No one will argue that the effectiveness of any step in politics can be judged by the events that follow that step.
For example, if the announcements about the “era of peace” after the defeat in the 2020 war, the refusal to fight for Black Lake, and the handing over of the Goris-Meghri strategic road sections to the enemy would bring peace and security to RA and Artsakh, then it would be possible to say that the policy of the Armenian authorities in these matters was effective and justified.
But all those “peaceful” steps were followed by another Azerbaijani aggression on September 13-14, 2022, as a result of which 224 Armenian soldiers were killed, and 139 square kilometers were lost from the sovereign territory of Armenia. From those events, it can be concluded that the steps mentioned above were wrong.
In October 2022 and May 2023, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan announced that he recognizes the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, including Artsakh. (One can, of course, deceive that the former leaders of Armenia also announced something similar, but it is unimportant in this case). The important is to answer the following question: Did the statements of the current leader lead to any positive results or not? In response to that manifestation of “goodwill,” did Azerbaijan stop the blockade of Artsakh? Did it leave the sovereign territory of Armenia? If not, then it was not worth making those appointments.
Read also
Instead, I can point out the negative consequences of those statements. During any international communication, be it at the state or public level, when the Armenian side talks about the disastrous situation of the people of Artsakh, the person who hears these complaints, even if he is disposed towards us in the most friendly way, responds as follows. “Yes, what is happening to the Armenians of Artsakh is terrible. But isn’t your leader who admits that it is the sovereign territory of Azerbaijan? Therefore, he also accepts that the government of that country can do what it thinks is right in that area.”
I naturally embrace pragmatism. If some step is taken, even if it is unpopular, which improves the situation, that step is correct. But if, without calculating the consequences, you just shoot yourself in the foot, it is not pragmatism. It needs to look for other names.
Aram ABRAHAMYAN
