Thirty-three years ago, around these days on August 20 or 21, 1991, the Chairman of the Parliament of Armenia, Levon Ter-Petrosyan, gathered journalists (I was working for “A1+” at that time) and asked us to carefully cover the events related to the ГКЧП (State Committee on the State of Emergency). While I don’t remember the conversation verbatim after all these years, the essence was clear: any careless words could cost us several villages in Artsakh.
Ter-Petrosyan wasn’t supportive of the desperate attempt to revive the USSR. Rather, he felt a deep sense of responsibility for Armenia (including Artsakh). Since we were already a de facto independent state at that time, he urged journalists to adopt a state-oriented approach.
I’m reminded of this today because of the way some of Pashinyan’s “pro-Western” supporters in Armenia express themselves when discussing Putin and his policies. Some even go so far as to call for his arrest and to send him to The Hague, should the Russian president set foot in Armenia. (Perhaps that’s one reason why Putin recently visited Baku, but not Yerevan).
Yes, the leader of Russia has established a harsh authoritarian regime in his country and launched an aggressive, bloody war against Ukraine. But does that justify the daily attacks on Russia at an almost official level? In my opinion, it does not. Such actions have already caused, and will continue to cause, losses, no matter how much they may please our Western partners. While I have great respect for the USA and the EU, I am certain that antagonizing Russia to please them is not a stateful approach, but rather, to put it mildly, an ‘infantile’ one.
Read also
What do we have as a result? Putin and Aliyev agree on something regarding our situation, and the Russian President merely promises to inform Pashinyan about their agreement. Can we realistically expect a positive outcome for us in that scenario?
Aram Abrahamyan
