The interlocutor of Radar Armenia is Hovsep Kthe hurshudyan, head of "Free Citizen" NGO.

- There are Russian and Washington options regarding the signing of a peace treaty between Armenia and Azerbaijan. In your opinion, which option could be more favorable for Armenia, taking into account the settlement of the NK issue?

- The Russian option is not to solve the Karabakh problem, to "leave it to the generations", that is, by and large, the life of the people of Artsakh should not be guaranteed by internationally certified and guaranteed mechanisms, but should remain completely dependent on Russian whims. Moreover, there is no guarantee that as a result of the new trade between the Kremlin and Baku, new concessions will not be made to Aliyev from the remaining territories of Artsakh, or that one day, along with the weakening of Russia, Russian peacekeepers will not leave the region.

The Washington version (and I believe that the document leaked by the Azerbaijanis through one of the Russian Telegram channels is correct) implies the re-recognition of Artsakh's subjectivity, will bring Azerbaijan to the format of direct negotiations with the Artsakh authorities under the auspices of the international community. There are clearly fixed the imperatives of ensuring the safety and rights of the Armenian population, which should be guaranteed by international mechanisms. Moreover, this option leaves room for the de-facto independence of Artsakh, because if Azerbaijan does not agree to sign a document in which Artsakh will receive guarantees of security and rights, that is, status, and such a possibility is high, then the West may lean towards the Kosovo option. application of any modification. Now, judge for yourself which of the Russian and American versions is more profitable for us.

- RA Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan announced that Russian proposals regarding the peace treaty are acceptable for Armenia, but active work with Washington is also continuing. How would you interpret it, and in the end, who holds the key to the settlement of the issue?

- Even before Sochi, Russia did not hide that it no longer holds the key to the settlement of the Artsakh problem, because it has lost its influence in the region, especially on Azerbaijan, where Turkey now has much greater influence. Sochi just proved it. That is why the Kremlin offers not to solve the problem, but to postpone it for an indefinite period, in order to ensure its military presence in Artsakh until then, and in the hope that during these two years, alien military divisions will come to the Kremlin's aid, they will win Ukraine instead, and save it with the introduction of new technologies. Russia's collapsing economy and will curb the growing separatist tendencies of national minorities in Russia's regions. If Nikol Pashinyan is sincere in his statement that the Russian version is acceptable to him, then probably he also shares those Russian hopes. Another option is that, knowing that Putin will not be able to force Aliyev to agree to his plan anyway, because the wording "delayed the settlement of the problem" means that the problem still exists, which Aliyev denies, just Washington's mediation. is to create a legitimate basis for giving an advantage, then you have to be careful here too, because Aliyev is also playing on the same two strings, whose game opportunities are now objectively greater.

- In this context, how would you interpret the tripartite meeting of foreign ministers in the USA? Judging by the official reports, what subject achievements were recorded?

- No achievements were registered, except that the USA once again officially accepted that Armenia and Azerbaijan were in 1991. have restored their independence (restoration of independence), which means that there can be no question about the succession of the Soviet republics, there can be no question about the legality of the Moscow or Ghars treaties, which opens a wide field for Armenia in the matter of border delimitation with Azerbaijan. It is another matter that the adoption of such a position by the USA, independent of the will of our authorities, which, by the way, is the only legal position from the point of view of international law, creates not only opportunities, but also risks. Armenia is now under military threat from Azerbaijan and must demand the intervention of the international court in the delimitation of the borders, as well as the presence of UN peacekeepers on our borders, in order to prevent the continuation of the Turkish-Bolshevik aggression of 1920 today, after which it will be possible for Armenia to issuing an official demand for the withdrawal of the Russian military base.

Otherwise, signing any treaty at gunpoint will not bring any stability and peace to the region, being worthless from the point of view of international law.

There was no other result, probably due to the resistance of Aliyev, who resists the acceptance of any document already made public based on the agreements reached last time, or at least the publication of the existing one. I think if Azerbaijan's weight in the possible depth of plans to suppress Iran does not increase again, it will have its negative consequences for Aliyev personally, and in general, for Azerbaijan as well.

Hayk Magoyan