It is an honour to return to the General Assembly, although I wish I were here with a more positive message given all the challenges and tribulations that the world has been through in the past few years. However, my statement will focus on the latest Azerbaijani unprovoked aggression against the sovereign territory of the Republic of Armenia and its overall impact on stability in the South Caucasus.
On 13 September, Azerbaijan launched an unprovoked and unjustified military aggression against Armenia. Using heavy artillery, multiple-launch rocket systems and combat unmanned aerial vehicles, the Azerbaijani armed forces shelled 36 residential areas and communities, including the towns of Goris, Jermuk, Vardenis, Kapan and Geghamasar, deep within the sovereign territory of Armenia. That was not a border clash. It was a direct, undeniable attack against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Armenia, which was condemned and addressed during the most recent Security Council meeting (see S/PV.9132) and beyond.
The Azerbaijani attack deliberately targeted the civilian population and vital civilian infrastructure. Jermuk is one of the main health tourism and resort sites of Armenia. As a result of the Azerbaijani aggression, all the hotels, resort facilities and health centres of Jermuk are now closed. All the residents of that town are displaced. Overall, the number of those temporarily displaced from the Gegharkunik, Vayots Dzor and Syunik regions of Armenia is more than 7,600 persons, mostly women and elderly people, among them 1,437 children and 99 persons with disabilities.
Around 192 houses, three hotels, two schools and one medical facility were partially or completely destroyed. Seven electrical infrastructures, five water infrastructures, three gas pipelines and one bridge were damaged. Two ambulances and four private cars were shelled. The Kechut water reservoir was targeted and shelled. Journalists and ambulance vehicles were also targeted and shelled.
As a result of the aggression, at the moment the number of victims and missing persons exceeds 207, among whom three civilians were killed and two civilians are missing. A total of 293 servicemen and eight civilians were wounded; at least 20 servicemen were captured. There is evidence of cases of torture, the mutilation of captured or already dead servicemen and numerous instances of extrajudicial killings and ill-treatment of Armenian prisoners of war, as well as the humiliating treatment of their bodies. The dead bodies of Armenian female military personnel were mutilated and then proudly video-taped by Azerbaijani servicemen with particular cruelty. The videotapes, featuring such gruesome war crimes and crimes against humanity, are being shared and praised on Azerbaijani social media by individual users.
No doubt, committing such unspeakable atrocities is a direct result of a decades-long policy of implanting anti-Armenian hatred and animosity in Azerbaijani society by the political leadership.
In the wake of that offensive, the official narrative and other sources of information suggest that Azerbaijan intends to occupy more territories of Armenia, which needs to be prevented. I want to stress that the risk of a new aggression by Azerbaijan remains very high, especially taking into account the fact that every day Azerbaijan violates the ceasefire, and the number of causalities and those injured could change at any moment. Another factor for further escalation may be the inappropriate reaction to this situation by the regional security organizations, which raised very difficult questions among Armenian society.
Despite the facts I just mentioned, Azerbaijan is trying to present itself as a country seeking peace in our region and peace with Armenia. Hearing from aside what Azerbaijan is saying, one can even be impressed by its devotion to peace efforts. To stage that impression, Azerbaijan is using the subjects of a peace treaty with Armenia, border delimitation and a regional communication opening agenda.
Why have we not made any tangible progress in those directions? The reason is very simple. Azerbaijan is using all those topics for territorial claims against Armenia. For example, one of the most important subjects of a peace treaty is the bilateral recognition of territorial integrity between Armenia and Azerbaijan. We already declared that we were ready to do that, but
so far Azerbaijan has not done so. On the contrary, Azerbaijan has been publicly voicing that the entire south and east of Armenia, and even the capital city of Yerevan, is Azerbaijani land. On the other hand, Azerbaijan is keeping physical territories of Armenia under occupation, and, as I said, the risk of a new aggression by Azerbaijan remains very high.
In that regard, I pose an official and public question to the Azerbaijani President. Could he show the map of Armenia that he recognizes, or is ready to recognize, as the Republic of Armenia? Why I am asking that is because it can come out that, from the point of view of official Azerbaijan, only half of Armenia, or even less, is the Republic of Armenia. If Azerbaijan would recognize the territorial integrity of Armenia, not theoretically, but concretely — I mean the integrity of our internationally recognized territory of 29,800 square kilometres — it would mean that we could sign a peace treaty by mutually recognizing each other’s territorial integrity. Otherwise, we will have a phantom peace treaty, and, after that, Azerbaijan will use the border delimitation process for new territorial claims and occupation.
As Member States may know, the bilateral commission for border delimitation and border security was formed in May, and two meetings of the commission took place. Before the formation of the commission, last year Azerbaijan occupied more than 40 square kilometres of territory of Armenia. One of Azerbaijan’s excuses for the reasons that it did that was that, according to it, Armenia refuses to form a border delimitation commission. Of course, we did not refuse to do that but insisted only that a border-security mechanism should be simultaneously established. In the end, according to a request by our international partners, who argued that the Border Commission’s work itself would be a reliable factor for border security, we agreed to start the work. But now that the Commission for Border Delimitation and Security has been established and is operational, Azerbaijan has initiated a new phase of aggression, while some of those international partners have been silent. So what is the explanation for Azerbaijan’s aggression now? As everyone knows, if someone is excessively aggressive, there is always a reason. As has been said in a movie, it is always possible to find a reason. Why was Prince Hamlet killed? Who killed him, how, when and why? The reason does not matter. The reality is that Azerbaijan is trying to use the delimitation process for territorial claims against Armenia and will continue to do so.
