Pashinyan speaks to Turkish media in ‘unprecedented event’

On Thursday evening, Armenia’s Public TV aired Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s interview with Turkish media outlets, an event Pashinyan called ‘unprecedented’. During the interview, Pashinyan discussed Armenia–Turkey relations, the ongoing trial of Armenian prisoners in Azerbaijan, and the Armenia–Azerbaijan peace negotiations.

Starting out the press conference with a brief statement, Pashinayn highlighted that ‘a meeting in such a format has never taken place before’, adding that he thought it was good to have such an opportunity to ‘talk and exchange ideas’.

In the wide-ranging interview, the first topic raised by a Turkish journalist was regarding the process of normalising Armenia–Turkey relations.

In response, Pashinyan highlighted that today, there is a ‘very direct dialogue’ between Armenia and Turkey, which he regards as a ‘very significant change’ from the past. In particular, he highlighted that Armenian and Turkish diplomats are in ‘constant direct contact’ with each other, whereas previously, all information was found out through third countries.

He also noted ‘concrete examples of cooperation’, including the recent extradition of two Turkish individuals wanted by Turkey and the invitation by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan for Pashinyan to participate in his inauguration in Ankara, as well as the dialogue between Armenia and Turkey in regards to Syria.

However, Pashinyan noted that in terms of further progress, he would like to see diplomatic relations be established between the two states, for the border to open for rail and road transport, and for business ties to be direct.

Related to Armenia–Turkey relations, Pashinyan also reiterated his government’s stance that the ‘international recognition of the Armenian Genocide is not among our foreign policy priorities today’.

‘I often talk about history and my main message is the following both in Armenia and when talking to our compatriots in the diaspora, that a demarcation must be made between history and today’, Pashinyan said, emphasising that ‘there is no absolute truth in history’.

He added, however, that while in Armenia and among Armenians, the Armenian Genocide is an ‘indisputable truth’, this was not the issue his government is discussing. Rather, he stated that the aim was to keep peaceful relations with Armenia’s neighbours and to not ruin progress through the perceptions of threats. He then clarified that the political vocabulary used in Armenia ‘not necessarily at the official level, but sometimes also at the official level’, could be perceived as such a threat.

‘They speak the language of conflict every day’

Commenting on the ongoing trial of Armenians in Azerbaijan, Pashinyan said that they ‘are a smokescreen, which have one goal, at least that’s our perception, to nullify the achievements that we have had in the peace process’.

During the interview, Pashinyan emphasised that the trilateral statement of 9 November 2020 — signed between Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Russia following the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War — ‘cannot be treated piecemeal’.

‘The trilateral statement mentions the exchange and return of prisoners of war, hostages, and other detained persons, but this issue has not been resolved yet. Moreover, it is being exacerbated by the trials taking place in Baku, which, in our assessment, are staged trials where prohibited measures, torture, and according to our information, other prohibited measures, etc. are being used’, Pashinyan said.
He added that while the statement ‘talks about the return of refugees to Nagorno-Karabakh and adjacent regions, but following the trilateral statement, on the contrary, the number of refugees has increased, and forced displacement has occurred’.

While noting that this statement is brought up repeatedly in the context of the Armenia–Azerbaijan peace negotiations, Pashinyan claimed that there is no mention of a ‘corridor’, with the expression of the Lachin Corridor.

He therefore emphasised that the ‘Zangezur corridor’ — a proposal to link mainland Azerbaijan to its exclave of Nakhchivan — was not a part of such statement, and therefore ‘there is no such agenda for providing a transport connection between the western regions of Azerbaijan and Nakhchivan’.

‘Armenia and Azerbaijan must mutually open communications for each other, both external and internal, that is, from Armenia to Armenia through the territory of Azerbaijan, and from Azerbaijan to Azerbaijan through the territory of Armenia’, Pashinyan said, stating that Armenia had made a ‘very specific proposal’ to Azerbaijan on this topic.

Pashinyan also emphasised that Armenia perceives the expression ‘Zangezur corridor’ to be a ‘territorial claim against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Armenia’, noting Azerbaijan’s repeated claims regarding what it calls ‘Western Azerbaijan’ make up ‘approximately 60-70%’ of Armenia’s sovereign territory.

‘Azerbaijan contradicts itself by the fact that they officially call 2021 and the following period a post-conflict period. But they speak the language of conflict every day’, Pashinyan said, before stating that, in contrast, ‘there is no expression of Western Armenia in our constitution’.

Baku has long demanded from Yerevan that changes be made to the Armenian constitution in order for a peace deal to be signed.

On Thursday, following the announcement that negotiations between Armenia and Azerbaijan had been completed, Azerbaijani Minister of Foreign Affairs Jeyhun Bayramov stated that ‘in the next phase, Armenia must eliminate territorial claims against Azerbaijan in its constitution’.

Armenia and Azerbaijan agree terms of peace deal

The two countries have reportedly agreed on the terms of a historic peace deal, after over three decades of bitter conflict.

OC MediaOC Media

In August 2024, Armenia announced plans to hold a referendum to approve a new constitution in 2027, with Pashinyan assigned to draft a new constitution by the end of 2025.

‘A possible opportunity’

The last topic touched upon by Pashinyan was Armenia’s strategy of ‘balancing foreign policy’, claiming that within the framework of this policy, Armenia is developing relations with both the European Union and with Russia within the framework of the Eurasian Economic Union (EaEU).

‘I want to say it directly, we simply want the Republic of Armenia to overcome the foreign policy of the absence of alternatives’, Pashinyan said, adding that ‘this is not at all a direct choice of one of those alternatives, but it is a possible opportunity, another alternative opportunity for our state and our people’.

The EU and the EaEU mandate members follow their own set of internal rules and standards, which are not compatible with each other. Both organisations also include a customs union — a free trade zone with unified trade tariffs on outside imports. Therefore, joining the EU would require Armenia to leave the EaEU.

In early January, Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan said the government had a ‘positive stance’ on the bill ‘on the launch of the process of the Republic of Armenia’s accession to the European Union’ considering the ‘rather intensive and dynamic relations’ between Armenia and the EU in recent years.

Armenian Economy Minister says Armenia ‘not replacing’ Eurasian Economic Union with EU

Russia’s deputy prime minister previously said Armenia’s potential EU aspirations are ‘incompatible’ with its Eurasian Economic Union membership.

OC MediaArshaluys Barseghyan