www.tert.am: Mr. Oskanian what is your opinion about recent developments in the Armenia-Turkey process?
Vartan Oskanian: My opinion is the same as it was at the start of this process. These documents are the product of miscalculations on both sides.
The Armenian side miscalculated, convinced that: 1. the Armenia-Turkey border opening is of existential importance for Armenia’s domestic stability and economic development; 2. it will be easy for Turkey to go counter to Azerbaijan‘s interests 3. If the document does not contain the words “Treaty of Kars,” “genocide” or “Nagorno Karabakh,” then by utilizing state propaganda mechanisms, it will be possible to convince the Armenian people that the formulations that indeed address those matters are harmless.
-Mr. Oskanian, how do you assess the fact that in Sochi, the sides agreed on the preamble to the Nagorno-Karabakh settlement documents? Is this in sync with the initial principle guiding these discussions that “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed?”
-That principle exists precisely for such complicated issues as Karabakh; every sentence of every relevant document is interrelated and every word is consequential. For this very reason, in agreeing on any public declaration, utmost caution must be exercised since not everything in the negotiating document is agreed to. In that regard, the declaration you cite, is at least cause for worry, since as a result of similar earlier “agreements,” whether the Meindorf or Athens declarations, Azerbaijan received plenty to use to its advantage.
Mr. Oskanian, the attention of Armenia’s political circles seems to be focused on the protocols’ ratification process. Yet, isn’t that interest already unnecessary and aren’t some things already pre-determined, so that focusing on them simply means not focusing on other more important matters?
Once these protocols were signed, the rest for me is already just a technical matter whose discussion is nearly pointless. For me, it's still incomprehensible, unacceptable and unexplainable that the independent Republic of Armenia, which as a full subject of international law, is obliged to defend our own interests, signed, without thinking long, a document which unambiguously contradicts our national interests. As you say, this situation that's been created is absurd: after this obvious capitulation, we are all, to a man, waiting and disussing what Turkey will do, whether they will open the border or not. The ball really is in Turkey's court, but i don't see that that's anything to boast about. After all these Armenian concessions, the ball should have at least been in our court. We are wasting our resources and energy on a process that is no longer under our control and which will require untold amounts of time and energy to neutralize its consequences.
Mr. Oskanian, it is obvious today that the executive branch and their majority in parliament are for signing the Armenia-Turkey protocols. It seems nothing stands in their way especially since their representatives constantly say that given the population’s grave socio-economic situation, it is obvious that they support the signing since that is the only way to have the border open.
First, there are more dignified ways to arrive at an open border, I’m certain of that. Today, it’s obvious that both in Armenia, and in the Diaspora the general mood is quite apparent. In Armenia, as a result of discussions, however superficial, and after Serzh Sargsya’s foreign visits, it’s obvious that there is a great deal of resistance to this initiative. As a result of this process, whose dangers were apparent to me early on, our nation finds itself in a complicated situation, from which the government is not trying to extricate itself; rather, it’s further intensifying it.
At the beginning of the Armenia-Turkey process, the political forces were reserved in their comments, and the pitfalls did not seem obvious to many. Was it possible to avoid publicizing these documents and to take the process in another direction?
Of course it was possible, but what we have today is the worst-case scenario. First, the process went public, which on the one hand enticed the Turkish side to exploit the process for its own sake, and as a result, important countries with differing interests engaged at very high levels.
Vartan Oskanian’s interview (translation below) to Radio Free Europe (FM 102, Yerevan) was aired on Saturday, August 1, 2009. Click here to listen on line.
RFE/RL: On debating members of the Armenian National Congress
VARTAN OSKANIAN: I have no problem debating anyone. I’m happy to debate any issue, but that debate must serve a purpose. Specifically on the topic of Nagorno Karabakh, I see no reason to engage in that debate because the opposition’s issue is not with me, but with the administration. So the opposition’s invitation to debate should be directed to the administration, to those conducting negotiations today. Of course we can sit and talk about history, about the past, about the last 17 years. Civilitas convenes such discussions. Perhaps in the coming months, it will be possible to convene one on the topic of Nagorno Karabakh and all those who wish to participate can come and do so. But right now, there would be no purpose to my debating the opposition. Their fundamental target should be today’s government.
