So, a lot has become extremely clear and open. For this it was necessary to reach Brussels. In fact, discussions on communications are not in the plane of rationality and economic benefits, but in the plane of political expediency. This is also normal, but at the same time there should be a clear understanding of who pays for what and what. Armen Gevorgyan, a member of the “Armenia” bloc, writes about this in his article.
“If communication solutions do not have economic benefits for at least one of the parties, they will only gain political significance. The Armenian side began to mention the project of the Yeraskh-Ordubad-Meghri-Baku-Russia railway connection under consideration more often in the context of gaining access to the Iranian railway, and not in the context of profitable transit to Russia. At the same time, we must understand that with the unresolved Artsakh issue and the absence of new, our own, more optimal ways of communication with Iran (railway, new high-speed highways, etc.), we again find ourselves depending on the whims of Azerbaijan, which can always stop freight flows from Armenia through its territory. We can discuss with Azerbaijan the unblocking of communications, but intensively and in parallel we must advance our communication agenda within the North-South framework.
The formula “corridor instead of corridor” is flawed and unacceptable in its essence and nature of origin, since it will finally lead the parties to the conflict away from the global political solution of the Artsakh issue itself, where the most important issue is the self-determination of the people of Artsakh and the final status of the Republic of Artsakh. Let me remind you of the three main components of the settlement: status, strong ties with Armenia and guarantees of the population’s security. And then – the theme of the corridor is already the theme of Armenia itself, its territorial integrity and sovereignty.
But today the reality is that the future solution of the Artsakh issue is no longer the prerogative of the Armenian authorities, all the main resources are now concentrated in the hands of Russia. Judging by the course of the negotiations, the Transnistrian one seems to be the most optimal Russian way out of the current situation. This means: to postpone the political solution of the conflict to the judgment of future generations, and before that establish dialogue and cooperation between the conflicting parties and achieve the preservation of Artsakh as Armenian-populated as possible, whose security must be protected by the peacekeeping contingent. A potentially visible process of the long-term status quo will be the Russification of Artsakh, the political generalization of which will be the Russian protectorate. It is clear that the Turkic coalition will resist this.
We must be ready for the fact that soon we can also learn about the conditions of Azerbaijan on the delimitation and demarcation of the interstate border and it turns out that we will have to cede a number of territories according to Azerbaijan’s ideas.
Until it is understood that a consistent policy of narrowing the historical area of residence of Armenians and their number in the South Caucasus is being implemented globally as the most optimal solution to the so-called Armenian question, we will only lose and lose. We must realize that the decisions made today will determine the history of our people and state for the coming decades, not years. It will be very difficult to change them, if at all possible. Therefore, the responsibility for them will not be limited only by the term of office of the current Government or the political majority. Such decisions and responsibilities do not have a historical prescription and are very difficult to disappear from the national memory. It is in this context that one must be careful about the agenda of peace and cooperation in the region, which in the public consciousness can minimize the historically conditioned security threats for the Armenian people and, therefore, the need to ensure it by allies or other states, that is, Russia.
And, by the way, about a possible new war. It is clear that this topic is only to justify the upcoming potential losses and concessions. Now the war is not profitable except for Armenia, also for Russia. A new war for Russia is the inevitable fulfillment of its allied obligations within the framework of bilateral relations and the CSTO. The new war is already the first line of contact in Artsakh. It will lead to Russia’s inevitable loss of both the status of an arbiter for Azerbaijan and the prospects for its involvement in integration projects, as well as an ally of Armenia. Failure in terms of non-fulfillment of obligations is a sharp rise in anti-Russian sentiments and an inevitable repetition of the Georgian scenario for ousting Russia from Armenia. For anti-Russian circles, this will be a continuation of the theme: who, after all, surrendered Karabakh?
At the same time, there will be no problems with gas, since Azerbaijan will already provide it! The Armenians will intensively trade with the Turks, import cheap gasoline, eat Turkish tomatoes and tangerines. We will be promised a lot of money from the transit of oil and gas. And this prospect may latently appeal to many residents of our country, who, most likely, in the coming years will not turn from a mercantile man in the street into a patriotic citizen. And many of them do not care whether they will live in a decent and independent state and therefore subconsciously vote in the elections for the prospect of their own ephemeral well-being. And the main majority is sitting at home and waiting for the appearance of their desired leader. And he still does not appear, because he is very different for everyone. ”
Armenian news – NEWS.am