Strange complaint

Unable to resist Azerbaijan's resolute operation to liberate its lands from separatists, terrorists, and those who carried out genocide, the Armenian president appealed to the European Union and NATO and called on "everyone in Brussels to put pressure on Turkey". Claiming that Turkey supports Azerbaijan in military operations, the Armenian president took it upon himself to convey to the EU and NATO leadership that this could change the geopolitics in the region.

This is one of the extensions of the policy that Armenia has been trying to put into circulation since the beginning: to try to get support from the world, describing Azerbaijan's military operations as a "war between Turkey and Armenia". It seems that the problem of Yerevan is deeper than it seems from the outside, the despair has reached such a level that even an accusation can no longer be made with the simplest logic and mathematics. Therefore, they start talking about "that the geopolitics of the region will change" when they cannot get support from the world by claiming that "we are at war with Turkey".

If the "geopolitics of the region" changes, shouldn't the address be Russia, which has controlled the region for 200 years? Doesn't Russia, which changed the geopolitics of the region 200 years ago by bringing Armenians to the Turkish lands in the Caucasus and using them for its own purposes, now see that, as Armen Sargsyan claims, "Turkey will change that policy"? If not, what can NATO do about it? What is NATO's fault if it does not intervene or does not have the power to do so? Maybe NATO itself desires the change of geopolitics, the Armenian president does not know about it, and because he does not know, he considers it his duty to inform Brussels that a country that has been a member of NATO for 68 years will "change the geopolitics in the Caucasus".

As it is said in Turkish, it is the case of “having more holes than swiss cheese”. It has been repeatedly said and written that the Azerbaijani army does not need additional support to liberate its lands, and when it comes to supporting, the vast majority of the Turkish population is with Azerbaijan, which they consider a brother.

The statements of the Turkish leadership that "we will support Azerbaijan both in the field of operations and at the table" do not mean that the armed forces will take part in operations on the Azerbaijani side. On the other hand, if the Armenian head of state is looking for a "geopolitical" change, NATO is at the forefront of international organizations in the region that want that change. And this desire is being tried to be realized in the Black Sea region, before the Caspian region.

As a member of the alliance, Turkey has both a role and a signature in the maximum support given to the strengthening of Ukraine's cooperation with NATO, in the calls and decisions taken to accelerate Georgia's membership in NATO. Therefore, as the Armenian President claims, "if Turkey's support for Azerbaijan will change the geopolitics in the Caucasus", no one, especially Armen Sargsyan, should doubt that NATO has a positive opinion. So what is the logic and mathematics behind the complaint against Turkey to Brussels?

Just as it is illogical for Azerbaijani lands to remain under Armenian occupation for a long time, President Sargsyan's complaint against Turkey to NATO is a logical consequence of the same illogicality.

Apparently, with this illogicality, Armen Sargsyan thought that despite being a member of NATO, Turkey acts independently of the alliance, is not responsible for its actions before the alliance, and Brussels does not demand any explanation from Turkey; therefore it complained against one of the oldest members to the alliance that "it will change the geopolitics in the Caucasus, stop it"

In fact, with this appeal on Twitter, the Armenian head of state has put Russia in a difficult situation, in all plans of which country, Armenia has been a tool for 200 years. So, doesn't the appeal raise the possibility that Russia will not be able to intervene in Turkey's intention to "change the geopolitical situation in the region"?

What do you think?...