Manvel Sargsyan sees our problems in our political philosophy
“Nothing has been changed, the international situation changed which led and showed the insolvency of our approach,” said the Director of the Armenian Center for Strategic and National Studies, Manvel Sargsyan, in an interview with “Aravot”.
In 1992-1995, he was the resident representative of NKR in Armenia and in 1992-1995, participated in the negotiations for the settlement of the conflict. “Aravot” daily was interested to know his opinion about the changes in the talks since the emergence of the NKR conflict, why the winning side is constantly talking about concessions during the negotiations, and on the other hand, the requirements of the loser and constantly attacker in the negotiation process seems to be more emphasized. “Today, people are trying to talk about concessions, raising the question of territories whether to yield or concede. In other words, it seems to people that by a concession of the territories, the problems will be resolved. Do not understand why because it has never been a condition for Azerbaijan to solve the problem for 25 years. They have never said anything like that. They have said, give the territories back to us, then we will talk with you about other things. But there are people who until now think that they can concede some things. They see the solution of the issue in concession. They are convinced that the politics is a kind of trade, they need to trade, and definitely they must concede something,” said Mr. Sargsyan, noting that those who create politics in the country actually absolutely have no idea what the politics, “They have no clue about the force of law and the politics is generally a struggle for the rights.
You must formulate your rights and demands to be reconsidered,” says Mr. Sargsyan and brings the example of Azerbaijan. – Azerbaijan has once already formulated its rights, saying the world that they offer Armenia to isolate, forcing it by means of pressure or force to return their territory, they cannot do it, they will do it by force. They say, because you have given this right to us under Article 51 of the UN Charter to use legal weapon, this right was also given to Azerbaijan by the Republic of Armenia in 1991, and it is not changed, not a single word is added to this text until today.”
Read also
Manvel Sargsyan also mentions the inactiveness of the political leadership of Armenia and says that they do not try to express any posture on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, “What is Karabakh for the Republic of Armenia as a political matter? No one has formulated it,” says the political analyst. Referring again to the talks about concessions, he emphasizes that Azerbaijan has never talked about concessions, it demands “its territories”, this word is only used by the winner in the war. “Nagorno-Karabakh must be clarified for us. At least one country, the UN, the OSCE member Armenia should recognize Nagorno-Karabakh so that the world would believe us. They cannot do it too. They say, as soon as we recognize, there is going to be a fight as if now it is not a fight going on. They say that it is going to be a great fight. No politics can survive with this psychology. If our political class does not free itself from these complexes, no politics will ever help us.”
According to the political analyst, our complexity of not standing for our rights is displayed everywhere, “Our military ally is selling weapons, inciting war against us, our enemy has forbidden our ally to give us arms, they send a note and it does not give us weapons. No diplomacy can help us as long as our nation does not have belief in defending our rights. We do not believe that it is possible to stand up for the rights. We say, let us find a sponsor to keep us. What should the diplomacy do if the Karabakh parliament is afraid to voice the word “independence”?” The political analyst is concerned that like 25 years ago and in these years, so as in the future, the country’s political philosophy will not be changed. “During the war, a thousand and one things were announced, the war ended, as if nothing has happened and will never happen. The same situation is now, nothing has been changed, – he says and then adds, – “Now, maybe there are things that are changing. This war puts some things under suspicion. Some fundamental convictions changed in every layer and every degree. As to what to change, they do not make it clear yet.”
Hripsime HOVHANNISYAN, “Aravot” daily
