Armenia Forces Azerbaijan to Open Up: 'Time' Newspaper

Azerbaijan, responding to the Armenian Defense Minister’s statement that Baku must prepare its army for peace, has declared that the Azerbaijani army is not preparing for peace but for war. In this context, it is noteworthy how Armenia's diplomatic and propaganda strategy is subtly shifting, as it begins to speak of peace and the 'combination' of enforcing peace. This means that on one hand, Armenia has significantly increased its rhetoric on peace and positions it within the context of common interests, while on the other hand, it actively combines this with a vibrant rhetoric of shifting its defensive strategy to an offensive one. As a result, Baku finds itself in a rather uncomfortable position. It is naive to say that this is a 'fatal' situation for Baku, but on the other hand, Baku is effectively forced to either adopt the Armenian logic or to discuss war with a pronounced rejection of peace.

Furthermore, considering that the Armenian side's rhetoric, built on aspects of peace, is finely tuned to address more to the Azerbaijani public, leaving the authorities to transition from a defensive to an offensive strategy and messages demanding peace, it effectively emerges that Baku is starting to propose war in contradiction to Armenia's peace proposal both to the international community and its public. This relationship is not new; the Armenian side has always been the proposer and protector of peace, while Azerbaijan has represented war. What is new here are the nuances and refinements of emphasis, which compel Baku to increasingly promote war and effectively find itself in a position where waging war becomes a self-justifying stance, or is forced to expose itself in such a way.

On a broader level, another significant aspect is worth noting. It is not armies that are prepared for war or peace, but rather states, i.e., the systems. Armies are part of those systems. It is undeniable that our army is prepared for exceptional feats, thanks not only to its spirit but also to its purely combat capabilities, as proven by both the first and new generations of the army in 2016.

In this sense, the Defense Minister’s statements, along with the political endorsement provided by the Prime Minister’s remarks, are grounded and crucial from the perspective of general state policy. However, all of this does not contradict but should be supplemented with a consistent expansion and enhancement of overall state capacities, as being prepared to enforce peace can only be effective across the entire organism; the capabilities of a single organ may be severely limited because it cannot bear the burden of other non-functioning organs for a prolonged period. In this regard, it is unequivocal that despite the substantial and fundamental changes brought about by the Velvet Revolution, including the more balanced state policy spectrum, the 'distribution' of organs' effectiveness still remains in a mode of disproportion, which necessitates a rapid institutional balancing out.

Read the full article in today’s issue of the newspaper.