On the memory of diplomat Hamlet Gasparyan

The issue of “communications” and borders is repeatedly put forward from the highest Moscow platform [Putin / Kremlin, 1]. The desire to strangle Armenians in a bucket like blind cats, haunts the Kremlin. However, there are signs that the “Zangezur brawl” may have a bad effect on Russia and even on Putin personally. This indicates the Russian officials, as well as the local specialized press cautious assessments [in Taras, 2].The fact that the Kars Treaty of 1921, if used correctly, can also fail Russian and Turkish dreams of recognizing the Soviet borders of Azerbaijan.

Special attention should be paid to the fact that the “corridor” of Russian cautious tendencies arose against the background of the insanity of the Armenian side [Pashinyan, 3].The Mirzoyan-Grigoryan tandem, which does not stand up to any criticism, is reduced only to impurity directed at society [Mirzoyan, 4]. It is clear that the reservations of Moscow circles [Zakharova, 5] arise from the realization that the attempt to “update” the Russian-Turkish consensus established in the South Caucasus in 1921 through genocide and war directed against Armenians is a hard-to-reach product.It is clear that the reservations of Moscow circles arise from the realization that the attempt to “update” the Russian-Turkish consensus established in the South Caucasus in 1921 through the genocide and the war against the Armenians is a hard-to-reach product. A lot of money, and significant staffing support for Rusart and anti-Armenian propaganda is in process. The results of the 2020 war are actually difficult for the West to access, since in the likely Caucasian military arena, the Russians are building a retreating, rearguard barrier to NATO. For those who are fascinated by the “peaceful era”, we emphasize: the dam and the blood of their generation. In order to understand Moscow’s alarm, let’s imagine what Russia’s position would be even after the November 9 statement if the Republic of Armenia had shown a clear position. 

These devotees in the genre of flat subscription consistently headed the Armenian Foreign Ministry in the government of Nikol Pashinyan

The clear position of the Republic of Armenia should have concerned the very cause of the aggression of September 27, 2020 – the exhaustion of the Moscow/The Kars Treaties of 1921. It was supposed to treat the reparation of the atrocities of 1915-1923 in the spirit of the Pan-Armenian Declaration of 2015 [declaration on the 100th anniversary, 6], to discuss the problem of Western Armenia in the spirit of Wilson’s jurisprudence, to resolve the borders of the Republic of Armenia and Turkey with the priority return of the Armenian Kars, Ararat and Nakhichevan.

The issue of the so-called “Azerbaijan Republic” was to be considered from the point of view of the separation of the Artsakh region and the restoration of ethnic diversity in other Armenian-populated areas of the Caspian West․ Representing Armenia’s policy as a settlement of the problem with Azerbaijan, it is not difficult to see that it will be spread from the Middle East and the wider international arena. And what do we have instead? Victims and mercilessly speculated hostage problems. That is, we are eyewitnesses of a pronounced provincial picture of governance, which is quite natural for a circle around the personality of Nikol Pashinyan. That is the highest level. Naturally, such things completely satisfy Moscow’s customers because they provide complete defenselessness and depression for Armenians [Ezerq, 7]. The lack of sovereignty of Armenia is not a consequence of the results of the autumn 2020  – to be clear the opposite is more correct.

 What should have been the position of sovereign Armenia in the months of the expiration of the 1921 treaty and what do we see? The result of the moment is in front of us. It should be noted that the absence of sovereignty, contrary to the imposed point of view, is not a consequence of the so-called “defeat” – the thesis that Russian, Turkish and local “personnel” propagandists impose on the neck of the Armenian people. Yes, the people are disoriented, but we would like to see the state of other people, nations who are under psychological post-war terror like us during history. The absence of a national identity is due to the fundamental absence of the idea of sovereignty in the  political elite groups. If we limit ourselves to the last century of the nation’s existence, then the situation did not arise on November 9, but has a history of three post-Soviet decades.

If the Kars Treaty is in force

The Zangezur narrative can seriously harm the image of Vladimir Putin, who left his soldiers in the Donbass under the attack of Turkish Bayraktar and, together with Erdogan and Aliyev, pulled the same sequence. The fact is that the Meghri road “leads” to Nakhichevan, and Nakhichevan in its current form is the Kars Treaty of 1921. If the treaty is not in use, then what about Mount Ararat on the other side of the border. If the treaty is used, then Nakhichevan is only a Baku protectorate with the consent of the Republic of Armenia (Chapter 5 of the treaty). Even in this case, it is not the sovereign territory of “Azerbaijan”, in particular, from the point of view of  their inclusion in Baku’s international treaties. So mutual recognition of borders means recognition of the status quo of the Kars Treaty “from the back door”, plus extracting new concessions from Armenia on the Nakhichevan issue, which is what Moscow and Ankara are striving for through Pashinyan. In Moscow, they are more sensitive to the status of the 1921 Kars than in Yerevan [IA REGNUM, 8], [Melkonyan, Scientific Conference of the National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Armenia, 9]. 

Shifts in Armenia will occur if in new Moscow form [Kopyrki, 10] the “actor of the Russian presence”, and in Armenian – perfect Nikol Pashinyan loses his electorate, ready to give thousands of interests of Russia and Turkey to the Land of Yerablur. Is already being deprived.

Eastern borders of the Republic of Armenia, represented by the National Council of Western Armenia (1919-1920))

http://www.western-armenia.eu/archives-nationales/Armenie_1920/L-Armenie_transcaucasienne-territoires_frontieres_statistiques.pdf