Interview of Serzh Sargsyan to “Armnews TV” (Part 2)
Third President of the Republic of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan gave an interview to ArmNews TV channel, referring to Negotiation process for the settlement of the conflict of the Nagorno-Karabakh, the diplomatic and military-political failures of the Republic of Armenia in the recent Artsakh war, the reasons and consequences of the capitulation, the way out of the current situation and future programs.
– There is one question, Mr. President, which you must answer in person. We are now talking about a war, which is more or less a diplomatic process, we discussed its defeat with you. After the end of the war, when Ali visited the occupied territories, he said that he had defeated not the army of the incumbent Prime Minister and him, but you, Robert Kocharyan, your army and Robert Kocharyan, did you lose? Did the army you created lose?
– I am sure that Aliyev always dreamed of defeating us, his dream did not come true, we defeated Aliyev’s father in the 90s, in 2016 Aliyev actually lost to me, Aliyev lost to me in the whole negotiation process from 2008 to 2018, I am convinced that he had an insatiable urge to win me over. Aliyev is not completely satisfied spiritually, he knows who won, how he won that victory.
– Does he know that this is not the final victory for him?
– Aliyev did not defeat the Armenian army, Aliyev did not win Armenian people, Aliyev defeated the apical authorities, neither the Armenian army nor the Armenian people capitulated, the RA Prime Minister capitulated with his team and he secretly from his team. Aliyev is right in some respects, yes, Robert Kocharyan and I, many other people, numerous generals, officers played a big role in the creation of the Armenian army. What role did the Capitulator play? In that sense, maybe Aliyev is right, but if we approach from Aliyev’s point of view, it means that this Capitulator was defeated by Elchibey, it is illogical what he said.
– Mr. President, let us discuss the issue of armaments, there is a lot of talk about that. The government talks about it a lot. When the war started, this government was in power for 2.5 years; objectively, it could not acquire large volumes of weapons, operate, serve and maintain them. Do you accept that in your time we could have been armed with much more technological weapons, to be better prepared for this war?
– No, I cannot deny it, because the more we have, the better, but I deny the stupid thesis that until 2018 our army was not efficient, did not have weapons, etc., the soldier did not eat strawberries. If we did not have an army, then, as we can say during the April 2016 war, we forced Azerbaijan to establish a ceasefire, but if we did not have an army at all, you had nothing, why before 2016, 2017 and 2018? Azerbaijan did not start a war. They do not correspond to the reality, the following corresponds to the reality that we have never had much more modern weapons than Azerbaijan: not in 92-94, not in 2016, not in 2020, but in the first two cases it did not prevent us from winning, because “devotees, knowledgeable people dealt with the issue,” people were fully committed to that work.
– Mr. President, I must now say the opposite of what you said, which is quite common. The fact that the army has been robbed in the last two decades, as we have all been robbed, the soldier has been robbed of bread. The soldier was half-starved. The money that was supposed to be spent on armaments, say, castles were built in the Monument, you have probably heard, the castles of the Monument were to be our drones.
By the way, this is a very important episode about drones. The most important weapons of this war were the drones. Why were not enough drones produced or bought during your presidency?
– I will answer that question a little differently. Various former officials have spoken about it in the press. So, after the April War, we were busy investigating the lessons of the April War, because any reform in the army, any acquisition of new weapons must be conditioned by the outcome of hostilities, the weapons and innovation used by your adversary. And we approved two documents for 2018-2024: Document number 1: Armed Forces Development Plan, consisting of 169 points, what we should do, what changes we should make in the Armed Forces, what weapons we should develop and what we should get as a result. Based on that document, we developed a military equipment acquisition plan.
USD 1 billion 300 million was provided for the plan, the sources of those funds were clearly available, 100 million were on credit each year, 100 million other budget funds. More than half was planned for 2018-2020 with more than USD 500 million out of USD 1 billion 300 million earmarked for the development and acquisition of aviation, air defense and unmanned aerial vehicles. Let me tell you a number: it was planned to purchase 2500 unmanned aerial vehicles by 2024.
– Mr. President, can you tell the supplying countries?
– I do not consider it expedient, but if there is an urgent need, I will say it once.
– Were those deals not made later?
– No, moreover, for 2018-2020 it was planned to purchase more than 1000 unmanned aerial vehicles, moreover, these devices were killers, reconnaissance devices; they would be able to operate within a radius of 5-150 km from the agreed cost. But, unfortunately, you do not know why, perhaps due to the character of the Armenian official, that I came to change something, because the former did not understand well, they changed the whole plan. I must honestly admit that I am not aware of any changes that have been made, but I say that it has definitely changed. The Tor complexes procurement plan, which was envisaged in three batches, was received by the Republic of Armenia only in one batch, under the contract we signed.
– But we bought a SU-30; we did not have fighter jets.
– Did you buy it and use it later? Buying weapons is also an art, you know. You just can’t aim to do PR with it, to solve political issues, thinking that the former brought Iskander, we bring SU-30, the former bring weapons of the 80s, and we bring a new SU-30 : How many times did the SU-30 fly, yes, it flew once during the Tavush border incident, and … they just say everything, it flew with such an incompetent horse that I had to ask one of my colleagues to call the Ministry of Defense will say, do not do that stupid thing, we see that the plane flies without weapons, where do you fly without weapons? I did not see any weapons on the plane; afterwards the military said there were no weapons. They once tried to justify that this is a very difficult thing, it takes a lot of time to use that complicated thing, etc. I am confident in saying this as I did not learn whether we used a drone or not, whether we used it effectively.
– In other words, did the project change as a result of a political decision?
– I cannot say, maybe the initiative came from the General Staff at that time, when a change has already taken place.
– But the military understood what we needed.
