In Protest, Sarkisian Snubs NATO Summit

YEREVAN (Combined Sources)—Armenian President Serzh Sarkisian announced late on Friday that he will not attend the upcoming NATO summit in Lisbon because of the alliance’s plans to uphold Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, RFE/RL’s Armenian service reported.

Sarkisian’s spokesman Armen Arzumanian said a draft resolution due to be adopted at the weekend summit calls for solutions to the ethnic disputes in the South Caucasus reflecting only the principle of territorial integrity.

In a written statement, Arzumanian warned that this “unacceptable” wording would complicate the Karabakh peace process “especially against the backdrop of the recent unprecedented rise in Azerbaijan’s military spending and its leaders’ Armenophobic rhetoric.”

“Given this concern, the president of the Republic of Armenia has decided not to depart to Lisbon,” he said, adding that Armenia will be represented at the summit by its defense and foreign ministers.

“We attach special importance to the content of documents dealing with vital issues for Armenia and the wording of those documents, which should be targeted at the reinforcement of security in the region,” Arzumanian was quoted by Armenian Public Radio as saying. He was referring to the draft’s reference to the principle of territorial integrity and its omission of self determination.

NATO did not immediately react to the dramatic move. Its draft resolution strongly opposed by Yerevan has not been officially publicized yet.

The United States and another key NATO member, France, advocate a Karabakh settlement based on territorial integrity and two other internationally recognized principles: peoples’ right to self-determination and non-use of force. A combination of these principles is at the heart of a framework peace accord put forward by the U.S., Russian and French co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group.

Earlier this year, the mediators urged the conflicting parties to refrain from a selective interpretation of elements of the proposed settlement.

Sarkisian was invited to the NATO summit along with the presidents of Azerbaijan, Georgia, Russia and other partner states. Speaking in Yerevan in September, NATO’s special representative to the South Caucasus, Robert Simmons, portrayed that invitation as a further sign of Armenia’s growing ties with the Western alliance. Simmons singled out the Armenian participation in the NATO-led multinational force in Afghanistan.

Arzumanian was careful not to present the situation as a crisis in Armenia-NATO relations. According to Armenian Public Radio, he emphasized that Yerevan remains a partner country of NATO and continues to attach “importance to its cooperation” with the alliance and its “contribution to the “implementation of reforms in the Armed Forces of the Republic of Armenia.”

In Arzumanian’s words, Yerevan remains committed to stepping up cooperation with NATO and considers that one of the “components” of its national security strategy. “We highly appreciate NATO’s contribution to the process of reforming the Armenian armed forces,” said the presidential press secretary.

He pointed to Armenia’s participation in peacekeeping efforts in Kosovo and Afghanistan as “the best proof of [its] productive cooperation with NATO.”

But, he added, Armenia can not accept “generalized formulations” relating to different regional conflicts.


Discussion Policy

Comments are welcomed and encouraged. Though you are fully responsible for the content you post, comments that include profanity, personal attacks or other inappropriate material will not be permitted. Asbarez reserves the right to block users who violate any of our posting standards and policies.


  1. Lusik said:

    From NATO website one finds the following two extracts from the “Strategic Concepts 2010″ document which contains “territorial integrity”:

    5. NATO remains the unique and essential transatlantic forum for CONSULTATIONS (my font)
    on all matters that affect the territorial integrity, political INDEPENDENCE (my font) and
    security of its MEMBERS (my comment: Armenia and Azerbaijan are not members) , as set out in Article 4 of the Washington Treaty. Any
    security issue of interest to any Ally can be brought to the NATO table, to
    share information, exchange views and, where appropriate, forge common

    34. The NATO-Russia RELATIONSHIP (my font) is based upon the goals, principles and
    commitments of the NATO-Russia Founding Act and the Rome Declaration,
    especially regarding the respect of democratic principles and the sovereignty,
    independence and territorial integrity of all states in the Euro-Atlantic area.
    Notwithstanding differences on particular issues, we remain convinced that
    the security of NATO and Russia is intertwined and that a strong and
    constructive partnership based on mutual confidence, transparency and
    predictability can best serve our security.

    Therefore, it is necessary to recognize Artsakh as a state now!

    • john said:

      Good point. yet don’t forget this is the Us, the hypocrite-in-chief and the self designated world’s sheriff .

  2. ara said:

    Oil- and location-the Sea-the Turks- what do we have there-some land and mtns.-we need to build our own weapons, fighter jets and defense AND NOT depend on them or anyone-they hit us-we STRIKE back 10 fold-

    this is a good move Mr Prez– A.R. A.

  3. Levon Lokmanian said:

    President Sarkisian is the best president Armenia can have.Is L ter Petrosyan was elected Artsakh would have been in azery hands now.

    • Paul said:

      ter ptrosyan is part of a mosad plan to completely erase Armenia from the map. The sooner some of us know this the better we can protect our homeland.

      GOD BLESS ARMENIA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  4. Seervart said:

    This is a very good move by Serze Sarkisian. I am happy with him now for sure.

  5. Katia K. said:

    Good move by the President. If we do not play hard ball during negotiations then we are done with. Armenia should not accept anything but full independent status for Nagorno Karabagh before proceeding. We must examine our past and trade these waters very carefully in order not to make mistakes we will later regret. No fuzzy future plans to determine the status of Karabagh somewhere down the road (which means never). Independence first and foremost for the security of the Karabaghzis and the future of Karabagh. This is “the” time to shout to the world that Karabagh was always Armenian, and that it was “given” to Azerbaijan by Stalin. Independant Karabagh or continued status quo. That should be the bottom line, otherwise we will knowingly fall in this obvious bait and switch trap.