Thursday, April 17 2025 11:52

ArmInfo.  During the Antalya Diplomacy Forum Minister of Foreign Affairs of Armenia Ararat Mirzoyan gave an interview to several Turkish media outlets. 

Journalist (Haberturk): Could you describe the meeting with the  Foreign Minister of Turkiye? 

Ararat Mirzoyan: Well, thank you for this opportunity. For me, this  is, of course, first of all, an opportunity to speak to you and  through you, to your colleagues, to the Turkish society, because I  have the feeling that sometimes there are some perceptions in both  societies which do not necessarily reflect the true, real relations  and perceptions among the leaderships of the two countries. So I  think this is a very good opportunity. 

I just had a meeting with Minister Fidan. That was, of course, not  the first meeting of ours. We had a very good discussion about our  bilateral agenda, the steps that have been implemented bilaterally,  but also the plans, and general regional issues as well, as you may  assume. 

Journalist (Haberturk): Can you specify, are there tangible results?

Ararat Mirzoyan: Look, if you speak about the Armenia-Turkiye  bilateral agenda, several tangible steps already have been  implemented, like using the airspace, like the specialists from the  two countries who made an evaluation of the infrastructure on  Margara-Alijan ground passage, the checkpoint on the border. Also,  the two countries bilaterally, jointly made an evaluation of the  infrastructure of the Gyumri-Kars railway, part of which is on the  border. Several days ago, specialists from two countries met in  Turkiye, specialists from different agencies, and the aim is the  restoration of the Ani historic bridge, again on the border. There  are several other plans.

But also, we both have the understanding that the final goal, the  aim, is to fully normalize relations, including establishment of  diplomatic relations and opening the whole border.  Moreover, today,  interestingly, I and Minister Fidan and the delegations, we discussed  opportunities that can bring normalization of relations. I mean, I'm  saying this to show that our dialogue is not only about merely  establishing diplomatic relations and formally opening the border.  It's about a huge trade that can take place between the two  countries.  It's about, and we have discussed, some joint energy  projects, transit opportunities. 

Moreover, we have touched upon the topic of cooperation on  international fora as well, because the reality shows that sometimes  when it comes to, for instance, to Middle Eastern issues, our views,  our perceptions are closer than one could assume. So there are lots  of opportunities. 

Journalist (CNN Turk): During today's session, you also mentioned,  but I still want to ask maybe one more time, maybe you can give  additional information. So about a month ago, a significant  development took place. Azerbaijani Foreign Minister, Jeyhun  Bayramov, announced that peace talks with Armenia had been concluded  and that both sides had agreed on a potential draft peace agreement.  So what is the current status? What is holding up the signing? Have  discussions begun or are they ongoing regarding a date and location?  Is it too hard to specify that? And also, is there any possibility  that Turkiye could host the signing? Or is there a deadlock in the  process? 

Ararat Mirzoyan: Of course, this is an important question, and I am  not going to hide it. This is part of the Armenia-Turkiye general  conversation as well. As you noted, we have managed to agree on the  text of the draft peace agreement, and it's completely ready to sign.  This is quite an achievement. This is, I would say, a historic event,  an unprecedented thing. Imagine Armenia and Azerbaijan after long  years of conflict, after the blood that we have seen in our region,  we managed, we succeeded to agree on a text.  Now, we suggested  immediately to start consultations with our Azerbaijani colleagues,  to start consultations to define the venue and the date of the  signing ceremony. 

Unfortunately, we see that Azerbaijan has a little bit different  perception of the issue.  They think that Armenia should implement  some other things to make the signing possible.

For instance, they mentioned the dissolution of the Minsk Group of  OSCE. And our perception, our response is that we are completely  ready to start, initiate the process of dissolution of the Minsk  Group of OSCE. ?ur understanding is that if there is no conflict, and  the Minsk Group is about conflict, then there is no need for this  Minsk Group as well.  But we should see, if I may say so, the  institutionalized ending of the conflict, which is the signing and  ratification of the peace treaty. So we believe and we suggested, we  proposed to our Azerbaijani colleagues to sign two documents on the  same day. First, the Peace Treaty, the peace agreement between our  two countries, and secondly, a joint application to the respective  secretariat of OSCE about our intention to initiate this process of  dissolution of the Minsk Group.

