When I wrote the “Aliyev, Pashinyan and the armchair experts” column in early 2019, I didn’t entertain hopes there would be no more speculations about the Karabakh conflict settlement.

However, social and mainstream media discussions of recent days can be described only as hysteria. An entire cyber operation unfolded in our country and the society was its target. We know that any means are fair in politics, but there seemed to be an unspoken agreement not to cross certain red lines.

No matter how unhappy current opposition is with current government (and the criticism is often justified), Karabakh conflict settlement is not an issue that can be used in domestic political squabbles. I have to repeat myself: if we discover facts proving that the government plans to “surrender Artsakh”, we will revolt together, but unless such facts are claimed and proven, we have grounds to state that we are dealing with an immoral approach.

There have been several acts of the operation. 

First, Sergey Lavrov’s visit to Baku was presented as a prelude to apocalypse. Yes, Lavrov did repeat what the Russian side had already stated – he criticized Pashinyan’s “Artsakh is Armenia and that is it” remark. Did anyone really expect the representative of a Minsk Group co-chair country to support statements predetermining the outcome of peace talks by any of the sides?

In the second act, reports came out that a pentalateral statement (Armenia, Azerbaijan and three co-chair states) could be issued on the margins of OSCE ministerial in Bratislava. Even if it were, it wouldn’t have been the first or the last such statement. Nevertheless, the genie was out of the bottle. People talked about “Bratislava” like it was going to be more terrifying that the Waterloo and Pearl Harbor battles combined. Your humble servant has been observing the Karabakh peace talks for 25 years. The psychotic atmosphere I have witnessed in recent days beats even the expectations people had before the peace talks in Key West, Rambouillet  or Kazan, although those rounds gave hope for a breakthrough in negotiations.

The third act was the “surprisingly” unanimous declaration of the statement, which Azerbaijani mission issued during the OSCE ministerial in Bratislava, an “ultimatum”. Almost no one tried to remind people that the official Baku has issued hundreds (if not thousands) such statements since 1994 and they were all nothing more than useless scraps of paper. The leaders of the co-chair countries have stated at least three times in the last 10 years the principles and key elements that must be the foundation of the conflict settlement. Unless Azerbaijan officially rejects those principles and elements, the talk of “ultimatum” is ridiculous.

On the other hand, you don’t feel like laughing when you remember that Azerbaijan closely monitors our news websites and social media. I believe that the discussions of the “ultimatum” have made our neighbors believe anew in the 7th myth discovered by Davit Alaverdyan.

After legitimization of the topic of “ultimatum” came the calls and demands for “halting the negotiations immediately”.

They were followed by the remarks of Armenian Foreign Minister in Bratislava on December 5. Don’t be surprised, but some of the organizers of “Operation Bratislava” had the audacity to claim that their “alerts” had a “sobering” effect.

The saddest part of the story is that on one hand, we showed the whole world the full spectrum of our fears in just a few days, and on the other, we urged to halt negotiations and “prepare for war”. Isn’t there a little contradiction?

There are clear facts one needs to understand not to become the post-truth victim time and again.

We will always put the emphasis on the right to self-determination. Azerbaijan will always put the emphasis on its territorial integrity and return of territories. Does it mean war is unavoidable? It does, most likely. However, it does not mean we should panic and be terrified of alleged “ultimatums”. It means that we should take the advice of the classics and “prepare for war if you want peace”, not try to invent a bicycle. I would like to quote a few remarks from my interview with Defense Minister Davit Tonoyan, which was published in April 2019:

“We have these problems within the society and we have to solve them. People need to understand and value victory. Sometimes people are affected by the information policy of our neighbor, as Azerbaijan keeps claiming that it is so strong, so powerful. Azerbaijan might think it has the monopoly on speaking about victories or territories, but Azerbaijan does not have it and never will.”

We can make assumptions about “Lavrov’s plan” and build theories of conspiracy, but world powers always try to promote their own interests, so we might see a “Pompeo’s plan” too, for instance. We need to understand that if our society can be fed an idea of “Bratislava battle”, it only whets the appetite of Lavrov, Pompeo and our certain neighbor. 

Ara Tadevosyan is Director of Mediamax