When silence is golden: did Pashinyan even need to speak at the UN and PACE?

Nikol Pashinyan did not need to speak at the UN. Just as it was not necessary to speak in PACE. In his case, it was unnecessary. It is clear that I really wanted to, but reason should have told me that in the current situation it was not necessary to go to the podium.

The situation is such that after the Washington meeting, he can no longer operate with the narratives that were in the constant recruitment of Armenian leaders. Any superfluous word that goes beyond the framework of the new relations between Baku and Yerevan can destroy the positive process that has begun. A few days earlier, the Azerbaijani leader spoke at the General Assembly, and after taking the podium, Pashinyan could not at least respond to the truth in streamlined phrases, so as not to come under fire from criticism in Armenia. That's why he should just stay away from the microphone so he doesn't have to talk nonsense.

He voiced the same nonsense in PACE. The strange theses he recently invented as arguments against the opposition's accusations absolutely do not reflect reality. What is worth, for example, the crazy idea expressed in PACE that the purpose of the 44-day war "was the statehood and independence of Armenia." This verbal construction distorts reality so much that it raises doubts: was it August 8th? We understand that by doing this he wanted to tease the opposition and, perhaps, simply failed to convey his message. But when addressing an international audience, you need to choose the right words and call a spade a spade. And if this is impossible, if you do not want or are afraid to talk about the true causes of the war, it is better to remember that silence is golden.

By choosing counterarguments against the accusations from the revanchists, Pashinyan sets in motion a fantasy that takes him too far. Instead of speaking in plain text, he completely confuses the Armenians. Well, maybe that's his goal, but the revanchists understood him straightforwardly anyway and were unhappy. He tried in vain.

Revanchists, having decomposed the speeches of the Armenian Prime Minister into syllables, came to the conclusion that there really is no peace process.

To be honest, listening to Pashinyan's strange phrases, sometimes it starts to seem that way to us too.

A representative of the Dashnaktsutyun leadership, Saghatelyan, "programmatically" crushed Nikol Pashinyan's speech, accusing him of failing to properly respond to the President of Azerbaijan. He allegedly talked about aggression and occupation and called the separatists on trial war criminals. And Pashinyan...

Another figure, former speaker Sharmazanov, contributed his five kopecks to the stoning of the prime minister, pointing out that Pashinyan's speech at the UN demonstrated the "failure of the peace agenda." Serzh Sargsyan's colleague was especially infuriated by Pashinyan's words that the world gives him joy. He does not understand why the Prime Minister is so happy if Armenia has lost all the occupied territories, as well as hopes for the "miatsum"?

Yes, revanchists and Dashnaks cannot understand what a real peace process should be. When they were in power, the so-called "peace" meant maintaining the status quo, retaining 20 percent of the neighbor's territories with the assistance of external actors, illegally settling them, unpunished robbery and vandalism, and many other "pleasant" moments. Armenian society is used to calling all this "peace." Of course, compared to all these "joys", the restoration of internationally recognized borders and the liberation of Armenia from the status of an occupier cannot be called peace in the understanding of revanchists and Dashnaks.

But Nikol Pashinyan understands the essence of the issue and is therefore inexpressibly happy about such a world, even though he puts his joy into strange verbal constructions. After all, everything could have ended much worse for Armenia. The country that defeated the occupier could move on to the next stage - revenge. The rabble in the person of the Sagatelians and Sharmazanovs has put their country in front of very serious problems. These political waste products have never thought about what might follow war and defeat. They did not even imagine that war and defeats were possible in principle. So, if they were in power, and not Pashinyan, Azerbaijan would not stand on ceremony and would try to eliminate the source of threat already on the territory of Armenia. The current revanchists themselves had previously thoughtfully argued that the conflict would not end until one of the capitals fell. The conflict could well have ended in Yerevan, Azerbaijan had all the opportunities and rights for this. But it ended at the internationally recognized border, because Baku is not bloodthirsty or vindictive.

Nikol Pashinyan really has something to be happy about. Although his country had done a lot of evil, it remained unscathed. Do Sagatelyan or Sharmazanov think they would have been as lucky? This attack poses a threat to Azerbaijan's security and peace in the region. And if she tries to return to power, Armenia will face very, very big troubles due to the need for deep rehabilitation.

The unfortunate Armenian people do not know what it is like to live in a normal country that is respected and not used. All the years of the conflict, the neighbors were in fear, like a thief, constantly trembling at the thought of losing what they had stolen. A criminal cannot live in peace, either the law or karma overtakes him. In the case of Armenia, the laws did not work, but karma did. And the Armenian society, including the Sharmazanovs and Saghatelyans, should pray to Pashinyan for being a "traitor." Otherwise, the historical dreams of Armenians about a sovereign state could have ended in 2020, without ever being realized.

That's what Nikol Pashinyan had to say from the rostrum of international organizations. Even if not in such words, the main thing is to tell the truth. It's nonsense that each side of the conflict always has its own truth. This does not apply to the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. There has always been only one truth in this conflict, and it has been and remains on the side of Azerbaijan. The Armenian prime minister knows and accepts her, otherwise Baku would not have spoken to him and would have given up on him, like Kocharyan and Sargsyan.

We have every right to talk about aggression and occupation and will not allow the history of the Karabakh conflict to begin in September 2020, as revanchists would like. We will not allow hiding the truth about the causes of the 44-day war and turning the tables on the internal political squabbles in Yerevan. This will not be a rejection of the Washington agreements, because nothing threatens Armenia and will not hinder the movement towards peace.

This conflict has brought too much grief and loss to the Azerbaijani people to forget about it for the sake of smiles from Yerevan. But this does not mean that peace is impossible. Azerbaijan has always worked for peace in the region. The liberation war also pursued this goal, because there could be no peace without eliminating the fact of occupation.

By the way, two nations have been living in peace for a year now. Do you know Sharmazanov and Saghatelyan?