DOCSLIB.ORG

Address by the President of the Republic of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan at the Opening Meeting of the Fourth Ordinary Session of the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Address by the President of the Republic of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan at the Opening Meeting of the Fourth Ordinary Session of the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly Address by the President of the Republic of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan at the opening meeting of the Fourth Ordinary Session of the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly Distinguished Chairman of the National Assembly, Distinguished Co-Chairs of the Assembly, Distinguished members of the EURONEST Parliamentary Assembly, It is a pleasure to greet you in Yerevan on the occasion of your participation in the Fourth Ordinary Session of the EURONEST Parliamentary Assembly. This week can be considered to be a truly “European” one for us: we are glad to host the EURONEST Session in Yerevan, after which I will depart for Brussels to participate in the EPP Summit. Both in Yerevan and Brussels I am scheduled to meet with the high level EU officials, and a few days later the Session of the Armenia-EU Parliamentary Cooperation Committee will take place here in Yerevan. It is good that relations between Armenia and EU are developing dynamically. I believe strongly that discussions to be held and resolutions to be adopted in the parliamentary dimension under the extensive list of agenda items of the EURONEST Session will contribute to the deepening of cooperation between the European Union and partner nations in a number of areas. Among those items are infrastructure and transport cooperation, energy efficiency and renewable sources of energy, dialogue in the area of culture. It is also a high time to exchange opinions in reviewing the European Neighborhood Policy and on the preparations for the upcoming Eastern Partnership Summit. I highly value the inter-parliamentary cooperation in the framework of the Eastern Partnership. It is significant and plays an important role in the whole system of our relations with the European Union. The Yerevan Session of the EURONEST Parliamentary Assembly is a good opportunity to conduct a broad and open exchange of views and opinions, genuine dialogue on the issues that are important for our society. I believe that inter-parliamentary discussions will let us form correct assessment of the challenges that our nations face as well as let us attempt to find joint avenues to overcome cooperatively those challenges. It is noteworthy that our cooperation towards making system of pan-European values the citizens’ property, its promotion and rooting engages both the parliamentary and civil society circles. Armenia today is a country of free speech and free media, we have got freedom of assembly, established civil society, which is well aware of its rights, and how it can struggle for its rights. With the aim to further improve the democratic processes in Armenia we have initiated constitutional reforms, which pursue the objective of improving the constitutional mechanisms for implementation of the rule of law and safeguarding fundamental human rights and freedoms. Distinguished ladies and gentlemen, Building on shared values Armenia is committed to the development of cooperation with the European Union directed at continued improvement of the democratic institutions and judiciary system, good governance, fight against corruption, consolidation of civil society, further improvement of the business environment for the expansion of trade and investment, continued implementation of mobility and partnership and expansion of the sectoral cooperation. We attach great importance to the steps to secure people to people contacts and free movement with the EU. We also anticipate support of the parliamentarians in the forthcoming launching of the dialogue with the EU for a visa-free regime to be established for our citizens. We are convinced that by joining efforts we will be able to arrive at joint approaches based on opportunities instead of incompatibilities, and thus secure for our citizens an opportunity to take best advantage of various integration formats, which in its turn will consolidate cooperation and let us avoid new confrontations on the European continent. We build upon the premise that it is possible to accommodate both the Armenia’s membership to the Eurasian Economic Union, with all commitments stemming thereof, and the European Union’s deep and comprehensive agenda. Moreover, we will attempt to explore compatible middle ground through establishment of close ties between the various integration processes, and thus contribute to the consolidation of shared pan-European values free of contradictions and dividing lines. Honorable Members of the Assembly, This year the whole Armenian nation has been joined by the civilized world in commemorating victims of the Armenian Genocide that took place in the Ottoman Empire in 1915. We recall with gratitude and highly value the role of the European Parliament in the recognition of the Armenian Genocide. It was the first among pan-European institutions to adopt in 1987 a resolution condemning that crime perpetrated against Armenians in the territory of the Ottoman Empire and calling upon the