After Chief Secretary of the European Union Terry Davis made a terrible
speech on the Karabagh conflict in Paris, vice president of the
National Assembly Tigran Torosyan gave a “counterblow” by stating that
that speech had no legality. Thus, there can be no discussion about the
delegation’s defeat. Let’s not forget to mention that despite the fact
that the speech made by Robert Kocharyan a couple of months ago in
Strasburg had no legality, it was an achievement in Armenia’s politics
and was considered probably as important as the battle of Avarair.
But this is not the main issue. Formally, Tigran Torosyan is right when
he claims that the speech has no legality. But we must state the fact
that the Chief Secretary of the EU sees the Karabagh peace settlement
within the framework of Azerbaijan’s totalitarian rule over the
territories and thinks that the “Armenian separatists” have simply
seized one part of Azerbaijan’s territory.
There are two problems that we face. The first is that the EU also
thinks the same way, and secondly, the Armenian political figures do
not comprehend this or make it seem like they don’t understand.
Basically, the problem is the following: whether we like it or not (and
of course we don’t), one of the principles of the EU is the
totalitarian rule over the territories and not only for the EU. Russia,
along with other countries and international organizations, announce
that the issue must be solved based on that principle, in other words,
we have to adjust to that and try to gain the de facto independence of
Karabagh through negotiations. We either have to let Karabagh be a part
of Azerbaijan or reject any help from international organizations and
claim that “we have nothing to solve because we have already solved the
Karabagh peace settlement.”
There is another problem. The problem with the authorities is that they
think that they can solve the conflict “cunningly”. What’s wrong with
that? After Yezhi Yaskerni’s speech, one got the impression that
Armenia is the world’s most democratic nation. So, why not print the
same speech about Karabagh and take it to Garni-Geghard? Unfortunately,
that will not work. The reason for this has nothing do with Davis or
Adkinson’s honesty. The European Union has simply refused to deal with
future plans of developing democracy in Armenia. That is why Yaskerni’s
speech at the European Union did not make a huge impact on the
audience, in other words, nobody cared if what he said was actually
true or not. This is what we should think about.
Meanwhile, the Karabagh issue is totally different. Although it is not
part of the internal affairs of Armenia, however, it plays a major role
in the outlook for the future of the region’s development. We will not
end everything with just Garni-Geghard. Moreover, in light of the
Karabagh peace settlement, the European Union will translate
Kocharyan’s “book”, it will declare Kocharyan as the father of
democracy, it will award medals, etc…. Might I add that the process has
already begun and we can observe that from Yaskerni’s speech. After
all, according to the Armenian saying, if the uncle gives his relative
diamonds as a gift, then either the uncle is fake or the diamonds.
Armenia was declared a democratic nation at the Strasburg convention.
We know that that is a lie. We simply don’t understand why that is a
lie.