On being responsible for the Madrid Principles
Each administration is responsible for its period in history. Today, there has been a change in administration, there is a new administration, and they have decided to continue the negotiations from where we left off. Therefore, today, the authorities are responsible and the debate should be between the administration and the opposition. I think that for 18 months, the opposition hasn’t understood this and it continues to try to conduct a debate with the past administration. I think it would be more useful if the administration and the opposition actually did debate the issues that concern our people.
Vartan Oskanian's interview with A1+ discussing negotiations regarding the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict Resolution, the OSCE Madrid Principles, and the current condition of Armenia-Azerbaijani Negotiations within the OSCE Minsk group framework.
Mr. Oskanian, the Madrid principles as they’ve been made public, are they more acceptable to Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh or to Azerbaijan? In general, how do you assess that proposal?
If we’re speaking about the resolution of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict, public sentiment can theoretically be divided into two segments. For one segment, any sort of concession is unacceptable. For this segment then, any document that emerges from Armenian-Azerbaijani negotiations, is in and of itself unacceptable.This approach is understandable but then, in this case, we must accept that we do not need negotiations, and that option depends solely on the price that Armenians are prepared to pay.
Nevertheless, if the issue is to reach a negotiated settlement, then it is important to understand that any document that is the product of Armenian-Azerbaijani talks must be viewed from two different perspectives. First, the principles on which the document is based. Second, the document itself in all its detail. For example, if one of the principles is that the people of Nagorno Karabakh have the right to self-determination, that principle is naturally considered acceptable. But in the final document, how this principle is actually formulated, is a different matter.
Mr. Oskanian, it’s been a while since the Armenian leadership declared that foreign policy should be pro-active and enterprising. In your opinion, can we assess, albeit preliminarily, the results of that approach, and generally what differences do you see between the pro-active approach and the foreign policy that came before?
About being enterprising, I want to say two things. First, before ‘initiating’ something in foreign relations, we must be able to calculate all steps from beginning to end, otherwise the initiative may work against the initiator. Second, being enterprising must be correctly understood. International relations are not static, and at different times, a country is under pressure to take or not take a step, to implement steps or counter other steps being taken in the immediate environment. In such a situation, deciding not to act requires as much initiative as deciding to act. For example, if the April 22 joint statement by the Armenian and Turkish foreign ministries was the product of a pro-active policy, then deciding not to take such a step could also be called being pro-active. If participating in NATO exercises is the result of a decision to be pro-active, the decision not to participate is equally pro-active. It is important to understand the nature of the initiative. The point I want to make is if we think that it is only by initiating ever-new steps that a policy or a country is pro-active, then, in the process of reaching for that next step, we risk going down the wrong road, as we’ve recently witnessed.
Vartan Oskanian's Interview with Gala TV discussing the Civilitas Foundation's "The Right to Elect" public discussion, the 2008 Armenian Presidential elections, and the lack of 'Free & Fair Democratic Elections' in the 17 year old Independent Republic of Armenia.
Vartan Oskanian will be in Boston Wednesday June 17 at the Bentley University La Cava Center Dining Hall to speak about his new book of speeches, SPEAKING TO BE HEARD, and about his years in office. The presentation will begin at 7 and is sponsored by the National Assn for Armenian Studies and Research (the book's North American distributor) and Bentley's Global Studies Program.
Hourig Mayissian: What led you to prepare Speaking to Be Heard?
Vartan Oskanian: Even when I was in office, I was conscious that a public official—elected or appointed—has a responsibility to communicate with the public, especially in a country like ours, where every event, every agreement, every international organization, everything is new.
Vartan Oskanian's Interview with Yerkir Media discussing Armenia's Independence, Nagorno Karabakh, Shushi's & Lachin's Liberation, Armenia-Turkey Relations, their links to the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict Negotiations, the recent Russian-Georgian War, its repercussions for Armenia, and Mr.Oskanian's work while in office as Foreign Minister of Armenia from 1998 to 2008.