Also, our Azerbaijani colleagues make continuous references to the  Constitution of the Republic of Armenia. They demand an amendment in  our Constitution. They say that in our Constitution, in the  preambular part of it, we have a reference to our Act of  Independence, which is true, in which we have a territorial claim  against their territorial integrity, which is a little bit not true,  because only those parts of our Act of Declaration of Independence  are valid in the sense of Constitution, which are literally quoted in  the Constitution. Moreover, the agreement which we are going to sign  addresses the issue.  So, here I need to give a little bit more  details  for you to fully understand the situation.  So, in the  agreement, we recognize each other's territorial integrity within the  borders that existed between our countries as Soviet Socialist  Republics at the time, at the moment of dissolution of the Soviet  Union, and then they became internationally recognized borders.  So,  this fully addresses the concerns of the Azerbaijani side, otherwise  they wouldn't have agreed over the text, and this fully addresses  also our perception.

If we sign this treaty, during and within the process of  ratification, it should go to our Constitutional Court for a  conclusion, for an opinion. This is our legal procedure. So, if our  Constitutional Court says that this sentence, this provision fully  complies with our Constitution - I mean not having any territorial  claim beyond the borders, which is acceptable for Azerbaijani side,  which is internationally recognized - if the Constitutional Court  says that this sentence, this provision complies with our  Constitution, that means there is no issue. So, the answer, the  solution is not beyond the peace agreement, but it is within, it is  inside the peace agreement. And the shortest way to address the issue  is to sign and ratify this peace treaty.  At the same time, and I can  say that, of course, theoretically there is a possibility that the  Constitutional Court gives a negative conclusion: they say that this  does not comply with the Constitution. But I have a solid basis to  say that most probably they will say yes, they will give a positive  opinion, because, and this is very interesting, several months ago,  in September, our Constitutional Court gave an opinion on a very  similar issue. We had another document signed between Armenia and  Azerbaijan. This was the first ever international document signed  between the two countries. This was the regulation of joint works of  respective border commissions, in other words, the delimitation  commissions.  So, in this regulation, we, the two countries, again  agreed that the basis of the delimitation should be the Alma-Ata  Declaration, which says almost the same, which I just quoted: the  borders are those which existed at the time of the dissolution of the  Soviet Union. 

So, again, to ratify the document, we applied to our Constitutional  Court, and our Constitutional Court said that this fully complies  with our Constitution. So, I have a solid ground to suppose that in  case of the peace agreement, which says the same thing, there is a  good chance that our Constitutional Court will again say that this  corresponds to our Constitution. So, there is no issue. 

In parallel, we see and have our own concerns regarding the  Azerbaijani Constitution.  And, again, I will explain. This is not  just a mere mirroring of the issue. In their Constitution, they have  a reference to their Act of Independence. So, in their Act of  Independence, they declare that this Republic of Azerbaijan is the  successor of the first Azerbaijani (Democratic) Republic, not the  Soviet one. And the first Azerbaijani Republic, which existed before  the Soviet Union, declared their sovereignty over much larger  territories than today's Azerbaijan. It includes more than 60% of  today's Armenian sovereign territories. So, we see, we have our own  concerns, but why aren't we raising this issue continuously? Because  we see, as I said before, in the case of our Constitution, the  solution is in the peace agreement. We sign it, and we address the  issue. That's it. 

So, coming back to the main issue, we are very constructive. We are  very flexible. We have worked hard to have this text. Now it's ready  to sign. There is no single peace agreement in the world that  addresses all possible issues. If the two societies, any two  societies, have the history of enmity, history of hostilities, they  cannot solve everything by one document. And in our peace agreement,  we establish a bilateral mechanism, a bilateral commission, to  oversee the implementation of the agreement, to handle all possible  hardships, turbulences, which can and definitely will occur. But we  establish a mechanism to manage this process. So, again, the  expectation that all possible questions should be answered before  they can sign, I would say, is not fair and is not realistic. 

Journalist (CNN Turk): So, what should we understand? Are you still  negotiating? Do you have an offer for the time and place? And can  Turkiye be the host? 

Ararat Mirzoyan: Yeah, I'm sorry, I forgot that part of the issue,  because I think this is important for everybody to understand all the  nuances. Otherwise, you won't have a clear picture of where we are  currently. Yes, we do negotiate because there is no other option.   Which is the alternative of negotiations, if we do have a peace  agenda?

