Since the existence of the third Republic of Armenia, there are rumors that “they are handing Karabakh.” Incidentally, those who inform this “news” in the last 25 years are talking with such a confidence as if they had seen the document, under which Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh are going to put their “traitor” signature underneath this document in the near future. “That’s it, everything is decided, it is handed and period,” they say. Mostly, the gossips are about the first president of Armenia, and the absurd gossip became a ground for a palace coup. But the rumors about “handing” are not stopped since then.
Any event can be a ground for such allegations. For example, Russian foreign minister’s visit to Armenia. Indeed, what else could Lavrov come to Armenia if not agreeing on the document to “sell Karabakh”? Or, the constitutional amendments. It appears that the Constitution is amended for handing Karabakh. It’s true, the opposite side’s argument is equally absurd, we amend the Constitution for never handing Artsakh.
Karabakh issue, in my opinion, in essence, has nothing to do the Constitution of Armenia nor with its amendment or non-amendment, nor with the domestic political fight. But the question is that various camps are trying to use this issue over 25 years. The authorities are saying, as long as it is a Karabakh issue, do not say anything bad about us. The opposition is saying, as long as the government wants to hand Karabakh, it should leave. I think it is time, to put it mildly, not to touch upon this issue at the simplistic level.
It is ridiculous when a Russian or American expert’s, publicist’s or politician’s article is viewed as a document that should be signed tomorrow or the day after tomorrow. Such articles have similar “power of evidence” as much as my article. I have already had the chance to write that any opinion should be perceived as an opinion, with which one can agree or disagree, not more.
Read also
And here’s my subjective opinion that it makes no sense to seriously negotiate with modern Azerbaijan on Karabakh settlement issue. If someone constantly attacks you and promises every other day to destroy you, so whether it is ready to negotiate with you. When it would be possible to reach an agreement with Azerbaijan on relieving the situation on the borders, only then it will be possible to speak about the rest. Or else, suppose it is written in an agreement, “Azerbaijan is committed to”, “Azerbaijan guarantees.” How many pennies will this piece of a paper cost? Talaat also guaranteed too much.
Aram ABRAHAMYAN
