Sputnik-Armenia: Minister Nalbandian, the recent statement of the President at the CSTO summit was quite sharp, highlighting the gaps that exist within the organization. Already assuming the Chairmanship of the organization what is Armenia doing to fill those gaps?

Edward Nalbandian: Armenia has always been an active member of the CSTO. We have always tried to do our best to contribute to the efforts aimed at increasing the effectiveness of the CSTO.

Needless to say, that upon assuming the Chairmanship, we feel additional responsibility to undertake further efforts, to improve the Organisation, to maintain its smooth functioning, ensure the full implementation of the commitments of the member-states emanating from their membership, and of course to support the creation of more advanced mechanisms in the field of foreign policy coordination.

However, naturally, it is not an issue of one chairmanship alone. I would say, it is an ongoing process that requires continuous efforts and consistency of all member states. On our part, as it was before, during and after our chairmanship we will continue our active participation and will come up with new initiatives.

Aravot. Mister Minister, Ilham Aliyev, President of Azerbaijan has recently made a bellicose statement on Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia. Once again he blamed Armenia for “occupation”, claimed the return of the territories. In your opinion, do such statements affect the negotiation process?

Edward Nalbandian. The Azerbaijani leadership has made such statements on numerous occasions; on the one hand, it seems there is nothing new, on the other hand, what they are saying is, in fact, admitting that due to its posture on Nagorno-Karabakh Azerbaijan does not enjoy the support of the Co-Chair states, and respectively that of the international community.

This time they went even further elaborating on the reasons why in their opinion the Co-Chairs do not support Baku. In fact, the leadership of Azerbaijan cannot say that they do not enjoy that support due to their own destructive policy. It is hard to imagine what they are saying instead, but they do insist that the Co-Chair countries are Islamophobic, and that’s why they do not support Azerbaijan. It would be wrong not to realize, that the manipulation with the religious factor, particularly, under current conditions, is quite dangerous. And of course, it is not the first time Baku strives to do that.

They claim that Azerbaijan is a country of multiculturalism and tolerance, which can set an example to the whole world. Moreover, they even state that Azerbaijan is unique in this regard. And, of course, as the song says “you are like no one, you are the only one - incomparable Azerbaijan”.

But, of course, they are unique. Because only they can perceive it as a tolerance. Through organizing great shows, conferences in Baku, they try to cover themselves with artificial hues.

They say that the situation with human rights is ideal in Azerbaijan, and the fact that the whole world criticises Azerbaijan is because of Armenia’s masterminding.

According to them, Armenia is to be blamed for the criticism of the world about the human rights situation in Azerbaijan. Armenia is to be blamed that the European Parliament, PACE adopted special resolutions on that. Armenia is to be blamed for the reduction of oil exports from Azerbaijan, Armenia is to be blamed that the guests who arrive in Azerbaijan for participating in the Eurovision and European Games, get acquainted with the situation on the ground and voice their criticism. But, of course, “the Armenians have sent them”. They claim that the opposition figures in Azerbaijan are the Armenian spies, and the local oligarchs, who lose the grace of their leadership, are of Armenian origin. In other words, it is a very simplistic approach: Armenians are to be blamed for everything. They know “seven songs and all of them are about the Armenians.” Of course, this is not an adequate approach, and they demonstrate the same inadequacy at the negotiation process.

Panorama. Mister Minister, the international community harshly criticize Azerbaijan on the violations of human rights. Does this situation impact the Nagorno-Karabakh settlement?

Edward Nalbandian. In fact, I have already answered to that question and I do not want to go into further details. Especially, since Azerbaijan asserts that we are to be blamed for everything, that we instigate all that. Let’s leave it to the international community, international structures to express their opinions in an unbiased manner, without Armenia’s interference.

GALA. Mister Minister, yesterday Member of Parliament Nikol Pashinian expressed some doubts in the National Assembly that the resignation of former Ombudsman Karen Andreassian was forced by Ambassador Mikayel Minassian, over some controversies. Have you already talked to the Ambassador on that issue? Has he denied or confirmed it? How he explained those allegations? And do such scandals around Ambassador Minasyan affect the reputation of the MFA?

Edward Nalbandian. First of all, I have not heard of any rumors concerning Mikael Minassian. Probably you do not enough understanding on the issue, if you suppose that the Foreign Minister should check the credibility of all rumors. Sometimes such absurd things are said that it would be rather weird to discuss or ask about them.

Yerevan.Today. Mister Minister, as you remember, the President and the Prime Minister gathered representatives of the diplomatic corps in the Sports and Concerts Complex. It seemed at the time that the instruction was quite clear - to attract investments. I would like to ask you to present in real numbers what do we have in this regard, which Ambassadors have clearly followed the instructions, and in what terms? Who failed and what is the reason for failure?

