· 11 comments · Save ·
News & Current Events May 12, 2026 at 7:36 PM

Pashinyan says Karabakh 'was not ours' as Armenia and Azerbaijan look to future

Posted by Inevitable-Push-8061

Pashinyan says Karabakh 'was not ours' as Armenia and Azerbaijan look to future
euronews
Pashinyan says Karabakh 'was not ours' as Armenia and Azerbaijan look to future
In an extraordinary admission, Armenia’s PM Nikol Pashinyan declared that Karabakh was not Armenia’s territory and that the Armenian movement for it was “a fatal mistake,” as Yerevan forges its peace with Azerbaijan and its decisive pro-EU course.
🚩 Report this post

11 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
ACompletelyLostCause 22 hr ago +28
That's a VERY brave and nuanced statement from Pashinyan. He's paying a heavy cost to say it. I hope Azerbaijan can understand that they need to find proactive ways to help Armenia, and collectively step away from Russia, otherwise they maybe end up with a much more unfriendly Armenian leader.
28
Protean_Protein 20 hr ago -15
All of this chaos smacks of Russia-US proxy bullshit.
-15
ACompletelyLostCause 20 hr ago +13
For once this has nothing to do with the US. Russia has spent decades provoking tentions between these two countries, then stepped in as 'peacekeeper'. They've created an unstable situation, where peace can only be kept as long as each country has Russian peacekeeper in them. If one moves away from Russia, Russia throws military support behind the other. Russia also undermines both countries and funds the most extreme elements of both, constently incouraging conflict. For either country to be free of Russia, and come to a peace agreement with each other, both must equally step away from Russia and stop courting Russia to get a military advantage. Either both are free and at peace with each other, or neither have anything.
13
xmuskorx 19 hr ago +4
> They've created an unstable situation This has been Russia's modus operandi for its weaker neighbors for decades (arguably for centuries) - create unstable situations and then exploit them at will.
4
Protean_Protein 20 hr ago -9
Think of the reason why Russia is doing this though. It is entirely out of the Cold War Soviet mindset of spheres of influence and you’d be sorely mistaken if you thought the CIA didn’t have operatives and activity in both countries the way they also obviously have in Ukraine since the Orange Revolution in 2004.
-9
ACompletelyLostCause 19 hr ago +4
People overstate the CIAs ability to influence foreign countrie's populations. It's why (like Russia) they prefer to deal with righwing autocratic regimes. The US has little real leverage in the region, the EU has a bit more because of trade deals. There's a genuine desire in both countries to have Russia stop string up factionalism, it's nothing to do with the US. And since you brought it up. The Ukrainian colour revolution was not a CIA inspired plot, that's Kremlin propaganda. It was a home grown grass roots movement as people just got sick & tired of one Russian puppet after another stealing everything not nailed down. If you read some neutral reports about the early days, the CIA were as surprised as Russia that the movement took hold. The CIA had more or less dismissed a revolution as impossible and they limited their meddling to just making work for Russian intelligence assets, hoping to gain intelligence where they could. At first the CIA thought the initial colour revolution movement was a Russian counter intelligence operation to flush out western assets, so stayed quite. It was only when they got intelligence from assets in Russia itself that they realised it wasn't a Russian op and that Russia thought it was being organised by the CIA.
4
Protean_Protein 19 hr ago -3
I think you’re misunderstanding my point. American espionage failures aren’t evidence that the phenomena we witness in the post-Soviet sphere aren’t a consequence of the dipolar Cold War and its ongoing unfolding as Putin consolidated his power. There is such a thing as aiding or pushing things without directly orchestrating them, for example. And clearly Russia and the US are doing that, well or poorly, at turns.
-3
green_flash 21 hr ago +13
> In an electrifying video widely circulated by the Armenian media on Sunday, Pashinyan is seen confronting accusations that Armenia “lost” Karabakh by asking repeatedly, “How was that land ours? How was it ours? Please explain how it was ours?" > “I don't want to speak behind dead people's backs, but let's say under the control of a few generals who planted wheat there for instance, let's say, was that it? How was it ours? How? Explain it, how was it?" > "Did we build a school there, did we build a kindergarten, did we build a factory, did we live there, a settlement... How was it ours? It was not ours. It was not ours," Pashinyan emphasised. I'm surprised he's making such a strong statement, just a few weeks before the election. That will give the opposition a lot of ammunition against him.
13
quarteretarded 18 hr ago +1
How is it a strong statement? It’s the literal opposite. If it was a strong statement it wouldn’t give anyone ammunition against him.
1
Weaselburg 10 hr ago +2
>How is it a strong statement? If you do not understand how saying 'yeah the land we seized and said was rightfully ours and fought wars over, then lost in a war, never actually rightfully belonged to us' is not a strong, divisive statement, then I struggle to think what you would believe to be a strong statement.
2
quarteretarded 9 hr ago +1
Why won’t the leader of azerbaijan make a similar statement then? They fought a war for mainland Armenia and their enclaves and lost. Do you think the leader of azerbaijan is weak?
1
← Back to Board