Pashinyan's "Dry Residue" and Mammadyarov's "Optimism"

In the Karabakh negotiation process, there was an unprecedented pacification in the literal sense: soldiers did not shoot, politicians of the warring parties exchanged peaceful statements, crowned by the proposal of Milli Mejlis deputy (MP) Zahid Oruj to abandon the mediation of the OSCE Minsk Group and negotiate with Yerevan directly, without intermediaries, and then proceed to the stage of negotiations between the two communities of Nagorno-Karabakh.

Political scientist Elkhan Shahinoglu approved the idea of ​​the MP, recalling the ineffective 20-year activity of the intermediaries. "The OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs make "tourist visits" to the region, and the personal representative of the OSCE Chairman Andrzej Kasprzyk has bought a villa with money earned here. Of course, negotiations without intermediaries do not mean mandatory success, but at least we will know that big countries do not manipulate our problem. Negotiations should be conducted directly with the occupier so that, in the absence of a result, responsibility fell on the enemy," the political scientist said.

New indirect facts speak about the possibility of such negotiations. Initially, in Yerevan, then in Baku, they confirmed the established direct line of communication between the two leaderships. On October 18, the Acting Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan said that a reliable operational communication was established with Azerbaijan, and within half an hour the operational data reached the heads of state.

Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov began to issue statements that were incomprehensible to experts, saying in early October that for the security of the military "we must send troops back."

https://www.facebook.com/zulfuqar.isgenderov.73/videos/vb.100022809309776/343714663065508/?type=2&theater

The Minister provoked a squall of bewilderment and ridicule in Azerbaijan. In another statement, Mammadyarov says that the two meetings he held with his Armenian counterpart, the conversation between the President of Azerbaijan and the Prime Minister of Armenia and what they heard behind closed doors gives a positive impulse about the possibilities of moving forward. Armenia"s readiness for peace and stability will be clear after the upcoming parliamentary elections in this country, Mammadyarov then explained at a meeting of Foreign Ministers of the Eastern Partnership countries.

Then how can you understand the well-known statements of Nikol Pashinyan about the impossibility of solving the Karabakh problem without the consent of Armenia, Nagorno-Karabakh and the Armenian Diaspora, without involving the NK separatist leadership in the negotiations? Where do you put his words about the personal vision of Karabakh as an integral part of Armenia? Why did Pashinyan, starting military exercises, declare Azerbaijan an enemy and the goal of training battles, and send his son to serve in the occupation corps in Azerbaijan?

The Foreign Ministry of Azerbaijan said that Pashinyan"s words are aimed at the internal audience, that is, it is important for him to get votes in the upcoming elections; therefore he says what the electorate likes. And having won the elections, will he act against the wishes of the voters?

"What a touching concern for the Armenians! They don"t even need to find arguments to justify their reluctance to liberate the occupied territories of Azerbaijan immediately, as required by the relevant UNSC resolutions ... It turns out that we made good progress with the previous administration of Serzh Sargsyan. For these statements he should be immediately turned off the microphone, otherwise the fathers and mothers of the Martyrs, who already know for sure that the adversary didn"t have any "progress" with us, could hear the Minister Mammadyarov, the former Ministers of Foreign Affairs Tofik Zulfugarov said.

Explaining the real position of Pashinyan, Zulfugarov explained the "dry residue" in his words after deducting the propagandist peel: "Pashinyan's position is that without determining the status of Karabakh (in his understanding, this is independence), the release of even part of the occupied territories is impossible. The subject of temporary or intermediate status has been rejected by Armenia, and, consequently, the concept of the "Madrid Principles" has also been denied. There are no topics for the upcoming talks, except for technical aspects of the functioning of the cease-fire regime. We could agree with Pashinyan in one point - that the secrecy of the negotiation process is a propaganda myth, since the settlement cannot be carried out secretly from the peoples. After such statements, "Lavrov"s tales" about the almost reached agreements on the liberation of 1, 3, 5, etc. of the occupied areas will look like, to say it diplomatically, "an insult to common sense." It is also inappropriate to consider the permanent and traditional "optimism" of Minister E. Mammadyarov returning from one more meeting and talks.

Recently, while touring the region, Presidential Adviser on National Security Bolton advised the Armenians to end the conflict with Turkey, resolve the Karabakh issue and become independent by buying weapons in America. Concluding the diplomatic mission in Armenia, US Ambassador Mills said in Yerevan that peace in Karabakh is unattainable without concessions to the Azerbaijanis. The statements of the Americans provoked indignation in Armenia and the Kremlin and satisfaction in Azerbaijan. Perhaps this is our only, so to say "victory" for all the quarter-century talks with Yerevan. Experts in Baku believe that all Armenian leaders have always been engaged in blasting the negotiation process, in fact, pursuing one goal - to keep all the occupied lands for Armenia. Pashinyan actually does the same...