According to French political analyst Gaidz Minasyan, both Armenia’s government and opposition forces must state that it is no longer possible to continue this way.
– After the Azerbaijani aggression in April, the possibility of recognition of Nagorno-Karabakh’s independence is widely considered. The RA authorities announce that if Azerbaijan resorts to military aggression again, Armenia will recognize Nagorno-Karabakh. What does this give to the Armenian side and whether it will prevent another aggression by Azerbaijan?
– Apparently, both way lead us to war. The process began since 1992, the negotiations were underway for 24 years, but we saw they ended – with a four-day war in April. The other process is directly the recognition of Karabakh’s independence, and it is likely that it will cause Azerbaijan’s anger, and it will apply to a new attack. In this sense, war is possible. If both ways lead to war, which is the better option, if this is the reality: to go to war without Karabakh’s recognition or to go to war with the recognition of Karabakh’s independence. In other words, to go to war on one knee or go to war on foot.
– And perhaps, the return of Nagorno-Karabakh to the negotiating table is a much more secure option, and maybe it would further reduce the likelihood of war if of course Azerbaijan agrees to negotiate with Karabakh. Nagorno-Karabakh signed the ceasefire agreement in 1994 as a party, hasn’t it? Therewith, Azerbaijan has affixed Karabakh as a party.
Read also
– Here, we first need to consider what happened in the course of 24-25 years. Karabakh should be recognized from the outset, and the main station was May 1994. At that time, it was very easy to recognize Karabakh’s independence. Why? Because at that time Azerbaijan was extremely weak and defeated, Russia was also weak. But we did not recognize, and Levon Ter-Petrosyan bears the responsibility on this. If the winning Armenian side had recognized, then Azerbaijan would not start a war, and we could do a lot during these 22 years for the international community to recognize the independence of NKR. Next, Robert Kocharian came to power, again, he did not do anything for Karabakh, neither in Armenia not in the Diaspora. He considered that the Karabakh issue is over, we won the war and Azerbaijan cannot war again.
Serzh Sargsyan, who was a part of Robert Kocharyan’s and Levon Ter-Petrosyan’s power, began making small steps since 2008 in the direction of Karabakh conflict. Seven US states have recognized the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, Uruguay is ready to recognize Karabakh’s independence, but I do not know what we did that it does not recognize. Some states could recognize the independence of Nagorno-Karabakh, such as Cyprus, Greece but did not do a particular work in this direction. Therefore, we must learn lessons from these 25 years. Today, it is a matter of dignity for us. Do we have the right to live in a free country or not? Do we have the right to win the war or not? We as a nation if we are united and consolidated around this idea, indeed, a lot can change. For example, the fight against corruption. It’s not only by words. The fight against corruption has become a security issue, if a real fight is conducted, the state will become strong but when the state becomes strong, the army will be strong too. This is very simple. Next, since a national outbreak is revived now, we need to use all the capabilities, both in Armenia and in the Diaspora. The way we have a powerful national army, so as we need to have a powerful national diplomacy, economy and so on. Thirdly, Armenia’s military-political value must be increased. In this sense, Serzh Sargsyan’s statement was true that if Azerbaijan starts a war again, Armenia will recognize the independence of NKR and therewith, Armenia’s military-political value was increased. In other words, Armenia’s society should come out of the post-Soviet identity, as a state, we must come out of the post-Soviet status as well as the Diaspora should revive. The most important issue today is the independence of Karabakh, the genocide recognition, in my opinion, is secondary, but it is also connected to Karabakh. We must show Russia, Europe and the United States that we have to recognize Karabakh’s independence because if we do not do it, it would be genocide. Genocide has already occurred in our history; it is impossible to allow it again.
– Mr. Minasyan, however, the OSCE Minsk Group co-chair countries, the international community urge Armenia and Azerbaijan to continue negotiations. Can Armenia resist the calls of the international community and not to go to negotiations for a long time?
