe and different bodies of the UN when there are provocations and when actions are undertaken that might destabilize, harm situation in conflict zone.

MFA’s first reaction to those provocations was made on 3rd of January, when all the media were on holiday. Maybe you did not notice?

There was a reaction from different structures several times, one from CSTO Secretary General. You should take into account that those structures, including CSTO, have many member-states, and respective statement is to be agreed upon. It is not a simple process. I do not think, that I have to elaborate on that. I think, I was pretty clear why and how.

Question (Azatutyun): I have two questions, Mister Minister. You started your address with the description of the Gyumri case, and we also witnessed Attorney General of Armenia stating at the National Assembly that when Russian border-guards arrested him, they were to transfer him to the Armenian side, which has not been done; in almost everyone’s view, it is a violation of Armenia’s Constitution. We witness military actions along the border, which concern the territory of the Republic of Armenia, and we witness Armenia’s allies not responding. My question is the following… Are you aware that against this backdrop, strong discontent is seen in the society, that, for instance, in connection with Gyumri case, grew to a mass concern. Does the current level of Armenian-Russian relations satisfy the military and political leadership of Armenia; do they think that something is not the way it should have been, and should be changed, take the situation along the border and the Gyumri case, when Armenia is not able to bring the suspect under jurisdiction of its competent bodies? And my second question. Following your visit to Brussels you declared, that the signing of the political part of Association Agreement is not excluded. What can you add? Thank you.

Edward Nalbandian: First question comes first. I was not depicting Gyumri tragedy’s chronology in my answer or those developments, I rather said, reacted to the supposition that timely actions were not undertaken.

I mentioned, that on that very day the President of Republic gave respective assignments, and I spoke about those steps, which are being undertaken, and relevant information is being provided.

Regarding the Armenian-Russian relations, we have allied strategic relations. I do not consider it right to link those things, i.e. our bilateral relations and the tragedy that occurred in Gyumri, towards which the public frustration and anger are humane and understandable. The way you put it, that we have to review, change… I do not find it appropriate. We have allied strategic relations with Russia, and through joint efforts consider their further deepening, strengthening and developing.

Pay attention to what Armenia’s Foreign Minister stated in Brussels, and follow from it. If anyone gave another wording there, perhaps, they knew something, but we discussed with the European Union the new legal basis that can be formed between the two sides. As both EU and Armenia have will, readiness and aspiration to give legal framework to that basis and continue to strengthen, deepen and develop relations and cooperation in all possible frameworks and directions that does not go against our commitments in other integration processes. That is what I was talking about in Brussels. Our colleagues that held session of Armenia-European Union Cooperation Council on behalf of the EU stated the same thing. Both Commissioner Hahn, and Foreign Minister of Latvia Rinkēvičs mentioned that. And we share one unified aspiration, i.e. moving forward.

Question: Mister Minister, you mentioned that you appealed both to CSTO and OSCE, concerning the Azerbaijani actions. Are you satisfied with the steps undertaken by them? As there is an opinion, that lot more had to be done, which is not being done. Thank you.

Edward Nalbandian: It is, for sure, a comment and an opinion. I respect your opinion, but it does not correspond the reality, as CSTO repeatedly made statements, also on the highest level, not only by Secretary General.

If you read what statement on Nagorno Karabakh was adopted during the last Summit and what wording is used there, which is exactly our stance, which was supported on the presidential level of other states.

Structures and organizations are different; each has its own peculiarities. If we speak about the OSCE, we speak about dozens of member-states. One should not have such a naive approach, that we appealed, they reacted, we presented and they immediately made a statement.

Dozens of provocations were organized by the Azerbaijani side recently. What if on each of provocation statement is made, or, as some label it “to send 1050th protest note ”. What then? We have to take a sober view of things, on what a diplomatic work is about, directed to, possibly not to allow those actions to lead to rather grave situation, to create respective conditions for negotiations to be continued.

Do you consider it a matter of a chance or something random, that the US, France and well before that, Russia organized Summit meetings of Presidents, during which all of that was thoroughly discussed. And the result?! Do you remember Azerbaijan President statement in the presence of media representatives and in front of cameras, that this issue is to be settled exclusively peacefully and only through negotiations.

Hence, talks had had some impact, which means they brought some result, but, probably Aliev’s memory is rather short, as once he returns to Baku, in his entourage he forgets it and says that his approval rating is above 90 per cent, media is free and things are great in Azerbaijan.

Question (Lragir): Mister Nalbandian, at this point, when from January on the situation along the border is tense, when Armenia has economic problems; views are voiced on numerous occasions that this is the failure of our Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Against that backdrop are you not going to resign? And second, please be clear, in a situation of infringement along the borders of Armenia, is CSTO under the treaty in such a case obliged to react, or not? Concrete steps, not like we appealed and they either responded or not… Concrete answer - under the treaty are they obliged or not?

