ARMENIA ACCUSES AZERBAIJAN OF UNDERMINING N-K

C O N F I D E N T I A L YEREVAN 000252 SIPDIS SIPDIS DEPT FOR EUR DAS BRYZA AND EUR/CARC E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/20/2018 TAGS: AM PGOV PREL AZ SUBJECT: ARMENIA ACCUSES AZERBAIJAN OF UNDERMINING N-K PEACE PROCESS Classified By: CDA JOSEPH PENNINGTON, REASONS 1.5(B,D) -------------- SUMMARY -------------- ¶1. (C) FM Oskanian convoled all Yerevan Chiefs of Mission on March 21 to raise the alarm about what he described as Aserbaijan's efforts to undermine the N-K peace process, and ultimately to dissolve the Minsk Group. Oskanian decried the recent UN resolution on N-K pushed by Azerbaijan and, speaking in apocalyptic terms, added that "if there is ever another war between Azerbaijan and Armenia, we will be able to trace it back to that document." The FM distributed a non-paper which, among other things, said that Armenia "may review its policy towards Nagorno-Karabakh in order to assure N-K's right to self-determination and security." End summary. -------------- UN RESOLUTION HAS DONE "IRREPARABLE HARM" -------------- ¶2. (C) FM Oskanian convoked all Yerevan Chiefs of Mission to discuss what he termed the "increasingly dangerous intransigence" of Azerbaijan" with regard to the N-K conflict. The FM recalled that Armenia "had warned all along" that the UN resolution on N-K would do "irreparable harm" to the peace process. "Unfortunately," he continued, "we are now being proved right." After asking the Chiefs of Mission not to take notes on what he was about to say, Oskanian struck an apocalytic tone: "We hope there is never another war between Azerbaijan and Armenia," he said. "But if that ever happens, we will be able to trace the origins of that war back to this resolution." ¶3. (C) Oskanian said that in Armenia's view, the only document relevant to the peace process is the one that reflects the Minsk Group talks. But that document, Oskanian asserted, is "going down the drain" because of Azerbaijani intransigence. He alleged that the Azerbaijani Government had written a formal letter to the OSCE Secretariat that "virtually demanded the dissolution of the Minsk Group." The Azerbaijanis "are now on record," he charged, as seeking to undermine a document "that is the product of 2 years of joint efforts" between the two countries. That document, the FM said, successfully reconciles the two conflicting principles of territorial integrity and self-determination. ¶4. (C) Oskanian concluded by saying he had heard earlier in the day that President Aliyev had declined a possible meeting with PM and President-elect Sargsian at the upcoming NATO Summit in Bucharest. He characterized the Azerbaijani position -- that such a meeting would violate principles of protocol -- as "laughable." The FM argued that the real goal in refusing such a meeting is to "delegitimize the Minsk Group document and the very existence of the Minsk Group." -------------- TEXT OF ARMENIAN NON-PAPER -------------- ¶5. (C) The Foreign Minister distributed the following non-paper in support of his points. BEGIN TEXT. Although an overwhelming majority of UN Member States did not support Azerbaijan, the non-binding resolution "on the situation in occupied territories of Azerbaijan" passed the UN General Assembly with 39 votes last week. Despite the conceptual rejection of Azerbaijan's position, the existence of this non-binding General Assembly resolution is a fact. It has emboldened the Azerbaijanis. Immediately following the vote, Azerbaijani foreign ministry officials rejected the compromise approach of the negotiation process and insisted on their own terms, citing the text of the resolution. Further, in the post-resolution period, Azerbaijan is seeking ways to dismantle the OSCE MG co-chairmanship, and therefore, the negotiating process. Past efforts to discredit the American, Russian and French co-chairs have multiplied with Azerbaijan's extreme and unwarranted accusations about the role and vision of those three important countries. Azerbaijan has already indicated that they will not use the opportunity of a multilateral meeting at the NATO/EAPC Bucharest Summit to meet with Armenia's President-elect. In other words, they do not wish to further legitimize the OSCE negotiating document which has evolved over two years under the auspices of the Minsk Group co-chairs and with input from the Azerbaijanis, at the highest levels. The only document that will bring a settlement to this conflict is one that will be signed by Armenia, Nagorno Karabakh and Azerbaijan. The co-chair countries in particular, and the OSCE membership, must rouse and compel renewed seriousness about reining in Azerbaijan's self-deceptive maneuvers. Rejection of the existing balanced, compromise document, coupled with the UN resolution's passage may indeed be the first steps toward a new war in the region, because together, they will have removed all acceptable channels of dialog. By working within the OSCE consensus environment, we had begun to achieve a compromise solution with creative ways of reconciling the principles of territorial integrity and self-determination. The MG Co-chairs said prior to the UN vote, "The proposal transmitted to the sides in Madrid comprises a balanced package of principles that are currently under negotiation." Azerbaijan's confidence in their increased military capacity, combined with reliance on documents, albeit non-binding, which call for one-sided solutions will aggravate the adversarial environment and further debilitate a combustible region. In order to assure Nagorno Karabakh's right to self-determination and security, Armenia may review its policy towards Nagorno Karabakh. The international community must seriously review the situation in this new phase. The consequences of this resolution will do lasting damage if appropriate responsive measures are not quickly taken. The region's security, Europe's energy security and the future of a generation are at stake. END TEXT PENNINGTON