– Of course, the military understood, but in many cases, I must say in a good way, there is a struggle among the military as to which armament should be increased. It is a competition, that is, the artilleryman who wants to have modern artillery, the pilot wants to have new modern planes, and so on. There is always a desire, but it is necessary to assess the very sober state, to observe the basic rules of purchasing weapons and ammunition. The initiative should come from within, from the General Staff departments, which will take into account the demands of the troops, the completeness of the means more suitable for the military arena and restraining the enemy, then, in case of large ammunition, it should get flesh and blood in the General Staff
– Understand what we need in a tight budget.
– Yes, if we had the opportunity to acquire fighter jets, reconnaissance aircraft, a large number of large-caliber weapons, the most modern means of air defense, etc., but when the contents of your pocket do not allow you to enjoy, you should to choose the most important, the vital, not the demonstrative.
– Mr. President, in connection with the arms trade, the Prime Minister has never accused you, claiming that you bought non-firearms. Let me quote it: “You have a case, people, Serzh Sargsyan’s government has given USD 42 million and bought a weapon, and that weapon does not work, it is not useful for anything, just scrap metal. They gave USD 42 million, it is useless, it is not a weapon, now a criminal case has been initiated, let Serzh Sargsyan come, give the answer to this, I say, you have no choice, you will bring it, it will be hot. The Investigative Committee has not issued any statement in this regard, what is it about, what weapon is this?
– You know, the statement follows that if I had been as guilty as a grain of wheat, I would have been somewhere else a long time ago; can you imagine what actions they would have taken?
– Were you not invited to the Investigative Committee?
– No, of course not, what should I have had to do with it? Besides, is Serzh Sargsyan signing a contract to buy weapons? This is one, second, what are those people arrested who were directly involved in acquiring that equipment, a whole year has passed, where is it? I ask in surprise, then he asks me, what are you surprised about? Each time this database of lies is released in such a large amount, people are fooled and try to force the law enforcement agencies to turn their intentions into a criminal case. Of course, I know what «Repellent» and «Autobasa» systems are all about. A criminal case has been filed for a long time, some people have been interrogated, but no one asked me any question yet.
– But your name is mentioned here.
– Well, he attributes everything to me, talks, tells stories, then what happens as a result? Of course, he has a great desire to find some gross mistake, to confirm, to find some corruption cases, etc. The man said, right? My family is the most corrupt family in the world, then this, to convince him that my call my relatives, my relatives, my children to justice. That is, what is it, to force assumptions to come true, that is; there is no other way to remove evil?
– Due to our insufficient preparedness for the war, there is a widespread nature that along the Artsakh border, except for the front line, we did not have deep echelon defense, there were no second or third defensive lines, moreover, you accuse the Lavrov or Kazan plan In order to implement it, you deliberately did not allow deep echelon defense in Artsakh, that is why it was possible to cross the front line in the southern direction and go deeper in the rear.
– But who puts forward such theses? Who is aware, has gone, seen, we have, we do not have, who are they, who have fled, who have lost, whose units went down, as the people say? Was there anyone who said that he saw? I do not say he did not see a trench, but who saw the whole picture, did the capitulator see, does he understand anything from that? This does not correspond to reality, we had the second, third lines of the army defense, our defense plan clearly states which units should occupy which positions in which case.
– Were they occupied in this war?
– Unfortunately, no, not because there were unnecessary interferences in the management of the war, by unnecessary, inappropriate, incompetent people.
– Do you mean the Prime Minister’s wife?
– I have nothing to do with women. I mean others. In other words, is the one who proclaimed himself the supreme chief archivist so competent that he could have done it?
– Well, at least he did not stay at the command post for that long.
– It is not long, but the famous operation that caused the whole capitulation was personally heard and approved by him.
– Are you talking about Lala Tepe operation?
– At least the name of the operation was not Lala Tepe, but it is about that operation.
– The task was to bring that height back at all costs, is that correct?
– Every time you were forced to make a breakthrough in hostilities, it is inadmissible, making a breakthrough is not a direct unprepared counterattack, in order to make a breakthrough you may be able to capture comfortable areas with the help of reserve forces, meet your retreating troops so that they can support them: losses of weapons, ammunition, etc., and with those fresh forces you will be able to stop the enemy, after which you can already think about organizing a counterattack operation. But no, they thought, look, look, go, blockade the Azerbaijani units that have already deepened, use the light of our eyes, our reserve, our best brigades, after which the head of the Defense Army was deprived of any reserve force. :
– What stage of the war are you talking about?
– I am talking about the beginning of October.
– In other words, inadmissible mistakes have been made since then.
– The inadmissible mistakes started from the end of September, from the first day of the war, they continued for a very long time, that is, why people had the right to think that it was a conspiratorial war, that it was a conspiracy.
– They also attribute it to you; they say it is the former government. Do you remember how many times the Prime Minister said that the former government would try to unleash a conspiratorial war and that during the war they allegedly told the troops that the lands had already been sold?
– But please, do not cite the words of that liar, because that lie was denied by Colonel Hambardzumyan who worked as Director of the National Security Service. He said that he had received an instruction from the Prime Minister to investigate, it turned out to be the complete opposite, and I should deny it or not. In other words, why should we have declared a conspiratorial war or not? In other words, when a person makes some baseless statements, he is guided by the principle of what he would do in such a case. Yes, they were conspirators in 2016, when they spread rumors that the army was eating grass, fighting with a shovel, and so on and so forth. They did it, didn’t they? Did any of us say anything in public for 44 days, they were making assumptions, spreading them, and unfortunately, they did not deny it?
– Mr. President, but they ultimately denied it; they admitted that there was no fight with shovels.