Turkish government to recognize it. The Armenian Genocide is not only the tragedy of our nation but also a world-scale crime against civilization and humanity, which reminds us of the failure to learn from history, dangers of a genocide denial, as well as the long-term negative consequences of letting this type of crime to go unpunished and unrecognized. The respect towards human rights is the pillar of the European Union values upon which our cooperation is built. In that context I highly value The Annual Report on Human Rights and Democracy in the world 2013 adopted by the European Parliament on March 12, which contained a separate paragraph addressing the Armenian Genocide Centennial and called upon all Member States to acknowledge it, and encouraged the EU institutions to contribute further to its recognition. With regard to the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh problem I would like to underline that we are not going to transform this platform into a propaganda tool or conduit to sow interethnic hostility, as it has been the case in Azerbaijan. We will try to take best advantage of the opportunities provided by this Assembly for the benefit of peaceful coexistence and cooperation of our nations. The best testimony to what I just stated was active participation of the Armenian delegations in a wide range of events that took place in Azerbaijan, including the Ordinary Session that took place in Baku back in 2012. I regret that Azerbaijani side evades meeting us halfway by responding to our steps towards constructive dialogue. It is though more disturbing that our neighboring State demonstrates unconstructive and maximalist stance in the very process of the peaceful resolution of the Karabakh conflict by backtracking on the already agreed points, by consistently trying to change the format of the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairmanship or to launch negotiations on the great treaty without registering agreement on the basic principles. It should be obvious that the keys to the settlement of this issue are not located in Paris, Moscow or Washington, but in Baku, Stepanakert and Yerevan. Meanwhile, Azerbaijan invents far-fetched excuses in order to avoid the settlement based on the principles proposed by the Co-Chairs. I think such tactics of that country deserves unequivocal assessment of the international community and European institutions. Regardless of Azerbaijan’s unrealistic claims and periodic provocations carried out on the Line-of-Contact there is no alternative to the peaceful resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. It has been the position of international community, especially in the recent years, that there is no alternative to the comprehensive settlement of this conflict but by the exercise of the people’s right to free expression of their will and self-determination, which is grounded in the European and universal values. This conflict can be comprehensively settled through the free exercise of this right by the people of Nagorno-Karabakh. That is the approach upon which the proposal of the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs is built. Distinguished Members of the Assembly, I again warmly welcome you upon the commencement of the Fourth Ordinary Session of the EURONEST Parliamentary Assembly, and wish you constructive discussions and fruitful work. Thank you for your attention. http://www.president.am/en/press-release/item/2015/03/17/President-Serzh-Sargsyan- National-Assembly-Euronest-Parliamentary-Assembly/.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bgr
    Received by NSD/FARA Registration Unit 09/28/2020 4:52:04 PM From: Tavlarides, Mark <mtavlarides(a)bgrdc.com> Sent: Monday, September 28, 2020 4:39 PM To: Tavlarides, Mark <mtavlarides(q>bgrdc.com> Subject: Azerbaijan Update Good afternoon, I wanted to bring to your attention a press release from the Embassy of the Republic of Azerbaijan on the recent attacks by Armenia on Azerbaijani civilians. It can be found here. Since yesterday, September 27, Armenia has launched a large-scale provocation against Azerbaijan, targeting residential areas and the armed forces of Azerbaijan. As a result of massive shelling of Azerbaijani villages, 8 civilians were killed and many more injured. The Azerbaijani Army, using the right of self-defense and in order to protect civilians, reacted through counter-offensive measures. Azerbaijan's operations are conducted within its internationally recognized sovereign territories, and Azerbaijan is abiding by its commitments under international humanitarian law. Azerbaijan has long expressed warnings that it expects larger military provocations by Armenia at any time. Open provocations by the Armenian leadership, especially by Prime Minister Pashinyan; recent intensified reconnaissance; and sabotage activities by Armenia, including using tactical drones against Azerbaijani positions, demonstrate that Armenia was preparing to launch another attack. Armenia has violated all the norms and principles of international law by occupying internationally recognized territories of Azerbaijan, which was condemned by four UN Security Council Resolutions. Against this background, please see attached for relevant information on the latest developments, including the list of Armenian provocations for the last 2 years. Please let me know if you have any questions.
