Euromedia24 on Play Store Euromedia24 on App Sore
BNB

$870.47

BTC

$113082

ADA

$0.868816

ETH

$4608.63

SOL

$213.76

31 °

Yerevan

20 °

Moscow

45 °

Dubai

20 °

London

26 °

Beijing

23 °

Brussels

16 °

Rome

23 °

Madrid

BNB

$870.47

BTC

$113082

ADA

$0.868816

ETH

$4608.63

SOL

$213.76

31 °

Yerevan

20 °

Moscow

45 °

Dubai

20 °

London

26 °

Beijing

23 °

Brussels

16 °

Rome

23 °

Madrid

This debate would have meaning and value if it started in 2018 or at least before losing Artsakh, why Pashinyan didn't do it? Hovhannisyan


We have a more important debate about the future at stake. Convinced that the remote "debate" between the current prime minister and former presidents should not be limited to the four of them, I am formulating the main points that are of interest to hundreds of thousands of people.

1. This debate would have meaning and value if it started in 2018 or at least before Artsakh was lost. Why didn't Pashinyan do that?

2. Has Nikol Pashinyan discussed or at least debated with former presidents?

a. When he announced in Artsakh the day after his election that he could not negotiate on behalf of Artsakh.

b. When he announced that he was starting the negotiations from scratch, rejecting the decades-long negotiation process,

c. When he made unbalanced provocative statements (Artsakh is Armenia and that's it), he organized demonstration parties in Shushi. When he could not (or did not want to) prevent war with possible diplomatic tools

e. When he refused the proposals to end the war early and caused enormous losses and human casualties, which could have been avoided.

f. When he accepted in Prague that Artsakh is a part of Azerbaijan

g.  When during the 9-month blockade of Artsakh, he could not (or did not want to) find solutions that existed.

All these questions have one answer: no. He did not consult, did not "debate" in any of these stages. Made SOLE decisions. Maybe those decisions were influenced by the members of a small group known to him, who are still in the same government as him.

Those SINGLE decisions led to a historic disaster. If you didn't do it at the necessary moments, what debate now, about what? And the last most important question.

Why did Nicole artificially start the debate topic? Taking into account our previous bitter experience, we can assume that he is going to take Armenia to a new big test in the near future. It can be either new major concessions to Aliyev, or a new phase of escalation of relations with Russia, which will lead to serious security and economic problems.

We don't know his next SINGLE plans. One thing is clear that at this stage of his administration, he is going to turn Armenia into a chaotic environment where all sick thoughts and false debates can become possible, distracting from important and real agendas.

For the sake of that chaos, he can even sacrifice many members of his political team in order to serve the media. And this is why we have more important things to do than the present-past "debate". Our actions, our actions should be for our real future.

Vahe Hovhannisyan

Alternative projects group