– But after how long? But that denial was not worth a penny, because by setting up the April Commission of Inquiry, they started the next stage of dismantling the army. How could such a commission be set up, how could hundreds of officers, soldiers be invited there and how could the army be destroyed with it, the word to destroy is not, perhaps, to take a brick out of a wall.
– Mr. President, why did you go? Colonel-General Yuri Khachaturov did not go; he refused, why did you go?
– I had to go, first of all, to defend the honor of the heroes of the April war, so who should have defended? I went to defend, I went to tell the members of that commission what the war is in general, how we acted. I went to explain to those people, I tried to convince them that it was pointless, do not do that, what should I do, avoid, I could not avoid. I repeat, this was the next stage in defeating the army.
– Mr. President, you spoke about the presence of incompetent people at the command post, please tell us about your visit to Artsakh during the war. Who did you meet? The second president said that the president of Artsakh did not receive him. I am sure you tried to meet him, did you meet?
– No, I did not meet. I went to Artsakh with some 5-6 people. I asked Bako Sahakyan to convey my request to the Artsakh President to receive me for a few minutes. On the first day Bako Sahakyan said that the Artsakh President was not in Stepanakert, he was at a frontline position, at the end of the second day he told me that he could not receive you for reasons known to you, I had only two goals. Explain to Arayik Harutyunyan that this war is heading towards defeat and all efforts should be made to stop the war; secondly, ask him how I can support Artsakh, the army, the economy, etc.
I was ready to do any work, but when the man did not accept, any ephemeral initiative, as you say, would be considered a conspiracy, so I did not see any sense in staying in Stepanakert, because on the one hand, as a burden for your comrades-in-arms, you should always be careful. be towards you և etc. That is why I returned to Yerevan.
– The same is true for the field generals of the first war; we hear that some of them were not allowed to take part in the management of the war, to be at the command post.
– No one was allowed, but already at the end of the war, when they saw that there was nothing, without an order, without anything official, they asked him to go here and there, and so on.
– One was told to go to Shushi, another one – to Stepanakert in order to organize defense.
– Well, it is obvious. You know, there were many different ways to end this war. First of all, let us understand what prevented them from going the right way? What made them change the development plan? War is a disaster, and you must try to use every possibility during a disaster. What prevented him from inviting Seyran Ohanyan and Yuri Khachaturov to serve as Onik Gasparyan’s advisers without expecting that the advice would be implemented, but they are experienced people, aren’t they? Onik Gasparyan was the Chief of the General Staff for only 2-3 months, and being the Chief of the General Staff is not a game and a dance, and especially conducting military operations, and the first, the second, look how many military operations they conducted. Well, what was the point of not inviting Levon Mnatsakanyan and Samvel Karapetyan to assist the inexperienced Jalal Harutyunyan as consultants? And people who do not distinguish between a machine gun and a machine gun find themselves at that point, isn’t this a joke, isn’t this a crime?
– In the final stage of the war, the defense of Shushi was trusted to Seyran Ohanyan, the defense of Stepanakert – to Levon Mnatsakanyan.
– It was done for other considerations, I am sure it was done for something else to be attributed to them. If you have noticed, in early November their media outlets started writing about the heroic efforts of Seyran Ohanyan to defend Shushi. I was surprised, but two or three days later Seyran Ohanyan was accused of not being able to keep Shushi. Sorry, but they wanted to “throw the fall of Shushi into Seyran’s pocket.” But he was just a consultant there. Or what subdivisions were given to Levon Mnatsakanyan? And then they tell tales about why Shushi fell in the end.
David, you see, I have so many connections, I am acquainted with hundreds of officers, dozens of generals, to this day I can not find out who was the commander of the defense of Shushi, who was the commander of the defense of Hadrut, and in general, who led that front. Well, back then, let us say it was a secret, but in reality there is nothing secret, but now we do not know who the commander was.
– Did Shushi fall or was it surrendered? What is your impression?
– Shushi was obviously handed over to the Azeris. I am not saying that it was given deliberately, because I knew when the war would end. Back in October 19, when acquaintances and colleagues I was in contact with asked me when I thought the war would end, I said unequivocally that when the Azeris would occupy Shushi. I am sure that sooner or later the people I spoke to will confirm these facts. So far nobody talked about it.
– Was it clear to you that this was their goal from the beginning?
– It was clear to me based on the actions of the Azerbaijani army, based on Aliyev’s statements, based on where the Azerbaijanis are moving and who is resisting them, I have come to that conclusion, surely.
– Mr. President, there is a lot of talk about Turkey’s role in this war. During your presidency, Turkey was not seen in public as a potential threat, as a source of war. In the summer of 2020, the head of the parliamentary faction told us that Turkey would not be involved in this war. Why do you think Turkey was involved in this war, how much was the part of Turkey? Do you admit that you are responsible for the years of your presidency? Maybe no appropriate explanatory work was done to show the public that Turkey night support Azerbaijan, it would not leave Azerbaijan alone in this war.
– David, I cannot agree with your opinion that Turkey only supported Azerbaijan during the last war. Turkey has always supported Azerbaijan, it has always been so in the early 90s, I can give examples, it was so in the early 2000s and after 2008; the ever-present Turkish threat was counterbalanced by the Armenian-Russian allied relations and the international community with competent work. Turkey played a role in the April war. It is no secret that Turkish instructors trained Azerbaijan’s Special Forces: it is obvious to everyone. There is only one explanation as to why Turkey was so open and relatively large-scale this time around, with the failure of the diplomatic and security policies of this apical government. We have to look for the root causes over there. We have to look for why there was excessive tension with our main ally as the balance of power did not work, that counterbalance did not work to the extent it should have worked.
– In other words, was Turkey so active due to the endangered Armenian-Russian strategic relations?