    [Show full text]
  • Azerbaijan's Perspectives on the Osce Minsk Group
    security and human rights 27 (2016) 442-466 brill.com/shrs Azerbaijan’s Perspectives on the osce Minsk Group Complicity in the Status Quo? Zaur Shiriyev Academy Associate at the Royal Institute of International Affairs ( Chatham House) in London Abstract The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (osce) led Minsk Group – the principal mediator tasked with the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, is often criticised by Azerbaijan, due to the stalemate in negotiations. The intensive period of engagement between 2006 and 2009 brought first the initial and then the “updated” Madrid Principles. This was the chief working document that set forth the basic principles for peaceful resolution. The inactivity of the Minsk Group is often con- ceded as the result of maintaining “minimalist goals” – preventing full scale war and trying to bring conflict parties to the negotiating table. The April war in 2016 tested the fragility of the first goal: preventing skirmishes from leading to larger scale conflict. Similarly, after the April 2016 war, the attempt to revitalise the second goal – i.e. bring- ing the parties to the negotiating table – also collapsed, due to the increased mistrust between the parties after the war. The article will evaluate the geopolitical changes and their impact on the Minsk Group’s work since 2008, the reasons for the demands to change the format of the Minsk Group, and finally Azerbaijan’s perspectives on the limitations of the Minsk Group’s current mandate and mechanisms. Keywords Azerbaijani-Armenian conflict – Nagorno-Karabakh conflict – fragile peace – April War * Zaur Shiriyev is an Academy Associate at the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House) in London.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Populism': Armenia's “Velvet Revolution”
    The Armenian Studies Program and the Institute of Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies present the 42nd Educator Outreach Conference Authoritarianism, Democratization, and ‘Populism’: Armenia’s “Velvet Revolution” in Perspective Saturday, May 1, 2021 Livestream on YouTube University of California, Berkeley From end March to early May 2018, a series of peaceful protests and demonstration led to the resignation of Prime Minister (PM) Serzh Sargsyan, whom the then ruling Republican Party he chaired had newly nominated for that office. Having completed his two terms as President, from 2008 to 2018, Serzh Sargsyan’s attempt to remain in power became obvious. This attempt also made it evident that the amended 2015 Constitution, which he had promoted to invigorate democratization by shifting power from the office of the President to the Parliament and the office of the Prime Minister, was merely a ploy to extend his rule. It was also the proverbial “last straw that broke the camel’s back.” A kleptocratic, semi-authoritarian regime that appeared to control all the levers of power and of the economy suddenly, and unexpectedly, collapsed. This regime change—which the leader of the protests and incoming new prime minister, Nikol Pashinyan, referred to as a “Velvet Revolution”—was peaceful, something unusual for a post-Soviet republic. Subsequent parliamentary elections brought to power a new generation, younger deputies mostly between the ages of twenty-five to forty. A similar generation change also characterized the formation of the government. Youth, however, also means inexperience as almost none of the new deputies and ministers had held any political position in the past.
    [Show full text]
  • Armenia-Azerbaijan Wars: Looking for Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict
    Armenia‐Azerbaijan Wars: Looking for Nagorno‐Karabakh Conflict Resolution Air University Advanced Research Program Next Generation Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance Aigerim T. Akhmetova Squadron Officer School Class – 21C March 31, 2021 "Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the Air University, the United States Air Force, the Department of Defense, or any other US government agency." Abstract The Nagorno‐Karabakh territorial dispute is one of the longest inter‐ethnic conflicts from the former Soviet Union, devastating Azerbaijan and Armenia since 1988. The geographic location complicates the situation from a geopolitical perspective by bringing several outside stakeholders to the discussion table. The efforts of one key organization to mitigate the conflict, the Minsk Group, have been questioned by both Armenia and Azerbaijan. The Minsk Group was established in 1992 to provide a peaceful resolution to this territorial dispute by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. Competing regional and international interests further complicate this stalemate and finding a single resolution that fits all involved parties’ interests has been an arduous path. This paper explores the complexities of this conflict, discusses if Minsk Group should continue leading negotiation efforts, and proposes possible courses of actions for the international community to take with these countries. Background and Involved Parties The inter‐ethnic tensions between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the Karabakh region can be traced back to the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union era (Migdalovitz 2001, 6). For a brief period in 1921, Nagorno‐Karabakh (NK) was part of Armenia before Stalin acknowledged their ties to Azerbaijan (ibid).
