By Wally Sarkeesian
“While public debate is generally a vital component of a healthy democratic process, the timing of Prime Minister Pashinyan’s invitation to former leaders for a debate on past decisions is perplexing for many observers. The nation faced numerous pivotal moments,
particularly concerning Artsakh and significant territorial reconfigurations, where a broad national dialogue, public referendum, or even extensive parliamentary debate seemed absent. Decisions leading to the current state, including the signing of the November 2020 statement and subsequent agreements, were made under circumstances that left many feeling that comprehensive discussion and public consensus were bypassed.
Furthermore, there are significant public concerns regarding the alignment of these outcomes with previous electoral promises and stated national objectives. Therefore, engaging in a debate now, after these irreversible steps have been taken and the landscape of Armenia and Artsakh has fundamentally shifted, raises questions about its true intent and effectiveness. For many, such a post-factum debate may not adequately address the profound concerns regarding the process by which these critical decisions were initially made, or the perceived need for clear accountability for their outcomes and the divergence from earlier assurances.”