Exactly what you said proves the fact that this man has a poor understanding of the negotiation process and does not know the details of the negotiation process nor the essence, said Armenia’s third President Serzh Sargsyan in an exclusive interview.
He referred to Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s statements that the issue of Nagorno Karabakh was delegated to the UN Security Council after the April War, while recalling the UNSC resolutions of 1993, and also speaking about the possibility of the UNSC to adopt or not to adopt a document.
“First of all, what does the UN Security Council resolution of 1993 have to do with it? It had to do with a completely different issue. All those resolutions passed in 1993 dealt with the cessation of hostilities. It was not a status issue or any other issue. As for the fact that the UN Security Council’s decision would not have been made, it begs the question, comparing what arguments does he come to that conclusion?” said Serzh Sargsyan.
“And I say that there would necessarily have been this Security Council resolution, based on the fact that three of the five permanent members of the Security Council – the United States, Russia, and France – have proposed this draft. I mean, can you imagine a situation where, I repeat, three of the five permanent members would present a resolution, and even if two voted against it, what would happen? Even if we went to extreme measures – one of the permanent members vetoed it – what would we lose from that? The co-chairmen could not make a proposal and then turn 180 degrees during the discussion and make a different decision. That’s impossible,” Sargsyan said.
Have you signed the Petition https://www.change.org/We-Demand-Pashinyan-Resignation-Now
If not, please do and share.
please message all your friends and followers as the best you can
In response to the remark that if such a thing had happened, the responsibility for the non-resolution would have fallen on the international community, the third president of Armenia said that not even the international community but a particular member of it would have become responsible. “But there could be no such thing. And it wasn’t a disaster, but for us, of course, it wasn’t the most desired document, and the Kazan document wasn’t our dream, but for us it was an acceptable document and in practice it was an implementable document,” Serzh Sargsyan said.