Kevorkov was blasted by his kinsmen again when his interview came out in 1977 in the sixth issue of Problems of Peace and Socialism, a periodical published in Prague and disseminated in 32 languages across 145 countries of the globe. The authors of the interview titled "We Have Seen the Brotherhood of Nations", Member of Indian Communist Party National Council Sarada Mitra and Member of Iraqi Communist Party Central Committee Adel Haba visited the Azerbaijan SSR at the invitation of CPSU Central Committee in order to look at the development of interethnic relations. They met Kevorkov in NKAO and asked him why Nagorno-Karabakh sat within the Azerbaijan SSR and not the Armenian SSR, if it was separated from the latter with only a narrow strip of land.
To that Kevorkov replied: "Although our autonomous region is close to the Armenian Union republic, they are separated by high mountains. Nagorno-Karabakh's Armenians chose statehood as part of Azerbaijan, and did it on their own volition. The region has prospered within Azerbaijan… Only nationalists could say: "I would rather live poorly but associated with Armenia." 
As soon as this magazine fell into the hands of writer Sero Khanzadyan, he wrote an open letter to Leonid Brezhnev. The timing was selected perfectly, as they could one more time remind the central government about transferring Nagorno-Karabakh to Armenia just on the eve of enactment of the new USSR Constitution.
In the beginning of his letter, Khanzadyan revisited the March 1975 Plenum of Nagorno-Karabakh Regional Committee and denounced Kevorkov's speech as an attempt to "defame successes and achievements of socialist Armenia". Going into details on Kevorkov's statement that "Nagorno-Karabakh's Armenians chose statehood as part of Azerbaijan, and did it on their own volition", he branded it "an injustice that has to be addressed".
In the conclusion, he wrote: "Dear Leonid Ilyich, It is not the first time when the unresolved Karabakh issue stands in the way of deepening friendship between the two nations. Our only hope is that you finally put an end to this issue, which has been the injustice incarnate for over half a century. Sitting within our unified and powerful state, the historically Armenian region with the Armenian population over 80% of the total count and Armenian schools does belong with the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic. A fair resolution of this issue will be viewed by people around the world as a new triumph of Lenin's national policy.
First Secretary of Armenian Communist Party Karen Demirchyan was in a lot of hot water because of his bold litterateur, and Azerbaijan did not succumb to Armenian provocation..
In 1975, famous writer Marietta Shaginyan arrived in Baku to participate in the Days of Soviet Literature. She had been heavily criticized back in 40s and even had to apologize to M.J. Baghirov-led government of Azerbaijan for slandering the Azerbaijani population of Karabakh in the book Soviet Transcaucasia
, which was published by Yerevan (Irevan)-based Armengiz Publishing House in 1946; in this book, she ascribed backwoods mentality and savagery to our people, and trampled with facts from Azerbaijan's history and culture.
After stopping in Kirovabad (Ganja) and NKAO and meeting local Armenian community, she headed to Baku and was received by Heydar Aliyev. Sharing her observations during the meeting, she had to admit that Armenians lived extremely well in Azerbaijan. She still pointed out that some Armenians harbored ideas of transferring NKAO to Armenia. 
In 1977, the preparation for adoption of the third USSR Constitution (branded by historians "Brezhnev's Constitution") was at a full swing; on the eve of this event, Armenians traditionally flooded Moscow with petitions, demanding Karabakh be incorporated with Armenia.
A letter was forwarded to the Constitutional Commission on 5 July 1977, signed by the famous Armenian writer Silva Kaputikyan, former NKAO Regional Committee Secretary T. Grigoryan, Professor G. Yepiskoposov, retired USSR official S. Аkopyan et al., which one more time raised the issue of transferring NKAO and Nakhchivan ASSR to Armenia.
In the first few sentences, the authors played with historical facts and indulged in wishful thinking to justify the revision of borders between Armenia and Azerbaijan. They tried to convince the Soviet leadership that these borders had been established during the reign of nationalist forces in the both republics (1918-1920) and were a direct consequence of interethnic wars and massacres, aggravated by "invasion of Transcaucasia by German-Turkish imperialists". They once again manipulated figures to play the "Armenian genocide in Turkey and Azerbaijan" card. Presenting such unilateral information, it was their intention to display Armenians as the only victims of ethnic clashes, with their lands "taken away by Azerbaijanis".
