Sargsyan announced the preparation for signing a peace document on  Karabakh in 2018

ArmInfo. "We accuse the capitulator (Sargsyan means Pashinyan - ed. note) not in that he signed a trilateral document, when the Azerbaijanis had already  conquered Shushi and were really very close to Stepanakert, but in  the situation he created." The third president of Armenia, Serzh  Sargsyan, stated this in an interview with the BBC Russian service.

The third President of the Republic of Armenia stated that Pashinyan  had many opportunities to stop the hostilities, but he did not.  "Definitely. These are not my assumptions. As you said, this was  stated in the statements of the President of Russia. But before that  there were absolutely many gross mistakes. We do not assert that the  hostilities began as a result of only and only the mistakes of  Armenia. No. Azerbaijan has always wanted to resolve the issue by  military means, but its actions could never be considered legitimate,  at least for the international community, at least as happened as of  September 27, "Sargsyan stated.  At the same time, he pointed to the  inappropriate reaction of the international community to what is  happening. "But what did we see on September 27 and after? One or two  fearful statements that are incapable of pacifying Azerbaijan and  especially Turkey. This was preceded by more serious mistakes. Let me  tell you the grave crimes committed immediately after coming to  power. They began to discredit the army, that is, they brought it  almost to the point of disorganization. It seemed to them that there  would be no fighting, because they are democratic, because they, what  to say, enjoy the support of the majority of the people, they are  legitimate, etc. Who can dare to attack a country with an extremely  democratic and legitimate government. And the other side, the  attacking side, as he later said, had tyranny, "the former head of  the Republic of Armenia noted.

Sargsyan believes that this was followed by another gross mistake,  and this is not only (Pashinyan's words):  "Artsakh is Armenia,  that's it." According to him, it is not about this statement.  Sargsyan considers Pashinyan's fatal mistake to declare that he will  not negotiate until Karabakh participates in negotiations.  "How  immature does one need to be not to understand that he sets this  condition not before the Azerbaijanis, but first of all before the  co-chairs of the Minsk Group? Because the presidents of Russia,  France and the United States made five statements in which they spoke  about both principles and format.  And it was obvious that Karabakh  could not become a full-fledged party to the negotiations. By "full-  fledged" I mean with separate flag and the president. It was  completely impossible. Then, as they call it, victorious military  actions (in the summer of 2020 on the Azerbaijani-Armenian border -  ed. note), and in my opinion, destructive actions that simply drove  Azerbaijan into a corner, and it had certainly do something, "  considers the third President of the Republic of Armenia.  At the  same time, according to Sargsyan, his government conducted very  dynamic and constructive negotiations. "No one can accuse us of  adhering to the idea of" not an inch of land "or deliberately  dragging out the negotiation process. Under no circumstances could  you hear from me that we would never return these lands. n even from  the rostrum of parliament I declared that Agdam is not my homeland.  Could this have been expressed more openly? I was ready to bear the  stigma of a traitor, but to resolve the issue so that we did not  suffer such a fate. about staying in history. I thought about solving  the problem. And I sincerely say, told everyone and I will tell you  that I remained prime minister, going to meet the calls of my  colleagues. Only and only in order to bring the negotiation process  to the moment when the solution of the issue will not depend on the  replacement of the chief negotiator. But, unfortunately, I did not  succeed, "the former head of the Armenian state said.

At the same time, according to Sargsyan, his government conducted  very dynamic and constructive negotiations. "No one can accuse us of  adhering to the idea of" not an inch of land "or deliberately  dragging out the negotiation process. Under no circumstances could  you hear from me that we would never return these lands. In 2000s  even from the rostrum of parliament I declared that Aghdam is not my  homeland.  Could this have been expressed more openly? I was ready to  bear the stigma of a traitor, but to resolve the issue so that we did  not suffer such a fate. I was not concerned about my rating, neither  of staying in history. I thought about solving the problem. And I  sincerely say, told everyone and I will tell you that I remained  prime minister, listening to the calls of my colleagues. Only and  only in order to bring the negotiation process to the moment when the  solution of the issue will not depend on the replacement of the chief  negotiator. But, unfortunately, I did not succeed, "the former head  of the Armenian state said.  When asked if he expected the signing of  a document in 2018 and that's why he stayed in power, Sargsyan  answered: "Yes". To clarify what could be expected from this  document, the third RA President said that the Azerbaijanis, of  course, should have recognize that the final status of  Nagorno-Karabakh should be determined by the free expression of the  will of the population of Karabakh, which must certainly have legal  force and whose agenda is not limited by anything.  

"Without naming a day of free expression of will. This would be our  minimum threshold.  We would pledge to return five regions to  Azerbaijan. The return of the two regions was tightly tied, with the  exception of the corridor securing the land border with Armenia, on  the day of the referendum, peacekeeping forces would come and we  would begin a certain process of reconciliation. President Aliyev  practically agreed with this.  Because the President of Azerbaijan in  the fall of 2016, after the April events, announced that behind  closed doors he was being forced to recognize the independence of  Karabakh. And secondly, after the war of 2020, when he was in the  Lachin region, he said that it was supposed that these two regions -  Lachin and Karvachar - would be left to the Armenians. I'm not  talking about this. These are his words. I repeat: Aliyev could  disagree. But for this there is the international community, the  co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group, the UN Security Council, where, by  the way, a draft resolution was prepared, "summed up the third  President of the Republic of Armenia.