The Decision To Punish Azerbaijan
Haikazn Ghahriyan, Editor-in-Chief
Comments – 15 November 2014, 13:39
The statement released by the press office of the RA president informs
that the presidents of Armenia and NKR watched the drills, then went
to the command post and “listened to the decision of the Defense Army
commander”. The statement does not disclose the decision, of course,
and cannot do.
After the drill Serzh Sargsyan, Seiran Ohanyan and Movses Hakobyan
announced that the Armenian side will respond, and the response is
going to be disproportionate.
The downed Armenian helicopter caused a wide reaction among
international stakeholders and the mass media. Unlike the August
events when the statements were more or less clear, and the
responsible side was indicated, these statements were blurred. For
example, the statement of the Minsk Group does not even note whose
helicopter it was.
The response of the Armenian side in August was in line with the
international community’s stance on punishing Azerbaijan. What
happened next? Russia wanted to “lift the blockade” of Armenia and
Azerbaijan was ready to allow communication between Russia and Armenia
via its territory. Of course, this issue was to be resolved at the
expense of the territories of Karabakh and through stationing Russian
troops in Karabakh.
The proper actions of the Armenian army in August thwarted this plan,
and the wide solidarity of the Armenian people had a great role. Since
the Russian-Azerbaijani plans contradicted the interests of the West,
Iran and China, the international community supported the Armenian
side. In fact, the decision on punishing Azerbaijan was made. In other
words, the actions of the Armenian army were fully in line with the
concept and trend of current global developments, and the Armenians
had an opportunity to see and understand how politics is done, and
what our real interests and foes are.
Currently, judging by international response to the helicopter
incident, there does not seem to be such background and “decision”.
However, there is not a clear-cut attitude to the incident. This means
that the issue remains open.
It is necessary to take into consideration the background situation of
the helicopter incident. It was preceded by NATO week, high-level
meetings between the RA Minister of Defense and NATO leadership during
which readiness to deepen cooperation was expressed.
At the same time, the heads of the Armenian and Russian ministries of
defense signed an agreement on cooperation between armed forces which
pointed out their “integration”. In other words, if NATO sees the
Armenian armed forces as a partner, Russia intends to “integrate” the
Armenian armed forces.
The Armenian army is the only structure which implements a sovereign
policy and also has to fulfill foreign political functions that are
aimed at the sovereignty and security of Armenia. The Armenian army is
currently the only obstacle to full absorption of Armenia.
The developments of August showed that the Armenian army and the
Armenian people are ready and capable of resistance and in that case
the entire progressive world stood beside the Armenians. The
helicopter incident cannot change this setting. On the other hand,
from the military point of view Azerbaijan depends on Russia and has
become an instrument that is used to persuade Armenians to “integrate”
the armies and actually change the status quo. And this contradicts
the international political situation.
In this regard, there is no alternative to the decision to punish
Azerbaijan even though it currently does not fit the “international
trend”. The problem is the scope and nature of punishment with the
non-traditional irregular methodologies that are being established in
the world after which Azerbaijan will refrain from any encroachment.
This fully fits in the rules and logic of international politics and
security.
Is the statement of the Armenian army on “disproportionate punishment”
evidence to such a decision?
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
