Foreign Affairs Committee on Jan. 31st, 2023

[Anahit Harutyunyan]

Absolutely. As I mentioned, the humanitarian situation is very dire on the ground in Nagorno-Karabakh. I have some friends who I am in constant contact with. I hear from them, too. All the essential goods and products are missing. Kindergartens are closed. Schools are closed. They have blackouts of the electricity. On a regular basis, the gas is cut off.

You know, I can go on and on saying how dire the situation is, but I think for this committee a very important reference should be the statements made by foreign governments, namely the U.S., France and Canada. They call it a blockade.

The European Court of Human Rights calls this a blockade. So do the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, the European Parliament, The Free Press, Amnesty International, the Helsinki Commission, Human Rights Watch, the International Crisis Group and the Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention. What else do we need to know just to call it a blockade? I think if we trust our allies and partners, that's a very important reference.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you very much.

We now go to Mr. Bergeron.

You have five minutes, sir.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much, Excellency, for being with us today.

I cannot overemphasize the importance of the question that Ms. Bendayan just asked and the answer you gave. Indeed, I was very surprised last week that some members of this committee appeared to consider all the testimony we received to be equally credible. As a result, we need neutral and indisputable information to overcome the Manichaean dynamic in which one person is right and the other is wrong, and vice versa, with arguments coming from people with vested interests. So, thank you very much for your answer to Ms. Bendayan’s excellent question for you.

As you know, at the very end of August, the Prime Minister of Armenia and the President of Azerbaijan met in Brussels, under the mediation of Mr. Charles Michel, President of the European Council. A few days later, Azerbaijan led a large-scale offensive against Armenia which lasted only three days, but it effectively allowed Azerbaijan to occupy Armenian sovereign territory.

Subsequently, there was another meeting in October between the Prime Minister of Armenia and the President of Azerbaijan. The French President, Emmanuel Macron, as well as Mr. Michel, were present. There was even a meeting at the end of October between the Prime Minister and the President, with the President of Russia in attendance.

During these two meetings in October, was the Azeri offensive discussed? Were any explanations given as to why this offensive was carried out, even though peace talks had started in August?

[Anahit Harutyunyan]

Of course, the main reasoning Azerbaijan is citing when it comes to the violation of the territorial integrity of Armenia is that the border lines are not clear, and there is a clear need for limitations and border security.

At the same time, Azerbaijan is engaging in the different talks. What I can say is that the reasoning for being engaged in the talks and then violating the territorial integrity of Armenia is just, somehow, for face-saving. However, as we see, Azerbaijan is not interested in peace at all, because Armenia, since the very beginning, has been engaged in three tracks of negotiations with Azerbaijan.

Those tracks are.... The first one.... We formed commissions on both sides. The first track is the opening of all transport communications in the region. That's one commission. The second one is the delimitation and border security issues. The third one is the agreement on the normalization of relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan, or a peace treaty, whatever you want to call it. Armenia was engaged in these three tracks in good faith, but what we see from Azerbaijan is no interest in implementing any kind of agreement reached during those discussions.

The actions of Azerbaijan clearly talk about its true reasoning. It's not interested in peace. It's interested in peace on its own terms. As you understand, peace can't be imposed. Peace should be negotiated. Peace means dignity and well-being for all. Peace doesn't mean just an absence of war. We are really interested in having a long-term and just solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and for Armenian-Azerbaijan relations. That's why we request that the international community be present there. Don't allow us to be alone with the Azerbaijani side, because we really need international engagement to find lasting peace and stability in the south Caucasus.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

One of the witnesses we heard last week, Ms. Olesya Vartanyan, made a somewhat shocking statement. She told us that the Azerbaijani offensive was simply intended to position itself strategically for a possible new armed conflict with Armenia. That way, Armenian territory would be split in two. They would therefore get through force that which they clearly seemed unable to obtain through negotiation, meaning a corridor leading to Nakhchivan.

What are your thoughts on Ms. Vartanyan’s testimony?

[Anahit Harutyunyan]

The gains that Azerbaijan made in September 2022 are particularly striking because of the way in which they widened the conflict footprint.

Azerbaijan has taken control, as I mentioned, of 140 square kilometres of Armenia itself. From their commanding position—they control very geographically important mountains and heights—the Azerbaijani soldiers have the capability to strike even further into the country and potentially, as you rightly mentioned, cut the southern part of Armenia off from the rest of the country. Local officials and foreign experts say about 40% of homes and villages were destroyed. The main reason is, of course, to have a linkage with Nakhchivan.

Of course, I think we'll still have time to talk about Nakhchivan and the issue of the corridor that Azerbaijan is raising, but to your point, I wanted to say that you rightly mentioned that they now have positions that will allow them to cut part of Armenia off from the rest of the country in a matter of days.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you.

We go to Ms. McPherson.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you very much, Ambassador. This has been very interesting and important for us to hear. Of course, I'm very sorry for what is happening in your country.

As a Canadian lawmaker and parliamentarian, I think we're all here looking for ways Canada can help and for how we can get to peace in the region, because the loss of life and the impacts on Armenians are very difficult.

You spoke a little about how Azerbaijan is not letting the international community come in as observers. What is the potential for peace talks to happen? What would need to happen? What role can Canada play for us to move toward a more peaceful resolution of this conflict right now?

Is that possible in the current context with Azerbaijan?

[Anahit Harutyunyan]

As a person who comes from Armenia, of course I want to believe that peace is possible. Peace is what is needed for Armenia, but as I mentioned, peace means dignity. You can't have peace at all costs. Peace should be negotiated.

Azerbaijan is trying to just present its point of view on the normalization of relations with Armenia. They think Armenia should accept them; otherwise it means Armenia doesn't want peace, but we want to find a negotiated solution.

Safety and stability are the ultimate conditions in which reconciliation or any move forward can take place. Azerbaijan is not helping at all to create confidence-building measures. People don't believe in the genuine interest of Azerbaijan in establishing peace with Armenia.

When we say that international presence is important and that pressure on Azerbaijan is important, this is why it's so stressed and I will continue stressing those points. You have to pressure Azerbaijan with your allies and partners that are on the ground and working very closely with both Armenia and Azerbaijan to pressure Azerbaijan back to the negotiating table.

We should find the root causes of this long-standing conflict. If the root causes of Nagorno-Karabakh are not addressed, it's not going to be a long-lasting peace.

As I said, Canada doesn't have an embassy yet, but we truly hope you will be on the ground. We hope you'll help us, that you'll work with like-minded countries on the ground, and that you'll try to be more constructive and complement the efforts all the countries are making to try to bring peace to our region.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you for that.

I have one last question for you. You speak about working with allies, partners and like-minded countries. You've spoken a bit about some of the multilateral institutions, but what are you hearing from other countries, specifically, on this?

Could you give us a bit of a sense of what some of the European countries are sharing with you at this time?

[Anahit Harutyunyan]

We were able to build a very big consensus of international communities, especially on the events that are unfolding in the Lachin corridor. There is this understanding that Azerbaijan is really not trying to take any type of step toward peace, so engagement is important.

The countries that are working with both Armenia and Azerbaijan are clearly mentioning Azerbaijan as an aggressor that is violating the rights of movement of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh. This is something that is very important.

The fact-finding mission of the European Union is more proof that the European Union is trying to be there and to be present. I don't think much is going to change vis-à-vis the Azerbaijan posture, but, at the same time, it can lower the risk of conflict there on the ground.

Canada's presence, of course, is very much welcomed. We hope that while you are there, as I said, you can work together and complement the efforts of your allies and partners.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you very much, Ms. McPherson.

We now move to the second round. Members will have four minutes.

We first go to Mr. Epp.

[Dave Epp, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Ambassador, for your excellent testimony.

I noted that twice in your testimony, early on, you mentioned the term looking for a “durable peace”. You concluded your remarks with “a lasting and sustainable peace”. You've touched on the four areas already in your testimony today.

May I ask, from your perspective, what peace looks like? You mentioned that Azerbaijan seems only to be imposing its own terms. You talked about a negotiation process.

Specifically, though, around four areas...I believe there are four. If there are more, please let me know.

You said the recognition of the border isn't clear. There isn't an international border that's accepted. What does peace look like around that issue?

Obviously, there's the Lachin corridor.

There's the blockade. I'm assuming that the removal and the free movement.... I'll let you put that into words.

Canada's foreign policy is built upon sovereignty, the recognition of other sovereignties or self-determination and peace, and the cessation of hostilities. What does that look like for Nagorno-Karabakh from an Armenian perspective in the context of sovereignty and recognition, as well as the corridor, or lack thereof, to Nakhchivan?

There are those four areas. We've touched on all four of them today, but from an Armenian perspective and a negotiating perspective, or from a desire for a durable peace, what does that look like?

[Anahit Harutyunyan]

Coming back again to the issue of peace, as I said, it is very important for our region. However, in order for us to be able to find that durable and stable peace, it should represent all of the interests in the region. It can't be dictated to Armenia what peace means, and we can't allow Azerbaijan to dictate its own terms. That's why we're holding the negotiations.

As I mentioned in my answer to the previous question, it's very important to address the root causes of the problem. You can't sign a peace agreement without mentioning the Nagorno-Karabakh issue. The issue is there. It doesn't matter how much Azerbaijan wants it to disappear from the international arena. Right now, what we're discussing is the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh and the rights and securities of the people in Nagorno-Karabakh.

If Azerbaijan is truly interested in peace, it wouldn't have the state-sponsored Armenophobia that we hear at the state level from Azerbaijan. It wouldn't torture and kill prisoners of war, desecrate the bodies of soldiers and civilians, and destroy Armenian cultural heritage. If this is the way it wants to have peace with Armenia, we have a problem.

The international community has a decisive voice and place in the south Caucasus. This is a very important region.

Canada again can be very active when it comes to the resolution of the conflict with its statesmen, with its involvement with the parties and with its involvement with Turkey. Turkey is a very important player in our region, as I said. It's a very negative player, unfortunately, despite the fact that we have another track of discussions with Turkey, trying to see how we can normalize relations with them. Unfortunately, I have to say that what we see is talks for the sake of talks. Nothing is moving.

We see from Turkey's side that there is no interest in pressuring Azerbaijan into being more constructive in the negotiating process.

[Dave Epp, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

Thank you.

What I'm hearing you say, and I'm perhaps interpreting, is that you're looking for that lasting peace to come through a direct negotiation as opposed to it being imposed. Correct me if I'm wrong on that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Mr. Epp, you're out of time. Do you want to wrap up quite quickly?

[Dave Epp, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

I was going to go to the internal process of accepting a durable peace in Armenia. Can you, very quickly, say what that process would look like?

[Anahit Harutyunyan]

Excuse me, I couldn't hear your question.

[Dave Epp, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

What would a lasting peace look like? Through your democracy, which Canada supports, what does peace look like as far as the acceptance from the Armenian legislature or the people is concerned? Is there a process internally that you would have to follow?

[Anahit Harutyunyan]

Of course, if we sign the agreement, there is a process for approval of that agreement. International agreements are approved by the court, the constitutional court.

Peace just means dignity and justice. If we can achieve it, through negotiations, to that point, this is the peace we are looking for.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you.

We now go to Madam Khalid.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thank you very much, Chair.

Thank you, Ambassador, for being here, and for the insights you're providing.

One point you made that I really appreciated was the connection between security and democracy. In the Dion report, which you've also referenced, Mr. Dion talks about fragile democracies and how Canada can better support them.

In terms of maintaining security and moving on to democracy in the context of the upcoming elections for Azerbaijan in 2025 and for Armenia in 2026, what role do you think Canada can play in building that democratic institution and providing that support as we're thinking long term in terms of safety and security in the region?

[Anahit Harutyunyan]

Of course, Canada has a very important role in supporting the Armenian democracy.

Stéphane Dion, in his report, of course mentioned certain areas where Canada can share its expertise and be really a very important player for Armenia. The areas he is talking about are, of course, fighting corruption, promoting human rights, supporting non-governmental organizations, and supporting the reforms in the Armenian parliament. As you know, we are a very young parliamentary democracy, and we are very happy that we have a very good, constructive working co-operation with the parliamentary centre, which is doing different projects for our parliament. Teaching us how to be a parliamentary democracy is very important for Armenia.

I can't say what Canada can do for Azerbaijan, because Azerbaijan, unfortunately, doesn't share any of these mentioned fields. For Azeris it's not a priority. As they are a country that doesn't respect the rights of its own people, they have no freedom of press, no freedom of assembly—that's why I was questioning the very essence of the environmental activists at the Lachin corridor—a more democratic Azerbaijan is better for Armenia.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thank you.

Just specifically with respect to Nagorno–Karabakh, you spoke a little bit about long-lasting peace and reconciliation. What role does Armenia have to play, and what role does Canada have to play with respect to building truth and reconciliation within that region specifically?

[Anahit Harutyunyan]

First of all, the parties involved in this conflict should have the political will to move forward toward that reconciliation. Unfortunately, that was my whole point during this presentation. We don't see any moves from Azerbaijan that it's ready to build confidence-building measures. This is the ultimate condition for peace and security and we don't see it from.... I don't know how we can move forward with those actions of Azerbaijan, but you can be sure that in Armenia, as a democratic society, we understand the importance of reconciliation.