Yerevan is confused, Baku is waiting for an answer …
Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan on April 19 Moscow Russia should meet with President Vladimir Putin. The meeting will focus on the Western-led agenda for the settlement of the Azerbaijani-Armenian conflict in Brussels.
On the eve of the meeting in Armenia political the temperature is rising. The past political elite-led opposition in Yerevan and holds continuous rallies in other cities and sends an ultimatum to the Pashinyan government. To the opposition and Russian-affiliated media outlets are also propagandizing that the government has handed over Karabakh to Azerbaijan.
Armenia’s 1998-20Former Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian said in an article published in local media that, The government should refrain from signing a peace agreement with Baku at any cost, as this document will make it inevitable that Nagorno-Karabakh will remain part of Azerbaijan. According to Oskanian according toSerious for Pashkina’s refusal to sign the document and There are solid arguments:
“First of all, from a legal point of view, this document is in line with the Armenian constitution and Armenia Ali It will contradict the decision of the Council in 1992. To sign such a document and to amend the Basic Law for ratification and Ali The decision of the council will have to be reconsidered “.
Oskanian noted, pointing to Pashinyan that, Winning the election does not mean having the right to decide the fate of an entire nation. The former foreign minister is the first with the current policy of the government president Levon drew parallels between Ter-Petrosyan’s position in 1997-1998. According to him according totoday’s situation is similar to the events of 24-25 years ago and is a fateful turning point. Oskanian’s article in 1998 JanuaryHe also spoke about the incident at a meeting of the Security Council.
“At that meeting president Ter-Petrosyan announced his approach to the settlement. President was sure that, With the exception of the Lachin region, the transfer of the regions around Nagorno-Karabakh to Azerbaijan is Armenia’s and in the interests of the Armenian people. He was emphasizing that, current geopolitical situation and Given Armenia’s limited development opportunities, no other options can be sought. Opponents of the president thought otherwise. They reported that, It is alarming that the document proposed by the mediators does not contain any notes on the status of Nagorno-Karabakh. The president insisted that, Any reference to the documents on the status of Karabakh will exclude the issue of Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity.
According to the former minister according tohe was sure at the time that, By raising the issue of status, it is possible to avoid statements about the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan in the negotiations: “The negotiation process of the following years proved me right. The OSCE Minsk Group has three proposals for resolving the conflict – a common state, the Key West option and He put the Madrid principles on the table. In all three proposals, the issue of the status of Nagorno-Karabakh was kept outside the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. The main difference between Pashinyan and Ter-Petrosyan is that that, The first president offered to avoid discussing the status of Nagorno-Karabakh and leave it for the future. The Prime Minister tends to recognize the people of Nagorno-Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan if the security is ensured. ”.
Oskanian thinks that, Pashinyan and The statements of its partners that they are ready to lower expectations about the status of Nagorno-Karabakh close all avenues for Armenia in the negotiations.
The current situation in Armenia and Political scientist Farhad Mammadov, who evaluates the anti-Pashinyan speeches, says that, Rallies of the Armenian opposition before the Prime Minister’s visit to Moscow and This is the behavior of war criminals in Karabakh political demonstrates the helplessness of groups: “Because the recognition of the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and acceptance of sovereignty these circles in Armenia and calls into question the existence of separatist criminals. To their more general sponsors – Russia and There is no attractive agenda to offer to the Armenian Diaspora. She according to also existing street protests and provocations they will face gasare the only answers to imminent danger “.
F.Mammadov emphasizes that, If no progress is made on the Armenian-Azerbaijani agenda after the Moscow meeting, Baku’s actions will be harsh and will be one-sided: “Our servicemen are on the border with Armenia and They are waiting in Karabakh ready to fulfill their tasks. In short, concrete decisions from Pashinyan within two weeks and steps await. It is felt at the first signs that, Russia is preparing to consult with the Armenian side on the text of the peace agreement “.
Turqut