Over the last few days some representatives of mainly western expert community, reflecting also the official statements which are neutral and non-directly condemning the aggressor, are from time to time underlining that it is not certain who organized the attacks and it is impossible to understand that since one side is shooting, the other responding and when the situation is getting escalated it is not essential who was the one to have started the shootings. If to some extent it is conceivable that on a state-level mediating or neutral states do not single out the guilty side (although this approach is absolutely condemnable), it is unacceptable when independent experts for the sake of “impartiality” are attempting to put a mark of equality between the aggressor and the victim of that aggression. When “impartiality” is crossing every limit it is turning into an apparently biased and subjective assessment. I would like to address two questions to those experts- 1. Why and for what reason would the armed forces of the Republic of Armenia or the Defense Army of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic start an attack? What military task do we have to achieve which we have not yet solved? And 2. Who or which side is continuously threatening to start military operations, boasting with the bloated military budget, with propaganda of hatred towards Armenians, with territorial claims towards other regions of Armenia and with phenomenal distortion of the history of the region? In case of having answers to those two questions it is undeniable that the aggressor should be singled out and condemned. Putting the aggressor and the victim of aggression on the same bar is also one of the reasons that the aggressor is ignoring all the appeals to peace preservation so impertinently.
Posted on: Wed, 06 Aug 2014 12:23:07 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015