The incident that took place in Shaki the day before has already prompted a strong public reaction, which is entirely natural. Yet there is a rather interesting detail concerning what happened that perhaps deserves attention.
The statement by Armenia’s National Security Service (NSS) officially confirming the incident in the village of Shaki begins with the following paragraph:
“On September 29, the State Security Service of Azerbaijan informed the National Security Service of Armenia that a serviceman from one of Azerbaijan’s military units had left his place of service under unknown circumstances.”
Thus, on September 29, Azerbaijan informed Armenia that a serviceman had left his place of duty under unknown circumstances. The following day, September 30, the Office of the Prime Minister of Armenia announced that Nikol Pashinyan had held a meeting of the National Security Council.
Read also
The information about this meeting sounded rather noteworthy against the backdrop of the visit to Armenia by Alexey Likhachev, head of Russia’s state nuclear corporation Rosatom, and his meeting with Nikol Pashinyan. All the more so because, upon leaving Yerevan, Likhachev made some rather interesting and ambiguous statements. Incidentally, today Nikol Pashinyan essentially added another layer to that ambiguity by declaring that a modular nuclear power plant may not be sufficient for Armenia’s needs.
But despite all this, the incident involving an Azerbaijani serviceman in the village of Shaki on October 1 casts the National Security Council meeting held on September 30 in a new light. And it raises at least the question of whether the Council discussed what Azerbaijan had informed Armenia about one day earlier, on September 29: that a serviceman had left his place of duty under unknown circumstances.
At the very least, it would be strange if this matter had not been discussed at the National Security Council meeting.
At the same time, whether or not it was discussed, it is in itself strange that on September 29 Armenia was informed of what was, in effect, a potential security risk, yet failed to take sufficient measures to prevent the Azerbaijani serviceman from reaching an Armenian settlement—and, even more importantly, from having any opportunity to pose a threat to residents.
In this sense, the Shaki incident is not about the absence of real peace. The absence of real peace is abundantly clear even without this incident.
The Shaki incident is about the absence of a viable state security system in Armenia.
Hakob BADALYAN