Distorting historical facts, authors attempted to prove that "ancient Armenian territories", that is, Nakhchivan and Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as Dashkasan, Shamkir, Gadabay, Khanlar, and Shaumyan (now Goranboy district of Azerbaijan) districts "had been occupied by Turkish forces and ceded to Azerbaijan".
Nor could the authors be unaware of that fact that it had been unresolved border disputes that caused bloody wars between the two states; the war only ended when Soviet power was established in Azerbaijan and Armenia in 1920. The Soviet government effectively froze these conflicts by setting up autonomous entities in Nakhchivan and Nagorno-Karabakh.
The authors provided the text of 1 December 1920 Baksovet Declaration, which, in their view, was effectively representing the Bolshevik program towards the resolution of land disputes between Armenia and Azerbaijan. This Declaration suggested ceding Zangezur and Nakhchivan to Armenia and granting Nagorno-Karabakh the right to self-determination. As far as Nakhchivan was concerned, the authors said, Turkey was the mastermind behind the failure of this program. The Nakhchivan issue was eventually resolved based on the Soviet-Turkish Treaty of Brotherhood. As to Nagorno-Karabakh, the authors wrote Armenians were not allowed to exercise their right to self-determination.
For some reason, the letter did not specify who prevented Armenians from exercising this right. For then they had no way but to admit that the Nagorno-Karabakh Armenian autonomy issue had been resolved on the operating level by Moscow emissaries to Caucasus, Ordzhonikidze and Kirov, and not by some "Turkish-German imperialists and Musavatist nationalists." It had been but Moscow that played a decisive role in a final determination of borders both between Armenia and Azerbaijan and between these republics and Turkey.
The main reason why Nagorno-Karabakh should have been ceded to Armenia, the letter went on, was about Azerbaijan's leadership allegedly obstructing economic and social development of the region's Armenian community, plus the lack of usable lands for economic development and accommodation of migrants in Armenia proper.
The authors manipulated with the outcomes of 1926 and 1970 censuses, while deliberately skipping over objective causes of demographic processes underway in NKAO, that is, reduction of Armenian population and increase of its Azerbaijani counterpart. They lamented that the same situation was observed in other Armenian-populated regions of Azerbaijan, especially in Baku and Kirovabad (Ganja). Armenians, they wrote, were stripped of their right to education in mother tongue, of their theater, and so on.
They one more time glorified the "eternal bonds of friendship between Armenian and Russian people", recalling Armenian contribution to Russia's triumphs in Russo-Persian and Russo-Turkish wars and in the Great Patriotic War. The authors made a conclusion that Armenian nation had the exclusive right to have its interests and hopes be regarded alongside its legit intention to preserve its historical, material, and spiritual values, as well as to unification with regions allegedly taken away from Armenia by Turkish invasions and Azerbaijani Musavatists.
They cynically suggested Azerbaijan yield a part of its historical territories for the sake of "brotherly interests", making a point that Azerbaijan would not suffer at all in the process. Comparing the territories and populations of the two republics, they showed Azerbaijan's superiority and called upon the USSR government to satisfy Armenia's territorial claims as the latter had always lacked usable lands for economic development and accommodation of migrants.
Concluding the letter, the authors tried to prove that revision of borders between Armenia and Azerbaijan would be in line with principles of democracy, construction of a communist society, and the genuine friendship of nations. They therefore suggested making the respective amendments to the USSR Constitution and considering incorporation of both Nakhchivan ASSR and NKAO in Armenia.
In a short memo attached to the 22 July 1977 message, Head of CPSU CC Organization Work Division's Sector A. Sannikov reported that Organization Work Division Instructor Gromyko had talked on this issue with one of the authors, S. Akopyan; the letter was reported on 11 August 1977 to CPSU CC Secretary Ivan Kapitonov.