Tuesday, August 27 2019 19:49

ArmInfo.On the issue of the Karabakh conflict settlement, the Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan, by and large, follows the example of Ilham Aliyev. A  similar opinion was expressed to ArmInfo by  Head of the Department  of Conflict and Migration Studies, Institute of Peace and Democracy  (Netherlands), political scientist Arif Yunusov.

"I can say that, at least on this issue, their position and policy,  in general, are very similar. Both of them talk about peace, send  their sons to military service. And at the same time, they escalate  the tension on the Line of Contact of troops through militaristic  statements of the heads of defense ministries. In this light, as I  understand it, the Armenian prime minister still does not fully  understand the importance and necessity of resolving the Karabakh  conflict, "he stressed.

Despite the significant intensification of the negotiation process on  the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict with the change of  power in Armenia: the heads of state and the foreign ministers met  more than a dozen times, killings of military personnel at the border  after a short break resumed. In this light, the Azerbaijani political  scientist is quite pessimistic about the prospects for ending the  border killings.  Convinced of the need to stop the deaths on the  Line of Contact in Karabakh and the Armenia-Azerbaijan interstate  border, Yunusov believes that the withdrawal of heavy equipment and  the cessation of snipers are quite possible. Especially considering  that this issue has been discussed repeatedly. The Azerbaijani  political scientist compared Pashinyan's Stepanakert statement  addressed to the Karabakh people, according to which Karabakh is part  of Armenia, with Aliyev's famous statement about the need to return  Yerevan to Azerbaijan. According to him, this statement by the  Azerbaijani president was addressed to Azerbaijanis, primarily those  who came  from Armenia and was aimed at raising his own ratings.  However, it was not Azerbaijanis, but Armenians who took seriously  and very negatively this openly populist statement. "In a similar  way, Pashinyan's statement was  perceived as a call to war in  Azerbaijan.  Meanwhile, in fact, both of them do not change anything.  And here a completely reasonable question arises about the degree of  mood and caution of the Armenian prime minister to such subtle and  serious issues.  And, of course, the degree of responsibility for the  life and blood of young soldiers on both sides of the conflict, "the  political scientist concluded.