Armenia, 2010

Each year, the great family of nations comes together

to assess what the Organization has achieved and to

consider together ways to respond to the problems

facing the world and to acknowledge what unites our

nations and what still divides them.

For 65 years, the General Assembly has carried

out this both difficult and noble mission. That mission

was summarized very well by the first speaker at the

first session of the General Assembly, on 10 January

1946, as the maintenance of peace and security and the

establishment, through cooperation, of those conditions

of stability and well-being which will ensure peaceful

and friendly relations, based on the principle of equal

rights and self-determination among the nations of the

world.

Since then, the General Assembly has changed.

The number of Members has almost quadrupled, major

decisions have been made, historic documents have

been adopted, old problems have given way to new,

and the scope of responsibilities of the General

Assembly has greatly increased as it has opened itself

to new challenges in international security,

non-proliferation, disarmament, respect for human

rights, poverty, terrorism, global warming, the financial

crisis and many other issues.

In short, many things have changed, including the

century.

Nevertheless and despite the developments that

have marked recent decades, the situation in the region

where Armenia is situated prompts me to return to that

day, 10 January 1946, which is so distant yet so close,

given the objectives that were put forward then and

which continue more than ever to underpin our actions.

How is it possible to maintain peace, security and

stability when we keep raising defence spending and

regularly threaten to use force and to start wars? How

can we promote friendly and peaceful relations

between peoples when we promote intolerance and

hatred and impose blockades and closed borders? How

can we assure the principle of the equal rights of

peoples and their right to make their own decisions

when we reject the fundamental principle of

international law — the right of peoples to self-

determination?

I would like to hereby touch upon the conflict

between Azerbaijan and Nagorno-Karabakh. The

people of Nagorno-Karabakh exercised their right to

self-determination two decades ago. They fought for

their right to freedom, withstanding the brutal war

unleashed by Azerbaijan, which had suppressed them

for 70 years and attempted to cleanse them from their

ancestral home. For that purpose, it even resorted to

the use of mercenaries closely linked to international

terrorist organizations. The people of Nagorno-

Karabakh had to pursue their right to self-

determination as they were being denied their right to

existence.

The right of peoples to self-determination is a

fundamental and indispensable right enshrined in the

29 10-55109

Charter of the United Nations. The advisory opinion

issued by the International Court of Justice in July

reaffirmed the wisdom of the founders of this

Organization, who made sure that one of the

fundamental principles for maintaining peace and

stability in the world — the right of peoples to self-

determination — could not be underrated in any way

compared with the other principles of international law.

Let us be realistic. One cannot say each and every

time that this is the last self-determination case. No

one is able to stop the progress of history; otherwise,

there would not be 192 Member States in this

Organization instead of 51, as there were at the time of

its founding.

The Nagorno-Karabakh peace process moves

forward with the internationally mandated mediation of

the Co-Chairs of the Organization for Security and

Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Minsk Group, who

continue their persistent efforts aimed at the peaceful

settlement of the conflict based on the fundamental

principles of international law: the non-use of force or

threat of force, the equal rights and self-determination

of peoples and territorial integrity.

On 17 July, at the margins of the OSCE informal

ministerial meeting in Almaty, the Minsk Group

Co-Chairs issued a statement in which they reiterated

that the proposed principles and elements have been

conceived as an integrated whole and that any attempt

to select some of them over others would make it

impossible to achieve a balanced solution. Armenia

fully shares this vision and will continue the

negotiations on that basis in search of a peaceful

settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

Unfortunately, Azerbaijan rejects two of the three

principles mentioned and is attempting not only to turn

upside down the essence of the negotiation process, but

also to distort the nature of the conflict in various

international forums, including the General Assembly,

as happened here about two weeks ago and again two

days ago. That country is attempting to mislead the

international community, presenting the consequences

of the conflict as its causes.

Azerbaijan’s unabated war rhetoric, growing

violations of the ceasefire regime, and unprecedented

military budget increases only exacerbate the situation,

raising concerns about the already fragile stability in

the region. Azerbaijan continues to reject proposals to

come to an agreement on the non-use of force or threat

of force, as well as calls for the consolidation of the

ceasefire. Azerbaijan’s attitude thus represents a threat

to regional peace and security. The money it derives

from oil revenues is being directed at funding new

military ventures. We all know the potential results of

such adventurism.

Azerbaijan should refrain from its continuing

attempts to remove the settlement process from the

Minsk Group format and framework and from making

provocative and bellicose statements and actions, in

order that the negotiation process may proceed more

constructively and effectively.

In an era when the protection and promotion of

human rights are considered essential in the civilized

world, intolerance for the values of others and acts that

intentionally, consistently and repeatedly damage or

destroy the cultural or religious heritage of other

civilizations must be condemned with the same resolve

and determination as violence against people.

The destruction by Azerbaijanis between 1998

and 2005 in Nakhichevan of thousands of cross-stones

delicately carved by Armenian masters in the ninth to

the sixteenth centuries is a vivid example of such a

crime. Under the Azerbaijani Government’s watchful

eye, thousands of these gigantic medieval sculptures

were bulldozed and the area turned into a military zone

in a Government-sanctioned operation. A resolution at

the sixteenth General Assembly of the International

Council on Monuments and Sites stated regretfully

with regard to this act of vandalism: “… this heritage

that once enjoyed its worthy place among the treasures

of the world’s heritage can no longer be transmitted

today to future generations”.

Armenia’s initiative for the normalization of

relations with Turkey without any preconditions was

fully supported by the international community. Last

year, after intensive negotiations, we achieved

agreement and finally signed the Armenian-Turkish

protocols. We made a confident investment in a durable

rapprochement, while Turkey, unfortunately,

backtracked from its commitments and not only

refrained from ratifying the signed protocols, but

returned to its initial language of preconditions.

Consequently, the Armenian-Turkish border continues

to remain the only closed border in Europe. Good

intentions must be proved in deeds, not just words.

Armenia is ready to move forward when Turkey will

10-55109 30

once again be prepared to normalize relations without

preconditions.

While we are discussing all possible ways to

create a more prosperous and safer world for our

peoples, we would be remiss if we did not speak about

the responsibility to protect. As a nation we survived

the most heinous crime against humanity, genocide,

95 years ago. We attach the utmost importance to

furthering all international efforts aimed at the

prevention of genocide and crimes against humanity. It

is encouraging that further discussions of the

Secretary-General’s report on early warning,

assessment and the responsibility to protect (A/64/864)

are being held in the General Assembly. This will

enable us come up with a formula that will allow us to

act in a timely and coherent manner, utilizing all the

United Nations system resources and capabilities for

early warning, assessment and prevention of situations

that could lead to genocide, war crimes or crimes

against humanity.

To bolster United Nations capacity to deal with

current challenges and those ahead, we need to

increase our efforts to further the process of United

Nations reform, making more efficient and effective

use of existing resources, making the “One United

Nations” policy work, and better utilizing regional

capacities to complement our global actions.

Today, the world is evolving faster than ever. To

meet security, political, economic, social,

environmental and other challenges we simply have to

put our efforts, resources, and political determination

together to deal with them and move the international

development agenda forward.