So, we continue the conversation. As for the venue, you know, it's  not important. There is an idea to sign it on the border between  Armenia and Azerbaijan. There are several other capitals who suggest  their services. I'm not excluding anything. I haven't got that  proposal. I'm not excluding anything. 

Journalist (Reuters): Mr. Minister, just a follow-up of the first  question of my colleague. By the way, I also followed your  interesting debate with Jeyhun Bayramov and your Georgian  counterpart. I mean, as you explained it, there's a solid demand by  Azerbaijan to change your Constitution. So, a short question. Would  you consider a Constitutional change? I mean, there were talks of  holding a referendum. So, would you consider a Constitutional change  to sign a peace agreement with Azerbaijan or not?

Ararat Mirzoyan: Well, when the democratic revolution in Armenia took  place and our current ruling party came to power, we almost  immediately said that we are going to amend our Constitution.  Moreover, as I see it now, it's going to be a new Constitution, not  even an amendment to the existing one. And the mandate of the current  commission, which is preparing the Constitutional amendments,  discussing the legalistic and legal mechanisms, the mandate is coming  to its end in 2026, I believe. And in 2026, we are having  parliamentary elections. So, since 2018, we have been speaking about  the necessity of a new Constitution, and it is in our agenda. So, we  are going to have it.  But connecting it with Armenian-Azerbaijani  normalization is not constructive. Again, I will come back to my  previous sentence, previous formulation. You have two choices, two  options. You can sit and wait until all answers to all possible  questions are given and then only act, or you can start. I will use  the same thing that I said during the panel discussion. Putting a  brick, and then another brick, and then another brick, start the  process of normalization. And I'm confident that sometimes later we  can look back and see that we have built a solid, powerful bridge.  So, we suggest starting immediately.

Journalist (Middle East Eye): Do you find the Azerbaijani demands,  not only the amendments of the Preambule, or the OCCE mission, or  even the EU mission, the monitoring mission, even though many of  these demands are already addressed, as far as I understand from your  comments, within the peace treaty, do you find them with good  intentions, or do you think Azerbaijan has a broader imagination or  agenda over here?  Because as far as I know, you were supposed to  release a joint declaration on the peace treaty draft, and then it  didn't happen. And the Azerbaijanis have unilaterally released a  statement before you did, and then they made those demands. And it  looks like even though this Preambule debate has been going on for a  while, and both sides have been trying to address it, it's still  hanging over the treaty. And also, my question is very late, and I'm  trying to bring my mind into it, but do you think there might be an  escalation out of this process? I mean, hopefully not, but where is  this going?

Ararat Mirzoyan: Very important question. Regarding the details, for  instance, the European monitoring mission, the mandate of the mission  is, in general, to support the normalization process, to support  stability along the border between Armenia and Azerbaijan. And as  soon as we have a peace treaty entering into force, we won't be  needing this monitoring anymore.

As soon as we have stability along the border, that means that the  mandate, the mission is accomplished, and we won't be needing any  additional services there. But in general, this is the main problem,  I believe. Not the Constitution, not the Minsk Group, not any other  detail. The problem is that sometimes we have the feeling that  Azerbaijan just does not want to build peace with Armenia. For what  calculations, I cannot say, but we do have concerns that they don't  want to finalize the normalization, they don't want to finalize the  negotiations to sign the peace treaty. 

There are several other tracks. We have made several other proposals  on connectivity issues, on mutual verification and arms control. We  have made very tangible and solid proposals. No positive response.  And the feeling is that they just don't want to finalize this  normalization process, they are not going to build peace. Moreover,  we also, from time to time, see the signs of escalation on the  ground. We see this escalation in the rhetoric of Azerbaijani  leadership, and unfortunately we see that this escalation has the  potential to become an escalation on the ground as well. 

The Armenian public opinion, for instance, if you look at it, you  will find out that citizens of Armenia mostly think that Azerbaijan  has further plans to attack Armenia again, to take control over some  of its sovereign territories, etc. So probably the answer to all  possible questions is in your question. As soon as we find out the  true intention of Azerbaijan, we most probably will find out answers  to the other questions as well. 

Journalist (Middle East Eye): From your comments, I understand that  Azerbaijan has not yet given a definitive answer for further meetings  on where and how to sign this peace deal, right?

