Pashinyan’s rise to power was pre-planned game — Igor Semenovsky

Speaking with Alpha News, political scientist Igor Semenovsky commented on the statements by the President of Azerbaijan and the policies of the Prime Minister of Armenia.

“Such bold statements are unacceptable for leaders. It is clear that this is political rhetoric addressed to the voters, the public that, riding the wave of supposed success, is trying to acquire some new achievements in Azerbaijan. In this regard, not concluding a peace agreement really plays into the hands of Azerbaijan. In other words, there are no legally binding guarantees of the inviolability of the territory of Armenia from Azerbaijan, since they do not exist. It is clear that the border delimitation commissions are working, but the longer this point of concluding an agreement is delayed, the more beneficial it is for Azerbaijan and the less beneficial it is for Armenia.

Why does Armenia not use regional institutions here? Why does only the European Union mission play a role here? This is a question of ensuring maximum security for Armenia. Azerbaijan felt that the economy plays into its hands, that the regional situation is developing in such a way that it can loudly declare its ambitions with the support of Turkey and the European Union, which is now in great need of energy resources. The Azerbaijani state, represented by its leader, feels that there is an opportunity to put more pressure and get some points, priorities, and advantages for itself,” the expert said.

Commenting on Pashinyan’s policy, the expert noted that it was a targeted and planned game in the interests of the West.

“In fact, neither France nor any other countries that are members of the OSCE nor the United States, with which defense cooperation is developing, will get involved in these problems. The question arises: Where is America, and where is the South Caucasus? Where is France, and where is the South Caucasus? It was simply a planned game, because it is already clear to everyone where the roots of Pashinyan’s rise to power are. Therefore, his targeted, non-sovereign policy led to such results. You don’t have to go far for other examples.

This is the same Ukrainian scenario, and a number of other scenarios, which, unfortunately, show that the non-sovereign course of politicians leads to negative consequences for statehood. Now the only tool with which Armenia can protect its territorial integrity is a return to the Eurasian institutions, which can affect security in the South Caucasus. These are the CSTO and the CIS. But as we understand, Pashinyan has pursued such a policy that it was not the CSTO that actually left Armenia, but Armenia that left the CSTO. The same thing, but more smoothly, slowly, and more delayedly, is happening with the CIS institutions. This concerns political track, security, and humanitarian cooperation,” Semenovsky concluded.