Not only external forces but also the failures of their own leadership are threatened by Armenia's sovereignty and national security. Azerbaijan's aspirations have long been clear, strengthen territorial achievements through military force and diplomatic pressure.
Former Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian wrote about this on his Facebook page.
In his opinion, these challenges have turned into a guilenary threat due to the inviolability of Baku's aggression, but also the misconceptions, the undeciationed policy of resisting Armenia's regional threats, turning the manageable conflict into a national catastrophe. Becoming the biggest threat to Armenia's security, making Azerbaijan's aggression possible in its failures.
Azerbaijan's strategic goals remained unchanged, but Armenia's ability to counteract them has weakened due to Pashinyan's leadership.
His tenure was marked by a full range of mistakes, which weakened Armenia's military training, diplomatic impact and internal unity. After the defeat of 2020, after the fall of Artsakh, the deportation of the people of Artsakh and the growing geopolitical isolation of Armenia comes from a leader who has no diplomatic, strategic and military-political skills to protect the interests of the country.
His mistakes did not start in 2020. They were obvious since 2018, when he continued revolutionary rhetoric, but lacked a clear vision of foreign policy. His management has made Armenia a vulnerable Azerbaijan's threats, turning a strong defensive potential to weakness and losing.
Instead of developing a real regional policy and a strong defense strategy, Pashinyan went from boyly nationalism to unacceptable concessions, none of which came from a realistic diplomatic and security framework.
His government ignored intelligence warnings, ignored Azerbaijan's military empowerment and misleaded relations with Russia, while alienating from traditional partners and to provide realistic alternatives.
One of his most illegal mistakes was the belief that political rhetoric could replace a strategic forecast. When it was tested at the test of war, he was completely unprepared for it. When he faced diplomatic consequences, it was indecisive and often unaware. And when the opportunity to change the direction came, he doubled the policy that further weakened Armenia's position.
Now that Pashinyan's personal security is becoming more and more connected with maintaining power, its foreign policy decisions are likely to be more than national protection.
His turn west was carried out carelessly, alienating Russia, and instead not provided with tangible western guarantees. Practical rearrangement could benefit Armenia if a strategic approach was taken. But Pashinyan's government relied on symbolic gestures, such as increasing the EU's accession to the EU, unable to establish a specific security framework.
The adoption of the bill on the launch of EU membership coincides with important geopolitical developments, including US Vice President J. D. The launch of Vancy Mukhnyan and the start of Russian-American talks, which marks a new geopolitical rearrangement for the Caucasus with significant consequences.
This obvious mistake, this calculation again testifies to the global dynamics of Pashinyan's ignorance. Instead of strengthening Armenia's position, he continues to operate in the vacuum, not seeing the broader interaction of geopolitical forces. Although complaints about Moscow's failures are grounded, the severance of ties is strategic recklessness without ensuring alternatives.
Diplomacy cannot be on demonstration steps. It is primarily about providing maximum national security. Under Pashinyan's reign, Armenia isolated from Moscow, not receiving the Western support and becoming vulnerable to Azerbaijan's pressure, Azerbaijan's demands continue to increase. Ilham Aliyev's aspirations are beyond the humiliations of Artsakh and his leadership. They are demanding disarmament of Armenia, resettlement of Azerbaijanis in Armenia and territorial concessions that disrupt Armenia's sovereignty. These are simply not aggressive positions, but a goosenic challenge for the future of Armenia.
However, Pashinyan's reaction was passive. He could not do so that Azerbaijan would respond to those actions and give a price. His government has swallowed diplomatic and military regressions, destroying Armenia's restraint capacity and becoming more vulnerable.
Armenia needs a new leadership, a leader who understands the balance of power, which can develop a realistic security policy, which can do diplomacy from the position of despair.
Pashinyan has repeatedly shown that this role is not wearing his clothes. The longer he stays in power, the greater the danger that the sovereignty of Armenia will be fulfilled, part to part, until there is nothing left for the state's independence. Armenia must reiterate its own role, re-establish its security priorities and reconstruct its diplomatic reliability, "Oskanian wrote.