Ararat Mirzoyan: No, nothing. No news on that. They say that their  position is that they are not going to discuss it unless this is  done, then the other demand is fulfilled, and then the third thing,  and then the fourth thing. This is the reality, but we continue  speaking to them.

Journalist (Middle East Eye): Do you think Turkiye can play a  constructive role to bring both sides, like at the leaders level, and  did you discuss it with the Foreign Minister?

Ararat Mirzoyan: Yes, obviously, and Turkiye's public position is  that we are doing very well. This is my interpretation. I'm not  literally quoting any statement by Turkish officials, but my overall  impression is that Turkiye's position is the following: yes, we are  doing very well on our bilateral track, we have this project, that  project. We have the intention to fully normalize Armenian-Turkish  relations, but we cannot do it completely before the  Armenian-Azerbaijani normalization is completely implemented. So, our  perception, my personal perception is that if we start with the other  end, if we succeed to fully normalize Armenian-Turkish relations,  that will obviously and definitely, for sure, have its positive  impact on Armenian-Azerbaijani relations. But this is an issue, this  is a question that, I mean, everyone has his or her answer to, and  yes, there are different views on that. But you ask me whether  Turkiye can have a positive role? Absolutely, yes.

Journalist (CNN Turk): So today, during these meetings, have you set  a date to come together, three countries? Or do you think that there  can be another option? I mean, what can be the underlying reason for  Azerbaijan.

Ararat Mirzoyan: There is no plan or agreement to come together, the  three countries, but there are several discussions. Hopefully, we  will have a happy ending to this story.

Journalist (CNN Turk): What did Hakan Fidan tell you when you said  that if we normalize Turkiye-Armenia relations that might have a  positive effect on the other side?  What was his reply? 

Ararat Mirzoyan: It's probably worth asking this to our Turkish  colleagues. If you have an answer, please share it with me.

Journalist (Anadolu Agency): So you said the general elections are  next year, right? In 2026? So if there is a change, if the Government  changes, will there be a reversal in the stream about the  negotiations?

Ararat Mirzoyan: An interesting aspect of the whole story. I can say  for sure that the peace agenda of the current Armenian government and  Prime Minister Pashinyan finds full support in Armenian society.  Well, of course, there are those who criticize. This is how democracy  works. I mean, if we don't have an opposition saying different  things, then how can we ensure development of the society in any  issue, in question? But, in general, we have the support of the  majority of the Armenian society. What about the parliament? In the  parliament as well, we have the majority.

But, time passes, and if the Armenian government does not deliver  tangible outcomes of the normalization process, even those who  believe in a peace agenda will come up with a question asking, "okay,  peace agenda sounds nice, but you cannot build peace alone. It looks  like your neighbors do not share your vision of a peaceful and  prosperous region and normal relations with the neighbors. This means  that it makes no sense for me to support your peace agenda tomorrow  as well".

So, I'm saying this to show that we have the support, but nothing is  unlimited in this world, and things may change of course. But at the  same time, it is obvious that if we have results in normalization, if  we, for instance, sign a peace treaty, open the communication  infrastructure, people start, restart, I would say, trade, people  would start interactions, humanitarian issues are being addressed,  etc. It will make the development of neighborly relations natural,  normal, and the reverse to the era of hostilities would become less  and less tangible, less and less realistic.

The same I can say for the case of our normalization with Turkiye. We  have already done several joint things. If we open the border, if we  start implementing joint energy projects, if the direct trade  increases, that will change the mood, that will change not only the  mood in our societies, that will change the whole region, I believe.  We do have this window of opportunity.

We do have public opinions supportive of this opportunity more than  ever in the past. So we have a choice. We can focus on obstacles, we  can focus on history, on the past, or we can focus on the present and  build a better future. We should decide jointly.

Journalist (Middle East Eye): Did you have any interaction with the  Trump administration? Because with the Biden administration, you  signed some important agreements before the departure of the last  administration. But with the Trump administration, did you have any  engagements? Because, as you know, there are lots of talks about  Witkoff visiting Baku and signing, potentially, or proposing the  signing of an Abraham Accord that can give security guarantees to  Azerbaijan. And, of course, that will basically change the balances  on the ground as well, and it will empower Azerbaijan through the  horizon. So do you have any engagements with Trump? 

