Armenian government publishes Karabakh files; opposition says key documents still hidden

YEREVAN — The Armenian government has released 13 documents related to the Nagorno-Karabakh (Artsakh) negotiation process, including the June 2019 proposal by the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs — long a point of contention among former and current authorities. 

The publication came on Dec. 2, just one day after the formal dissolution of the OSCE Minsk Group, the body that had mediated the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict for over three decades. The timing has drawn attention, as the group’s dismantling aligned with one of President Aliyev’s key preconditions for signing a peace treaty with Armenia: removing the last institutional framework that preserved the conflict’s international status.

The release immediately triggered strong reactions from opposition figures.

Artur Khachatryan, an MP from the “Hayastan Alliance” and a member of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF), sharply criticized the publication, calling it misleading, incomplete and politically motivated. 

“The documents published by Pashinyan allow us to draw several conclusions,” Khachatryan said. “Even a preliminary review shows that any negotiation option included would have been far more favorable to Armenia than the outcome his administration produced.”

He emphasized that the materials contradict Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s repeated claim that international negotiations focused solely on Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity. 

“Familiarize yourself with proposals from 2006 to 2019,” he wrote. “You will see that the right of self-determination for the people of Nagorno-Karabakh was consistently present in all working drafts, including the Lavrov Plan. The documents he published disprove his claims regarding the ‘interim status,’ as well.”

Khachatryan called the release partial and selective, noting omissions of historically significant proposals such as those from the 1990s, the 1997 Russian-Finnish co-chair package and even the 1988 Sakharov-Starovoitova plan. He also accused the government of misrepresenting UN Security Council resolutions. 

“Post-war, Pashinyan presented these resolutions as proof that Nagorno-Karabakh had to remain within Azerbaijan,” he stated. “That is false. UNSC Resolutions 874 and 884 were part of a broader package and did not dictate territorial outcomes. They were aligned with the OSCE Minsk Group’s comprehensive proposals, which included the future determination of Nagorno-Karabakh’s legal status.”

Khachatryan specifically denounced the handling of the 1999 Key West agreement, calling it one of the most critical negotiation documents. “No Key West document has been released,” he said. “Instead, Pashinyan presented a newspaper article from Haykakan Zhamanak, published in 2008 by Levon Ter-Petrosyan’s campaign team, and called it a ‘negotiation document.’ If they didn’t have the document, how could they make judgments about its contents? If they did, why not request copies from the co-chair countries?” 

He added that the 1999 OSCE Istanbul Declaration was also omitted: “In Istanbul, Armenia did not recognize Nagorno-Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan, contrary to what the current administration implies.”

Khachatryan further condemned the selective use of widely known historical excerpts, including from Vladimir Kazimirov’s book. “Anyone familiar with the Nagorno-Karabakh negotiations has long known these proposals. Presenting them now as ‘documents’ is almost a mockery of the historical record,” he said. He concluded, “The publication reveals both the government’s failure to defend Armenia’s position in negotiations and its systematic misrepresentation of facts.

Bagrat Mikoyan, head of the office of former Armenian President Robert Kocharyan, also criticized the government’s recent publication of negotiation documents, calling the compilation misleading and incomplete.

Speaking to NEWS.am, Mikoyan emphasized that several materials included are not official negotiation documents. He pointed to one entry labeled as a “document” that is, in fact, a 2008 newspaper article published by Haykakan Zhamanak and was never part of any formal negotiation.

“Calling this a document is inaccurate,” he remarked. “The Key West negotiation package, which was actually on the table during talks, is missing. Instead, the government included a text that was never formally negotiated or recognized as a negotiation document, published in a newspaper. Prime Minister Pashinyan refers to printed words from 2008 and calls it a document. If he had published the Key West agreement, the myth that Meghri could have been ceded would immediately collapse,” he continued.

Mikoyan also addressed the June 2019 proposal from the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs, which previous Armenian presidents had urged Pashinyan to release. He urged the public to review the original proposal to understand what Pashinyan allegedly rejected, contrasting it with the prime minister’s claims that Nagorno-Karabakh was irrevocably lost to Azerbaijan.

“People can read and see that what we have now — war, casualties, territorial losses and continuous humiliation — was all avoidable. The 2019 paper offered a legitimate negotiation path, unlike the so-called ‘Meghri exchange’ article published in Haykakan Zhamanak,” Mikoyan stated.

Responding to the government’s assertion that there was no viable way to maintain Nagorno-Karabakh under Armenian administration, Mikoyan argued that Pashinyan’s administration consistently ignored concrete solutions outlined in the 2019 proposal:

“They surrendered everything, gave up territory and endured losses, and only then began speculating with ‘what ifs’ about the proposals in that paper. Nothing outlined in the document was implemented and, instead, Pashinyan repeatedly claimed he was negotiating from scratch.”

Mikoyan further criticized the selective nature of the publication, noting that widely known materials such as the Madrid Principles and excerpts from Kazimirov were included, while the Key West negotiation papers — the most consequential documents — remain unpublished.

“If this is how the government negotiates diplomatically, it is no surprise we ended up in the current catastrophic situation,” he said.

Mikoyan concluded that the government’s omission of the Key West documents suggests a deliberate attempt to conceal inconvenient truths.

“The prime minister can debate with himself in the mirror using Haykakan Zhamanak articles, but independent experts say that a newspaper article, no matter how convincing, cannot be treated as an official negotiation document. International partners should ask: Are you mocking us by presenting your invention instead of our proposals? Such audacity has a cost in international relations, and our country is paying it systematically,” Mikoyan warned.

Levon Zurabyan, vice-chair of the Armenian National Congress, claimed the documents validate the opposition’s long-standing position that the 2019 proposal could have ensured peace, unblocking of regional routes and a de facto independent Artsakh. He argued that Pashinyan must now disclose the Armenian government’s official written response, which was not included in the published package.

“Either Pashinyan is hiding Armenia’s official response — which only deepens his culpability — or there was no response at all, revealing a far more alarming reality: that he ignored the proposal, effectively rejecting negotiations and paving the way to disastrous war,” Zurabyan concluded.

Armen Ashotyan, deputy chairman of the Republican Party, called the publication a “major political fiasco” for Pashinyan and said that the documents confirm the existence of a legitimate path preserving Artsakh’s right to self-determination.

He argued that the government’s attempt to invoke the 1996 Lisbon Summit was misleading and irrelevant to the 2019 proposal, calling the current administration’s narrative “false” and “manipulative.”

As debate continues, it remains unclear whether the government will publish the remaining negotiation materials, including the Key West documents.