“It’d be more accurate to yield up Stepanakert rather than Shusha” – Vova Vartanov Interview continuation

Question - What would happen if the truce act were not signed on November 10? 

Answer –I referred to my battalion no purpose. I had 350 volunteers at most – I was forbidden to muster a larger number - and if it‘d be possible more, I’d raise an array, one and half-two thousand volunteers. Note that 120 soldiers of my battalion did not serve in the army and there were two disabled. This notwithstanding, we inflicted heavier losses than the enemy did. Ask your military what had happened under Krasniy Bazar and Tagavard  villages. We had ten killed, you had 23. In so doing, your soldiers took a part of killed and wounded. It became possible due to the fact that we consolidated at heights with minimum anti-tank weapons, without artillery; however, we succeeded in stemming your advance, shot a number of armored vehicles. A frontline on our sector had 14 km of total length, and we managed to hold our positions even despite artillery bombardment and remote-piloted vehicles.

Question - For all that, we did capture a half of Tagavard.

Answer – It was before our battalion’s coming over there. 

Question – You contend that our troops failed to break the barrier. However, Krasniy Bazar is not on the line of contact? It is in the middle of Martuni region. Prior to that, our troops captured Fizuli and populated localities of Hadrut. Then our troops passed round Krasniy Bazar and moved towards Shusha. 

Answer – I mean to say that had we established ourselves in the mountains you’d face great difficulties, suffer human and functional losses. This could result in mood of panic in your society and refusal of national minorities from war participation. Our military-political leadership failed to show grit; otherwise, we’d not speak to each other or stay on the riverbank of Kura.

Question – At any rate, you’ve underrated our motivation.

Answer – No, I failed to evaluate motivation of our leadership.

Question – What’s your opinion on our special forces?

Answer – I’ve always had a high regard for them. As a matter of fact, your special forces are rather professional and well trained. We squared off with them and disabled three armored cars.

Question – After that our special forces moved further on Shusha?…

Answer – You should not speak ironically. Your side is glossing over losses on this track and importance of Krasniy Bazar’ capture. The point is that it would provide an opportunity to deploy military equipment to Shusha and improve supply of military units in the town. Our position № 333 was located not far from roads your detachments were moving towards Shusha; so should we block them, your soldiers were marooned at any moment.

Question – In short, we were on the brink of defeat but had never been onto it, so did Pashinyan.

Answer – No, it’s only a tentative opinion. I mean to say that Armenians’ underlying hazard – capture of Shush had taken no place so far. Your troops entered Shusha but had not yet captured. That was well-trained detachments. I always liked these special service detachments and mountaineers. This grouping would be surrounded without any augmentation. The point is that in a day the fog closed down and it started to rain.

Question – Tentatively thinking, the situation is not like Shusha’s loss; however, the reality proved to be different. By the way, you have just mentioned that we concealed our losses. Now then, according to your official data, Armenians lost 4,000 killed; unofficially – 7, 000. Our figures stand at 2,900 killed and approx. 40 missing. All data on killed, including their photographs, are posted on the site of the Defense Ministry. It is impossible to cover up losses from parents as is the case in Armenia today.

How can you explain the fact that we as attacking side lost one and half lesser officially and two and half lesser servicemen unofficially. I know causes of this but I’d like to ask another question. In a recent interview to Armenian mass media, asked about the end of hostilities between Armenians and Azerbaijanis you replied as follows: when we seize Baku or they seize Yerevan. Do Armenians really believe that they are capable of seizing Baku?

Answer - I do not rule out this possibility, the same is true of your Supreme Commander’s view on the subject, he calls our territories as «Iravan», «Gekcha», «Zangezur» bearing in mind that historically these were ancestral Azerbaijani territories.

Question – But this is a fact, isn’t it? There was the Irevan khanate, wasn’t there?

