Armenia has to choose between two options - catastrophic, very bad Analyst Vigen Akopyan on difficult task facing Armenia's leadership

Armenia will have to choose based on which document to continue negotiations with Azerbaijan - Prague or Sochi. It can’t run parallel trials.

As Caliber.Az reports, the political strategist Vigen Akopyan expressed this opinion to Armenian media outlets.

He noted that following the trilateral talks in Sochi between Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan with the Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and Russian President Vladimir Putin, a joint statement was adopted that provided virtually nothing new to the existing negotiating process.

From this angle, according to Hakobyan, Putin’s goal at the talks was to persuade Aliyev to agree to the postponing of the resolution of Karabakh’s status, which he failed to do. In order to achieve this, in all likelihood, two of the most important points on the agenda would have had to be removed from the preliminary text of the statement, namely the status of Karabakh and the corridor through Zangezur.

"The most important provisions that would have distinguished the Russian document from the so-called ‘Washington’ one were removed from the preliminary version of the text. The difference, if I am not mistaken, is that under the Russian version the status of Karabakh is frozen, meaning the decision will be made later, unlike in the Western version. Secondly, the Russian version is based on the ninth paragraph of the statement from November 9 [2020], according to which there will be a sovereign Armenian road, which will be controlled by the Russian border service. The western approach excludes the presence of third forces along the road", the political strategist stated.

According to the expert, the Sochi negotiations not only did not make a breakthrough in the negotiation process, but, on the contrary, brought further confusion to it. So, now there are two adopted documents - Prague, signed by Pashinyan and Aliyev with the mediation of France and the EU, and [the one signed in] Sochi. At the same time, the document signed in Prague contains concrete actions by the Foreign Ministers of the parties to the conflict and the demarcation and delimitation commissions, as well as the agreed timetable of action, and this document has not been contested or canceled. The Sochi statement is more vague and requires a lengthy process of discussion.

"I think in the next 3-4 days we will see whether the Prague process will be continued, and then it will become clear that the parties are moving in this direction, although the president of Russia said that he will continue to address the issue. It turns out that now these two processes are moving parallel to each other, but I think it’s illogical. In addition, Pashinyan told Putin that in signing the document in Prague, he was basing himself on the principles of the Moscow agreement. This is not only illogical, but, knowing the content of the two documents and the fundamental differences between them - on the status of Karabakh and the status of the road - it is not clear how they can be combined at all. So we will have to either make a choice or make a new document", believes Hakobyan.

Hakobyan notes that both documents stand in contradiction to the interests of Armenia.

"Just the deference of resolving the question of Karabakh’s status gives us at least some chances. Another option puts the end to the process. Therefore we are choosing between catastrophic and very bad options", concluded the political strategist.