The second, supposedly, the first is not listening, but...

As it is known, the Prime Minister of Armenia, Nikol Pashinyan, stated at the meeting with representatives of the Armenian community in Munich that the international community did not support Armenia in the issue of self-determination of Karabakh. Apparently, these views of Nikol were expressed by Vardan Oskanyan, the former foreign minister of the country.

Oskanyan contradicted what Nikol said in an interview with the local "Five Channel". Of course, at this time, it has come to nonsense. In general, Vardan has become an expert in talking nonsense, and in fact, it would be impossible not to pay attention to the ramblings of the former foreign minister. However, there is one point, which is why we consider it important to focus on what Oskanyan said. You will know what it is in the last part of the article.

Algarez, V. Oskanyan said that in the process of solving the Karabakh problem, no country supported that self-determination of Karabakh should take place within the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. Apparently, the former foreign minister talks for the sake of talking.

The point is that the issue raised by this person, which became a parody in the name of diplomacy, was not in the diary at all. At the same time, what Oskanyan said does not have the essence of a logical answer to Pashinyan. All he expressed was manipulation. See the statement, the self-determination of Karabakh within the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. Is it such a strange, absurd idea? All that aside, if destiny is determined, can it be based on the territorial integrity of a country? Of course not!

Yes, it is true that in the process of negotiations on the Karabakh problem, the issue of giving the region the highest status within Azerbaijan has become a subject of discussion. What Pashinyan said was that the international community did not accept the issue as self-determination of the Armenians of the region.

As for Oskanyan, he emphasizes that the Armenian government, of which he is a member, had a serious opportunity to realize the determination of Karabakh's destiny. "Nikol Pashiyan got this opportunity more in 2018. If he had not deviated from the logic of the processes (of the Karabakh negotiations - ed.), believe me, today we would have an intermediate status with the prospect of holding a referendum within the borders of the former Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Province," V. Oskanyan stressed.

The point is that Azerbaijan has never allowed Karabakh to be excluded from its territory, or to have any idea about it prevail. That is, what Oskanyan told is a fairy tale. And also because Oskanyan and other Armenian officials have only tried to extend the time for nearly thirty years. In other words, form the reality of Azerbaijan coming to terms with the loss of Karabakh by extending time and hoping for the replacement of generations.

However, this tactic did not work. Of course, Oskanyan is right that when N. Pashinyan came to power, he started everything from scratch. More precisely, it stalls the negotiation process. Oskanyan is free to call it "Anatomy of the loss of Karabakh". But in any case, the general result does not change in front of Azerbaijan's position. The position was always of fundamental importance, guided by uncompromisingness, and not only did not see Karabakh as outside our country, but did not even allow it to be suspected even a little.

The former head of the Foreign Ministry of Armenia also spoke about the current Prime Minister N. Pashinyan's avoidance of the tripartite statement dated November 10, 2020. He stated that the said statement confirmed the autonomous status of Karabakh. However, according to Oskanyan, this status was not taken into account during the subsequent Prague summit (the meeting of the leaders of Azerbaijan and Armenia held in October 2022 with the mediation of the President of the Council of the European Union Charles Michel).

The former head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs says that Pashinyan should have relied on the Madrid principles and tried to discuss the document with the former government. As if the situation would be completely different then. "If the Armenian government had not deviated from the tripartite declaration, today there would be Lachin Corridor and Karabakh operating within tighter borders. To deviate from the document was to avoid Russian mediation in favor of Western mediation. The Armenian side hastily took steps that were not foreseen at the current stage," said Oskanyan, who believes that all this worked for the benefit of Azerbaijan.

The former head of the Foreign Ministry of Armenia stands on the statement made after the Prague meeting as the main component of the loss of Karabakh. "After the Prague statement, if Pashinyan's opposition, in particular, had listened to my advice and included the fact that Karabakh had an autonomous status in the Soviet era in the agenda of the peace talks, perhaps the situation would have been a little different," Oskanyan said. believes. Of course, he is seriously wrong. First, he prefers the expression "the people of Karabakh", which was also brought up by the Pashinyan government. However, the process has shown that the approach is fundamentally wrong. Rather, our country proved the inadmissibility and inadmissibility of the mentioned approach.

Secondly, the former MFA chief says that the Prague statement is incorrect, and talks about the possibility of holding negotiations with the "people of Karabakh" if the above-mentioned scenario comes true, which is complete nonsense. Because Azerbaijan never accepted Karabakh as a separate party in the negotiation process during the time when he was the minister. After becoming the winner of the war, he would not agree to the issue under any circumstances. Azerbaijan put forward the logic of integration of the Armenian population of Karabakh into our country, which neither official Iravan nor its patrons abroad considered. They tried to raise the "importance" of the former separatist regime in Karabakh, so that everyone saw the sad fate of such behavior as a result of local anti-terrorist measures.

It should be noted that when V. Oskanyan always expresses an opinion about Karabakh, he concludes with an optimistic note. In the sense that this creature, which looks like a shepherd dog when it gets old, sends messages that nothing is lost yet. Most likely, he believes that someone in Pashinyan's power will call him for advice.

Oskanyan, continuing the same "script" again, says that if the return of the Karabakh Armenians is insisted upon, there will be a chance for change in the negotiation process. He even dares to turn the issue he spoke about into a part of this process.

Of course, the main issue is not what V. Oskanyan said. The main point is that the Armenian government does not have the potential to present a different and constructive approach from the former Foreign Minister. There is no doubt that someone in Pashinyan's team or close circles will criticize Oskanyan for what he said, and there will even be those who insult him by recalling the past.

At the end, let's get a link to the point we said we would talk about. The real problem is that, as a result, we do not see that the representatives of the current Armenian government behave differently from those who were in power in the past. Pashinyan brought up the confusions of the Armenian opposition, the revanchists, whom he does not like indirectly, on the subject of Karabakh, and tried to bring those confusions to the negotiation table in a slightly different presentation. Every time, his desire remained in his eyes. Thus, on the one hand, the peace process has been disrupted, and on the other hand, Armenia has aggravated the peace conditions that are profitable for itself. Currently, Oskanyan's "advices" are nothing more than making the situation worse for Yerevan. So, it remains for Pashinyan to listen to the "advice"...

R.ƏVƏZ
XQ