Commenting on the question of reporters on “Lavrov’s plan”, the deputy minister of foreign affairs Shavarsh Kocharyan stated that there is not such a plan.
“Imagine such a situation. We pass through Kerry our proposal on the recognition of Nagorno-Karabakh by Armenia and return of territories. Kerry passes our proposal, and we state that there is “Kerry’s plan”. I do not give this example accidentally. The sides pass proposals through mediators, and it is not right to call them a plan. Lavrov has also repetitively denied the plan ascribed to him,” Shavarsh Kocharyan announced.
The example is interesting. Kocharyan actually hints that Lavrov has brought Azerbaijani proposals to Armenia. One can imagine what they looked like. At the same time, it is interesting that Kocharyan mentions Kerry, not Lavrov, in the example about the proposals of the Armenian side, noting that he does not give this example at random.
The Armenian deputy foreign minister actually hints that in the so-called negotiation process Russia was the provider of the Azerbaijani proposals and the United States was the provider of the Armenian proposals. At the end of the day, this situation is surprising, and it is not even unexpected because Aliyev and his administration were not stupid to accuse repetitively the United States for a pro-Armenian stance, especially in the recent period.
Interestingly, official Yerevan informs about the state of things, hinting that there was a “Kerry’s plan” which was preferred by Yerevan, unlike “Lavrov’s plan” that was preferred by Baku.
It is hard to tell why official Yerevan is disclosing this information now. It is not ruled out that this is an attempt to put pressure on Russia, which is determined by the aggressive behavior of Azerbaijan in the recent period, and with such a hint at Russia Yerevan is trying to place Moscow in a situation when it will have to take practical steps to contain Baku.
It should not be ruled out that the disclosure is related to a wider change of the situation when the plans of both Kerry and Lavrov are in the past. Usually, they are disclosed at a time when there is no need to damage them with impertinent publicity.
The American co-chair of the Minsk Group has recently announced that he leaves his position on December 31. Warlick is leaving diplomatic service. At the same time, President Obama and the Democratic administration, including Secretary Kerry leaves in January. It is not clear who the next secretary in the administration of Republic Trump will be. Shavarsh Kocharyan says that there is no need to expect an essential change in the policy of the new U.S. administration on Artsakh.
Does Yerevan expect that Washington will maintain its status of “provider” of Armenian interests?
The essential issue here is how Yerevan’s policy on Artsakh will change and whether official Yerevan will have the will to get out of the trap of the negotiation content of the past two decades in which the first war in Artsakh willingly appeared immediately after the war. The pole of this trap is that after the start of the negotiations of the regulatory process official Yerevan agreed to revise the outcome of the war, which was the “spade” used to dig the big negotiation pit of the past two decades.
Yerevan needs to get out of that pit. Shavarsh Kocharyan hints that the ongoing process has no content, it is practically empty. However, this void cannot last long, it will be filled with new content supposing new logic of the process of conflict settlement or will be filled with a new war.
The April war gave Yerevan a chance for a new content, which is still in place despite the lost opportunities of the past months.