The Initiative Group for the Return to Western Azerbaijan of the Milli Majlis (Parliament) of Azerbaijan has issued a statement.
The statement reads: “The attempt by Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan to draw a parallel between the question of Western Azerbaijan and the conception of the fictitious ‘Western Armenia’ concept is unacceptable.
The question of Western Azerbaijan is a topic of human rights, one which aims to serve a peaceful, secure and dignified return of the Azerbaijani people subjected to ethnic cleansing to Armenia. The words ‘Western Armenia’, on the other hand, represent a territorial claim that is enshrined in the Constitution and other key documents and political acts of Armenia.
In reality, the Prime Minister should have long ago at least called into question the very notion of ‘Western Armenia’ as well as made declarations about ‘the transition from the mythical Armenia to the real Armenia’. Still, this ought not to happen in prejudice to the right of the people of Western Azerbaijan, who were subjected to an ethnic cleansing, to return to their homes.
It is inadmissible to compare our rights activism with territorial claims. We once again remind that the Western Azerbaijan Community has repeatedly appealed to the Government of Armenia for a dialogue about the issue of the return of the people of Western Azerbaijan in full compliance with international law standards and principles, including those concerning territorial integrity and sovereignty of nations. However, Armenia not only disregarded those appeals but distorted the activities of the Community, calling it a threat to its territorial integrity.
Rather than making such erroneous comparisons, Prime Minister Pashinyan should respond to the appeals of the Community, ensure a safe and dignified return of the Western Azerbaijanis, start work on deleting territorial claims to Azerbaijan and the other neighbouring countries from Armenia’s Constitution and other documents immediately and unconditionally, and put an end to the hazardous militarisation policy.”
