Interview with member of the Azerbaijani Milli Majlis (Parliament) Zahid Oruj.
In an interview with a German magazine, Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan accused Azerbaijan of intending to solve the Karabakh problem by military means. How can you assess Armenian President’s statements given the fact that Baku, unlike Yerevan, has already approved the updated Madrid principles?
Armenian leaders want to bring their position to the world through the European media. But, as the last interview of the Armenian President demonstrated, they fail to do this. After the interview was published, Yerevan stated that the text of the interview had some mistakes.
Thus, Serzh Sargsyan has once again proved that he is a real smatterer in foreign policy matters. But this is only the smallest part of the evils. His claims that Azerbaijan’s willingness to resolve this issue by military means is the major obstacle to the settlement of the conflict are untrue.
In fact, the statements coming from Baku indicate that Armenia slows down the negotiation process, and the world powers do nothing to persuade Armenia to the peaceful resolution of the Karabakh problem. The organization that must deal with the Nagorno-Karabakh settlement claims that the parties themselves must find a way to resolve the conflict. But Armenia has occupied our territory, therefore, it speaks the language of militarism. However, when Azerbaijan tries to talk with Yerevan in its language, it becomes a matter of concern abroad.
Any international expert with confidence confirm that Armenia does not have sufficient economic capacity to wage a war. So I think if Azerbaijan succeeds to deprive Armenia of its foreign backers, we will immediately start a war, because Yerevan leaves us no choice.
In an interview with the same magazine the Sargsyan said that “Agrydag will forever live in the hearts of Armenians”. In your opinion, is it possible that Armenia will make territorial claims to Turkey in case the U.S. recognizes the “Armenian genocide”?
All are interested in what will happen after a possible recognition of “Armenian genocide” by the countries of the world. I think Western countries have more market interests in this respect than Armenia. For example, Washington uses the “Armenian genocide” to make Ankara more loyal in the Iranian issue.
Turkey has already begun thinking about how to resist Armenia’s efforts to get world countries to recognize the “Armenian genocide”. They do not raise the issue Armenian crimes in the Ottoman Empire in vain. Thus, Ankara, showing Armenia’s true face, wants to balance the claims of the sides.
With regard to Agrydag, I think claims by a small Armenia against Turkey, a country with a population of 80 million, can be costly for Yerevan. Introducing Agrydag as a symbol of Armenia will destroy its statehood.
On the other hand, Armenian President’s statements claiming that it is impossible to creat a joint committee with Turkey to study the events of 1915 in the Ottoman Empire are contrary to the texts of Zurich protocols. It arises a question – then why the country assumed an obligation to establish a commission to establish the truth about this issue?
Armenia has announced several times that it may withdraw from the Zurich protocols. But we have not heard such statements since Serzh Sargsyan’s visit to France. By and large, very little depends on Armenia in this matrer.
Do you think return of the Turkish Ambassador to Washington and the forthcoming visit of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan to the U.S. indicate that the two countries have left behind the tensions between them?
First and foremost, it shows that Armenia and the Armenian lobby have failed to achieve their goal to embroil Turkey with the U.S. and other countries. Ankara and Washington could reach consensus, because these countries have too many common interests. The U.S. wants to pursue its policy in the region through this country, and I think that the parties succeeded to to agree and understand each other.
Today.Az
