‘Shame was chosen between shame and war’: expert on Armenia’s policy on Karabakh

In an interview with Alpha News, Russian political scientist, geostrategist Andrey Shkolnikov assessed what happened in Karabakh and analyzed the fate of Armenian-Russian relations.

“The problems of Armenia and Karabakh are based on the policy of the Armenian authorities,
or rather, their attempt not to have it both ways, but to be oriented towards Western countries and in many ways to be oriented towards the West. As a result, a consistent series of anti-Russian actions began to be perceived as the norm. For many years, Russia has spelt it out: if you want us to be your allies, you must also be our allies.

But it never happened. As a result, in Transcaucasia we observed a situation that was interesting to the point of stupidity, when in fact both the Armenian and the Azerbaijani authorities were used as toys of external forces which tried to call on Russia to side with one of these puppets, since the national interests of both the countries were against what they were doing. This will have long-term negative consequences for both parties. It resulted in an abhorrent situation when Armenia was simply destroyed,” he said.

The expert noted that French equipment and American assistance would lead to nothing.

“What we are seeing now was clear when Nikol Pashinyan was brought to power; in 2019, I wrote an article saying that if Armenia does not change its new policy, then it simply will not exist. The only one that can save it is Russia.

Because you can appeal to whoever you want, talk about French equipment or about American assistance, but the French are now getting kicked out of Africa, they can’t even stay there, and American assistance won’t lead to anything either. That is, instead of telling beautiful words about the need to recognize the Genocide, they should have built and created the future. In the end, it was necessary to launch a North-South, Russia-Iran project, develop transport corridors, negotiate, communicate on this topic with Georgia, try to do something, but they did not do this,” Shkolnikov noted.

According to the expert, repeated attempts to insult Russia, which were made in the hope of earning the support of the West, led to a well-deserved result.

“The advantage that was gained immediately after the collapse of the Soviet Union was not used in any way. As a result, the first, the second, then the third Karabakh war led to the complete destruction of Karabakh, to the expulsion and exodus of the Armenians. And this happened not because the policy was unbalanced, but because the policy in principle was not a policy. That is, it was a complete disregard for events. Repeated attempts to offend and insult Russia, which were made in the hope of earning the support of the West – which cannot do anything and cannot provide any help – led to a well-deserved result. Russians cannot be more Armenians than the Armenians themselves. Russia cannot defend Karabakh if Armenia itself does not want to, if for some reason the borders are recognized. Why did Armenia not recognize Karabakh? What was it afraid of? Of sanctions?

This reluctance to fight on their own ultimately led to a classic situation. Shame was chosen between shame and war, resulting in the death of people. And now the question arises about the survival, strictly speaking, of Armenia. Azerbaijan smelled blood. Azerbaijan is now like a predator that wants to finish off, and it will move on, it will not stop. And we face a situation that is very negative, very unpleasant,” the expert concluded.