    [Show full text]
  • Armenia: Why the European Neighbourhood Policy Has Failed
    >> POLICY BRIEF ISSN: 1989-2667 Nº 68 - FEBRUARY 2011 Armenia: Why the European Neighbourhood Policy has failed Nelli Babayan The EU has failed to use either the European Neighbourhood >> Policy (ENP) or the Eastern Partnership (EaP) to leverage reform in Armenia. Armenia saw its inclusion in the EaP as a path to gaining EU HIGHLIGHTS membership and a way of resolving ongoing problems with its neighbours. However the EU is still neither actively involved in conflict resolution nor • Despite deteriorating strongly committed to closer political integration with its Eastern partners. democratic performance, Its vague policy stipulations have done little to shore up its own position in negotiations of an EU-Armenia the South Caucasus. Association Agreement began in July with the third and latest Armenia is often over-looked, compared to Georgia’s more dramatic events plenary round on 15 December in recent years and Azerbaijan’s pivotal energy role. But the country is also 2010. important to South Caucasus security. Relations with Turkey continue to be uneasy. The ‘frozen’ conflict with Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh is • The Nagorno-Karabakh on the verge of becoming more active. Blocked democratic reforms breed conflict not only poses a social frustration. Given Armenia’s landlocked position, the closed border security threat at the EU with Turkey, the recently closed Russian-Georgian border, and the borders but is a clear example ongoing half-frozen conflict with Azerbaijan, regional cooperation focused of the EU’s reactive rather than on reconciliation is essential to EU interests. The EU needs to upgrade its proactive strategy towards political engagement in order to head off probable instability in all these conflict resolution.
    [Show full text]
  • The OSCE in the Caucasus: Long-Standing Mediation for Long-Term Resolutions1
    In: IFSH (ed.), OSCE Yearbook 1999, Baden-Baden 2000, pp. 247-256. Ermina Van Hoye The OSCE in the Caucasus: Long-Standing Mediation for Long-Term Resolutions1 This article reviews the contributions of the OSCE towards conflict settle- ment in the area dealt with by the Minsk Group and in Georgia over a two- year period (1997-1998). In the first section it outlines and evaluates peace negotiations for Nagorno-Karabakh. The second part discusses the specifies of the OSCE Mission in South Ossetia and highlights the relationship be- tween the OSCE and the UN in Abkhazia. The Conflict Dealt with by the Minsk Group The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict has gone into its eleventh year, as no accept- able political settlement has been reached up to now. Moreover, all parties to the conflict seem to be caught up in a pre-negotiation phase: differences re- main over methodology (step-by-step or package approach) and over the rec- ognition of the direct participants in the peace talks (Karabakh Armenians/ Karabakh Azeris). The current "no peace no war" situation thus continues. Nevertheless the situation has evolved over the last decade.2 Thriving on the beneficial climate of glasnost and perestroika, in February 1988 the ethnic Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh, an enclave within Azerbaijan, raised its voice in favour of secession from Azerbaijan and unification with Armenia. It later traded this irredentist aspiration for outright independence, which the Nagorno-Karabakh republic declared on 6 January 1992. However, this step was neither recognized by the Azeri nor by the Armenian leadership. Com- plaints about cultural discrimination, along with painful memories of nation- ality policies during the early Stalin period, were pressing enough to induce serious ethno-nationalist unrest, which culminated in a grave internal dispute over territorial rights.
    [Show full text]
  • Celebrating 85 Years
    NOVEMBER 4, 2017 Mirror-SpeTHE ARMENIAN ctator Volume LXXXVIII, NO. 16, Issue 4510 $ 2.00 NEWS The First English Language Armenian Weekly in the United States Since 1932 INBRIEF AGBU Issues Statement Turkey Frees In Support of Domestic Some Hostages Violence Legislation NEW YORK — The Armenian General Benevolent Union released a statement this which By Muriel Mirak-Weissbach in which it said it “strongly supports legislation to Special to the Mirror-Spectator criminalize domestic violence in the Republic of Armenia and to provide support for victims across the nation. Freedom from abuse is a fundamental BERLIN — The news on October 26 that human right to which a person is inherently enti- a Turkish court decided to release German tled regardless of their nation, location, language, human rights activist Peter Steudtner from religion, ethnic origin or any other status. Violence prison, and even allow him to leave the in the home cannot be tolerated in any modern country, was not expected and was greeted society. Strong families are the foundation of by sighs of relief. But it is by no means the Armenian society and women are at the heart of end of the story. Although he and seven families. When a woman’s safety and well-being is other political prisoners were liberated, the threatened, so is the safety and security of her fam- charges against ily, her community and ultimately the nation. President Serzh Sargsyan presents a medal to the young students. them have not AGBU joins Armenians across the globe in stand- been dropped and ing together to enact legislation that speaks to the trial is sched- these very values and beliefs.” Armenian President Awards Creators uled to continue on November 22.
