Andranik, who is he that I should go discuss issues with him? - Seyran Ohanyan

During the period from October 3-6, I told Nikol Pashinyan in Araik Harutyunyan’s office regarding the issue of mobilization: “This is your question; go, execute it, win, if you want to take me along for 20 years afterward, then go ahead.” Nothing came of it. He runs the country in a streetwise manner before, during, and after the war,

said former Defense Minister Seyran Ohanyan in an interview with NEWS.am, addressing Pashinyan’s statements from the day before and other remarks related to him.

Yesterday, Pashinyan recalled an operation and mentioned the son of one of the generals. Fingers were pointed at you. Regarding Shushi, Pashinyan said he has many questions. Were you or your son ever summoned for questioning to find out the truth from you?

No one from the authorities has attempted to clarify anything from me. I believe there’s nothing to clarify, because they led and controlled the military operations themselves. I have simply stated in my interviews that if an investigative commission is established, I am ready to provide information, as I was there for 40 out of the 44 days. I can conduct analyses and provide information.

Why are the arrows aimed at you and your son?

They have two objectives: to find scapegoats for their failures and to point fingers at those who were not responsible for this war. Since I am forced to respond to their statements every time and am among those demanding a resignation, the arrows are directed at me. But it's very unfortunate that they also occasionally try to point arrows at my family and sons because of me. I have never referred to anyone's family during criticism; it is wrong and unbecoming of a man.

Yesterday, the Security Council published excerpts from recordings of one of the meetings during the war that were related to Onik Gasparyan’s statements. Isn’t it concerning that the authorities are releasing confidential information for internal confrontation?

Clearly, it is concerning, but there's another aspect that is troubling. They say that it was not planned for the Chief of Staff to speak at the Security Council meeting. During the war, when the situation is extremely tense in the Security Council, what are they discussing if the Chief of Staff, who is responsible for the entire military system, is not supposed to speak and present the situation? Secondly, the country’s leader, who becomes the Supreme Commander, should create his own command post and lead it in a 24-hour format over 44 days, not the Security Council, the government, or the parliament. They should have worked day and night to make the right decisions.

Pashinyan and his teammates have recently continuously promoted the thesis that the seven regions were surrendered long ago. As a former defense minister, was there any order, discussion, or conversation during your tenure to prepare for the surrender of the seven regions?

A significant amount of serious negotiation potential has been accumulated over the past 30 years; there are experienced individuals who have negotiated over documents (regardless of what document is currently being discussed). Each side has negotiated, advancing the interests of their country. And the interests of our country have always been a priority, based on the principle of self-determination of the people of Artsakh. The remaining problems should have been resolved through negotiations. During my entire tenure as minister, there has never been a direct order from my leadership to say, “Go, get ready, we are surrendering the regions.” There has never been such a directive. Moreover, I have always promoted the thesis that defensive structures and security should be strengthened. Artsakh should be integrated with Armenia at a rapid pace, prioritizing the development of historical-cultural and legal frameworks, economic integration, and, of course, defense and security systems. All this has been accomplished. As a minister, my task has been to ensure the defense and security of Armenia and Artsakh, which has been carried out. I have served in Artsakh for 20 years, 7.5 of which I was the Minister of Defense.

Yesterday, My Step’s Andranik Kocharyan announced on H1 that he, along with Samvel Babayan, is inviting you again to discuss defense issues and matters related to the army. Why did you reject the first invitation, and are you ready to participate in discussions in that format?

During the war, I saw Andranik Kocharyan once in Artsakh; I told him to focus on mobilization. Petr Ghazaryan called me once and said he wanted to discuss security issues with me. I said I was busy. He informed me that he also wanted to invite Samvel Babayan and Andranik Kocharyan. It later became clear that it was not Petr Ghazaryan but Andranik Kocharyan who initiated all this. However, Kocharyan had connections with me; we had a normal, friendly relationship. When I was the defense minister, we met regularly, and there were requests. At his request, I even reinstated certain individuals who had left the army.

Yesterday, in his speech, Andranik Kocharyan says he is again inviting me to discussions. I called him to ask when he had invited me, that he was inviting me again. He did not answer my calls. He said on air, “Let him come; I’ll ask him a question, I want to see…” and was asking trivial questions. If Andranik Kocharyan is using trivial questions as a basis for security discussions, it means they are not interested in security issues but rather want to label people again, as they have previously. In this context, since you raised the issue, taking the opportunity, I must make a few conclusions: who is Andranik that I should go discuss issues with him? If he wants to discuss matters with Samvel Babayan, why is he not inviting him to that meeting? He should add people from his entourage and discuss. If Andranik Kocharyan has had friendly relations with me in the past, now, as a person, he no longer exists for me. It is very unfortunate that women are becoming men, and it is also unfortunate that men are acquiring feminine traits. As for him, he is a gossipy, feminine character who reflects on people’s families. Am I not going to touch his family? Now I tell him, who are you, boy, to touch my family? If you try once more, then the conclusions will be different. He discusses women’s clothing. Let him come and study, see which dress he likes, we’ll give it to him, and he can wear it and roam around the globe or in Armenia. He has not answered my calls and said he wouldn’t respond until I come. Who is he? Is Andranik qualified to tell me to come and answer accusations? They should go and deal with their families. They don’t correspond to any norms of patriotism or morality for me. If he continues, I will present that publicly. I have nothing to discuss with such people. If they want to create an investigative commission, I will go wherever they want and state my piece.

By the way, I must draw a conclusion from the discussions of the previous day in the parliament regarding the government’s performance; it was a report to the parliament, but the head of the government said two words related to 2020 and, according to his characteristics and activity, began to manipulate and justify himself. This shows his political ignorance. We live in a country where the parliamentary leadership is present, the head of the country did not report to the parliament; moreover, did you see how he speaks to the deputies? He and many members of his team do not differ in any way from street criminals and those within a criminal subculture. Such a leader is not needed for our holy country. How can anything be discussed with such people who even speak in criminal jargon?