Political commentator Hakob Badalyan wrote on his Facebook page.

"There is a point of view that the US said, what more can we say, the step is ours, will we take that step, will the US give us the weapons?"
"There is a point of view that the US said, what more can we say, the step is ours, will we take that step, will the US give us the weapons?"
Suppose we take the step Now, which means we bring it against Russia because that imagined step does not mean anything else.
Naturally, Russia is taking a counterstep. And the retaliatory step is made through whom? Well, I guess Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan and Turkey are naturally waiting for it. That is, they are waiting for more difficult challenges for Russia to demand a higher price from it for help in overcoming them.
Now, in the presence of this scheme, should Armenia take the risk of the "step," and should the USA not at least come under the responsibility of a clear and objective "speech" so that tomorrow, after our "step" is taken, their "speech"? In case of non-keeping, we can remind you about it.
With small, limited resources and enormous challenges, should Armenia be left with the hypothetical or potential "transition" responsibility instead of the number one superpower assuming that responsibility?
I think that just as the Russian orientation resolution "Armenia is always to blame before Russia" is illogical and ineffective, the American orientation resolution "Armenia is always to blame before the USA" is also incredible.
The Armenian-American relationship based on that formula cannot have a stable perspective and a strong future. And, I think, that resolution will not be taken seriously by the USA itself first."