And what is the alternative, the question is asked in response to the criticism, harsh opposition, and resistance that various public and political circles are raising before the government on the occasion of the Armenian-Azerbaijani agreement on the two sections of the Tavush border. The government itself answers the question it raised: the alternative is war. And it seems that everything is iron and exhausting: either we agree to the only existing option, or war.
No sane person can wish for war. However, it cannot be considered sane to fix the absence of an alternative in any state issue, especially when it is not an internal, but an external-security problem, that is, a problem with the enemy, which is not particularly constrained by the use of force tools. When a situation of “no choice” is created on that level, it not only gives the opponent an incentive, a new charge to deepen the blackmail, but essentially also “legitimizes” that situation internationally.
If the Armenian people, the Armenian community, the Armenian public-political elites are unable to ensure the existence and operation of realistic mechanisms for alternative solutions in difficult situations, then what is happening to them is fair. This will be the attitude and assessment of the various centers of world power, if it is not already, and if what is happening to us is not already a consequence of it.
If our collective mind should work not to form the potential of our alternative solutions, but only in the direction of looking for an alternative savior, be it an internal or an external savior, then the external attitude towards us will be just that: what is happening to that society and the state is fair. : And even if what is being done humanly and morally has nothing to do with justice, politically, no matter how painful it sounds, it will be fair if we are not able to find any alternative to the existing solution, instead of threatening ourselves with war along with the enemy.
#severe #consequence #alternative