Mr. Chairman, Distinguished representatives

Here we are again, at an OSCE Ministerial, on a journey began long time ago, in Helsinki. The journey has not always been a smooth one, nor the achievements continuous or to everyone's liking, but they have been cumulative, and they have helped progress towards greater security and cooperation in Europe. It is true, the OSCE and its antecedent the CSCE, did not exist in a historical and political vacuum. A lot has changed since the days when it was conceived as a way of diminishing the risk of direct armed confrontation in a divided Europe of two military-political camps. All that has changed. Walls are gone, alliances have mutated and the Euro-Atlantic space is no longer divided. But as a new Europe emerges out of the shadows of former empires and military pacts, new threats and challenges loom.

Through OSCE Ministerials and Summits of the last several years, this organization has tried to adapt to the new challenges with a dual path. On the one hand, it has tried to elaborate and enshrine norms and principles in order to frame the relationships of sovereign and equal states while on the other hand it has tried to establish mechanisms for early warning, conflict prevention, crisis management and post-conflict rehabilitation. These two tracts have had the same broader objectives: the maintenance of peace, security and stability. Within this framework, the OSCE has recognized and transformed into doctrine the respect for human rights both as an ultimate goal and as a very practical, real instrumentality. It is this that makes the OSCE's foundations both normative and prescriptive.

My Government, the Republic of Armenia fully subscribes to this underlying framework of the OSCE and believes that all progress must come, and can only come by the continuing reinforcement of this foundation.

Mr. Chairman,

Today as some long suppressed conflicts surface, we notice with satisfaction that the OSCE is willing to rise to the challenge and explore new territory. In its pursuit of finding solutions or managing crises, the OSCE, a complex, multinational organization, often needs to reconcile principles and norms that may not always appear to be primae facie compatible.

In any democratic society the challenge consists in reconciling values from within a range of multiple and competing values, all seemingly important and equally valid. It was the contribution of the late great political philosopher Sir Isaiah Berlin to draw attention to pluralism as an essential, irreducible ingredient of democracy. This process of ongoing negotiations between multiple values and their advocates can maintain and strengthen the democratic credentials of the OSCE itself. Transparence and consensus in decision making and the attempt to reconcile competing principles are all essential for the OSCE in pursuing security through dialogue and negotiation, rather than through the imposition of a singular principle overriding all others. The transformation of any principle into inflexible and orthodox dogma risks freezing conflicts or imposing brittle solutions that do not take into account the complexities of competing, legitimate norms and claims.

Mr. Chairman,

Since 1992 the OSCE has been an integral part of the process for finding a peaceful solution to the conflict in Nagorno-Karabagh. It has been actively involved, through the various permutations of the Minsk process to define the elements for a durable peace and stability in the region of the Transcaucasus. Armenia, is part of this region, and recognizes the need for stability. It is committed to pursue every possible and credible attempt to resolve the conflicts that linger in the region. It is committed to explore every avenue for peaceful relations with all its neighbors, relations based on mutual respect and recognition. Moreover, Armenia believes that the conflict in Nagorno-Karabagh poses a special challenge since the parties to the conflict, the people of Nagorno-Karabagh and Azerbaijan, have valid claims to foundational principles of the OSCE. Previous efforts by the Minsk group and its co-chairmen had failed to recognize the equal legitimacy of the competing parties.That is why, both Armenia and Nagorno-Karabagh considered the previous formula as being unacceptably one sided.

We have always advocated a more flexible approach on the part of the OSCE, through the co-chairs of the Minsk group, to try to reconcile seemingly incompatible principles and claims. We have always remained opposed to one-sided orthodoxy. It is therefore with interest that Armenia and Nagorno-Karabagh received the Minsk Group Co-Chairs' draft proposal during their recent visit to the region last November. My Government, as well as the authorities of Nagorno-Karabagh, considered the Co-Chairs proposal a realistic effort in trying to address the thorny issue of status in a manner that minimizes prejudice to either of the competing claims. Unlike previous attempts, the Co-Chairs seem to have come to the realization that old orthodoxies and inflexible formulations will not be effective in moving forward the process for a negotiated settlement. Perhaps the boldness with which the Co-Chairs have proposed to reconcile the seemingly irreconcilable principles of territorial integrity and national self-determination, grows out of their concern that the window of opportunity for a negotiated settlement is narrowing, and that cease-fires are inherently unstable.