    [Show full text]
  • The Anatomy of Russia's Grip on Armenia: Bound to Persist?
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Terzyan, Aram Article The anatomy of Russia’s grip on Armenia: Bound to persist? CES Working Papers Provided in Cooperation with: Centre for European Studies, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University Suggested Citation: Terzyan, Aram (2018) : The anatomy of Russia’s grip on Armenia: Bound to persist?, CES Working Papers, ISSN 2067-7693, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iasi, Centre for European Studies, Iasi, Vol. 10, Iss. 2, pp. 234-250 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/198543 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ www.econstor.eu CES Working Papers – Volume X, Issue 2 The anatomy of Russia’s grip on Armenia: bound to persist? Aram TERZYAN* Abstract The 2018 “Velvet revolution” in Armenia has engendered a bunch of unanswered questions regarding both its domestic as well as foreign policy implications.
    [Show full text]
  • The Armenia-Azerbaijan Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict As the Key Threat to Peace and Cooperation in the South Caucasus Farhad Mammadov*
    The Armenia-Azerbaijan Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict as the Key Threat to Peace and Cooperation in the South Caucasus Farhad Mammadov* Among the conflicts in the South Caucasus, the Armenia-Azerbaijan Nagorno-Kara- bakh conflict is undoubtedly the most complex, as well as the most dangerous con- flict. It holds the most serious security and humanitarian implications not only for the South Caucasus, but also for the whole Eurasian region. The 23-year-old peace process, led by the OSCE Minsk Group, has so far failed to deliver peace and stability to the region. Impeded by problems such as lack of commitment, focus on conflict management instead of conflict resolutions, intergovernmental nature and rotating chairmanship of the organization, the OSCE is failing to address the resurgence of violence in this simmering conflict. Taking advantage of the shortcoming of OSCE Minsk Group’s peace efforts, Armenia has refused to make any compromises for the sake of peace. During the recent negotiations in Vienna and St. Petersburg, the presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia agreed on the phased resolution of the con- flict, creating hope that the deadlock would be broken and the peace process would be reactivated. However, the danger remains that if the peace process fails again, the resumption of violence will become inevitable and renewed war will have serious regional and global repercussions. * Dr. Farhad Mammadov is the Director of the Center for Strategic Studies under the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan 157 Caucasus International Introduction he conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Azerbai- Tjan’s Nagorno-Karabakh region is the longest running and the bloodiest conflict in the post-Soviet space.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement on the Joint Statement of the Presidents of the OSCE Minsk
    PC.DEL/663/12 3 July 2012 ENGLISH only Statement On the Joint Statement of the Presidents of the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chair States delivered by Ambassador Arman Kirakossian at the 918th Meeting of the OSCE Permanent Council June 21, 2012 Mr. Chairperson, Armenia highly appreciates the efforts of the Heads of the OSCE Minsk Group Co- Chair states - the Presidents of the United States, the Russian Federation and the French Republic, aimed at the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. The joint statement adopted in Los Cabos by Presidents Barack Obama, Vladimir Putin, and François Hollande is the fourth document issued by the Heads of the Co- Chair countries on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict which may serve an impetus for the negotiation process. Armenia is unanimous with the Co-Chair countries in their resolute commitment to achieve an exclusively peaceful settlement of the issue. We also regret that despite the call in the Deauville statement, progress was not achieved at the Kazan Summit on June 24, given the well-known position of one party to the conflict on which my delegation elaborated after the Kazan summit. Staying committed to the already reached agreements, reflected in the joint statement of Sochi made by the Presidents of Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan on January 23, Armenia will continue its efforts aimed at the endorsement of the Basic Principles of the conflict settlement. Along with the Co-Chair countries, we have repeatedly called to respect the ceasefire agreement of May 1994 and to abstain from hostile rhetoric and invited the attention of the Permanent Council to the recent flagrant violations of the ceasefire.
