Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, answering the question of Aravot.am at the press conference held on January 10 and referring to the consequences of the war, said: “We didn’t know it was going to happen. Were we, you, ready to go and sign a paper that the territories are returned? Five are handed; I don’t know what happens to the two; they are temporarily returned, the Karabakh issue without status adjustment and a status perspective.
Well, were we all ready for this? Now, in retrospect, we can say it would have been better. Of course, we can say, but maybe we are the victims of Armenian back mind.” We clarified we really were not ready, but you were the supreme commander during the war of 2020. You were reported, you should have mastered the situation and it is about the responsibility of your decision; we were not ready; how about you? Nikol Pashinyan answered:
“I wasn’t ready either because I didn’t fall from the sky; where did I come from? Well, I also have a political biography, I also have an idea, and I also have a perception. The problem is not that I was not ready or not ready today. Let me say more: I was prepared for concession, but I didn’t see the limit of that concession: how far do I have to give in for everything to end? How far? If the amount of settlement is visible, you know that you have to concede this much, and that’s it; this story ends, and you can thoughtfully discuss it, but the content that was today is the problem.
Of course, you are right: you are doing your business, and I am doing mine. Why should I hold you accountable in my case? I am ready to bear that responsibility even today, and I have stated my problem directly: it is not clear where the limit of the flexibility of this concession or compromise is, to come and say: people, look, this concession has been made, but that’s it. The problem is that the line doesn’t appear to yield, that you yielded so much, that’s the end of the story. The government can resign after that, and the people can elect a new government and tell the previous government that it was a traitor; it made many concessions. Still, as a result, it will be an internal discourse without external challenges. That limit is not visible.”
Read also
Hripsime JEBEJYAN
