“If Nikol Pashinyan stays in power and continues the policy he is implementing today, then Tigranashen will face the same fate as Shurnukh, but much worse,” said Arthur Khachatryan, member of the Hayastan faction, in a briefing with journalists in the National Assembly, referring to Nikol Pashinyan’s statements. According to Artur Khachatryan, Nikol Pashinyan refers to 1975 on the maps. Still, the question arises: why 1975 and not, for example, the maps of the 1920s, according to which the Al Lakes were the territory of the Republic of Armenia, then inexplicably handed over to Azerbaijan? In the process, more territories were ceded to Azerbaijan.
“It is not understandable, although it is understandable: Azerbaijan wants it that way, and he does it that way. According to the same 1975 map, for example, the Goris-Kapan road passed 100 percent through the territory of Armenia. Now, if they used that 1975 map as a basis, why did they cede that territory to Azerbaijan that too quickly? Since the border is not separated and drawn, why are you handing over our territory?
As for Tigranashen, if he wants to cede some territory from the actual territory of Armenia, it should happen through a referendum, as required by the RA legislation,” he said. Referring to Nikol Pashinyan’s statement that the road network is being developed in such a way that road problems will not arise in Armenia, Arthur Khachatryan said: “Let me remind you that when they gave Shurnukh to the Turks, they offered a so-called new road instead, which was destroyed three months later. By saying an alternative road to the road passing through Tigranashen, he probably means the road passing through Urtsadzor. Let me say that the Urtsadzor road is not a road intended for trucks either. One cannot give something, say: we are doing well, because there is an alternative. With the same logic, you can cede the center of Yerevan to the Turks, say: from Nubarashen to Avan, we can go another way. This is not acceptable.”
Roza HOVHANNISYAN