By rejecting the recent principles submitted by the OSCE, Azerbaijan has not taken a single step towards compromise. Nor has it shown any political will or disposition to take responsibilities for peace. Azerbaijan still believes that sooner or later, the resolution of this conflict will be on its own terms. Far from serving the purpose of peace, such unyielding attitude will lead to the kind of escalation that neither Azerbaijan, nor Armenia nor Nagorno-Karabagh can afford.

There are signs of indifference within the OSCE community to Azerbaijan's rejection of the Co-Chairs' recent proposal, which, if left unchallenged, could further deepen the current impasse of the peace process. There is a clear distinction between Armenia's rejection of the previous proposal and Azerbaijan's current rejection. What Armenia and Nagorno-Karabagh were offered in the past was nothing more than a simple autonomy within Azerbaijan. Had the new proposal of the Co-Chairs offered outright independence to Nagorno-Karabagh, Azerbaijan's rejection could have been equated with Armenia's refusal. However, what we are presented with today, is a clear middle road which may lead to a status that the parties can live with. As the Chairman in Office mentioned at the opening of this meeting, there are many notions of federation or confederation that have been used in Europe and can serve as a conceptual basis for the solution of this conflict. Azerbaijan's rejection of this middle road is a clear indication of its unwillingness or inability to reach a negotiated settlement of this conflict on the basis of mutual compromises.

Mr. Chairman, Distinguished representatives,

The conflict in Nagorno-Karabagh is a conflict the OSCE must remain engaged in in the search for a political settlement. It must help prevent, together with the parties involved, Azerbaijan, Nagorno-Karabagh and Armenia, the renewal of violence. It must also not allow the dispute to settle down into a protracted, uneasy perpetuation of continued low level hostilities likely to prolong the suffering, deprivation and marginalization of affected populations. This uneasy, unstable on-going precarious situation is a serious impediment to the region's economic growth and development. My Government is willing to look beyond this confrontation and see a future of regional cooperation and stability, a crossroads for exchange and cohabitation rather than animosity, distrust, isolation and wasteful military operations.

My Government feels strongly that the OSCE is best at adaptive, flexible , even innovative methods, which could eventually become models of operations. But in the search for resolutions to conflicts, eventual settlement can only be possible by recognizing the uniqueness and particularity that are the hallmark of such conflicts. We should not suffer from the collective paralyzing fear of precedent setting. We are neither a court of law nor a legislative body. And the solutions we would seek, through the OSCE, are solutions exactly because the process lends itself to dealing with the particularity of every dispute. Without the implicit recognition of this principle, we would not have gone to Kosovo.

Mr. Chairman,

My Government's commitment to all of the OSCE norms, principles and activities is rock-solid. Our participation in its wide ranging operations is reflected in our joining every decision, every declaration, every document issued by the Oslo Ministerial. Ten years ago, when the Soviet system collapsed, many small and medium sized countries such as Armenia, could have been left in a political and security vacuum. The OSCE had the vision and the leadership to include those countries in its structure, and thus provide a small country like Armenia the opportunity to anchor itself in the community of European nations in accordance with long established European political and social values. While we hope this integration process will be an ongoing comprehensive process, we approach our engagement with Europe to represent both challenges and opportunities. We want to take the responsibilities implied in our engagement seriously. In spite of our limited resources, we are eager to demonstrate our desire to make our contribution, to share in the burden. Perhaps the Chairmanship in Office of the OSCE for Armenia would demonstrate our coming of age, and show to all concerned that OSCE's commitment to equality between large and small, powerful and not so powerful is not just rhetoric but concrete reality. It is in this spirit that with a sense of confidence and humility, but enormous faith and optimism about OSCE's growing democratization that we submit our candidacy to the Chairmanship, sometime early in the next century, Armenia's 4th Millennium.

We welcome the progress of work done on a Document Charter, and are aware of the direction necessary for the work ahead. Our participation in the adaptation process of the CFE treaty is in full accord with our recognition of its critical importance in maintaining stability and reducing tension. It is this spirit of full and equal participation in the various initiations that my Government strongly urges the OSCE to entertain bolder notions, to undertake new operations and assume a wider, more active role in the pursuit of security and cooperation in Europe. We will do our utmost to participate vigorously and vigilantly in the further construction of the European Security Architecture, an architecture that recognizes the basic and fundamental human values of dignity, freedom and social justice.

Thank you Mr. Chairman.