– Serzh Sargsyan’s statements with regard to pointing out the responsible for the created situation was also a right move. It was also a question of responsibility of the international community. We cannot endlessly say, come to the negotiation table, it is no longer enough, we saw the result. Serzh Sargsyan said this because if no one says Azerbaijan that it is enough, be sure that tomorrow, a month later, two months later or I do not know when, Azerbaijan will resort to aggression again because no one gave a diplomatic slap at official Baku. If Azerbaijan does not feel pressure on itself, it will continue the same policy. In this regard, S. Sargsyan’s statement was remarkable, these preconditions were mostly addressed to the international community rather than to Azerbaijan. The international community, the OSCE Minsk Group co-chair countries are reluctant for the Karabakh conflict resolution to become a priority. For the US, Russia and Europe, priority is Syria, Ukraine rather than the Caucasus, especially now when Iran has become a player in the international arena. The four-day war did give anything to Azerbaijan and Armenia, it gave us one thing – it awakened and sobered us all. I do not know what will be the situation of Azerbaijan one year later, but the four-day war at least awakened Armenia. Certainly, the authorities of Armenia, both opposition and non-opposition forces, must affirm that it is impossible to continue like this anymore. Serzh Sargsyan with his recommended conditions perhaps wants to show the international community and the society of Armenia that the earlier situation has been changed, they are facing new challenges, we need to enter in the way that we have visualized and we can implement it as the Karabakh issue is not a priority for the international community.
– On the four-day war, it became evident that Russia comes up with a separate mediation mission, Russian officials visited Yerevan and Baku. What is your impression about the role of Russia? What game does it lead in the NK settlement process?
– The four-day war showed Russia’s weakness. It is evident that Russia did not know how to act: on the one side, it is its partner Azerbaijan, on the other side, its ally Armenia.
– In other words, do you think that the attack by Azerbaijan was a surprise for Russia?
– I think, yes, it was a surprise. It was beneficial for Russia to proceed the negotiations like usual and the situation is maintained like before early April. But war broke out through Azerbaijan and Turkey. As there are fight and contradiction between Erdoğan and Putin, Erdoğan wanted to prove that the Caucasus does not belong to Russia. Russia appeared in an unexpected situation, it did not know what to do. Medvedev and Lavrov came/went to Yerevan and Baku, but nothing happened. Russia was seeking to end the war, but now this important question for Russia is as follows: what to do that Turkey will not interfere. Therefore, they initiated the affirmation of the ceasefire but the risk still maintains, it is uncertainty, no one knows what to expect, including Russians. In general, the following question should be referred to Russian officials: what is Russia for you as a state, and what does an ally mean for you? If you are as such, I am sorry, but it is a stupid posture. I will bring an example, Lavrov said that Assad is not Russia’s ally, but they help him with weapons. Armenia is Russia’s ally but does Russia help Armenia …
– And do you think it accidental that in an interview with Bloomberg, at this stage, Serzh Sargsyan spoke on the deployment of Russian peacekeepers, noting that currently he does not see any such possibility?
– There are doubts and contradictions in Russia’s domestic life, they realize their own mistakes, their hyper-valuation and responsibility in different problems. I think Serzh Sargsyan did right, showing that Armenia is a sovereign state. This statement proves the fact that Serzh Sargsyan realized that Armenia should increase its military-political significance not to appear in a more difficult situation.
– Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu leaves the post of the leader of “Justice and Development” party, which means that Turkey will soon have a new prime minister. What can his withdrawal change? Where does Erdoğan lead the country, a more radical Turkey?
– Davutoğlu’s presence in the power symbolized the connection between Turkey and Europe, the connection with the intellectual; he was symbolizing a bit “temperance,” with the exception, of course, its posture on the Karabakh conflict. After the withdrawal of Davutoglu, Turkey will display a more radical stance while Erdoğan will lead Turkey to a more authoritarian governance, in other words, it is likely that he will make this country not entirely but a tyrannical state. Erdoğan’s power will grow but will be isolated. I do not expect news from Turkey regarding the relations with Armenia.
EMMA GABRIELYAN “Aravot” daily
I was never asleep, I always knew the azeries were savages