The Man in the Soil
“Mutual concessions are necessary. Moreover, these mutual concessions should be reasonable and equivalent. Regarding the limit of mutual concessions, in no way should they weaken the security system and act as a tempting circumstance for aggression for the other side,” Bako Sahakyan, president of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic, said in an interview with Journal du Parlement newspaper. He has already been criticized, in the forthcoming days and weeks criticism and degrading will continue. Maybe until the next likewise statement, which will be introduced, qualified and assessed by almost everyone as manifestation of defeatism, readiness to concede territories.
The critics do it for different reasons. Some, sincerely considering that even NK authorities are ready to be defeated, some directly, some out of different reasons, conjecture, out of the aspiration to serve that statement and its assessment to different interests. It’s difficult to say which aspiration prevails in any of them. As it’s difficult to understand the aspiration of NKR president to appear with such a statement, particularly today and in this condition: did he touch upon it, as he really believes that it’s a reasonable way of the conflict settlement or geo-political developments obliged to make such statements?
However, despite aspirations of those stating and criticizing, sincerity requires to record that the statement or idea will lay on the basis of Karabakh conflict settlement. Not only honesty but also the vision of Karabakh’s and generally Armenia’s future requires this. If, of course, on the basis of that vision lies the intention of peaceful, developing, prospering and democratic countries (country). Just the contrary, it’s the vision of the country, which wages eternal war.
Finally, maybe it’s high time to reply to the question with the whole nation, and not with the nation, but replying as a citizen: from 2 possible alternatives which one do we want to choose as a way of developing Armenia’s statehood/s— perspective for an eternal war or peaceful prosperity? Moreover, both maybe be equally justified and grounded, if it’s not the choice of a few favorites, but that of the society, choice of the societies of both countries, choice of Karabakh’s and Armenia’s citizens.
As a result of Karabakh war territories adjacent to Nagorno Karabakh have been liberated and announced as a security zone. At the same time, the price has been stated, for which they can return those territories. Security. With its most direct, narrow, comprehensive and lasting sense.
The most important word in Bako Sahakyan’s statement isn’t the “mutual concession” but “reasonable,” which can’t suppose existence within Azerbaijan by any status. The reasonable one is the Nagorno Karabakh Republic.
And Bako Sahakyan and others in Karabakh, and first and foremost, in Armenia, should be criticized not for the point, that he expressed readiness to concede the territories, which at the moment of liberation have been freed for the sake of Karabakh’s independence and returning them, but for the purpose that they couldn’t and can’t correlate with the world, friends, allies, enemies and loyals in a way that the world besides independent Nagorno Karabakh Republic didn’t observe any variant of the conflict settlement. Didn’t see, discuss and urge.
The “Not to yield an inch” slogan is contemporary today, and by being contemporary it pleases people and provides likes. As those, insisting the contrary, are deprived of the authority to the degree of impermissibility. And the most important, as those speaking contrary to “Not to yield an inch,” who conditioned by circumstances and external coercion are representatives of the authorities. They speak that way not for the reason that it comes from their views, ideology, with the circumstance of the belief of classifying a human above everything even of the territory, as they consider, that by speaking that way the world will treat them as strict constructivists, and will allow to continue enjoying the power, as a result of inactivity of which dignified peace has been equalized to defeatism.
The key to Karabakh conflict settlement, in fact, is not in Moscow, Paris or Washington, but as it has been repeatedly stated with disgust—in Yerevan. The key is in Yerevan not in the sense, by which those repeatedly stating mean, but absolutely, in the internal sense. And the sense has nothing to do with geo-political centers or conspiracy theories and is called an electoral system.
Dignified settlement to Karabakh conflict are the authorities, enjoying people’s trust, having real legitimacy, representatives of which may also support from the perspective of mass psychosis, not easy, but steps crucial for the state’s current condition, and most importantly, for the future. Or at least asking about it to the society, which won’t be convinced, that despite its reply, the authorities will introduce the reply in a way they want.
Like it introduces election results, i.e. when the “man” will be found, who, without internal and external criticism, without staying alone and being criticized, moreover, without the fear of losing his power, will announce that for life and for a dignified life he also needs to concede and to mutually concede, and its alternative is not “Not to yield an inch”?
NK conflict will have a dignified settlement, when besides the above-mentioned factors, any opinion, viewpoint and position will be accepted and perceived as an opinion, viewpoint and position, and not a treacherous act directed to serving interests of the Kremlin, Baghramyan 26, Shushi battalion, Masonic lodge and other centers. Like, this modest opinion may be qualified, and to all probabilities, will be qualified as well. Thus, Not to yield an inch.”
By Garnik Gevorgyan
