After the presidential election of February 19 and the adoption of the famous resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly various RA statesmen have started to make mildly said rough statements on the regulation of the NKR conflict and about the activities of the OCSE Minsk Group co-chairmen.
They started to especially complain about the co-chairman Mathew Bryza, who NA chairman Tigran Torosyan is most discontent with. And everything started because of the statement made by Kocharyan at the dawn of his presidency. He made this statement when answering a question regarding the possibility of refusing the Minsk Group format and the belligerent statements of Azerbaijan regarding the NKR conflict resolution. He said that in that case RA will also recognize the independence of the NKR. A little later he added that even if the possibility of the peaceful regulation of the conflict disappears Armenia shouldn’t be intimidated by the threats of Azerbaijan and shouldn’t’ accept any compromises. And two days ago the RA NA was discussing the NKR conflict resolution and Torosyan presented the statement made in that regard. Several MPs made statements. “RA must be ready for stettling the conflict in other international instances,” stated the NA chairman. “The Armenian side must show its resistance to the belligerent statements and references of Azerbaijan,” stated ARF member Vahan Hovhannisyan. Other MPs also made such strict statements. So what does all this mean? What can it bring to Armenia? What consequences can it have for Armenia and does this mean that there is a possibility for the war resumption? Or maybe these statements, which at the first sight are addressed to Azerbaijan, are meant to be used for the internal purposes. “This means that the presidential elections are not over yet and elections are to be held in Azerbaijan. On one hand it is a PR action. It means they are trying to show how powerful and decisive they are (the RA government – A.A.). On the other hand it is a psychological preparation, as a result of which they can justify any kind of riot, repression and violence,” says political scientist Aghasi Yenokyan. In the opinion of the NDP chairman Shavarsh Kocharyan these statements mean “changing the approach by showing that the conflict resolution implies attempts of no compromise but pressuring on the weak one and that the weak side may become the Armenian state is not true.” “The ones, who think that the two Armenian states have weakened due to the internal political developments in the country, are totally mistaken,” thinks Kocharyan. Nevertheless, both of our interviewees do not see any danger for the resumption of war. “Despite the fact that Azerbaijan comes up with threatening statements we should also claim that we are going to protect the security of the people of the NKR.” And Yenokyan thinks that the war will be started only when one of the sides will have a prevailing advantage. In the words of the political scientist during the upcoming several months Azerbaijan will not have such an opportunity in the near future. “I think that we will not have this advantage for awhile either,” says Yenokyan. Doesn’t the NKR conflict regulation move to other instances weaken the positions of Armenia especially in the event of Azerbaijan’s ability of having certain success in this process? Kocharyan tried to pass this question by answering another one. He mentioned that Mathew Bryza didn’t have the right to interfere in the internal affairs of Armenia. “The internal political struggle must not trespass the margin, when it harms the internal positions of the country. If you have a clear standpoint and are unanimous you will always have good results. I am asking a simple question. How can one be an objective co-chairman and meanwhile interfere in the internal affairs of Armenia? These roles must be shared among several people especially if Azerbaijan is in no better stance than us in terms of political prisoners. But Bryza in Azerbaijan is occupied with issues of energy. And this statement should have been made long ago. Every state can give estimation about the internal state of the country but this statement shouldn’t be made with the lips of someone, who is a mediator. This already becomes a means for pressure. Thus I mean that in this case we are dealing not with rough statements but dignity,” says Kocharyan. “At least Azerbaijan has found this other format, which was more profitable for them. Has Tigran Sargsyan offered a format, which is more profitable for us than the Minsk Group? He hasn’t. It means that they are only bragging,” thinks Yenokyan, who thinks that first of all the policy must be changed and even the economic policy. Although he hopes that in the coming one year the positions of the RA will become more favorable. “The incumbent government doesn’t undertake steps in this direction. All the bandit-state does is robbing the country and the military budget,” says Yenokyan.