“It was not written anywhere, but one can draw such a conclusion from the context.” This is how Prime Minister Pashinyan interpreted one of the details of the so-called “Lavrov Plan” yesterday. It is unimportant which detail we are discussing and whether the interpretation is correct.
The mistake here is methodological. In my analysis, I can write in that style, the same Pashinyan could write if he were a journalist. A politician, even more so, a statesman, the Leader of the State, should rely purely on officially recorded facts. For example, he cannot rely on the recent interview of independent expert Jirair Libaridian in his “open testimony” to the National Assembly Investigative Committee, no matter how authoritative that expert’s opinion is. For a serious political text, only published documents and speeches of responsible officials should serve as a basis.
In this case, the “Lavrov Plan” source should be, in particular, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. In that regard, I suggest you familiarize yourself with the recent “Azatutyun” – “Liberty” radio station analysis. I think it should be clear from this publication that if the “Lavrov Plan” had been accepted, we would not have the current situation. Yes, the status of Artsakh would be postponed, but the entire former region of the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast, as well as the regions of Karvachar and Lachin, would be under the control of the Armenians.
That possibility existed in 2019 as well. But even if the “Lavrov Plan” had foreseen the “current architecture,” the difference is again huge; firstly, we would not have thousands of victims; secondly, the negotiated result is a hundred times better than the conditions imposed on you due to the defeat.
Read also
I will not touch on the rest of what the Prime Minister said, which was also in that, so to speak, public speaking style. Instead, I will suggest watching another material as a sample of a political text: my interview with the representative of the Armenian National Congress, Avetis Avagyan (Avetis very rarely gives interviews, and as a public figure, he may not be familiar to a wide range of readers). That material, in my opinion, is an example of a political text.
The interview was recorded on March 3, 2017, during the parliamentary election campaign. The basis of the campaign of the “Armenian National Congress-People’s Party of Armenia” Alliance was to convince the public that the existing plan for peaceful settlement should be accepted. Please pay attention to what kind of mathematically calculated arguments my interlocutor makes. It is essential to the arguments themselves and the culture of presenting them.
Let me remind you, as a result of those elections, the Republican Party of Armenia – 49.15%, the Prosperous Armenia Party – 27.35%, the ” Yelk or Way Out ” Alliance – 7.78%, The Armenian Revolutionary Federation- Dashnaktsutyun- 6.58% entered the parliament. The “Armenian National Congress – People’s Party of Armenia” Alliance received only 1.65%.
Aram ABRAHAMYAN
