Viewpoint
Why are both sides calling for de-escalation when one seems to be taking steps to escalate tensions?
Political commentator Hakob Badalyan wrote on his Facebook page.
"Jake Sullivan calls Armen Grigoryan and Hikmet Hajiyev separately. Then the US released a message about it, noting that Sullivan called on both sides to take steps to ease the tension. And, of course, there is a call again to restore the free movement of the corridor. But let's pay attention to the wording. It is not mentioned that the corridor is closed, but "movement restrictions."
And in diplomacy, the wording is crucial, and we have two things to understand. Why is there a call for steps to de-escalate tension when it seems one is taking steps leading to stress? And the other: Why is there concern not about the closure of the corridor but about "barriers to movement"?
But first, we need to understand if we have the desire to ask ourselves these questions, to understand them, to delve into them to understand what the US wants, what could happen if we put ourselves in the place of a rubber tube and think the USA only and only wants the independence of Karabakh and Kosovo-2, and treacherous Russia wants the opposite.
What Russia wants is more than apparent, and it is clear that to put it mildly, it has little in common with what we want or imagine. But what does the USA want? What step does it expect from Armenia to ease the tension? Don't they write those sentences with an appeal to both sides?
Or are we only fans, West or Russia, black or white, Messi or Mbappe, and so on?"
