Aliyev, who considers him a dictator, “warns” Pashinyan that the dictatorship is rare

The fact that Nikol Pashinyan fights against opponents, initiates criminal cases, arrests is seen by everyone, and Aliyev, who repeatedly demanded from Pashinyan to “solve the issues of revanchist forces, eradicate revanchism” in RA and “did everything” to restore the current government, suddenly decided to accuse the same Pashinyan of being a dictator.

In particular, two media outlets promoting the Baku propaganda machine or Aliyev’s theses: minval.az, 1news.az, publish an article with the same title.:

Moreover, 1news.az Kamala Mamedova, editor-in-chief of the online edition, within the framework of the “Bridge of Peace” initiative twice visited Armenia:

And the Azerbaijani media draw attention especially to the post-election persecution of Nikol Pashinyan, the opposition forces and leaders, moreover, here they suddenly remember the European double standards.

“European and American officials prefer to turn a blind eye to repression, because Pashinyan is pursuing a geopolitical line that is beneficial for them: distancing from CSTO and rapprochement with the EU and the USA. A classic example of a double standard. When the repressions are carried out by the “own” leader, they are qualified as “legal actions within the framework of the legal state”.

When the unwanted or “inconvenient” government does the same, it is called “authoritarianism” and becomes a pretext for sanctions.

However, Western support does not make Armenia more democratic, but rather more dependent.

Pashinyan is gradually turning the country from a Russian outpost into a tool of Western policy in Transcaucasia. History shows that dictatorships, even “pro-European” ones, rarely end well, both for the people and for the neighbors. And in this regard, Armenia is not an exception,” he wrote minval.az:

In turn 1news.az–The article’s author adds:

«During the rule of Robert Kocharyan and Serzh Sargsyan, the country was effectively a military-bureaucratic dictatorship. The government at that time relied on the power bloc and the Karabakh clan, not hiding its harsh style of management.

At that time, the collective West preferred to turn a blind eye to gross violations of human rights and rigging of elections in Armenia, based on pragmatic considerations and the so-called strategic interests related to the regional balance of power.

History repeats itself, with the difference that Western capitals persistently continue to call Pashinyan a “beacon of democracy” in the region, which they did not do to his predecessors.

This allows him to carry out more large-scale repression, taking advantage of the complete carte blanche given by his European and American partners, who prefer to maintain grave silence in the background of the mass arrests taking place in Yerevan.

The situation in the security sector is even more threatening.

Turning into an arena of violent confrontation between Russia and the West, Armenia loses the remains of its subjectivity and becomes a hostage to the game of others.

Instead of the promised stability and prosperity, Pashinyan’s authoritarian regime is persistently pushing his country into internal disturbances and new regional upheavals, making the Armenian state the main victim of the global struggle of great powers.”

Naturally, we have no desire to spread Azeri assessments, even if it is about the regime of Nikol Pashinyan, who speaks from international platforms and podiums about his country’s internal political problems, opponents, and the church.

We are writing this so that Pashinyan, who sacredly keeps confidential information that has the power to shake up the internal situation of Azerbaijan, and in no way notices the Turkish-Azerbaijani interference when it comes to supporting him, sees that the same Aliyev and the Baku propaganda machine can interfere in the internal affairs of Armenia by criticizing his administration and actions.

Aliyev himself jails opposition figures and even journalists, and by and large, it’s not like Europe takes much notice of his dictatorial actions, except for international organizations that occasionally remember imprisoned Azerbaijani journalists.

And what does Aliyev want to show with this, that Nikol Pashinyan is not better than him, that he is forgiven much more? But the dictator of Baku leaves Pashinyan with the responsibility for possible regional upheavals and clashes between the main players.

It is interesting that despite this, Nikol Pashinyan continues to spare Aliyev, and why, Pashinyan himself should answer.

—