The way U.S. is using Armenian political crisis: media points to the hypocrisy of the West

Criticizing the Georgian government for attacking the opposition, the State Department hypocritically ignores the repression of the Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan.

The way U.S. is using Armenian political crisis: media points to the hypocrisy of the West

As News Front reported, anti-government protests have not subsided in Armenia for several months. The reason for this was the deal with Azerbaijan within the framework of the Karabakh settlement. With the mediation of Moscow, Baku and Yerevan signed an agreement that ended the confrontation in Nagorno-Karabakh, while Armenia had to cede part of the territories.

But the actual defeat of the republic in the confrontation is only “the tip of the iceberg”, The Dudan writes. The opposition quickly mobilized supporters, as the Armenians were tired of Pashinyan’s many years of incompetent policies. The prime minister himself could well have used the outcome of the Karabakh conflict to unite the people. Instead, he chose to “push the country into the abyss of chaos, responding to the actions of opponents with repression.

In particular, the publication draws attention to Pashinyan’s statement regarding the Russian Iskander. The prime minister accused the missile systems of being ineffective, although the Armenian army did not even use them in the Karabakh conflict. As a result, Pashinyan displeased not only Moscow, but also his own army, which he tried to blame for the failure in Karabakh. When the General Staff began to demand the resignation of the prime minister, Pashinyan accused the army of attempting a military coup. But in the current situation, the behavior of Western countries raises much more questions, the newspaper notes.

For example, the US Embassy responded to the crisis with a formal appeal to the parties “for calmness, restraint”. It is noteworthy that a similar situation in Georgia, where opposition leader Nika Melia was recently detained, aroused much more indignation and criticism in the State Department.

“We are shocked by the divisive rhetoric used by Georgian leaders during the crisis. Violent methods and aggression are not the way to resolve political differences in Georgia. Today Georgia has taken a step back on the path of stronger democracy in the family of Euro-Atlantic states”, – the US Embassy said.

Double standards are easy to explain, the newspaper writes. While Pashinyan enjoys the patronage of Western elites, Bidzina Ivanishvili, the head of the Georgian ruling party, cannot boast of the same. But the West’s indulgence towards the Armenian prime minister has another more alarming reason.

The newspaper recalled that France and the United States, although they are the guarantors of the settlement of the Karabakh conflict, did not even bother to pacify the allied Turkey, which supplied Azerbaijan with equipment and militants.

Peace in Karabakh is a merit of Russia, but the Western elites are clearly not satisfied with this alignment.

The chaos that gripped Armenia is quite conducive to the deal falling through. But the author asks the question, does the end really justify the means in this case?

The West will achieve an escalation of tensions near the borders of Russia, but strategically they can lose Armenia, turning it into another Ukraine. The latter also experienced more than one revolution, and the West actively supported the chaos. As a result of this chaos, Ukraine lost part of its territories, and the oligarchs finally seized power in the country.

“Now the Ukrainian economy cannot exist without tranches from the IMF. If the USA and Europe do not want such an outcome for Armenia, they should reconsider their approach”, – the newspaper stated.


comments powered by HyperComments