If I may, you keep mentioning that all this is the result of the destructive behaviour of Azerbaijan, the stalemate in the negotiation process other things. In your opinion, what would make Azerbaijan to once again be actively engaged in the negotiation process and be more constructive? Maybe it will be, let’s say, the loss of one or two regions, or launch of one or two rockets.

Edward Nalbandian. As to the question on Ambassadors. It’s strange to think that during a press conference the Foreign Minister would publicly inform about the omissions of Ambassadors or would thank through the press those who worked hard.

Any supervisor discusses those issues with his staff during working contacts. Those who fail, if there is a necessity, lose their job, are being replaced. Those who succeeded continue to perform their duties.

Recently I saw in a newspaper the photos of a number of Ambassadors, and comments that they do not work well. Excuse my language, but there is some masochism in it. The criticism should, indeed, be based on serious analysis or solid understanding on what is being done and what is not.

I have mentioned on numerous occasions and would like to repeat once again, that diplomacy is like an iceberg, the largest part of the work done is not visible. And this is quite right, that it should not be visible. Can you imagine drumming out all the things?! it is not by shouting that our cause will advance.

I would repeat once again, that throwing stone on a diplomat is immoral, because the diplomat is the same soldier in international arena, and it is not good to stab in the back, particularly in the way some people do.

RFE/RL Armenian Service: I have two questions, Minister Nalbandian. Why the allies of Armenia - Russia, the CSTO do not react when it comes to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict? The Armenian leadership keeps telling, that we don’t need the reaction of our allies on this issue, as we are able to adequately repel the adversary, the enemy. However, as my colleagues have already mentioned before, the statement, and probably I should say even the criticism of the President of Armenia during the CSTO summit, hints that we have some expectations from our allies. My question is the following: what has changed in the position of the CSTO after the statement of the President? Will the CSTO continue the same neutral position or will it not react at all?

My second question concerns Iran. If I am not mistaken, recently the Deputy Minister of Defense of Armenia stated that, seemingly, some opportunities are being opened in the field of military-technical cooperation. What can we expect with regard to the Armenian-Iranian relations after the lift of Iran sanctions, in particular not in economic, but more in military and political areas?

Edward Nalbandian: First, before answering your questions, I would like to return to the question which remained unanswered. The journalist, who asked a question before you, was wondering what can make Azerbaijan to be more constructive, return to the negotiation table. That is exactly what the international community is dealing with - to bring Azerbaijan to senses. We will see whether it would be possible or not.

Certain states for whatever reasons adopt statements, include wordings in the documents issued during visits to Azerbaijan or during the visits of Azerbaijan’s leaders to those countries, which create an illusion within the leadership of Azerbaijan, that the international community’s approach towards the settlement of the issue is not that much united.

The success of the negotiations on Iran’s nuclear issue was guaranteed, as I have already mentioned, firstly by the constructive approach, flexible diplomacy and political will that Iran demonstrated. However, the united and unanimous approach of the international community also had an immense role. And this very fact demonstrates that everything, even the most complicated issues can be solved through negotiations.

With regard to the Nagorno-Karabakh issue the Co-Chairs have a united approach. In the international arena there are very few conflicts, on which the Presidents of those countries issued five joint statements. However, it is also important for the international community not to make any exemptions, to express the same common position.

Everything happens in front of your eyes. Azerbaijan pretends that, for example, some countries within the PACE support it. However, in fact, the position of countries in the CoE is expressed through the Committee of Ministers. And the opinion of PACE is the opinion of the PACE parliamentarians, not the CoE member-states. It creates an illusion in Azerbaijan and they try to fool themselves.

You know, they say “if you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth”, it leads to the impression that the lie is becoming a reality. In fact, that lie seems a reality only to those who have invented that lie. It can not impress anyone else. It is another big question when Azerbaijan will realized that .

With regard to the question about the CSTO, it is the fifth time you are asking me the same question. Anywhere, even on the street, whenever you see me, you ask the same question. Maybe you have some problems with the CSTO. Today I have already answered that question.

I think Zhvanetsky used to say: ”the Director of the Transportation Department has not been heard again.” Today I have referred in depth to the CSTO and said that we have always demonstrated initiating policy in that direction and, by assuming the chairmanship, we feel greater responsibility to continue the work towards that goal. However it is not a question of one chairmanship. It is a continuous process of improvement. We should also take into consideration that with regard to the coordination of foreign policy, as well as to make the cooperation in that direction more effective, consistent and continuous efforts are required, which means consistent work by all the member states.

I would like to remind you what I have once answered, but, probably you have forgotten it. Four documents were adopted at the CSTO Summits and Ministerial meetings, expressing also the CSTO states’ position on the Nagorno-Karabakh issue. Principles of the conflict settlement are clearly outlined in those documents, and they reflect the position of OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs, as well as our approaches.

