Extremism grows among Armenian revanchists Terrorism as a last resort?

During the 16th BRICS Summit in Kazan, a significant meeting took place between Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan. Following their discussions, both countries’ foreign ministers were instructed to continue bilateral negotiations aimed at finalizing a peace agreement and establishing interstate relations as swiftly as possible.

In diplomatic terms, this development offers a glimmer of cautious optimism regarding the potential for a prompt peace agreement between Baku and Yerevan.

Undoubtedly, the situation still heavily depends on the leadership of Armenia. While they often speak of their readiness to conclude a peace agreement, we have yet to see any real steps in that direction. The amendments to Armenia's Constitution, which contain territorial claims against Azerbaijan, have not been removed. Additionally, Armenia's leadership has not made any statements regarding the de jure dissolution of the OSCE Minsk Group.

In this context, the situation becomes clearer: France is exerting pressure on official Yerevan, preventing it from taking actions that align with the logic of new realities and Armenia's national interests. Armenia needs to break free from the self-isolation it has been in due to an initially misguided path of development.

Various madams and messieurs regularly spread blatant lies and nonsensical claims about Azerbaijan. Macron's France, engulfed in a mire of economic and geopolitical problems, continues to attempt to derail the peace process between Azerbaijan and Armenia. The French side is particularly active in the European Parliament, mistakenly believing that resolutions from this body carry any significant weight for Azerbaijan.

Azerbaijan can remind the international community—both collectively and individually—that Armenia had failed to comply with four UN Security Council resolutions, which explicitly demanded the withdrawal of illegal Armenian armed formations from the formerly occupied territories. Yet, no sanctions have been imposed on Armenia for this violation. Given this reality, the noise generated by citizens of a country whose symbol is the Gallic rooster will have no impact on Azerbaijan whatsoever. The country has restored its sovereignty and territorial integrity despite the plans of the OSCE Minsk Group member states and is now focused on developing the liberated territories while preparing to host COP29. Notably, Armenia has also agreed to this event in Baku.

This context underscores the absurdity of various French politicians—regardless of gender or political orientation—calling for a boycott of the conference. They are likely being well-compensated for their willingness to appear foolish, indicating that their actions are calculated and serve their own interests.

In contrast, Armenian revanchists are gripped by fear at the prospect of a peace agreement between Baku and Yerevan. Recently, Vartan Oskanian, the head of the farcical “Committee for the Protection of Fundamental Rights of Artsakh People” and former Armenian Foreign Minister, has been throwing a fit. It was clear from the beginning that Oskanian could have just as easily campaigned for the rights of quadcopters to gain autonomy within Armenia. However, he needed a platform to cling to, so he took charge of a cause that, in reality, does not exist and never will.

Oskanian’s excessive self-importance was apparent to former leaders of the Karabakh junta and those who unlawfully resided in the temporarily occupied territories of Azerbaijan. He asked them, “What are you doing?” This question served as a pointed reminder that their presence holds little value. It reflected a broader frustration with the unsettling new reality that the revanchists now face.

The Opposition Initiative Council Hayakve recently showcased a rather dramatic display of hysteria. This is the same group that frequently accuses the current Armenian government of "betrayal" and readiness to "surrender the national interests of the country." This time, Hayakve decided to diversify their repertoire by directing accusations at their fellow revanchists. Specifically, they claimed that the "current Armenian parliamentary opposition, despite not participating in the vote to ratify the border security commissions' regulations, contributed to the legitimization of lawlessness through their mere presence."

This statement refers to the Armenian National Assembly's approval on October 23 of the regulations for the joint activities of the border demarcation commissions between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Hayakve blames the opposition for not renouncing their parliamentary mandates in the past. While it's true they did not, the question remains: what difference would that have made? The answer is none at all, as public opinion polls indicate that the Armenian opposition's approval rating stands at a mere two per cent. In fact, Hayakve's rating is so low that it falls within the margin of error.

What does all this indicate? It suggests that the only "weapon" left for this group of revanchists, who have already begun infighting among themselves, is terrorism. Will they resort to such measures to derail the signing of a peace agreement between Baku and Yerevan? Such attempts cannot be ruled out. However, this also presents a challenge for the current leadership of Armenia. They must take a comprehensive approach to eliminating obstacles to signing the peace agreement, starting with the implementation of the reasonable and justified conditions articulated by Azerbaijan.