Yerevan /Mediamax/. Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan referred today to the sitting of the Security Council on March 28, noting that the statement made during it “naturally raised additional questions.”

During the cabinet sitting today Nikol Pashinyan presented a number of clarifications and reasoning to make the situation created in the region clear for both Armenian and international community.

He reminded that the statement of the Security Council stressed that Azerbaijan aims to undertake new provocations and attacks in the direction of Nagorno Karabakh and registered that the possibility of such developments on Armenian-Azerbaijani border also exist.

“Like before, during and after the 44-day war in 2020, Azerbaijan pursues a policy of shaping the content of the speech justifying the military attack on Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh.

It first throws theses, proposals or comments on the diplomatic and public platform, then accuses Armenia of not responding to them or reacting in unconstructive way, or rejecting them, then attributes some promises to Armenia, makes up some agreements.

In the context of this speech, Azerbaijan attributes to Armenia non-constructive, denial, failure to fulfill promises, non-compliance with agreements work style, building aggressive rhetoric on this accusation, followed by aggressive actions,” the head of the government said.

He stressed that this practice, repeated many times, continues now as well making it obvious that with this Azerbaijan is trying to form the legitimacy of a large-scale attack against Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia. “My aim today is to show that this statement is baseless and illegitimate. In the above mentioned context, misinformation sometimes plays a significant role.

For example, Azerbaijan keeps on claiming that Armenia does not respond to this issue. This is not true at all, as I have repeatedly stated Armenia’s readiness to sign a peace agreement with Azerbaijan. But Azerbaijan continues to announce that it has sent a five-point proposal to Armenia, but we have allegedly left those proposals without response.”

He reminded that during the previous cabinet sitting he referred to this issue in detail and noted that four days after receiving the proposals, on March 14, Armenia responded to it in a written form and handed over in the same way it has received – through the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairing countries.

“Armenia has responded to Azerbaijan’s proposals through both public and working diplomatic channels. Azerbaijan considers it absence of response because the Republic of Armenia has mentioned in its public and diplomatic responses that there is a Nagorno-Karabakh issue and that the issue of the rights of the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh should be addressed in the context of a comprehensive settlement between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Azerbaijan’s position is that there is no Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, it is already resolved. But it does not answer an important question: how was the issue of the rights of the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh resolved? This is the reason why the international community constantly speaks about the need for a comprehensive settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Realizing that this issue will be more expressed on the international agenda, Azerbaijan is trying to close it. And this operation started from Parukh village of Askeran region, which has an obvious tendency to continue.

Azerbaijan is trying to displace all Armenians from Nagorno-Karabakh, thus considering the issue closed. If we are wrong, then let Azerbaijan show a concrete interest in discussing the rights and security guarantees of the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh – an issue that is raised not only by Armenia but also by the entire international community.

But official Baku is moving in the opposite direction, claiming that there is no Nagorno-Karabakh.

By the way, the fact that Azerbaijan has adopted and is implementing “Nagorno-Karabakh without Armenians” policy is also substantiated with arbitrary interpretations of the November 9 trilateral statement. For example, Azerbaijan’s continuous claims that with the November 9 trilateral statement the Defense Army has an obligation to withdraw from Nagorno Karabakh,” Nikol Pashinyan said.

He added that “withdrawal of Nagorno-Karabakh Defense Army means withdrawal of Armenians from Nagorno-Karabakh.”