About the ceasefire
The information that a ceasefire and agreement has been reached does not yet give any reason to believe that the hostilities will definitely be stopped at this point. It is likely that it will emerge during the negotiations that the demands put forward by Azerbaijan cannot be accepted by the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh. In fact, they are not ready for complete disarmament, because disarmament and Azerbaijan’s progress in a hostile environment means suicide for them. And it may well be that Azerbaijan will rely on just such a response to continue its military operations.
Azerbaijan takes advantage of this situation. He believes that Russia is now too committed to Ukraine to intervene and open a second front.
He believes rightly through his actions [армянский премьер Никол] Pashinyan undermined the trust between Russia and Armenia as allies. This does not further motivate Russia to act decisively in this region. The victims of this are the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh, who are not responsible in any way for Pashinyan’s betrayal. They are dedicated.
I would not rush to end the Karabakh conflict.
Moreover, given the entire centuries-old history of this region, I believe that excessive ambitions to ensure the surrender of the enemy will lead to nothing but “sowing the dragon’s teeth.” Tomorrow, the day after tomorrow, after some time, they will definitely rise. It can be said that the Armenian side did not take into account the increasing threat from Azerbaijan when it was called to prevent military action and accept the return of Azerbaijani lands around Nagorno-Karabakh to Azerbaijan, which is still useful. , was still seen as a peaceful option for resolving the conflict.
Regarding the solution of the Karabakh conflict
Since the nineties, I have advocated a package solution to the Karabakh conflict through the transfer of at least five (and perhaps more) regions, excluding corridor areas, to Azerbaijan in exchange for de facto recognition of Nagorno-Karabakh’s right to self-determination. It was possible to delay this, as suggested, and hold a referendum some time later. This was exactly what was in the Nagorno-Karabakh proposal package, which the parties actually abandoned: both Azerbaijan and Armenia. That’s when the Armenian side actually took an uncompromising stance and did not accept compromise.
Now Azerbaijan is making the same mistake. So it’s overly demanding. In fact, he has set his sights on the deportation of Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh and is definitely trying to achieve this.
Of course, he cannot publicly declare such goals, but the conditions he sets say exactly that. What are these conditions? Disarmament and rejection of negotiations with representatives of the Nagorno-Karabakh authorities. He does not see them as authorities.
Azerbaijan calls everything the restoration of constitutional order. But I want to ask, what kind of constitution are we talking about? If we are talking about the restoration of the constitutional order of the Azerbaijan SSR, then Nagorno-Karabakh was the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region. But today’s Azerbaijan does not want to hear this. The constitutional order after Karabakh was actually subordinated to Azerbaijan – this happened during the Soviet period – has no direct relationship with Karabakh. The constitutional order in the territory of the rest of Azerbaijan is the internal decision of Azerbaijan in the conditions where Karabakh has already been lost. So this is a false excuse. Behind this is the desire to either assimilate or expel Armenians from the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh. And for this it is necessary to disarm them, and for this it is necessary to exclude, disable representatives of the political elite of Nagorno-Karabakh from the dialogue.
Who will they talk to? With ordinary citizens? It is clear that they want to behead Nagorno-Karabakh. Behead and disarm.
In my opinion, these are the seeds of a future conflict. Not today, not tomorrow, but definitely.
On accusations of non-fulfillment of agreements made against Russia regarding Karabakh
Secretary of the Security Council of Armenia, Mr. [Армен] Grigoryan openly hates Russia in Armenia. His appointment to this position immediately after the Velvet Revolution already signaled the path that the Pashinyan government would follow. Moreover, Mr. Grigoryan is considered Pashinyan’s heir if anything happens. He is much more determined in his speeches than Mr. Pashinyan. It is not possible to imagine cooperation between Armenia and Russia in the field of security in an environment where Grigoryan is the senior representative of the Armenian side.
About signs of genocide connected with Azerbaijan’s actions
I agree that the initiative taken, the conditions put forward, are very similar to those actually implemented during the Armenian genocide at the beginning of the twentieth century. Let me remind you that the Armenian genocide during the First World War began with the destruction of all Armenian military personnel of the Turkish army. They were simply executed. So much so that these people with guns in their hands then resorted to deportation, deportation, murder, robbery, etc. They could not defend the Armenian population that was exposed.
In total, as is known, more than a million Armenians died. And this is recognized by many countries, including Russia. Azerbaijan and Türkiye do not recognize this.
In this case, can the Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh trust Azerbaijan, which demands disarmament? It just means putting yourself at the mercy of the winner. Thats the problem. And what Azerbaijan is doing today, yes, this is very reminiscent of the first steps of carrying out actions that fall within the concept of “genocide”. This may be a little early, but it’s true.
Source: Gazeta
Dolores Johnson is a voice of reason at “Social Bites”. As an opinion writer, she provides her readers with insightful commentary on the most pressing issues of the day. With her well-informed perspectives and clear writing style, Dolores helps readers navigate the complex world of news and politics, providing a balanced and thoughtful view on the most important topics of the moment.