Insult as a style of Armenian diplomacy

The cross fire between Azerbaijani and Armenian diplomats has become common through the past years. It is logical that the statements of one party and counter-statements of the other relate to the ways of the resolution of Nagorno Karabakh conflict. At the same time, each party, referring to international documents, try to interpret them in favor of its position.

Naturally, each party should try to make its arguments more weighty and reflect the demands of the international acts. But it seems that arguments of the Armenian diplomacy are being exhausted and instead of professional diplomatic reaction they prefer insults and statements, falling beyond the frames of diplomatic ethics.

The recent verbal counteraction between spokesmen of Azerbaijan and Armenia regarding interpretation of the points of Helsinki final act of 1975 did not become an exception. Frankly speaking, the analysis of this document by the Armenian side can hardly be called an interpretation as the statement of the opposite side was aimed just to humiliate spokesman for Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry Khazar Ibrahim than to give the clear interpretation to the paragraphs of the Helsinki final act.

It should be noted that Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandyan said to Armenian reporters that the talks on the resolution of Nagorno Karabakh conflict are based on paragraphs 2, 4 and 8 of the Helsinki final act of 1975, according to which the conflicts should be settled peacefully on the basis of self-determination and territorial integrity. Spokesman for Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry Khazar Ibrahim in turn said that this is an astonishing cynicism or incomprehension of the Armenian Foreign Minister. Speaking on the paragraphs of the Helsinki final act, referred to by the Armenian Foreign Minister, Kh.Ibrahim noted that by his words Edward Nalbandyan proves the correctness of Azerbaijan's position and complete inconsistency of Armenia's actions with the said points.

Kh.Ibrahim's words were commented by spokesman for Armenian Foreign Minister Tigran Balayan, who accused him of tactlessness and ignorance.

Insulting is a "wonderful" reaction for a diplomat, attempting to represent his country on the international arena and being spokesman for the Armenian external policy, in place of an argumented response on the Helsinki final act.

Though, the response of the spokesman for the Armenian Foreign Ministry should not be a surprise considering the style of the activity of this country's Foreign Ministry through the past years. It should be reminded that previous spokesman for the Armenian Foreign Ministry Karapetyan was constantly insulting the Foreign Ministry of Azerbaijan and Khazar Ibrahim personally, while some time later he made identical statements addressed to his leadership and demonstratively quited the Ministry. Now Balayan has started his career in the same direction.

It seems that the point is not the personalities of the spokesmen of Armenian Foreign Ministry but the essence of the Armenian external policy, when spokesmen are made to voice such statements, thus, showing them up in the public and making them lose trust to their leadership. The style can not be changed: Armenian diplomacy conducts talks the way it treats its staff.

/Day.Az/