Edward Nalbandian: You are a representative of a media outlet, and, of course, before raising the question, you had to familiarize yourself with the documents to raise questions on those treaties. I would like to ask you to thoroughly read the CSTO Charter and other documents, and then you would find an answer.

As to if Lragir is requiring my resignation, then I should have been too naïve to take it seriously, I would tell you that you are grossly mistaken, and I am well aware of the public opinion. Leave the public to have its opinion.

Question (Zhoghovurd): Mister Minister, we can talk to you on rare occasions, which is why I have several questions. It is the 2014 that you summarize, and it is the first time we can ask questions. You also are not present in the National Assembly during Questions and Answers sessions, so that we could raise our questions. I am going to ask them all now.

First, please, present clearly, why do you avoid meetings with journalists, even if you do not want to answer questions by the Armenian media, why don’t you hold meetings with foreign media, the way Mr. Lavrov does. He often voices responses to aggressor Azerbaijan even more often than our MFA does. First, why do you avoid answering questions of media, at the backdrop of tense situation along the border, when journalists wished to learn about your actions.

Edward Nalbandian: First of all, I would tell you that you are terribly mistaken over Foreign Minister’s absence from the National Assembly’s QA sessions. According to the procedure, no one except for the Minister is able to represent respective Structure. Deputy Ministers can not go to the National Assembly for the QA. When the Foreign Minister is in Armenia, he certainly, is present.

You probably know, that main obligations of the Foreign Minister are connected with the work abroad, not with domestic issues, which is why the Foreign Minister very often is on visits abroad. You have heard the number of visits paid by the Minister of Foreign Affairs abroad, I would assure you that each visit was followed by either press conference, interview or speeches delivered. And during those press conferences all the raised questions got their answers. All the meetings with Foreign Ministers or Heads of international organizations, hosted in Armenia were also followed by press conferences.

If you were not present, it is your problem. I do not say you should certainly attend press conferences. But the questions raised by the media get their answers during the press conferences. Tomorrow the Foreign Minister of Iran will be here, and there will be a press conference again, though I have answered to many questions today.

But you also say that Lavrov gives good answers to the questions concerning Nagorno-Karabakh. I’m very glad, I will convey your opinion, and I think he will be pleased, too.

I would ask you not to compare the Foreign Minister of Armenia with the Foreign Ministers of the United Nations Security Council permanent member-states, who express their opinion on every development occurring around the world.

If the Foreign Minister of Armenia had such aspirations we would not even manage to do our work, as our Foreign Ministry is at least 50 times smaller than those of these states. And to claim that we avoid responding. I have already answered that question. Take a look at stenography of that answer if you were not careful enough or did not listen to the answer which I gave to your colleague. One of the first questions was that on not responding by Foreign Ministry to which I answered that it responds when it finds necessity to respond. Those reactions can be different, and to say that a reaction should be only via media, is not correct. The effectiveness of responses is linked to the fact, that not always one should make them public.

Question (Kentron TV): Mister Minister, Turkish Zaman and Radikal newspapers have published some materials according to which during his visit to Turkey Putin was asked by Erdogan to mediate, so that Armenia again signs or ratifies Treaty of Kars. Let us not talk about Russia here. Has Armenia received such an offer from Turkey at least through diplomatic channels and, in general, what is the official view, stance of Armenia over Treaty of Kars?

Edward Nalbandian: I would like to tell you that we have not received such a request or such an offer and personally I do not think that such an issue has ever been discussed as it is not serious to speak about resigning the Treaty of Kars today. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Armenia voiced its opinion over the Treaty of Kars nearly eight or nine years ago, which is published. You can have a look. Since then we have not expressed our opinion due to respective reasons. When the Armenian-Turkish process was on-going we said that one should not link them to each other.

Question (epress.am): During the hearings, with the presence of Attorney General, over the Gyumri tragedy the MPs and particularly Aleksandr Arzumanyan, who took part in the formation of Armenian-Russian agreement of 1997, highlighted that with respect to the Gyumri tragedy this agreement has been violated as the border-guards exceeded their powers. Do you consider that the agreement was violated? It was highlighted in the National Assembly that you as Foreign Minister, and Chief of National Security Service alike should be present during those hearings.

Edward Nalbandian: Once the Foreign Minister is invited to the National Assembly, he is always present. If the representative of Foreign Ministry is invited to any hearings he is always present during those hearings.

Regarding an interpretation of that or any other agreement, if some contradictions arise, according to international practice, and I believe, if you pay attention, in that agreement there is such wording, when there is contradiction then competent bodies are to apply to the Ministries of Foreign Affairs over existing contradiction, and the MFAs hold talks on the establishment of respective committee. If such a committee is created and is not able to reach progress, find solutions, which could satisfy the sides, then the issues are resolved through diplomatic channels.