The minister of foreign affairs of the Republic of Armenia, citing the statement made by the heads of the states of the OSCE Minsk Group, said the following: “The final status of Karabakh must be decided by a legally-binding expression of will by the people of Nagorno-Karabakh.” (lragir.am, 27 June, 2010) There is no such phrase in the actual statement. The statement does not clearly outline who is included in those expressing their will, whether it is the population of the former Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast, the current Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh, or the Republic of Azerbaijan. It is not clear as such as to who is expressing any will; perhaps those in charge in Baku, perhaps some group clumped together in Baku today or tomorrow proclaiming itself to be the legal representatives of Nagorno-Karabakh. I believe that the minister has gotten confused over the (working) Russian version: “определение будущего, окончательного правового статуса Нагорного Карабаха путем имеющего обязательную юридическую силу волеизъявления его населения” (“determining the future, final legal status of Nagorno-Karabakh by having a legally-binding expression of will of its population”). The official English text of this phrase is as follows: “final status of Nagorno-Karabakh to be determined in the future by a legally-binding expression of will.” The expression “его населения” (“of its population”) is missing in the official English version. There is also another important difference between this paragraph as it appears officially and in the Russian version. The Russian refers to the determination of a legal status (“определение… правового статуса”), whereas the word “legal” does not appear in the official text. In logical terms as well as from the perspective of international law, the fate of any territory ought to be determined by the people of that territory. That is the real essence of self-determination. If someone else is to determine your future, then what kind of self-determination is that? However, are we seeing much of anything reasonable in the leadership of Azerbaijan and, what is worse, in the steps taken by the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs? Ara Papian Head of the Modus Vivendi Centre 27 June, 2010 P.S. This analysis of details does not at all imply that I accept the rationale presented to resolve the issue over Artsakh, when Nagorno-Karabakh is a priori viewed as part of Azerbaijan without any legal basis, and the attempts are being made to come up with some solution or other given that condition. When I was a child, in order that there be peace in our region – which was the playground at that time – the grown-ups would tell us, “There is blood in rocks.” Now we must tell our grown-ups (we are forced to admit today that the co-chairs are in that position), “There is blood in what you propose.”