YEREVAN (Noyan Tapan)–"The Armenian Revolutionary Federation Executive Council of Armenia views commen’s made by Levon Ter-Petrosyan in connection with the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict as dangerous," Rouben Hakobian–ARF Executive Council representative said at a news conference Wednesday.
He defined as a serious mistake the contrasting of the national-liberation struggle in Karabakh and the building of Armenia’s independent statehood. According to him–formation of Armenia’s independence is contributed to the national-liberation struggle in Karabakh by Ter-Petrosyan
According to Hakobian–one cannot offer a toss-up between national liberation and economic stability to the people of Armenia. He said that the key to Karabakh’s victory was in the spirit of the Armenian people–and the settlement of the issue must become the exhaltation of the people’s soul.
The argumen’s mentioned by Ter-Petrosyan–according to Hakobian–do not correspond to the real state of things. He said that the blockade–which was mentioned by the official as the main cause of problems–does not effect a group of people–five to six clans–who can even privatize the entire republic.
He noted that the Armenian people are wise and realize that certain concessions and hardships are needed for the building of Karabakh’s statehood and freedom–but it is very dangerous to so freely abuse such understanding.
"The fate of Karabakh is being solved first of all in Armenia–but the political fate of Armenia and all Armenia’s is today being solved in Karabakh," Hakobian concluded.
In an interview with Hayots Ashkhar daily–ARF Bureau member Massis Baghdassarian–in evaluating Ter-Petrosyan’s statemen’s during his press conference–stated that since 1988 there have been two approaches–schools of thought–to the Karabakh conflict.
Baghdassarian explained that one of those approaches was viewing Karabakh as a significant factor in the strengthening of Armenia’s independent statehood–economy and society. The second approach saw Karabakh as an obstacle to Armenia’s socio-economic development.
Baghdassarian stated that he believed that Ter-Petrosyan was advocating for the second approach–to which–the Bureau member said–the ARF has been and will continue to be opposed.
"Our position on this matter has always been clear. We have always been and will continue to be proponents of the first approach," Baghdassarian declared.
The second approach–Baghdassarian said–would force Armenia into having its fate decided by regional or super powers based on their political agendas–leaving Armenia with no say in its future and in an inferior position.