A number of questions to political forces of Armenia
The Karabakh conflict settlement has become a subject of internal political discourse in pre-election Armenia. And it is good. Since Armenia’s entire political field, with small exceptions, attaches great importance to “serious efforts” exerted by Russia, furthermore, it considers that the “key to the solution of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is in the hands of Russia”, and it is worthy for all these political forces answer a number of questions during the pre-election campaign with the same convictions.
Since when did the Russian authorities begin arming Azerbaijan, including the offensive weapons?
Since when did Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev become more and more unruly, blackmail the OSCE Minsk Group and the international community, by adopting a deconstructive stance in Nagorno-Karabakh peace process?
Read also
Why did Aliyev begin unleashing a 4-day war in April?
By whose “OK” or at least in the knowledge of did Aliyev unleash the four-day war in April? Why did Armenia’s strategic-ally Russia not condemned Aliyev for unleashing a war in April?
Why did persistent rumors about the “Lavrov plan” emerge after the April war? Are Armenia’s borders protected? Is Armenia’s security a reliable achievement? Is there no threat of war as those who were justifying the decision to access the EaEU delivered to us many years ago?
Does the CSTO support Armenia in the case of encroachment on the borders of Armenia by Azerbaijan?
Why do the Armenia’s political forces not demand from Armenia’s strategic-ally Russian authorities to stop selling weapons to Azerbaijan if they consider that “the key to the solution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is in the hands of Russia?”
Why is the hope of Azerbaijani and Turkish authorities on Nagorno-Karabakh conflict not the OSCE Minsk Group but Moscow?
Why does Moscow not refute the consistent statements by Turkish and Azerbaijani authorities after the April war that Russia has a separate plan for the settlement or as it is used to say, the “Lavrov” plan?
Why does Armenia’s political field not demand a disclosure of the Russian plan?
Why is Armenia’s political field not interested in the issue why Moscow is discussing the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict with official Ankara, and more specifically, what kind of option is discussed?
Why does Armenia’s political field not interested in the issue why official Ankara and Baku are fascinated by Russian plan, while official Yerevan refutes “Lavrov’s plan”?
Who inspired April-war-unleashed Aliyev to the degree that he now rejects the offers to introduce mechanism for the investigation of border incidents as well as to expand the office of personal representative of the OSCE Chairman-in-Office?
Why does Armenia’s strategic-ally Russia which is also a strategic partner of Azerbaijan not answer the question of why Aliyev is rejecting the offers to introduce a mechanism for the investigation of border incidents as well as to expand the office of personal representative of the OSCE Chairman-in-Office?
Why did Moscow send Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin to Baku on a business trip with the main mission to sign arms deals three months later after some disturbances in Azerbaijan as a result of the demonstration of “Iskanders” in the military parade dedicated to the Independence of Armenia held in Yerevan on September 21?
Raising these questions and getting the sincere responses to them, Armenia’s political forces would have helped Serzh Sargsyan to act from the positions of power in the talks on Nagorno-Karabakh problem. Raising these questions, Armenia’s political forces would have gained the confidence of the public, would be able to increase the probability of appearing in the next parliament relying on their own forces and strengthening Armenia’s positions in the negotiation. In this case, they would not have to please Moscow for receiving several mandates in the next parliament and make judgments have nothing to do with the reality regarding Russia’s role in the peaceful settlement of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
EMMA GABRIELYAN