Another related topic is the opening of regional transport communication links. Azerbaijan is trying to portray Armenia as the destructive side in that discussion. The reality is that Armenia is ready to open its roads to Azerbaijan within the framework of our national legislation. The Government also recently published a draft decision proposing to open three checkpoints on the border with Azerbaijan in order to implement article 9 of the trilateral statement of 9 November 2020. According to the draft decision, citizens and goods coming from Azerbaijan would be eligible to use Armenia’s existing roads to commute from Azerbaijan proper to the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic. The Armenian Government, in a demonstration of political will, was willing to adopt the draft decision unilaterally. But Azerbaijani officials have told us that they do not want those routes. What do they want? They want a new road to be built, which is also acceptable to Armenia. But according to article 9 of the trilateral statement, a new road can be built only with the consent of both sides. Armenia is ready to build that road if its operation is regulated under the legislation and sovereign control of the Republic of Armenia.
What therefore is the point of Azerbaijan’s claims? It is hinting that Armenia must provide an extraterritorial corridor, and, according to Azerbaijan, article 9 of the trilateral statement of 9 November 2020 is supposed to support that claim. The statement is a public document, and in article 9 there is no mention of a corridor, extraterritoriality or any related matters. So what is Azerbaijan’s purpose in this? It is to create a new crisis to provide a pretext for a new aggression against Armenia and a new territorial claim. We have shared packages of proposals with Azerbaijan on the topic of opening communications, and if Azerbaijan accepts the fact that those roads must operate in accordance with national legislation, we can decide that very quickly. By the way, the trilateral statements of 9 November 2020 and 11 January 2021 imply not only that Armenia should provide roads to Azerbaijan, but that Azerbaijan should provide roads to Armenia too. And we have received nothing so far. As for the wording about corridors, it is very important to note that in the trilateral statement of 9 November 2020 only one corridor is mentioned, the Lachin corridor for Nagorno Karabakh.
One of the crucial factors in the stability of our region is a comprehensive settlement of the conflict in Nagorno Karabakh whereby the rights and security of the Armenians living there must be addressed and guaranteed. However, the latest aggression is happening while the humanitarian consequences of the 2020 war in Nagorno Karabakh have yet to be addressed. The post-war rehabilitation of Nagorno Karabakh, the psychosocial issues of the displaced population, the repatriation of Armenian prisoners of war and the preservation of cultural and religious heritage remain on our Government’s agenda. Nevertheless, the Armenians in Nagorno Karabakh are in need of the international community’s support. We call for support for ensuring that United Nations humanitarian agencies have secure and unhindered access to Nagorno Karabakh in order to assess the humanitarian and human rights situation and ensure the protection of cultural heritage on the ground. We believe that the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and an independent factfinding mission under the auspices of UNESCO should be granted access to the Nagorno Karabakh conflict zone. Unfortunately, Azerbaijan has been blocking the possibility of a visit by either body by setting artificial, political preconditions, essentially blocking access for an independent fact-finding mission in Nagorno Karabakh. It is also reprehensible that Azerbaijan is stalling the repatriation of Armenian prisoners of war, among other things subjecting them to staged trials in gross violation of international humanitarian law, its own commitments and in contravention of the calls of the international community.
Sustainable regional peace and stability are our objective. Last year, through snap democratic elections, our people strongly supported the Government’s peace agenda and reaffirmed Armenia’s commitment to pursuing its democratic path. It is very important to emphasize that Azerbaijan’s attacks target not only Armenia’s independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity but its democracy as well. Despite the expectations of certain forces, in the wake of the devastating war of 2020 Armenia has remained democratic, using free, fair and democratic elections as a way to avoid an internal political crisis, a fact that the international community has unanimously recognized and praised. Armenia’s democracy is struggling in an atmosphere in which Azerbaijan is using force every day to unilaterally impose its plans to put an end to our statehood, independence and democracy. But I am here to announce that we are determined to defend our democracy, independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity by every possible means. I want to underscore that diplomatic solutions are an absolute priority for us and that the international community’s full engagement and support are crucial. In that regard, I would like to mention that an international observation mission to the Armenia-Azerbaijan border areas would be an important factor in achieving regional stability. There can be no question that in the interests of regional stability and in accordance with the norms and principles of international law, Azerbaijan’s military forces must be withdrawn from the sovereign territory of the Republic of Armenia.
I want to stress once again that we are determined to build peace in our region, but we need the full support of the international community in standing by our sovereign and democratic country and people, who have been subjected to aggression that goes against the norms and principles of international law. I believe in the possibility that we can establish long-term stability, security and peace, and Armenia is committed to continuing diplomatic efforts to that end.