Nagorno-Karabakh conflict: High time for decisive steps from Armenia

WThe outcome of the visit of U.S. President's National Security Adviser John Bolton was disappointing for Armenians who hoped that he would dispel all doubt about the statements of former Ambassador to Armenia Richard Mills.

Following the visit to Moscow and Baku, John Bolton came to Yerevan on October 25.

There are points that need to be emphasized once again to sum up this, unusual in many ways, voyage of an American official.

At a press conference, he had to fend off bothersome journalists with regards to the recent statement of Richard Mills, who, leaving Armenia, said that the occupied Azerbaijani territories should be returned.

Bolton noted that solving the problem is very difficult and this is proved by the fact that the conflict couldn't be settled for a long time. Also, he stressed that the U.S. stance remains unchanged, the parties must work with each other and find the solution themselves.

It was a short visit, which literally shook all segments of the Armenian society. During his visit to Baku, Bolton called Azerbaijan a strategic partner of the U.S. However, he abstained from the same description, speaking about relations with Armenia.

The statements made by Bolton in Azerbaijan are the words of a representative of a partner country interested in developing bilateral relations and generally making serious bets on cooperation with official Baku. What was said in Armenia sounded more like instructions and insistent advice to the Armenian side on how it should act in matters of interest to Washington.

Unrest also began among Armenians living in the U.S. In connection with the words of John Bolton about the possibility of President Trump’s abolition of the notorious anti-Azerbaijani 907th Amendment, Armenian National Committee of America declared that this amendment must be saved.

The diaspora and lobby are especially frightened in the future by the sale of weapons by U.S. to the parties to the conflict, including Azerbaijan. Given the size of the military budget of Azerbaijan, this country can acquire much more modern American weapons than Armenia, states committee.

And this is true. Azerbaijan really has immeasurably large opportunities, its positions are much more durable, and the ability to influence processes in and around the region is simply irreplaceable. It is quite natural that, as a strategic partner and ally, the U.S. is interested in Baku.

Armenia also could have all this -- even now that chances are not lost yet. But for this it is necessary to abandon the destructive rhetoric and occupation policy, which does not bring this country anything except misfortunes and regular frustration.

In case acting Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan wins the elections, this would be a good opportunity to take decisive measures to resolve the Karabakh conflict, Bolton believes.

Thus, the corresponding message to Pashinyan has already been made.

Now it is up to him to decide whether to step on the rake of the previous regime, seeking to preserve the status quo, or take a course on effective ways to resolve the conflict in accordance with the norms and principles of the international law.

Only when making a decision, one should bear in mind that Azerbaijan definitely possesses diplomatic, economic and military advantages. Moreover, truth and legality are on the side of Azerbaijan.

Armenian leadership should understand that political instability, stemming from unresolved conflict, causes lose of population and economic problems. And no state can exist without people. Migration from Armenia hit the record levels recently. People leave Armenia not only because of deep economic crisis, but also because of lack of social justice, political instability and longlasting war.

Moreover, it is obvious that the team of the acting prime minister is not strong enough - it concerns both internal and external political course of the country. Some appointments of Pashinyan have already caused bewilderment and criticism. This also applies to some practical steps that can be called excessively harsh and thoughtless - especially those that worsened the relations with Moscow.

Nikol Pashinyan can make speeches about strategic partnership with Russia every day and publicly be proud of each of their meetings and telephone conversations with Putin. But it would be good for him not to forget that Moscow does not just “believe in tears”, but also evaluates everything according to deeds. Pashinyan should establish peace and not play political games, especially since the U.S. does not intend to help the new authorities of Armenia, realizing the illegal seizure of Karabakh.

Bolton, in particular, noted that if the forecasts of public opinion in Armenia are confirmed, after the elections, the Prime Minister will have a very strong mandate to implement a series of decisive steps and efforts to resolve the Karabakh issue. If there is readiness, then we must work so that there is a similar reaction from the Azerbaijani side, he said.

If translate the statement of Bolton from the “diplomatic” language to the “human” language, then it becomes clear that at the price of Pashinyan’s mandate after the extraordinary elections there will be “decisive steps in the Karabakh issue”. From the Armenian side only the territories handed over to Azerbaijan can be considered as decisive steps.

It can be concluded from the statement of Bolton that the American side is ready to “work with Azerbaijan” so that official Baku would positively respond to the “decisive steps of Yerevan”.

After his election as prime minister, Pashinyan has repeatedly stated that he has no right to usurp the mandate to negotiate from “Karabakh side“. However, the reality shows that official Yerevan, contrary to the statements of acting Prime Minister, continued and continues to conduct negotiations within the framework of the OSCE Minsk Group format. Moreover, during the rallies, Pashinyan laid the solution to the Karabakh problem on the shoulders of the people, repeatedly stating that the people's opinion is the decisive factor that must determine whether this or that solution to the Karabakh issue is beneficial or not. Behind the wording “opinion of the people,” Pashinyan hid his personal vision of the settlement, but John Bolton, with statements about “expectations from Pashinyan of decisive steps,” returned the acting Prime Minister from heaven to earth.

By the way, the former U.S. ambassador to Armenia Richard Mills also returned Pashinyan to reality, who stated that any settlement of the Karabakh conflict would require the return of a certain part of the occupied territories.

Moreover, in the course of the visit, Bolton refused the invitation of the Secretary of the Security Council of Armenia. It would seem that John Bolton first of all should have been a “guest” of the Armenian Security Council and its secretary Armen Grigoryan. However, a oneon-one meeting with the secretary did not take place, although Bolton visited the council. At the end of the day, Grigoryan tried to invite Bolton to dinner, but received a refusal. Immediately after the press conference, the U.S. representative left the country.

All of the above implies the following conclusion - U.S. will not defend Armenia with its two-faced current authorities.

And now it’s time for Armenia to finally decide on whether to remain in the position of an outpost with an eternally outstretched hand or, throwing off rogue country label, which it imposed on itself, give up her aggressive policy and be allowed into the circle of regional development.