[Armenian News note: the below is translated from Armenian]
Armenian Public TV hosted a debate on 3 February on the recent statements about the governments of Armenia and Azerbaijan preparing their nations for peace as part of peace talks on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
The OSCE Minsk Group co-chairmen, who mediate work towards a peaceful settlement to the Karabakh conflict, and the UN Secretary General, came up with similar statements after a meeting between Armenian and Azerbaijani foreign ministers in Paris on 16 January.
During the debate on 3 February, presenter Petros Ghazaryan said that peace is good but it should be "mutual" and there should be a consensus between the conflicting parties.
Ghazaryan wondered why Armenian should get ready for peace "if the opponent is going to attack us".
Calls for peace 'not new'
Ruben Rubinyan, the head of the parliament's standing committee on foreign relations of the ruling My Step bloc, insisted that calls for peace were not new, and had been repeatedly voiced since 2006.
He reiterated the new government's position that no decision will be taken on Karabakh without the agreement of the Armenian and Karabakh people. The MP also underscored that the option of "peace for territories" has not and must not be discussed in Armenia unless the issue of the recognition of the Karabakh people's right for self-determination is discussed in Azerbaijan.
"It has been stated that there is no document or list of provisions on the table of negotiations now. No scenario is being discussed at the moment," Rubinyan said.
He called on all political forces to avoid "seeding unfounded doubts" or "inspiring defeatist fears".
No clear-cut strategy on Karabakh
Pundit Hakob Badalyan noted that the international calls for peace are an indication that no peace agreement is on the table.
He also stated that the Armenian public is concerned about the state of the talks because, for the last 25 years, Armenians had been made to believe that they must be "the first one to cede" in the Karabakh conflict settlement.
Propaganda of hatred
The pundit added that the two countries' view of the conflict is radically different. In Armenia, the Karabakh issue is seen as a matter for the country's leadership to solve, Badalyan noted.
But in Azerbaijan, he said, it is seen as a matter of state identity. He said that the main problem is that the Armenian public has assumed a passive stance, and suspects every succeeding government of ceding territories.
Badalyan said it is wrong for Armenia to assume an "obedient constructive stance" in front of the international community – and it is wrong for society to think that it is what they expect from Armenia.
The pundit added that the issue to focus on is not whether or not Armenia should adopt a policy of hatred towards Azerbaijanis. "The problem we have is to formulate our state strategy," Badalyan said.
Opponent or enemy
Gegham Manukyan, the head of the news department of Yerkir Media TV affiliated with the Armenian Revolutionary Federation Dashnaktsutyun, pointed out that surveys have shown Armenian society is more tolerant.
"What do we call Azerbaijan on TV? We call it our opponent, do we not? All the TV stations have called it our opponent for years and even during the [2016] April war. Watch any TV channel in Azerbaijan, they call [Armenia] dusman [enemy in Azeri]. They do not say opponent, they say enemy," Manukyan said.
He argued that Armenia needs to be "intolerant".
"I do not speak about total militarisation but the Armenian society should be psychologically ready for what happened in April [2016]. Society must be as ready as the [soldiers on the] frontline so that the connection between the society and the frontline does not break up," Manukyan said.
But MP Rubinyan argued that Armenia is not a militant society.
"Unlike Azerbaijan, we are not militant, we do not hate anyone but at the same time, we, our society, our armed forces will simply destroy the enemy, if, at any moment, there is any encroachment on the borders of the Republic of Armenia or Republic of Artsakh [Karavakh]. And no context of peace preparation can neutralise this," he said.