NKR Foreign Minister Georgy Petrossian’s answers to the mass media questions These days, in a conversation with a BBC correspondent, a representative of the Azerbaijani MFA stated that the status of Nagorno Karabakh can be discussed only after the liberation of some territories and return of the Azerbaijanis to Nagorno Karabakh. What is the NKR position on this issue? This discourse reflects the traditional approach of the Azerbaijani policy on misinterpretation of the grounds, core, and consequences of the Azerbaijani-Karabakh conflict. We believe that for creating a basis for the final settlement of the Azerbaijani-Karabakh conflict and establishing stable peace in the region, first of all, achievement of mutual recognition of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic and the Azerbaijani Republic, as well as mutual rejection of any attempts of a military solution to the conflict is needed. Mutual recognition of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic and Azerbaijan and rejection of any war gamble should become the start point of the negotiations and not the final. This approach will allow to create favorable conditions for solving the most complicated issues: territories, refugees, and borders. They must be mutual and brought into step with the course of the peace process. The key issue among the noted ones is the issue of the Armenian refugees from the former Azerbaijani Soviet Socialist Republic. Exclusion of the Armenian refugees from the context of the Azerbaijani-Karabakh conflict settlement, suppression of their legal rights is a way to nowhere. Without solving the issue of the Armenian refugees from the Azerbaijani SSR, solution of the issue of any other refugees or some other issues is impossible. At a public meeting in Vienna on supporting the peaceful settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict, with the participation of public representatives from Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Nagorno Karabakh, OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairman from France Bernard Fassier stated that “a new war can be initiated both by the recognition of Nagorno Karabakh as an independent state, which isn’t done even by Armenia, and any attempt of unconditional return of this territory to Azerbaijan”. What is your assessment of the discourse of the OSCE MG Co-Chairman from France? We flatly reject the statement that a new war can be initiated also by the recognition of Nagorno Karabakh as an independent state. A new war can be initiated by the tolerance of the world policy centers towards the warmonger, leading to an ironic situation that the direct threats to peace by official Baku, in fact, don’t result in tangible political or legal responsibility. This policy will only strengthen the Azerbaijani elite’s conviction of its own impunity, which is just the basic threat to the regional peace. In due time, Azerbaijan’s aggression against the Nagorno Karabakh Republic became, in a greater extend, possible due to the international community’s recognition in 1991-1992 the right of Azerbaijan to independence and non-recognition of the similar right of Nagorno Karabakh, although the Nagorno Karabakh Republic and the Azerbaijani Republic were formed from the former Azerbaijani SSR, basing on general principles of law. Continuation of this policy and especially any opposition to the recognition of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic represent a serious threat to peace and stability in the region, as they encourage the Azerbaijani party for false imagination that they can get away with a new war gamble. In this regard, we consider it important to emphasize that the world policy centers’ refusal of the formula of “parity approach” to the parties’ actions will not only allow strengthening our confidence of their ability to fairly and impartially assess the situation, but will also become a guarantee for progress in the negotiation process. The OSCE MG Co-Chairman also stated that “the most real option now is to return the Azerbaijani territories under the current control of the Armenian armed forces, to specify a medium status for Nagorno Karabakh, with consideration of its security guarantees, which would be acceptable both for Baku and Yerevan. The second part of the issue is not solvable now, and the self-determination of the people of Nagorno Karabakh is possible only in 5 or 10 or 15 years, after the Azerbaijani community’s return to the region”. How will you comment on this position? Mr. Fassier voiced the elements of the so-called “basic principles”, which the OSCE MG proposes for consideration of the Armenian and Azerbaijani Presidents. The consultations between Armenia and Azerbaijan on these principles take place on the formula “nothing is agreed and solved until everything is agreed and solved”. Due to this, it seems untimely to comment now on the functional elements of these consultations, which may not get their final shape introduced by the mediators. Consequently, when the consultations give specific results, then we’ll assess if they are acceptable for our people or if they are generally realizable, because achievement of the final settlement of the conflict and stable peace is impossible without taking into consideration the position of Nagorno Karabakh.