– I am sure, yes, but at the same time I want to emphasize that it happened, maybe I do not choose the right word, but with the idea of a lie that this tension increases the degree of our independence. One must clearly realize that he is the leader of the country, at least one of the leaders. Why do I say this because he has been attributing the role of the head of state to himself, in reality the head of our country is the President of the Republic. He must understand that he does not like boyish approaches; he must understand that he is responsible not only for his actions, but also for the security of the people. When you try to endanger the reputation of the CSTO by making such a decision in violation of all diplomatic rules, you must understand that tomorrow, the next day, you will have problems.
– Are you talking about the call with the Secretary General?
– Yes, when you break the laws of your own country at the airport, you do not meet the head of the UN Security Council, who is your ally, then you instruct fakes, websites of unknown origin to write what a boy he is, how he raised our sovereignty, you have to understand that tomorrow, the next day you will be punished for it, this is obvious.
You need to understand that when you enter into secret negotiations behind the backs of others, those others will change their attitude towards you, because they put effort, energy, and authority in their actions. It is clear that they have their own interests. Therefore, it is not surprising that no one condemned Azerbaijan for resuming hostilities. Do you remember how in April 2016, when the international community unanimously condemned the offensive of Azerbaijan? And why should we not have it in time, even if we did not realize that we had to have very good anti-aircraft facilities, why should we not have it in time?
What does it mean that the airspace of Armenia is inaccessible? In simple language, we were forbidden to transport military cargo through the airspace of Georgia or through the airspace of Iran? Do you remember when it was during the April war, before or after that we had a problem transporting something through the airspace of Georgia, where did we transport the S300s or Iskanders, etc.? That means that you have ruined your relationship with everyone. Do you want them to do more than you can do in your difficult moment, in your crucial moment?
– Mr. President, the Iskander was the most mentioned weapon in this war, but it was never used against the enemy. I remember very well that in both 2016 and August 2020, you said in your press conferences that it did not make sense to use Iskander during the April battles as it was equal to making a cannon shot at sparrows.
The war in 2020 was a large-scale one, but our operational tactical missiles were not used; not only that, it turned out that we did not destroy any military airport, large military headquarters, command post, oil and gas infrastructure, bridge. Moreover, the President of the Republic of Armenia, who by the way was your candidate for presidency, if we have time to return to it briefly, stated several times to international media, guaranteed that Armenia would not target the oil and gas infrastructure in the enemy’s territory?
– First of all, I must say that I do not quite agree that Iskander was not used, it was in the press, I have reliable information that Iskander was used, it was used in the last period of the war, and more specifically in the direction of Shushi.
– That is why I said enemy in the direction of the territory of the state.
– Yes, the area, something else. I can not say for sure why it was not used, but I suppose it was not used for fear of retaliation. In other words, from whatever territory of Armenia he fired, maybe that territory would be counterattacked.
– With a mega-missile with such a distance?
– With another missile, not with the same distance, not with the same accuracy, but you know, when you have a lot of fears during a war, you end up with this day. And Iskander should have been used on the fourth or fifth day of the war, when Azerbaijan had accumulated a huge amount of manpower, military equipment in Horadiz and other parts, Iskander is for that. But I think the other thesis is not so true, when they say that our other measures were not applied to the territory of Azerbaijan, you remember that a boastful person said that he had ordered the evacuation of Kirovabad airport.
– It turned out to be a lie.
– But it is a fact that Kirovabad was shot.
– Residential district of the city.
– What is the biggest stupidity: I do not understand the actions of these people.
– The international community started condemning us after that.
– Of course he must condemn, not only the international community began to judge, but after that both Stepanakert and Martuni began to be ruthlessly targeting. I am not saying that Stepanakert had not been fired before, but that fire was aimed at two targets, one at the Defense Army headquarters and the other at the power plant. This, of course, had to be used, what did we get it for? And in general, who needed those assurances of the international community? Let alone that the first target should have been the gas pipelines, the oil pipeline, etc., so why did we get Iskanders, if we did not want to use them at the right time?
– Do you think there was an agreement not to shoot?
– I do not think there was an agreement.
– They were afraid to launch it.
– If you remember that on the fifth or third day of the war, some so-called “huts” were circulating, as if Iskander is not ours, the system of government is somewhere else, it is ignorance, Iskander is ours, we are the only one our ally provided I do not understand whether to use such a weapon. David, there are so many questions that are just weird for me on the one hand, I do not know on the other hand they lead to other thoughts.
– To attack the Armenian Shushi with our Iskander… Mr. President, can this fit into our thoughts, even assuming that the city was already abandoned, or maybe we did not have accurate information on the day at which we left the city?
– It has been talked about many times, the Capitulator wrote on the ninth of the month that fighting was underway for Shushi, while as early as on the night of November 5 Shushi was already under the control of the Azerbaijanis. As they wrote that there was fierce fighting for Shushi, and so on, it should be construed that our people were trying to take back Shushi, which is also strange to me, because taking it back is ten times harder than defending it. Why did we not defend, then why did we make so many casualties, and during those attempts, so-called stubborn battles; we had hundreds of unnecessary casualties.
– Mr. President, when we talk now about the reality of the army, I remember the big award ceremony organized by the Prime Minister in Sardarapat in late August last year. Ruben Sanamyan became a National Hero. The Prime Minister said a very important “descriptive episode,” describing the fighting efficiency of the Armenian army. I suggest recalling his remarks and then continue…
Video: “The Armenian army has reached unprecedented tactical heights, which further increases our confidence that we have an efficient and intelligent army with a decisive influence in the region.”
– I remember people saying for many decades that the Armenian army was the most efficient in the region, but this seems to have been at odds with the reality. Sorry, but we failed to go beyond that. Will you agree with the Prime Minister’s assessment of our army?