Answer – They were called in this manner historically but now the situation has changed. Can you imagine what happens when your senior President, I mean Erdogan, exhibits a photograph of Karabekir? That’s why we must justify the necessity of entering Baku. Your references came to fruition as far back as 120 years ago while ours have just been shaped.

Question – Does that strike you as a path toward self-destruction?

Answer - It may be true. If you fail to change your leadership and reshape your state, the appetite comes with eating, and we’ll have to oppose it. That’s what I meant when saying that the war would end either in Baku or Yerevan.

Unfortunately, hardly anybody is receptive to my words; they say that I’m engaged in radicalizing the population. My view is that every action has a reaction.

Question – Let’s go back to our first meeting two years ago. I asked you a question, are you minded to liberate seven regions around Karabakh in exchange for status, peace treaty, investments and cooperation to live in peace and tranquility?  You replied that it would be a suicide for Armenians. By occupying Kelbadjar, Gubadly, Lachin, Agdam, Fizuli and Jabrail Azerbaijanis will be able to strangle Armenians and cannonade all your populated localities with the cheapest shells. With that consideration, Armenians will not liberate an inch except that Azerbaijan surrenders all its armored vehicles, artillery and missiles systems.

From now on you have lost all these regions together with Shusha and Gadrut but got nothing for all your pains. 

The current situation is not just errors of Pashinyan or military but an eloquent testimony to the system crisis of Armenian mentality and national idea. No offense but I state the fact. Is it rational to fight with neighbors, capture a territory and then live a happy life?

Answer – It is a very interesting question, I’ll think of it. Did you raise this question before your compatriots?

Question – Yes, indeed.

Answer – What kind of answer was it?

Question – Answer was that we lived in peace and tranquility until Armenians raised a Karabakh issue in 1988.

Answer – It is your leadership that is unwilling to live in love and peace with neighbors. It seems to you that the problem has been cured and that your army’s victory will lead to peace? Absolutely not. The current geopolitical situation is fraught with a new war irrespective of our/your desire but interests of big powers. Did you want it? Your country disagreed to grant a status to Karabakh and return some territories under your control. Both of us feel bad: it is not our mission to address the issue today.  

Question – At present, Armenia is cursing Russia as saying that they have betrayed you. What do you make of this?

Answer - No, not exactly this way. Russia is not such a dope to put its ally Armenia in peril because of Pashinyan. Russia has no desire to intervene in the conflict, so it brought its peacekeepers onto the region grudgingly. It was done due to Turkey’s active involvement in the matter, so Russia could not stand on the sidelines. In so doing, Russia fulfilled its allied commitments and went on supplying arms to Armenia. Russians shifted additional forces to the base №102 in view of threats against Armenia from Turkey. This might be done a lot more but really minimum.

Question – Addressing the Parliament, your deputy Andranik Kocharyan said that it was necessary to conclude a peace treaty with Turkey and Azerbaijan and establish diplomatic relations. Do you agree with this?

Answer – It is possible to establish relations with Azerbaijan with account taken of our compatriots in Karabakh. These preconditions provided the right to bring Armenian forces onto Karabakh for provision of population’s security.

We are unlikely to arrange with Turkey: this country puts forward preliminary conditions that we cannot demand anything. At first, Turkey must claim its responsibility for events of 1915; on this understanding it is possible to sit down at the negotiating table. In other words, security guarantees are needed both for Karabakh and Armenia.

Question – It is possible in principle. This is a positive outcome of talks.

Answer – I can’t but disagree with you that the result is positive. From now on, peace coexistence does not depend on us but Turkey and Russia that interfered in the area at Ilham Aliyev’s behest. It’s hardly possible. Armenians do not want to be citizens of Azerbaijan.

The peace is possible granting a certain status of Karabakh, particularly, its own armed forces, security guarantees, local administration, police, etc, as well as the right of Armenian armed forces to come to the rescue in case of emergency.-02-

İnterviewed  Shahin Hajiyev

Yerevan-Baku

3 February

The initial part