Ararat Mirzoyan: Yes, we do. We do have engagements. The U.S. new  administration welcomed our statements on agreeing over the text of  the peace agreement. I can also say that there is an interest in the  new United States administration towards normalization of relations  between Armenia and Azerbaijan. We see the signs of it. And if this  results in a positive contribution, then why not? 

Journalist (Haberturk): You mentioned the potential changing mindset  of Azerbaijan.  Can we say that the public opinion of Armenia has a  distinctive difference between the normalization process with  Azerbaijan, and the normalization process with Turkiye?

Ararat Mirzoyan: You know, to tell the truth, some wounds are still  very fresh. And it's not easy. The issues are very sensitive for both  societies, I believe, not only for Armenian society. I probably  shouldn't express an opinion on Azerbaijani society or its public  opinion. I mean, that would need a little bit more study or  information, but I can say for sure that in Armenian society, there  is support for the peace agenda, as I said. There is support for this  normalization process, despite the fact that the wounds are still  very fresh.

But also, we should deliver - this is the main issue - we should  fulfill the expectations.  Otherwise, again, the moods can change. I  cannot see a huge difference regarding the perception of  normalization of Armenian-Azerbaijani relations and Armenian-Turkish  relations, except the fact that, as I said, in the case of  Armenian-Azerbaijani topic, the wounds are very fresh. There are  still humanitarian issues that are not addressed so far.  But there  is readiness in both cases, I believe. 

Journalist (CNN Turk): What I'm going to ask is, you said the wounds  are very fresh.  But last month, Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan  made remarks to Turkish journals that were widely interpreted as  signaling a new chapter in relations between the two countries.  Pashinyan said, that your official position is that international  recognition of the Armenian Genocide is not currently among your  foreign policy priorities. So do you believe this issue won't be a  source of tension between Turkiye and Armenia? Can it finally be  resolved?

Ararat Mirzoyan: The Prime Minister said that. Moreover, I myself  said that in the Parliament. But, you know, history is history,  memory is memory. It could be very hard to forget the ancestors and  forget the history. But one thing is paying tribute to the past, to  history. And a completely different thing is living in history. It is  very easy to remain in the past.

Most probably, moving forward needs a little bit more courage, a  little bit more understanding, and a little bit more focus and belief  in the future. So we prefer the future.  We jointly should do that.  You know, I cannot do it alone. My Turkish counterpart cannot do it  alone. No one can do it alone. But together, we can remember history,  but we can move forward and build a better future. Time and again,  I'm not getting tired of repeating this sentence today: it's a matter  of choice, what are we choosing? 

Journalist (Haberturk): Can you say that these comments of the Prime  Minister of Armenia are unprecedented for statesmen speaking on the  Armenian side?

Ararat Mirzoyan: To say so, we need to dig a little bit deeper. I  believe there have been signs from the Armenian authorities in the  past as well. Once, we even succeeded in signing protocols, and then  we gave up their ratifications.

Journalist (Reuters): I'll go back to Turkiye's role. You said that  the Turkish Minister obviously will speak on behalf of Turkiye, which  we will ask him tomorrow. But I'm going to ask you, did you ask  Turkiye to play any facilitator role between Armenia and Azerbaijan  in this difficult time? I mean, in this deadlocked, obviously, talks  between Armenia and Azerbaijan?

Ararat Mirzoyan: Look, the short history of Armenia-Azerbaijan  negotiations show that there have been several facilitators,  moderators, like the Russian Federation, like the United States, like  the European Union, different countries. But the history of Armenia-  Azerbaijan negotiations shows that when we had bilateral  negotiations, those negotiations were the most successful. So,  probably, we can have the engagement of all the countries that are  interested in peace in the South Caucasus, in peace between Armenia  and Azerbaijan in some way. But when it comes to concrete  negotiations, when we are left alone, the two countries alone in the  room, we can, we are able to talk directly, we have the contacts, we  easily exchange thoughts.

So in terms of technicalities, we don't have any problems. So we  probably also don't need any other facilitation. But again, all the  countries which I mentioned, most probably some others as well, can  have a positive contribution. So the involvement should not be  limited to facilitating the negotiations. 

That's it, dear colleagues. Thank you very much.

I think this was an interesting conversation.