– Absolutely, it is one thing to have an efficient army: it is another thing to have a decisive influence in the region. Do we understand what the region is or do we mean only Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia? Even if so, the word “decisive” used in this video was not the most accurate definition.
The Capitulator said that the Tavush heroic battle had a shocking effect on many countries, including Turkey. In other words, I honestly do not underestimate the work done by the commander of the third army corps, that is, the commander of the corps defending Tavush, the officers, the soldiers, I honestly say that they did their job well, but to take that job and turn it into PR. What is the point of trying to create a border incident, make it Sardarapat, and do stupid things during the real Sardarapat? It was obvious, wasn’t it? It was clear to everyone that this was the ultimate point before the countdown of the war. I announced at a press conference last August that the war was too close, and it was obvious why it was done.
– Do you think they provoked a war, did they?
– You know, there are two very big problems, first I will return to why the ally should not be deceived, when you initiate a positional improvement, then the conflict grows a little, and then you start shouting around the world that the Azeris attacked us, you have to realize one simple thing: before you announce it, countries like Russia, the United States, France already know who provoked them.
– Russia announced about it, too, Lavrov did. In fact, we were the ones to start hostilities.
– What does it mean, why are you cheating, are you trying to cheat, who? After all, trust reaches zero in such cases, it simply reaches zero. And why did it happen? If we remember, Lavrov announced in April 2020 that we should finally start substantive talks. Throughout a year, these weak-minded people tried to convince us that there was no paper on the negotiating table, no document, no negotiations were taking place at all, of course they were entangled in their lies. One foreign minister said we were holding serious talks, another said there was none.
– We need to negotiate something.
– But I knew one hundred percent that there are negotiations, I told the Karabakh leadership that there were negotiations going on, and those negotiations could not lead to anything good.
– You mean the former President of Artsakh?
– I mean former Artsakh President Bako Sahakyan.
– Was he not informed about the results of the negotiations?
– No. I told him that there was such a thing, but he did not answer anything. He then asked them, and they said no, Since Bako Sahakyan is an honest person, he told me that it was not the case.
– During his rule, did the Artsakh President not know whether there was a negotiation on Artsakh or not?
– No, he did not know. Not only did he not know, but he did not believe that there was such a thing. But you may remember that we sounded the alarm, criticized and put pressure on the authorities, and I think finally they came to the conclusion that these conditions could lead to the loss of their power, because five districts had to be handed over unilaterally in exchange for unblocking some kind of regional communications, which is somewhat funny. Maybe something else happened and in order for the document to be watered down, to show that you know what kind of army we have, it was all organized.
– What you said turns out to be a conspiratorial war.
– Sorry, or at least if it was not done with that in mind, but there was simply a positional improvement, the military did not know about it, they used that improvement, the conflict for that purpose.
Look, David, we have had many positional improvements since 1994, ask all the corps commanders of that time, ask the commander of the third corps, the commander of the fourth corps, ask Seyran Ohanyan, ask the chief of the general staff, who was the regiment commander at that time.
We had a positional improvement in 2012 or 2013, or maybe sooner or later, that we had an improvement of at least 100 square kilometers, but we did not advertise it, because if you advertise such things, you create a hopeless situation for yourself. For the enemy, he had to retaliate elsewhere. Aliyev had learned a lesson and when he had a major improvement in Nakhichevan in May and June 2018, he did not announce it out loud. He realized that declarations did not matter that much; what matters most is to improve your position.
– Well, ours also hid the fact for quite a long time until the former Chief of the General Staff said that we had significant positional losses in that period.
– But when did it happen? There are two options, either you have to work on getting an eyeball, that is, you have to be a populist or an extreme populist, or your goal has to be to work on something that announcing that does not hurt, you can do it. I do not mean at all that one should not think about his /her rating, but your goal should not be your rating, your goal should be to fulfill your responsibilities.
Now, after this video, I have a question, David, on the one hand you say that there is an opinion that the army has been looted for 20 years, weapons have not been acquired, etc. On the other hand, there is such a video and there are many videos, starting from the fact that After 2018, an unprecedented number of weapons were allegedly acquired, which were either new, that is, in 2019, or not used at all, which covered the shameful page of the weapons of the 80s, up to the praise of the army, etc. Now I suggest to you, and to those who are spreading that view to decide whether our troops constituted an efficient army or a poor squad of soldiers that had been robbed by fire.
– In July 2020 it was efficient, yes, efficient in positional fighting.
– In other words, you mean it was efficient in July, but was robbed in September?
– Not ready for a large-scale war.
– If it was unprepared for a large-scale war, how did he play a decisive role in the region, how was it shocked all over the world, including Turkey, how was it announced that Azerbaijan was finally convinced that there was no military solution to the problem? So, what would be decided by the border conflict, is it solved by military means or not?
You see, a lie should be told at least in moderation, if it is at all true, it should be ruled out. But when a person spreads lies every day, every hour, he also gets entangled in those lies, in the end there can be nothing logical. It cannot be like that, they robbed, it was robbed, and we will talk about robbery more seriously after the change of power, why do I say that, because the real robbery of the army took place before the war, and even after the war, but I will be tempted to say a fact. Bypassing the Ministry of Defense, this government made procurements during the war. It is not clear why they bypassed the Ministry of Defense, carried out, for example, two or three times more expensive purchases than it could have been done.
– Is it about armaments?
– For example, they bought a large number of body armor for almost $ 600, whoever has more or less information about the case may not believe it, but I know many such examples. Were we the robbers? Let them show that we bought a penny more than the real value. Let them show, are we robbing when they take low-quality fuel and force the army to accept it and then use it? You cannot build an efficient army with strawberries and underwear.
