Pashinyan's Statement on Mirror Withdrawal of Troops Loosens Azerbaijan's Hands, Says Tatevik Hayrapetyan

Without the demarcation and delimitation process with Azerbaijan, the Azerbaijani aggression has a clear assessment: invasion and penetration of troops into the territory of Armenia. This was stated by the former MP of the RA National Assembly from the 'My Step' faction, Azerbaijani expert Tatevik Hayrapetyan in an interview with 'Factinfo'.

According to her, we are constantly being presented with the idea that the delimitation and demarcation process is an additional guarantee in preventing Azerbaijani aggression, whereas this is not the case. Hayrapetyan notes that Armenia has internationally recognized borders, by which it became a member of the UN, and even without delimitation and demarcation, this aggression means a military invasion.

She recorded that since the invasion of the Azerbaijani armed forces into the sovereign territory of Armenia on May 12, there have been statements and assessments from the international community. "At that time, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs managed to achieve that, unlike the evaluations given during the 44-day war, we had clear assessments including from the USA, Canada, India, and France. The advancement of Azerbaijani armed forces into the territory of Armenia on May 12 was qualified as an invasion of Azerbaijani forces. Unfortunately, when the Prime Minister of Armenia made a statement about mirror withdrawal at that time, the Azerbaijani side declared that it was their territory, and presented the same to the international community as disputed territory, after which the issue was moved to another plane," noted the Azerbaijani expert.

She remarked that the quality of the international community's statements sharply changed after that proposal about mirror withdrawal, which not only did not work, did not restrain Azerbaijan, but rather loosened Azerbaijan's hands. When you present your own territory as disputed territory, any power center, regardless of its attitude, is not going to make a clearer statement.

Hayrapetyan mentioned that after the Azerbaijani aggression on November 16, the international statements were already vague and called for delimitation and demarcation between the parties. "I don’t think it is correct to go for the delimitation and demarcation process in the face of Azerbaijani aggression and pressure. That process should be implemented, but the issue is how and in what environment and not under the threat of force," noted the Azerbaijani expert, adding that if we could have received a proportional response from the international community—such responses we received before the statement on mirror withdrawal—we would then have clear mechanisms for organizing our further steps.

Referring to the establishment of operational communication between the defense ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan and Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan's statement that as a result of this contact it should also become clear who is more interested in provocations and who is not, Hayrapetyan noted that discussions about operational communication have been ongoing for a long time and it remains unclear whether this communication existed or not and if it did, how it worked.

The Azerbaijani expert believes that the establishment of such communication between the defense ministers even worked during the wars of the 1990s and was often effective in organizing and resolving certain issues quickly, therefore, it cannot be considered an inherently negative phenomenon. "The problem here is how you present it. Until now, has it been a question for us who is carrying out provocations? Until now, should we understand who is carrying out provocations, or are we trying to explain it to other sides? For even the internationals, it is not that straightforward," said Tatevik Hayrapetyan.

Regarding Pashinyan's statement that they want to normalize relations with Turkey, but the issue of a corridor will not be discussed, Hayrapetyan notes that Turkey will not move towards normalization of relations. "The more you retreat and say, we will also do this, we will open a path, you will connect with each other, we have no problem with the Turkish world connecting, we are not a bone in your throat, and you say similar texts, that does not mean they will open the border with you. The Prime Minister, who a year ago stated that Turkey returned to the South Caucasus with the aim of continuing its genocidal policy, does he have doubts on this issue or does he want to make additional clarifications?" emphasized the Azerbaijani expert.

She stressed that there should be a clear awareness and assessment of the situation, as well as adequate steps at the state and public levels. Hayrapetyan emphasizes that there is no logical person who does not wish for peace, however, this advocacy is received negatively, since on one hand, they speak of opening an era of peace, while on the other hand, soldiers are again being taken captive, territorial losses occur, and the President of Azerbaijan threatens to punch us on the head.

"This means you are simply engaged in self-deception and narcotizing your own public. I am not saying that the counterweight is the hatred propagated by Aliyev, but there must be an appropriate vigilance within society, awareness of the situation, so that the response also corresponds to the situation. The Armenian soldier is standing on the border, but the society is behind that soldier, and public sentiment is also important in terms of the soldier’s future actions," concluded Tatevik Hayrapetyan.