“Suppose we proceed from the assumption at the political level that Kyarki was there (we are talking about Tigranashen village of Ararat Region, RA – AA). Let’s say we have to look at the legal basis. From a political point of view, if it turns out that according to this map it belongs to Azerbaijan, we have no problem, and it is not a fact that Azerbaijan will return Artsvashen and take Kyarki,” Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said during a meeting with the Armenian community of Moldova. “But even if it is so, I want us not to overestimate the value of this issue because no such enclave will cause an unsolvable road problem for us,” added the Prime Minister.
First of all, Azerbaijan demands from us not only “Kyarki” but also six more villages located in the territory of Armenia. Second, yes, whatever is written in the “Peace Treaty,” they will take those seven villages, but they will not return Artsvashen to Armenia. Thirdly, let’s imagine the situation with the example of Tigranashen.
Suppose 100 or several hundred Azerbaijanis live there. We know from the example of “environmentalists” that they will not be peaceful villagers but employees of special services with clear instructions. And here they are closing the highway from Ararat Region to Vayots Dzor Region for some “environmental,” “rights protection,” or another purpose. If our policemen touch them with a finger, Azerbaijan will have all “legitimate” grounds to protect “its citizens.” What is it if not the beginning of a new war?
Moreover, if the Azerbaijanis “return” to the “non-enclave” villages of the Republic of Armenia, where they allegedly lived before 1990, it will have equally explosive consequences. Unlike the Armenian authorities, who believe that they are not responsible for the lives of the people of Artsakh and limit themselves to some vague wording of “security and rights,” Azerbaijan will “protect” its compatriots by all means of force, even if they do not need such protection. It may happen if not now, but after 5 or 10 years, but if our supposedly “peace-loving” government allows it, the probability of such scenarios is very high. I don’t think that Pashinyan doesn’t understand that much.
Read also
In 1795, the German philosopher Immanuel Kant wrote his work “Perpetual Peace,” formulating the principles of establishing peace worldwide. The very first principle is formulated as follows. “No peace treaty can be considered as such if, at its conclusion, the basis of future war is openly preserved.”
Aram ABRAHAMYAN