    [Show full text]
  • 1287Th PLENARY MEETING of the COUNCIL
    PC.JOUR/1287 Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe 29 October 2020 Permanent Council Original: ENGLISH Chairmanship: Albania 1287th PLENARY MEETING OF THE COUNCIL 1. Date: Thursday, 29 October 2020 (in the Neuer Saal and via video teleconference) Opened: 10.05 a.m. Suspended: 12.55 p.m. Resumed: 3 p.m. Closed: 5.55 p.m. 2. Chairperson: Ambassador I. Hasani Ms. E. Dobrushi Prior to taking up the agenda, the Chairperson reminded the Permanent Council of the technical modalities for the conduct of meetings of the Council during the COVID-19 pandemic. 3. Subjects discussed – Statements – Decisions/documents adopted: Agenda item 1: REPORT BY THE DIRECTOR OF THE CONFLICT PREVENTION CENTRE Chairperson, Director of the Conflict Prevention Centre (SEC.GAL/157/20 OSCE+), Russian Federation (PC.DEL/1458/20 OSCE+), Germany-European Union (with the candidate countries Albania, Montenegro and North Macedonia; the European Free Trade Association countries Iceland and Liechtenstein, members of the European Economic Area; as well as Andorra, Georgia, Moldova and San Marino, in alignment) (PC.DEL/1517/20), Armenia (Annex 1), Turkey (PC.DEL/1488/20 OSCE+), United States of America (PC.DEL/1457/20), Azerbaijan (Annex 2), Belarus (PC.DEL/1460/20 OSCE+), Switzerland (PC.DEL/1461/20 OSCE+), Georgia (PC.DEL/1467/20 OSCE+), Norway (PC.DEL/1473/20), United Kingdom, Kazakhstan PCOEW1287 - 2 - PC.JOUR/1287 29 October 2020 Agenda item 2: REVIEW OF CURRENT ISSUES Chairperson (a) Russia’s ongoing aggression against Ukraine and illegal occupation of Crimea:
    [Show full text]
  • Human Rights Without Frontiers International
    Human Rights Without Frontiers International Avenue d’Auderghem 61/16, 1040 Brussels Phone/ Fax: 32 2 3456145 Email: [email protected] – Website: http://www.hrwf.net OSCE Human Dimension Implementation Meeting Warsaw, 3 October 2011 Working Session 11: Humanitarian Issues and Other Commitments/ IDPs 600 000 IDPs waiting for 20 years to return to Nagorno-Karabakh and the 7 Azerbaijani districts occupied by Armenia 600 000 is the number of internally displaced people in Azerbaijan that the UNHCR mentioned in its report Global Trends in 2009. These 600 000 IDPs were violently forced from their homes during the armed aggression by the Republic of Armenia against Azerbaijan. More than 40,000 come from the Nagorno-Karabakh region and around 550,000 come from the seven surrounding districts of Azerbaijan. As a result of an ethnic cleansing perpetrated by the Armenian forces not a single Azerbaijani remained there. All these regions have been occupied by Armenia for almost 20 years despite numerous decisions adopted by the UN Security Council, UN General Assembly, OSCE and the Council of Europe. Since 1992, the political settlement of the conflict has been discussed within the framework of the OSCE Minsk Group with Russia, United States and France as its Co-Chairs. The peace talks were reinvigorated in 2009 with the promotion of the Basic Principles contained in the Madrid Document and the Statement by the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chair countries on 10 July 2009. The Basic Principles call for: The return of the territories surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh to Azerbaijani control; An interim status for Nagorno-Karabakh providing guarantees for security and self- governance; A corridor linking Armenia to Nagorno-Karabakh; Future determination of the final legal status of Nagorno-Karabakh through a legally binding expression of will; The right of all internally displaced persons (IDPs) and refugees to return to their former places of residence; International security guarantees that would include a peacekeeping operation.
    [Show full text]