Nikolai Bordyuzha, Secretary-General of the CSTO has issued relevant statements on numerous occasions on behalf of the secretariat.

Regarding the second question, Iran is our good neighbouring state. We are interested on the development of mutually beneficial cooperation with Iran in different areas in all possible directions.

In one of my previous answers, I made quite a positive statement on the perspectives and possibilities, which serve as a basis for the strengthening and deepening the relations between the two friendly states.

1in.am. Mister Minister, you have also mentioned about Armenia-US relations. In this regard, I would like to ask you to comment or assess the latest statement of the US President, that historic level of U.S. investment in Armenia in 2015 is just the beginning. What can Armenia’s economy expect in this regard? Can we say, in a broad sense, that the US's interests grow towards the South Caucasus and, particularly, Armenia?

Edward Nalbandian. Concerning the US, I have mentioned that quite promising development took place in 2015. I have recalled the signing of Trade and Investment Framework Agreement, which took place in Washington, during the visit of the President of Armenia. It established the U.S.-Armenia Trade and Investment Framework Agreement Council which has already convened its first meeting

We have been discussing, preparing this agreement for over 20 years, and I am glad that two years ago, during the meeting with John Kerry, US Secretary of State, in Washington we agreed to sign it. And this became reality. During that meeting, we also agreed to facilitate visa regime between the two states. We agreed, and that also was called into life.

Trade and Investment Framework Agreement is not just a piece of paper, it is quite an important agreement, that creates opportunities for the further development of deep cooperation and partnership. Perhaps this was due to the fact that the United States made a very important investment, its first major investment in Armenia. Perhaps, it facilitated the signing of the agreement.

Likewise, the session of Armenia-US task force on intergovernmental economic cooperation was held in November of last year.

And we are determined to further strengthen, expand and deepen our partnership with the United States in different directions and areas.

Bloomberg. Minister Nalbandian, will the economic crisis in Azerbaijan somehow contribute, or further complicate the negotiation process?

Edward Nalbandian. The Azerbaijani leadership has continuously boasted about their great achievements and that the economic reforms gave tangible results. They don’t try to play modest and in this regard again claim to be unique in the world.

Three days ago, Minister of Finance of Azerbaijan criticised Standard & Poor's for reducing the Azerbaijan’s Investment rating to the lowest level and said that he hopes that once the prices of gas and oil increase, Standard & Poor's will raise Azerbaijan’s rating in the same expedited manner. What a confession! It turns out that everything depends on the price of oil and gas. Therefore, Azerbaijan is on the oil and gas needle, and when the needle popped that balloon, the air started to gradually leak out. And this was all about their success story.

Will this bring them to conscience? Maybe. But, what if the stressful condition of the Azerbaijani leadership, aggravated by the increased dissatisfaction of people on social and economic problems, force Baku to further escalate the situation along the border and the Line of Contact? There are experts who express such an opinion. However, the international community cannot welcome that. And the targeted and clear calls addressed to Azerbaijan are the evidence of that.

Shant TV. Mister Minister, in the beginning you enumerated your activities in 2015, mostly in the positive light. I will not repeat my colleague's question regarding the Ambassadors. I would like to ask in general, what would you consider as an omission, a drawback, or maybe a failure of 2015? Isn’t there a room for self-criticism?

Edward Nalbandian. What I have mentioned were not only the successful stories. I never drum out victories, I do not suffer from self-praising. I prefer not to use categories of “victory” and “defeat”. I simply take note of what was achieved based on facts and in a self-restrained manner. One each point, there is a room to do more, to move further, to reach a greater success. It is not in my style to say “See what we have done”. We outline what has been done, and do not say “What a Pushkin, what a fine fellow”. I apologize for citing so many proverbs in different languages.

I think that our diplomacy is so mature that we do not make a statement to deny it on the other day, claiming that you got it wrong. We are very restrained and cautious in making our statements. We say what we have.

Civilnet. Mister Minister, you have mentioned in your remarks, that membership in the EAEU would bring new opportunities for the economy of Armenia. How would you comment that amid the depreciation of the Russian rouble and decrease of export volumes from Armenia to Russia?

Edward Nalbandian. The global crisis, conditioned by financial, economic and other factors, does not concern only one institution, say, the EAEU, the EU or others.

Today the whole world is affected by the aftershocks of fall in the prices for oil, gas and other commodities. It does not concern only one state or only the EAEU. I would not enumerate all the countries, all the institutions. I think, you are well aware, as you follow those developments. You witness the shocks happening in different regions, and discussions on the fall in oil and gas prices in different institutions, that deal with these sorts of issues.

The advantages that the EAEU may offer to Armenia are obvious, and we have thoroughly presented them on numerous occasions. If there is a need, you may look through those materials.