Aliyev’s regime solves the issue of self-preservation and for the sake of it, he can at least repeat the April adventurism. What should Armenia and Artsakh do in this case? A few days ago, in the morning of February 25, the Azerbaijani units again brutally violated the agreed ceasefire regime by trying to sudden the Armenian side and attack in two directions at a time. The unpredictability did not work The factor to sudden did not work and the Armenian troops simply punished the enemy. While in the rear, “clashes” are taking place between individuals of political ambitions but completely ignorant of politics, moreover, it comes the turn of hand-to-hand fighting.
The ruling RPA has put forward the “Security and Progress” campaign motto in a situation where the first one is significantly jeopardized and the second one is missing at all. Indeed, not only compared to the meaningless motto of “Ahead Armenia” in 2008 but generally, this campaign motto should be estimated as equivalent to the situation and arising from the situation. However, as we know, life is more complicated, and it is not a fact that appropriate political moves will be drawn from this motto. The fact is, as life showed, that this “Ahead Armenia” took us to new risks, which could but block the road to progress.
Moreover, the routes to withstand these risks are not even outlined in today’s pursued politics, and it becomes clear that our country has become the hostage to these risks. While the political parties are not discussing these vital issues. Whereas it is also a fact and was proved in the four-day war that this type of policy, this type of diplomacy and this type of course of events leads to a war. It is no secret that war for Aliyev who has a problem of self-preservation and has appointed his wife a vice president can serve as a lifebuoy regardless of the outcome. Yes, the outcome is not important, let us recall: one loss of Khojaly was not forgiven to Mutalibov, a loss of one region was not forgiven to Elchibey, while KGB General Aliyev who has lost five regions became not only a “leader of the nation” but also passed on the power to his “rational” son.
However we just do not need this war. After the meeting in May 2016 in Vienna, the Armenian diplomacy missed the chance to make the political price to resume a war unacceptably high for Azerbaijan by the political way. And missed the chance because it still hasn’t learned to say “No” to Russia, while it was completely possible. Now, when both Baku and Moscow do not hide their endeavor to move the negotiation process from Minsk Group co-chairmanship format to Yerevan-Moscow-Baku tripartite format, it does not happen because Yerevan is not agree to it. This is what should have been done after Vienna and Russia shouldn’t have been allowed to save Aliyev’s skin in St. Petersburg in “separate” format which actually took place
This should have been done after Vienna and not to allow Russia to save Aliyev in St. Petersburg in a “separate” format which actually happened. Later, we were attacked on the border of Armenia in Tavush, and once again on February 25 in Artsakh, and as you can see, the story can be repeated.
RA Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian visited Munich and Moscow in February this year, and it does not matter what happened there but what did not happen: the tripartite Nalbandian-Lavrov-Mammadyarov meeting which Moscow and Baku were dreaming about did not take place. The co-chairs’ visit to the region is expected in the near future, and the most important question is how strong is Yerevan for not to allow the process to enter an impasse like it did last year due to the efforts of Moscow and Baku, and to free Aliyev’s hands for further large-scale operations. The logic hints that the Armenian side is obligated to take measure to enhance the reserve of security and foreign political steadiness.
First of all, to balance Moscow’s pressure, it is a priority to intensify the efforts in the direction of the US, EU, Iran and Georgia, to try doing the best in this reality to diversify our foreign political and foreign economic relations. In the Karabakh settlement process, first, Yerevan should not allow it to deviate from the Vienna agenda. By and large, in the short-run, the key to peacekeeping is there rather than in Russia as some people think or try to present in that way. The provocative and irresponsible statement by Erdogan’s chief adviser Yalçın Topçu that the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict should become an agenda item of all countries of the Islamic world and all Muslims prompts the need for actions yet in another important direction.
Armenia, having established active and friendly relations with a set of Muslim countries must multiply and coordinate the efforts to eliminate the endeavors of Turkish authorities to convey a religious shade to the conflict. The Islamic world, the Christian world … the wording typical to this cave mentality are far from the reality, however, these myths are used as you can see by unfriendly to us and irresponsible regimes to “wrap” their own political interests. Accordingly, Armenia’s interests and motives must be accessible, perceivable and globally acceptable also in the perceptions of Muslim communities.
It is also necessary to understand that the wave of Islamophobia raised in some Western extremist circles is not only unacceptable in general about which the American generals are openly speaking but also directly contradicts to our national interests as our country not to mention the neighboring Georgia is located in a Muslim environment and has developed all the preconditions for good neighborhood for centuries. The events in February as well as the April war last year showed that the army is able to freeze the hotheads of Baku.
However, we cannot leave everything for the army and leave the army face-to-face the fire with a political shortsightedness and then “admire with our hero guys” and glorify the martyrs with a stance of a hero. It is simply immorality. … In 1944, the US Army General George Patton said his subordinate soldiers, “The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his.”
In 1944, the US Army General George Patton said to his subordinate soldiers, “The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his.” In some sense, this principle should be implied to security and foreign policy systems.
In some sense, this principle should be implied to security and foreign policy systems. And it is not necessarily for the Republic of Armenia to always “die” for our “strategic ally’s” incomprehensible and unacceptable interests.