To be honest, after May 4, I was left with a very unpleasant, bitter impression, when Ilham Aliyev, at least in kind, called our prisoners of war “war criminals” and the ethnic cleansing operation in Artsakh “restoration of territorial integrity” in the presence of participants of the European Political Community gathered in the heart of Yerevan.

A political slap that was wrapped in the rhetoric of peace.
We have already seen all this.

For decades, the dictator of Baku has perfected the art of speaking with Europe in the language of ultimatums. Aliyev simply accused the European Parliament of “sabotaging peace”, referring to 14 resolutions adopted in 5 years, and demonstrably froze cooperation with European institutions.

This whole “theater of one actor” was played out for both domestic and foreign audiences to clearly show that Baku is no longer defending itself, but is dictating terms to the West.

However, the most bitter and tragic thing is elsewhere: the European “peacemakers” pretended that it should be like that. They need Baku as an alternative source of gas, and for this they are ready to shake hands with the authoritarian leader for years, turning a blind eye to his bold rhetoric.

Western double standards and the current situation are dangerous for us.

While Prime Minister Pashinyan reassures the people with the mantra of “crossroads of peace”, the opponent acts very concretely and relentlessly.

Baku is systematically strengthening its military muscles. The defense budget for 2026 is 8.7 billion manats, almost 5 billion dollars, which is naturally intended to “pacify” Armenia.

And what is official Yerevan doing at the moment?

Reduces own defense costs by about 16 percent, effectively launching a unilateral disarmament process.

The peak of cynicism is the “West Azerbaijan” project. It has become a state strategy in Baku, with attempts to legalize it at the international level. When the “No West Azerbaijan” movement raises the alarm and gives the phenomena their real names, saying that it is a policy of demographic expansion of Azerbaijan under the guise of “return”, we are called “enemies of peace” and accused of undermining the settlement process.

But what kind of peace can we talk about when on June 18-19, immediately after our “fatal” elections, Baku has already planned a festival with the derisive name “Return to Western Azerbaijan”.

That is why the question posed in the title arises: elections or referendum? They are trying to put us in front of a false dilemma, presenting the June 7 vote as a “war or peace dilemma, and under “peace” is understood the unconditional acceptance of the road map brought down from Baku.

This is a scam. The real choice is far more dire: either we retain the last vestiges of sovereignty and the right to determine our own future, or we finally accept the humiliation of “West Azerbaijan”

Pashinyan’s strategy is based on a dangerous illusion, giving up Artsakh and “liberating” Russia, as if one can have a “bright European future” and security guarantees for the West.

But where are those guarantees? Where is Europe’s response to Aliyev’s cannibalistic statements in Yerevan?

There are none. There are only regular “paper” resolutions that lack political will, let alone security guarantees.

Those who say that if Pashinyan is re-elected on June 7, “Western Azerbaijan” is really waiting for us, are absolutely right.

We are offered beautiful words and promises without a strong army, without allies, without a clear state strategy.

June 7 is a referendum where the Armenian people will have to choose between the Republic of Armenia and “Western Azerbaijan”.

Political scientist Suren Surenyants

—