Vartan Oskanian's Interview with Kentron TV discussing the United Nations Resolution regarding Nagorno Karabakh and Azerbaijan's 'Territorial Integrity', the nations who support or are against Azerbaijan in terms of Nagorno Karabakh, the position of the major powers of the United Nations, and Armenia-Azerbaijan Negotiations over the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict.
Was there a way to prevent this panic and the losses that so many have incurred?
Yes, certainly, the shock of sudden Dram devaluation would have been mitigated if the government had been frank and honest with the public, and if it had better understood the crisis. The reason the Dram fell so abruptly is because the government miscalculated. They apparently thought they could continue to sustain its artificial strength by continuing to spend dollars to do so. But, look at what we have. They spent more than $400 million just last year and then still had to go to a sudden decision to float. That is irresponsible.
Salpi H. Ghazarian, director of the Civilitas Foundation, hosted by Gala TV in Gyumrii, discusses the activities and goals of the Civilitas Foundation, and former Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian's efforts to continue the use of his experience and resources toward the development of the Republic of Armenia and its society.
Vartan Oskanian of the Civilitas Foundation on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty's Armenian service discussing the Russian mediated agreement signed in Moscow between Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan and President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev, the Madrid Principles, and the impact renewed Russian-American relations will have upon the South Caucasus.
Vartan Oskanian's Interview with discussing the gathering of the Armenian National Assembly, the relationship between members of parliament and society, Nagorno Karabakh negotiations and the Moscow Agreement, the negotiations in Prague, the political climate in the South Caucasus, and the responsibility of the Armenian Presidency.
Vartan Oskanian's Interview with Gala TV regarding the founding of the Civilitas Foundation, the Foundation's initiatives, Gala TV's political and economic issues, resolving the issues of Armenian Society, Armenian Civil Awareness, and Armenian Foreign Diplomacy.
Vartan Oskanian's Interview with Kentron TV discussing Armenian Foreign Diplomacy in the South Caucasus, regional cooperation and economic development, as well as former President Robert Kocharyan's administration and policies.
Vartan Oskanian's Interview with "25 Minutes" discussing the founding of the Civilitas Foundation, Armenian Political Development, Civil Awareness, Mr.Oskanian's Political Involvement, as well as the responsibility to express one's opinions and impressions freely.
I think there’s a big responsibility here. I believe NATO at least publicly but more so through diplomatic channels should talk to Russia and consider reviewing their policy vis-à-vis the Caucasus, Ukraine. I’m not suggesting that they change anything, but at least they should be prepared at this stage to sit down and talk with Russia and express the willingness to review things, to see if they can come up with an option that will be viable and also acceptable to all parties.
Our previous question was: "Do you believe that free elections (one where even an incumbent can be defeated) can change a country?"
Opinions were mostly divided. Of those who answered the question, 53% thought that such elections could bring positive change to the country; 43% thought they could not. Around 4% did not have an answer.
Sharistan Melkonian is a director at the Armenian Volunteer Corps (AVC), a non-profit that helps skilled Armenian Diasporans come to Armenia to work and live, while at the same time, helping them transition from one society into another by facilitating their placements into schools, non-profit organizations, churches, and the business sector.
The project goal is to stimulate the development and transformation of Armenian society into a functioning polity by promoting a healthy political discourse on the key developmental issues of the country, through the creation of a forum of discussions.
www.tert.am
-Mr. Oskanian, how do you assess the fact that in Sochi, the sides agreed on the preamble to the Nagorno-Karabakh settlement documents? Is this in sync with the initial principle guiding these discussions that “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed?”
Vartan Oskanian will be in Boston Wednesday June 17 at the Bentley University La Cava Center Dining Hall to speak about his new book of speeches, SPEAKING TO BE HEARD, and about his years in office. The presentation will begin at 7 and is sponsored by the National Assn for Armenian Studies and Research (the book's North American distributor) and Bentley's Global Studies Program.
