I have heard about the use of Iskander from the media, I have no information on the rest: Ohanyan

Former Minister of Defense of the Republic of Armenia, Hero of Artsakh Seyran Ohanyan's interview with Aysor.am.

- Mr. Ohanyan, the third President of the Republic of Armenia, Serzh Sargsyan, stated in his interview that the defense of Shushi was left to Seyran Ohanyan "for other reasons." He said that they wanted to blame the fall of Shushi on Seyran's "pocket." Do you share the President's view, and what actually happened in Shushi?

- While listening to the interview of the third President of the Republic of Armenia, Serzh Sargsyan, I want to once again emphasize all the values that have been built in these 30 years and all those people, that great team that has been united around the three Presidents of Armenia and the Presidents of Artsakh. The third President shares all concerns, he has gone through this entire path and has those opportunities, and he is also obliged to present the truth to our society as much as possible. I believe that Serzh Sargsyan spoke not only about concerns but also about fears, which were expressed during failures in the negotiation process, as well as deficiencies in state governance and military building, and overall, this last war, which includes the existing mystery around Shushi. I thank the third President for presenting the truth to our society, a truth that the majority of the public shares.

Regarding Shushi, I have been there several times during the 44 days for various issues—voluntarily—but I had been there a few days at the beginning of November, at the request of the President of Artsakh. I left there on the morning of November 6 at 5:30. I share the concern expressed by the third President. He possesses much more information and I believe he is stating the truth. As for the remaining dark times related to the surrender of Shushi, I believe that when an investigative commission is created, all the issues will be revealed—whether Shushi was surrendered, whether there was treachery, or whether it all happened during combat operations.

- According to Serzh Sargsyan, the Iskander was used in the last period of the war, specifically towards Shushi. What information do you possess regarding this?

- Regarding the use of the Iskander, like everyone else, I have heard about it from the media; I have no other information.

- Serzh Sargsyan also spoke about the Armed Forces development plan, stating that it was planned to acquire 2500 drones by 2024, but the new government changed the plan. In your opinion, why did the government take this step? Why was the plan changed when it is continuously stated that Armenia definitely needs UAVs?

- The President is telling absolute truth; I can only add that after the April war, we made rapid changes in the plans of the Armed Forces from 2016 to 2020, and a considerable number of not only unmanned aerial vehicles but also air forces, air defense, and electronic warfare measures were to be purchased. Furthermore, a new plan was drafted for 2018-2024, which was already not within my time. Since the President says it, it means he is telling the truth. Each such plan—a state program for the development of the Armed Forces and the development of military equipment—was discussed and drafted within the framework of the state system of the Republic of Armenia through a joint inter-agency commission, involving all state management bodies, and also international expert groups participating and determining their importance. Making hasty changes to those programs means not fully mastering the situation. It is also clear to us that this government had placed all its efforts solely on information and disinformation, engaging only in those directions that would enhance their rating and raise their merits in society, thinking that way. Meanwhile, the development of the Armed Forces and military building is primarily aimed at enhancing operational readiness and enhancing combat quality.

- Mr. Ohanyan, ultimately, could we have won this war?

- I unequivocally say that not only could we have won this war, but we were also obliged to win it. The main reason for defeat in this war lies in the fact that, first of all, the state management system, the government, the National Assembly, as well as society did not unite around the main task set before us—to conduct a patriotic war and achieve victory. Another reason was the failure to grasp the military-political situation—the entire capacity of the Security Council was not directed towards providing a full assessment and drawing conclusions from the military-political situation, and subsequently, it should have been decided whether to stop or continue the war, and if continuing, what regroupings and what changes should have been made in the overall operational arrangements and also in the comprehensive support of the army. Another reason was the failure to implement conscription issues—namely, that the army did not feel secure from behind to ensure its full tasks, especially the recovery of sanitary losses, formation of new units, replenishments, and so on. The next reason was the low level of discipline—from the state management bodies to their leadership points, finishing up with the situation prevailing in certain units, and also due to the complete lack of measures taken by the judicial or legal system. All of this led to defeat.

Read the continuation on the original source website.