– But the public perception was formed that way, Mr. President. In the last three years, we have been told that in matters of logistics, soldiers’ food, clothing and communications, and a number of other issues related to the rear, neither armaments nor combat readiness, we have solved the issues, so our army is the best, yes, our soldier is full.
– It seems to them that they had solved the problems, because they did not know how that army was formed, they were not aware that in the initial stage of its formation, the army had no barracks, no uniform and enough food; our 18-year-old soldiers did not have shoes in Horadiz because that was the state of the country. The situation improved year by year, when we had enough food for soldiers, and let them not speculate as to why parents are sending parcels to their sons; this is a tradition dating back to the Soviet era.
– It continues now, by the way.
– Of course it must continue, first of all the army cannot show an individual approach, give the soldier the food he likes best.
– Yes, the army is not a hotel.
– The army is not a sanatorium, when they try to turn the army into a sanatorium, we have such a result. Army discipline disappears when a soldier is told that if he is dissatisfied with his officer, he should write to the Prime Minister immediately. The army is not a sanatorium. Yes, things like that have happened; I mean the unscrupulous officers, I am talking about soldiers and generals. And the answer was not late, was it? They left the whole military unit in Meghri, there was no such thing in the history of our army.
– Why do you go far, remember the days of the revolution, the peacekeeping corps …
– And now they say that someone ran away. What did you want when you discredited the generals and officers, saying “mice stealing seeds?” If we were “mice stealing seeds,” then be so kind to tell me who bought a bulletproof vest for $ 600. Why did they change three chiefs of general staff in two years?
Is the Chief of General Staff is a toy for you, any of them can imagine what functions the real Chief of General Staff has, what experience he should have, how could one change three commanders of the Defense Army? Levon Mnatsakanyan, who had the experience of two wars, how could he be changed merely because he was a “former,” that is, to replace the professionals with adapters? The result was that nine commanders of the defense district were changed and in some cases two or three times. All but one of the potential commanders of the military units of the central subordination were changed, so what, why not, so that we would not conspire there, so how could we conspire there, how could we conspire against our homeland? , they are capable of it.
We have never given such an opportunity in our past, a lot of gossip has been spread, a lot of defamatory materials, 99% untrue, then what was they doing? They inflicted such blows on the army and then try to attack the army. There was an army on the battlefield, but that army did not have the commanders it needed, that army did not have the spirit it needed, that army, unfortunately, was left alone, it was not organized in the human news, it is not surprising, our Half of the Armenian part of the army did not take part in one of those military operations.
– One of the corps participated in full.
– I am aware that some units were taken from different corps, but it should not have happened.
– In other words, the majority of the Armenian army was not actually involved in the hostilities.
– Yes, the majority of the Armenian army was not actually involved in these hostilities, did you imagine on the one hand they said that Azerbaijan is strong, has a larger army, and our army did not participate at all. Is it not strange? Now they have to start telling tales that those troops were supposed to guard the borders of the Republic of Armenia, there were several ways to guard the borders of the Republic of Armenia.
– They are internationally guaranteed.
– First, we have three agreements with our ally, according to which they are obliged to provide for our security…
– CSTO, United Troops.
– No, so it is purely bilateral, plus the CSTO, moreover, when you were offered a month ago in the form of military exercises that there will be an attack on Armenia, etc., give those proposals, even theoretically, say that the security of Nagorno Karabakh is very important for us. We are the guarantor, we will take all our troops there, please ensure our security by placing your flags.
We did not apply to our ally, did we? There is another option, why did you send the reservists to Karabakh irregularly, to different places, did you send volunteers there, would you send them to the RA borders, would we take that regular army there? Why did you not do that?
– Mr. President, you would apply to the CSTO in this situation.
– In this situation, I would do as I tried to explain, first of all I would talk to our main ally, while saying that I predict such a thing, please, tell me how you can help us, based on that I would formulate my requests.
They said, “If we applied, they might refuse!” What is it like to bring a boy-girl relationship into state relations? As if they were going for a marriage proposal, and were scared of being refused, it is offensive. Was that the bitterest of the scenarios?”
– The main counterargument was that the CSTO has no jurisdiction over Artsakh.
– But before the CSTO, we had an ally, why did we not turn to our ally, what if we consider the CSTO an integral part of our security, why did we treat the CSTO that way? When during the exercise you were warned of such a danger, why did you not make any move? Yes, the CSTO is not responsible for Karabakh, but it is responsible for Armenia, so it could be asked to ensure Armenia’s security.
– And our army would deal with Artsakh.
– Of course, I do not intend to underestimate the volunteers, on the contrary, for well-known reasons I treat them very respectfully, but which would be more effective, would those volunteers go and keep the borders of Armenia or go to Karabakh as they say? Coming to reservists, I am now asking why did you not send a sufficient number first, why did you not replenish the military units protecting the RA borders, and the actual personnel of the military unit, who were prepared for the war, at least should have been like that. You know, the answer is the people did not let us, the people came out, did not let us take the army.
– Yes, the entrances of the military units were closed, is there such an assertion?
– We have thousands of military policemen, what is it like when people take to the streets, the police go breaking and smashing everything, so why did you introduce martial law, when several people have to leave? They would come and say, “We will not let the troops go.” It was a slander, wasn’t it?
– But after the war he said that the Prime Minister did not lead the fight.
– Well, you know, you can always say, but in reality he is not the commander-in-chief.
– You mean Armenia did not declare war.
– Yes, but he played that role in that undeclared war, at least he should not have beaten his chest in public, he should have said that he knows all that very well.
– Now about the command vertical, this is a very important episode, Mr. President, retired defense…
– I see what kind of question you are going to ask.
– Let us understand the guilt of those responsible.
