The "Fact" daily writes:
Especially after the criticizing Artsakh, Azerbaijan has adopted a maximum pressure strategy, trying not only to limit Armenia's foreign opportunities, but also affect the country's sovereignty, the registration processes of the national identity.
It is obvious that the demands of the hostile country are increasing and increasing their systematic reset pressure aimed at organizing Armenia's internal institutional basis.
The recent worried news is that Azerbaijan has openly begun to demand a change in the state coat of arms of Armenia, justifying that it depicts "threatening" symbols. This requirement is not just absurd, but a very dangerous precedent. If any other state allows itself to make such a demand about the state symbols of another sovereign state, it is already a threat to the foundations of the country's identity.
And since the symbols on the RA coat of arms are an integral part of our national history and identity, the change of coat of arms can signify Armenia's sovereignty.
But the most terrified thing is that Armenia does not only have an adequate response mechanism for the legitimacy of these aspirations. It can be constantly listed, but if we spend on the Constitution, national symbols, history textbooks and, in general, they see that they are synchronously with the requirements of Azerbaijan today.
This means that the political agenda of the government is not formed not by a strategy based on national interests, but by the opponent's dictation.
The steps in this direction are taken in advance to justify further concertion. This is nothing more than the ideological disintegration of sovereignty. When the state is beginning to review its own symbols, not within its identity, historical law or social consolidation, it opens a vacuum, which can pour external forces on their agenda, including hostile countries.
It is no coincidence that in the background of such claims, there are concerns that there may be demands from Azerbaijan related to Armenian history textbooks. This is not just another match. The transformation of historical consciousness is the most influential way to hit the national thinking.
When a state forcesing the other to renounce its historical memory, the name of the historical science, neutralizing all the roots of territorial law or historical justice.
When all this is added to Azerbaijan's demands on foreign policy limitations, in particular Hikmet Haji's statement that there is no need for a foreign military presence in the region, the general strategy becomes clear. This, Azerbaijan reserves the right to determine whom Yerevan can have military or strategic cooperation with.
But in this case, one of the biggest dangers is that in the context of the Armenian-Azerbaijani relations, the whole process is formed when Armenia has adopted "peace agenda" that does not have neither visions or guarantees or security structures.
The so-called peace agreement, to which the Armenian leadership is striving, is gradually becoming a forced manipulative document, every next point is almost unilaterally dictated from Baku.
Arsen Sahakyan
