Yerevan/Mediamax/. In a meeting with the Armenian community of Vienna on March 29, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan told about his meeting with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev.

We present that excerpt from Prime Minister’s speech: 

“I positively assess our meeting with President Aliyev. I cannot say that there has been a breakthrough in the negotiation process, a revolution, a turning point, but it is important that a process has started, which allows us to speak about our agenda, ideas, concerns and talk about the process I referred to in Stepanakert and later on during my press conference. 

I hope that President Aliyev will also make a positive assessment of the meeting. 

Here, I would like to touch upon a nuance. By saying that I positively assess the outcome of our meeting, I do not mean that someone has won or lost at all. As a matter of fact, meetings used to be held in that very logic until now. The point in today’s talks was not to go out and declare about one’s victory. 

A dialogue is underway, and each side has its own ideas. The conflict is deeply rooted, and we need to state that we do not deal with a simple situation. This is a very serious problem, and I find it important to shape an atmosphere where we can voice and talk about each other’s concerns. 

We should have the understanding that there is nothing harmful in talking to each other. The point is whether we can stabilize the situation at the line of contact, whether we can ensure that people in the border villages may live a normal life without any fear that snipers can kill them in the exercise of farming activities.

We must understand whether we can reflect on humanitarian aspects.There are civilians living on both sides, and we should understand whether we can try to organize meetings between individual families so that people could communicate with one another, or whether we can task our foreign ministers to follow up on the talks in order to understand the point of the problem. 

But it is also clear that each side has its own position in which they are deeply convinced. Nevertheless, we can also try to speak about the opponent’s position in order to understand the rationale behind the opposite position.”