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