What is behind Pashinyan's "good" intentions?

Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan is an amazing politician. He has seven Fridays a week. In the morning, he can declare one thing, at lunch - the exact opposite, and by dinner, the flow of thoughts generally begins to zigzag.

At the UN General Assembly, he delivered a touching speech full of humanistic messages and beautiful phrases. It's not that we don't believe that he, Nikol Pashinyan, wants peace and an end to problems with his neighbors. We want to believe that. But here's the thing - such issues cannot be solved by will alone. These are very difficult issues, and to solve them, it is not enough just to put on angel wings and fly around the United Nations meeting room. Such problems require real action and real effort. If there are none, then there are no honest intentions. In the absence of honest intentions, even the most correct words mean nothing. In his speech at the GA, Pashinyan did not seem to go beyond the bounds of decency as usual, but there are completely different motives behind his beautiful words. And this is clearly felt in every phrase.

Nikol Pashinyan is very fond of appearing at events that the President of Azerbaijan did not attend. In the absence of the Azerbaijani leader, he feels relaxed. He can calmly pretend to be a peacemaker or throw accusations without fear of getting slapped on the lips. This time, he spoke at the UN only about how Armenia wants peace, how it dreams of hugging its neighbors, opening all roads to them and dancing around them. On the advice of the guardians, Yerevan changed its tactics. Earlier, Armenia's patrons needed the peace treaty not to be signed, now they needed it to be concluded as soon as possible. They believe that they decide this when the "final stage of negotiations" comes. This is how the recent meeting of the Foreign Ministers of Azerbaijan and Armenia in the presence of the US Secretary of State was announced. Before the elections in the States, the ruling party wants to show its ability to influence issues of war and peace. It was not possible to do this in the Russian-Ukrainian and Palestinian-Israeli conflicts. And the settlement between Baku and Yerevan seems to be a simple matter for the state. But this is a misconception.

Who said that the negotiations are nearing the end? No one in Baku thinks so. If 80 percent of the issues are agreed upon, this does not mean that it remains to cross the threshold. One of a hundred problems can slow down the process for years. In our case, this is exactly what happens. Armenia, patronized by the powers, has been stalling for four years instead of fulfilling Azerbaijan's conditions. And these conditions are very mild and sparing, considering how many crimes have been committed by Armenians against the Azerbaijani people. If there were no external guardianship, Yerevan would not be able to resist. Instead of making sweet speeches at the UN General Assembly, Nikol Pashinyan should have started removing obstacles to the peace treaty two years ago. He did everything to do nothing, and today he speaks of Armenia's readiness to change the Constitution for the sake of peace. They say that the Armenian Constitution is impeccable, but if Baku asks for it, after signing the peace treaty, it will think about it. From the rostrum of the United Nations, he is doing a favor to Azerbaijan, and these words of his with caramel-honey comments are spreading in the Western media. And the following picture is drawn: small, aggrieved Armenia is ready for peace, but big and evil Azerbaijan is not.

That's the whole point. The main reason why there is still no peace is that Armenia and all those who try to interfere are trying to present the process as negotiations between equal parties. Not as between the former occupier and the country that defeated him, but as between two schoolchildren who fought, each of whom is guilty in his own way. There is no other example where the world has approached such issues so hypocritically. Armenians were considered victims when the eyes of Azerbaijani babies were burned out, when Azerbaijani cemeteries were destroyed, and when Azerbaijani cities were razed to the ground. It is not necessary to say how much the image of the victim has strengthened behind them after the Second Karabakh War and the September ATO.

Let's not argue - the image of the victim suits our neighbors, but the image of the winner is a problem. All the years of occupation, Armenia, having seemingly won the war, looked pitiful and lost, cowardly tucked its tail like a fox caught in a chicken coop, and clung to someone else's hem. Unlike her, Azerbaijan, having lost its lands, behaved with dignity and pride, did not seek support and help, did not cry, did not try to profitably sell its citizens deprived by the Armenian aggression. With his head held high, he solved problems that a major power would not have been able to cope with. But this does not mean that the roles have been reversed. The pathetic aggressor and thief has not acquired the status of a victim. A thief, after taking the loot from him, remains a thief and is punished for this. The loss in the Second Karabakh War did not lift the burden of responsibility for the thirty-year occupation, ethnic cleansing, genocide and vandalism from the Armenian neck. These crimes remain with Armenia, and there can be no equation of the status of the parties in the negotiations. And that's exactly what all the negotiators are trying to do. Armenian handouts are so sweet and Armenians are so helpful that world actors continue to sin against truth and justice, betting on Armenia.

Let's pay attention - no one remembers today about the First Karabakh War and the years of the Armenian occupation of the territories of Azerbaijan, as if the conflict between the two countries began on September 27, 2020. Everything that happened before and that led to the 44-day war has been diligently erased from the agenda of the international community, which is terribly concerned about peace in the Caucasus. There was no occupation, there were not a million refugees and internally displaced persons, there were not tens of thousands of Azerbaijani civilians killed by Armenians, there were not numerous terrorist attacks carried out by neighbors. When the Western media talks about restoration work in Karabakh and Eastern Zangezur, they do not talk about where such destruction comes from, but focus on concern about the environment due to the construction of power plants and roads by the Azerbaijani side (!).

A year ago, after the anti-terrorist operation in Karabakh, Azerbaijani bloggers posted two articles from the influential The Economist as an example of the hypocrisy of the Western media. One of them was published in September 1996, the other in September 2023.

In the first one we read: "Nowhere have Armenians shown such energy and steadfastness as in "Nagorno-Karabakh" (our quotes-ed.) ... Now Karabakh is actually part of Armenia, its population of about 130 thousand people is completely liberated from Azerbaijanis (Azeri-free)... Armenians are actively settling former Azerbaijani districts (especially villages along the most important road through Lachin). These are tough and determined people who have shown themselves to be much better fighters than the Azerbaijanis today... The real leader is Samvel Babayan, a 30-year-old defense minister, petite but ruthless and charismatic. Samvel Babayan is a proponent of expansion, who believes that Karabakh should extend even further north."

In last year's article on the anti-terrorist operation of the Azerbaijani army, there are completely different emotions: "Azerbaijan is guilty of ethnic cleansing, having decided to attack the enclave instead of concluding a Western-backed agreement guaranteeing the civil rights of the Armenian minority."

As they say, there are two big differences...

All this, of course, inspires the Armenians, gives them hope that peace can wait. With the real world, and not the one offered to Azerbaijan by Pashinyan and his support group.