– I want to say the following, that vertical inefficiency, etc., these are fairy tales, these are the opinions of people who do not know well not only our Constitution, laws, the law on our protection clearly states that this vertical must work , and why the officials could not shape the vertical as they should, then who is to blame? Maybe not us, they still want to put it in our “pocket,” they still want to say that it is not clear.
-Which is your constitution…
– Let those who speak about that Constitution bother themselves, not to read and pass once, but to understand the essence, but as an occasion I will repeat something. The commander-in-chief has many important functions, but he has two most important functions, the commander-in-chief never sits next to the map like this or stands, thinking and saying, this corps should go here, this division should go here, this artillery here.
– Should he not develop tactics?
– It is not his job at all, even if he is well acquainted with the situation, he has no right to do it, because by doing so you are preventing the certain army commander from carrying out his ideas, at the same time you are weakening his responsibility to some extent.
The Commander-in-Chief must mobilize all the country’s potential to solve a military-political problem, stop or crush the enemy, or at least to show the least worthy resistance. This is the first major responsibility. But when we catch some reasons, why we could not supplement the news, why we could not send troops, we tried to return to the detachments from which we got rid of in the 90s, it means you have to be silent.
The second most important function of the Commander-in-Chief is that he must be in control of the situation and make military-political decisions based on the situation. That is why he has all the tools and when the Chief of the General Staff reports and the Minister of Defense voices his consent, you are simply obliged to immediately check the situation, we have special services, we have a Chief Military Inspector, we have other tools to check the situation and make the resulting decisions.
In other words, if such a report comes from everywhere, and you understand that you are not able to continue the hostilities with dignity, you are obliged to make every effort to stop the war, never thinking about the consequences, how it will affect your personal reputation. Ultimately, you should at least address your allies as if to stop the war.
You may remember the Capitulator justify himself when asked “Why did you not stop the war earlier?” He answered: “If I stopped it, people would say I was a traitor.” In other words, in order not to be called a traitor, he was ready to sacrifice thousands of people, to concede thousands of square kilometers, that is, what kind of attitude, should all this go unpunished, our people think so. These are questions that have been asked many times and will be asked.
– Mr. President, let us take a look at the command vertical to outline management uncertainties and failures. Here are some key characters: Prime Minister, who was considered to be the Commander-in-Chief, while no war was declared, Minister of Defense, Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces, President of Artsakh; at least I listed the names of the main culprits. You can now say the amount of guilt of each of them, because you see, you say the Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces, the Minister of Defense reported on the fourth day, that is, they did their job and is it their fault?
– I do not want to take on the role of a judge, I am not afraid of that, to put it bluntly, but I simply do not consider it right to give assessments to everyone, especially as regards the failures, because it calls for a probe. What I can say is that obviously the role of the Commander-in-Chief has simply failed, from small examples to large ones.
I just talked about the senior staff. Let me give you a small example. As it was announced, the so-called Commander-in-Chief only called the Commander of the Defense Army on the fifth day of the war, can you imagine? During the April war, I immediately contacted the commander of the Defense Army from the plane, not to give instructions as a leader, but to encourage the person to say that I supported him to the best of my ability, how is it possible, especially after such heavy losses? How can this be done?
At first glance, this may seem like a small thing, but in that case, how did you find out how to proceed? I do not justify Onik Gasparyan, I am honest, but I do not think that Onik Gasparyan is the main responsible. Let me say that I do not support Onik Gasparyan, Mikael Arzumanyan, but I do not think that Onik Gasparyan and Mikael Arzumanyan are involved in any alleged conspiracy. To follow up the information they had, they should at least oppose, which would give them the opportunity to justify their actions. I do not mean at all that they should disobey…
– Should they take control of the situation?
– No, it is not about taking control, it is about the fact that if you are convinced, as a commander, you will not be able to continue the hostilities as you want, or as you are obliged, you will have irreparable losses, if If nothing else, I do not say he ought to resign, but at least it should be made public to some extent.
You can always say I did, but it is not your job to do it alone. Even after so many changes, there were literate officers left, well on their way, the opinion of those people had to be taken into account. After all, it is not just making a noise or barbecuing in the street, you must be able to make people understand that they have to believe in you.
They should understand that you will not blame them for their wrongdoings. You will not put the blame on them, so why do they say the Commander-in-Chief is the number one culprit, or the number one winner? And these puns are the number one culprit, so which way is responsibility manifested? You say I am responsible, but am I not the number one guilty? I am the driver of the car, I am responsible for driving, but I had an accident. Am I not to blame?
– Mr. President, a while ago when we were talking about the weapons of the 80s, because you spoke now about responsibility, guilt, one of the theses of the ruling faction is that, yes, they are the main responsible, but they are not the main culprit, yes, because most of our weapons were bought during your time, and they dated back to the 80s, and as we are talking about the weapons of the 80s, I have to quote an excerpt from your August press conference related to the purpose of the weapons of the 80s… That statement was made in Germany shortly after the four-day war, and well-informed people know that Germany chaired the OSCE in 2016. What I said, if we translate into diplomatic language, was the following, “Dear OSCE members, regardless of the fact that you have turned a blind eye. On the fact that Azerbaijan is arming itself to the teeth, our fighters are able to defend their homeland.”
But I want to add in connection with the concept of weapons of the 80s. You have all the opportunities to find out if there is an army in the world today that does not have the weapons of the 80s. If we find such an army among the most modern armies, I will declare that I do not understand anything about it at all. Can the weapons of the 80s win the fifth generation war?
– First of all, I would like to ask you to show the audience the video in which the official representative of the Ministry of Defense, the well-known Artsrun Hovhannisyan, says good things about the 80s weapons. What do the weapons of the 80s mean in general? And secondly, do not exaggerate the events – talk about the fifth generation war, it is not a serious conversation. God forbid, when there is a fifth generation war, then you will see if they are using the weapons of the 80s or not. After all, what do those people who talk about such high things think, for example, have the nuclear missiles created in the 60s and 70s been completely destroyed by charges, or are there no other B52 planes, no F16s? What is nonsense, it is a basic thing, it should not be understood.
