Baku is preparing the text of Armenia’s unconditional surrender

While Nikol Pashinyan stated at the UN, “Let us speak the positive, in order to be well,” Azerbaijan signed a contract with the Israeli company AS Holdings and a subsidiary of Ari Arms, which is known for producing NATO-standard light small arms, and also publicly wrote another chapter of the “act of Armenia’s unconditional surrender.”

In an interview with the Italian La Repubblica, Assistant to the President of Azerbaijan Hikmet Hajiyev again called on Armenia to change the Constitution, stated that Armenia’s military construction should be “responsible and proportional”, and also noted that “the best solution for Armenia would be neutrality.” In other words, Baku demands Armenia’s demilitarization.

For any citizen who is more or less actively following the developments in the South Caucasus, there is nothing new or surprising in Hajiyev’s statements. Baku is not preparing a peace treaty for Armenia but an act of unconditional surrender, which, among other things, should really mean limiting Armenia’s military potential.

All other things being equal, Azerbaijan’s statements should have led Armenia to reconsider its strategy regarding talks with Baku. However, instead, Nikol Pashinyan continues to lead the process, the direction of which was outlined back in 2018 by former US National Security Adviser John Bolton, who called on Armenia to abandon “historical stereotypes”. Pashinyan is also leading Armenia along the path specified by former EU Special Representative for the South Caucasus Toivo Klaar, who stated that Turkey can help establish regional peace as the leading country in the region.

It was based on the logic of Bolton-Klaar that Pashinyan met with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan during his visit to the United States and asked for Ankara’s assistance in signing an agreement with Baku. In other words, Pashinyan asked Erdogan to influence Aliyev. Or, in other words, Pashinyan asked Erdogan to mediate in the Armenian-Azerbaijani process.

Wait, but how is that? How can the Armenian authorities ask for mediation, especially Turkey, if officials from Andranik Kocharyan and Artur Hovhannisyan to Nikol Pashinyan used to say that there should not be a mediator because “a mediator brings their own interests into the negotiation process.” Do they want to convince the Armenian people that Turkey will be an impartial mediator? Turkey, which, among other things, signed the “Shushi Declaration” with Baku that has territorial claims to Armenia.

By the way, do Armenian politicians not want to give a political assessment of Pashinyan’s actions to involve Ankara as a “mediator” in the negotiation process between Armenia and Azerbaijan?

Pashinyan and the members of the Civil Contract Party know perfectly well that Turkey has not been and will never be an impartial mediator, but there is a pragmatic political calculation in the actions of the authorities. Only in Armenia, integrated into the Turkic world, do they personally have hopes for security guarantees.

Think about it…