Armenia's "Crossroads of Peace" project has little prospects for realisation – pundit

Armenian political analyst Suren Surenyants has said that Prime Minister Pashinyan’s "crossroads" has no chance for realisation.

"Crossroads of Peace is not a project whose artistic component should be discussed or evaluated. I have the impression that the government emphasized that the project should be presented properly: beautiful design, several maps, presentation in different languages, etc.," the pundit said in an interview with the Armenian media, Caliber.Az reports.

“In such cases, the political component is of paramount importance, not advertising. No matter how much you want to advertise it, no matter how much you talk about it, it is obvious that at least four out of five countries in the region are not interested in this project. Moreover, some countries see opportunities in it that are contrary to their interests. Therefore, regardless of the form of presentation and the artistic component of the project, this project has little, if any prospects for realization, because first we need to reach a political settlement, and then we can talk about unblocking communications.

The real context is created in the region. At least three countries - Türkiye, Azerbaijan, Russia - regularly make statements that if Armenia does not fulfill some obligations, it will bypass regional communications. We have all heard these statements. That leaves Iran, which may be partially interested in this project, but even for Georgia it is not beneficial, as Georgia plays the role of a transit country. The government is demonstrating false activism.

The Armenian government and Nikol Pashinyan are fully aware and know very well that on November 9, 2020 Nikol Pashinyan signed a document that, to put it mildly, contains risky decisions, especially the issue of the Azerbaijan-Nakhchivan transport connection. I am completely convinced that they understand this very well, they put forward this project just to gain time and to be constructive.

International players are interested in whether you have or have not created a unit in the National Security Service to deal with these roads. From the international relations view, it is even absurd when the Prime Minister talks about internal mechanisms for servicing non-existent projects. In the same series, consider this map and don't rule out that in a week they will publish the same French version or in other languages, but the reality will not change from that. They should go and actively negotiate, but no consensus will be formed around this "crossroads", I assure you.

Instead of proposing this project, which, I assure you, is intended to soften point 9 of the November 9 trilateral statement, to put it bluntly, it would be better to go to negotiations and reach settlements that would prevent a new war on the one hand, and on the other hand, prevent Armenia from being marginalized in the communication nodes and, thirdly, find regulations that would not significantly affect Armenia's sovereignty. These risks can only be neutralized through negotiations; they cannot be addressed by showing beautiful maps and films, especially since this is one of the key issues of the conflict.

Today the whole region is actively discussing some things. For example, Russia, Iran and Azerbaijan are discussing the North-South corridor, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Türkiye have a great number of energy infrastructures. In a nutshell, everyone is discussing real things, and between them, there appears the "Crossroads of Peace", which I very much compare to the Munich Principles document. The Armenian government does not understand that it is not a think tank or a newspaper, but a government with a mandate not to propose fantastic ideas, but to find concrete solutions," the political analyst added.

Regarding the Turkish-Armenian relations, Surenyants said: “I fully agree with Erdogan, he speaks the truth.

Perhaps thousands of our viewers will be disappointed if I go on record as saying that I almost completely agree with the Turkish president that the Armenian people and their leaders should not seek security thousands of miles away, but in peace and cooperation with their neighbors. He spoke an axiomatic truth."

“You know, we should not look for the truth only from our politicians or the politicians from friendly countries. Sometimes the truth is also revealed by the leaders of those countries with whom we have tough relations. Yes, the key to security for the region is in the region. Moreover, what Erdogan said lends itself very clearly to the events of the first half of the 1920s. When the Armenian people sought salvation in Sevres, sought salvation in Washington and became a victim of regional realities. In the end, our issues in the region were addressed by Türkiye and Russia.

We continued raising toasts to the delusion of Sevres on the ruins of the first republic, and we may repeat this painful reality after 103 years if we don't learn our lessons. And we don't need Putin or Erdogan or Raisi or any other figure to tell us that. We need to realize that the issue of Armenia's statehood is largely defined by the quality of Armenian-Russian and Armenian-Turkish relations, which Erdogan meant," the political scientist said.