The fifth generation war: Armenia and Azerbaijan are capable of waging a fifth-generation war, that arrogance destroyed our house, that arrogance with superstition, this irresponsible crime. After all, these people are responsible for the security of our citizens, how they look at these issues through their fingers.
No, there have been many shortcomings in the work of each of us, but have we had such an irresponsible approach, we certainly have not, I am not talking about everyone, but at least those who hold key positions.
After all, one of the most important qualities of a leader is the high sense of responsibility that you have been elected or appointed to this high position, you have to show a very responsible approach, I do not say so slowly cut the size seven times, no, you have to have specialists around you, you need to be able to create an atmosphere of responsibility so that people can express their opinions freely so that you can make a decision. “No, I know everything, I think so, I negotiate whatever I want.” Such an approach is inadmissible, how can one hear the history of the Karabakh talks from Aliyev, how can one trust your enemy more than your political opponent, is that permissible? Edik Nalbandyan, who is the master of the case, was listened to for 15 minutes.
– After his resignation.
– Yes, that is, they heard the history of 30 years of negotiations in 15 minutes.
– Well, you were a political opponent, he did not accept you for fundamental reasons, but the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is a system, Zohrab Mnatsakanyan was Edward Nalbandyan’s deputy, they should have institutional memory, but attempts were made to curb it?
– Institutional memory is also formed by documents, but in order to be able to master that document, you must be aware of that topic, because every word, every comma in that document has an essential meaning. And the negotiation process is not such that you can cover a very wide range, but all the documents were in our Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but if you are not aware, you can hardly understand that evolution. If you think that what is important in the negotiation process is not to give, your attention will be there, not what you get.
– Mr. President, the current government talks a lot about the comeback of the formers, referring to you. The party you lead is active in the extra-parliamentary opposition field, but you do not appear in the public arena, this is your first big interview after some local silence on the platforms. Do you have personal plans for the future of the state? What are your plans?
– I have never left big politics, I have been in big politics for the last 30 years. I understand the meaning of the question; I clearly say that I consider that I have completed my service in high positions in the state system. Many can hit back: “Well, in 2015, too, you said that you would run for the post of Prime Minister.” It is a topic of another conversation, another interview, but I say that in any case I will not be a leader in Armenia.
– In which case?
– In any case, I can be an advisor to any official, advisory, but no more, what I said does not mean that I am going to leave active politics, what I said does not mean that the RPA will lose its influence in the political field. On the contrary, I will be active, the RPA will be even more active, if there are elections without the Capitulator, we will actively participate.
– As we can see, they rejected the idea of elections.
– Well, I do not have the naivety to say, to be honest, to believe that it was a final decision. How many times have people changed their minds, once said this, once said that…
– Is it not a final decision?
– Of course, not. A person who can give fake information about the war will do so when it comes to elections. The elections are no more important than the war.
– Why did Sasun Mikaelyan say that the Artsakh liberation war was less important than the Velvet Revolution?
– Well, they said, that is their opinion, my opinion is a little different, that is why not only that we refused.
– I can guess that you are not going to run in the elections organized by him?
– You are right, but it should not be considered a sign of passivity, we will be active. I repeat, I will not hold any other leadership position.
– Mr. President, we must summarize the picture of the future, we are living in a very difficult period, it is in general morality, we have received a terrible blow in addition to everything, except for all other losses, as you see the future of Artsakh, the future of Armenia.
– I think that the first thing we should do is not to divide Artsakh and Armenia; we cannot have a bad future for Artsakh and think that we can have a good future in Armenia. No matter what tragedy these capitulators have brought about: we must banish despair, we are certainly in a very difficult situation, the unthinkable has already happened, but on the other hand we must simply analyze the reality without fear and look into the eyes of the truth.
Throughout our history, the Armenian people have faced much more difficult situations, but there have been individuals, there have been sympathizers, there have been people with will and brains who have been able to lead our people and we have been able to rise nationally from the ruins. One of the proofs of that is that my generation was able to fight to the death and win.
It was not easy, even in the moments when everything seemed to be over, we were never looking for culprits, but we were able to assess and hold accountable people who did not do their job well. After all, we were a victorious nation for 30 years, the world accepted us as such, we gave our compatriots living far from Armenia the opportunity to be representatives of a victorious nation; we gave them the opportunity to represent that victorious people.
Why am I paying attention to this aspect, since many people talk about emigration, I must say that it is not the right approach. Everyone should understand that after leaving Armenia maybe their living conditions will be better, maybe their children will study in better schools, but they will be representatives of a defeated nation, whether they like it or not, they will not be able to raise their heads.
We must stay in Armenia and realize that we have a difficult task ahead of us, we all have to work hard, big and small, we must realize that we have a short time we will not be able to restore everything, but with this realization and approach we can save the situation.
These authorities must leave, they cannot remain in the same position when there was a catastrophe, it is impossible, and individuals with the abilities I mentioned must come to lead the nation, otherwise we will lose our statehood; we will disappear as a nation. Of course, I consider this last scenario unlikely, but if every day brings us new losses, and we have to humble ourselves every time with something out of hands, then I wonder who needs such a life; who needs such people…
One thing we must remember clearly is that others help those who want to improve their lives or their status, others feel sorry for the beggars, we have never been beggars, we should not be so, we should be able to ensure our security, we should be able to improve our social situation.
– Thank you for this opportunity to answer my questions, all the best to you.
– I am also grateful for this opportunity
3rd President of the Republic of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan