Foreign Affairs Committee on Jan. 31st, 2023

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

Just very quickly, with my last 30 seconds I think I would be remiss not to talk about the gendered aspects of conflict.

What do you have to say about the role of women in ensuring peace and security in the region?

[Anahit Harutyunyan]

Since Armenia became a parliamentary democracy, women are now quite actively involved in Armenian politics. We've secured gender equality in our parliament, and the same goes for Nagorno–Karabakh, so women have a decisive role to play.

Canada has an ambassador for women and peace. I think this area is a very good context for working with our Canadian partners. We can, of course, host a visit of the ambassador, and she can share her experience and help us to be more involved in the conflict resolution problem.

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

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you.

We now go to Mr. Bergeron for two minutes.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Your Excellency, I would like to follow up on the discussion we had about Ms. Vartanyan’s testimony.

I think the elephant in the room is the corridor to Nakhchivan. Last week, some testimony suggested that peace negotiations did not seem to be going well on the Nakhchivan corridor, even though Armenia did commit to considering the possibility of creating such a corridor. Blocking the Lachin corridor was intended to pressure Armenia into concluding negotiations on the corridor to Nakhchivan. That led another witness to tell us that we were comparing apples and oranges, because Nakhchivan is not a landlocked territory. It’s in direct contact with Turkey, while Nagorno-Karabakh is landlocked territory inside Azerbaijan.

What do you think of this kind of testimony?

[Anahit Harutyunyan]

This corridor rhetoric was brought forward by the Azerbaijani president. He acknowledged that in his annual conference, saying that of course there was no mention in the November 9, 2020 statement about Nakhchivan, the corridor connecting Nakhchivan.

This is something he is bringing forward for the discussions. He is going to pressure Armenia to give him that extraterritorial corridor that will connect western parts of Azerbaijan to Nakhchivan.

Armenia made it very clear right from the beginning, when this issue started to be discussed, that we ruled out any extraterritorial corridor on the territory of the Republic of Armenia. This is the principal position of Armenia. Nothing can change this position. I want to make sure you understand that our position is fully in line with the relevant provisions of the November 9 statement.

The decision on providing a link between the western regions of Azerbaijan and Nakhchivan can be resolved very swiftly. That's why we're on a track where we're discussing the unblocking of all the regional transport routes. We can do it very swiftly, as soon as Azerbaijan admits that all communications should operate under the jurisdiction and legislation of the Republic of Armenia.

I just have one more point, since I have this time to talk about the Nakhchivan corridor. I want to make sure to show you the differences between the Lachin corridor and the connection between Azerbaijan and Nakhchivan.

First of all, Nakhchivan and Nagorno-Karabakh have different needs that exist in very different realities. They don't face the same threats. Nakhchivan, first of all, cannot be blocked by Armenia. Nakhchivan has neighbours, Iran and Turkey. It doesn't face the existential threat coming from Armenia on a daily basis. The Nagorno-Karabakh people do face threats, because Nagorno-Karabakh is surrounded only by Azerbaijan. It's a matter of seconds to blockade it wherever Azerbaijan wants.

Another very important point is that Nakhchivan has a status with being Azerbaijan. It is an autonomous republic through the Treaty of Kars of 1921. Now what Azerbaijan is doing is refusing to accept the status that Nagorno-Karabakh had during the Soviet Union era.... It was the Nagorno-Karabakh autonomous region.

These are the differences that I wanted to talk about between Nagorno-Karabakh's case and of course Nakhchivan.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you.

We now go to Ms. McPherson for two minutes, please.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you again for your testimony, Your Excellency.

We're trying to find ways to protect civilians in the short term as we try to develop a longer-term peace in the region.

What role could EU civilian monitoring play? What roles could NGOs, human rights organizations and other civil society groups play in terms of having a ceasefire, having a peace...right now that would protect civilians as we try to build on a greater, more concrete peace going forward?

[Anahit Harutyunyan]

It's a very important question that you are raising, but it can't be one-sided. We should have Azerbaijan co-operating in everything, but we don't see that. Of course we can pursue the peace; of course we can eliminate the hatred that exists and try to build that desire to have peace and confidence-building towards Azerbaijani people, but we can't do it just on our own. We need a partner; we need a country that is really willing to have peace with its neighbours—that's the problem.

The EU has a lot to do on the ground, and hopefully it will do the same thing in Azerbaijan. Civil society has a lot of work to do. I'm grateful that Canada, through Stéphane Dion's report, is going to support our civil society. This is a very important part of democratic society.

Of course, there's a lot of work to be done, but again, when it comes to the lasting peace and a solution to the problem on the ground with Azerbaijan, I don't see any perspective with the Azerbaijani government.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, that's fine, thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you very much, Ms. McPherson. On that note, everyone's had an opportunity to ask questions.

Allow me to thank you, Madam Ambassador, for having been here and for having shared your insights and your perspectives. We're very grateful that you agreed to appear before us.

Let me also say that we would all like to see an immediate cessation of hostilities and for an enduring and just peace to prevail.

Thank you.

[Anahit Harutyunyan]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

We'll suspend for two minutes before the subcommittee—

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair. You had agreed previously to my request that we spend one minute. I have something to discuss.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

You're absolutely right, yes.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

Madam Clerk, can you confirm that the deadline for making travel requests is indeed February 8?

Then, if we want to travel as a committee, do we need anything other than instruction from the members?

[The Clerk of the Committee, Ms. Ariane Gagné-Frégeau]

A description including the country, length of the trip and number of people is enough.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

Very well.

Mr. Chair, I therefore move that we table a new request to travel to Ukraine. Many parliamentarians in this country, especially those from Europe, have made this trip. The Minister of National Defence was just in Ukraine two weeks ago, and I hope that the situation will allow committee members to make the trip.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Yes, Mr. Bergeron.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Mr. Chair, I can’t tell you how reassured I feel by what Ms. Bendayan just said.

I remind everyone that I wanted to travel to Ukraine for months. I think it’s inconceivable that Canada, which claims to be one of its closest allies, if not Ukraine’s closest ally, be one of the only ones, if not the only one, who has not sent a parliamentary delegation until now. For me, that was an anomaly we needed to correct as quickly as possible.

I find it unacceptable that travelling in Ukraine seems to be considered a privilege of the executive. There is no privilege for the executive here, Mr. Chair. On that level, I can only enthusiastically support the request Ms. Bendayan just made. I dare to hope that this time, we will succeed in finding a way to go to Ukraine to meet our colleagues and, through our very presence, demonstrate our unwavering support for Ukraine during the dark time it’s still experiencing.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you, Mr. Bergeron.

We now go to Mr. Genuis.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, can we move this discussion in camera, just because one of the reasons we're having this discussion is because a trip previously agreed to is not able to go to Ukraine.

I think it would be useful just to bring this portion of the meeting into an in camera discussion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

That's fair enough.

First of all, as I understand it, that's a non-debatable motion. We can talk about it after this meeting is over, but we have a subcommittee meeting slated at 12 o'clock.

Would there be unanimous consent for adoption of that motion?

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Is this to adjourn this?

[Some hon. members]

No, it's to go in camera.