Tweet
RUSSIA AND WEST: THE RACING GAME
Today.Az
16 September 2008 [15:38]
Every time when some events directly or indirectly affect the
interests of our country, our analysts start to burst out emotional
and analytically doubtful comments, instead of consistent and calm
analysis.
This time our political scientists have become anxious with the visit
of Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev to Moscow. They started to put
forward proposals that probably we are moving towards Russia and,
in the result, we do not proceed towards the West. This naive logics
could have contained amusing things, if they have not been voiced by
the journalists, whom I personally consider to be philosophers.
When I read the works of Morris Druon, I lost any interest to
conspiralogic theories. I think it is inadmissible to think that
we will be seized by anyone, when the protection and defense of the
vital interests of our country is obvious and when multi-directional
and balanced policy is fruitful. Why should we think so? Do only the
authors of these forecasts read about or watch the world processes? Or
do only the respected political scientists know that a unilateral
policy leads a country to a deadlock, regardless of whose side you
have taken?
The theories of our reported intention to side the Kremlin, as Moscow
ignores the situation with democracy, are absurd. Did Dick Cheney, who
visited our capital recently, picket our presidential administration
in connection with democracy? Or perhaps Nicholas Sarkozy and Gordon
Brown send messages to each others in connection with any of our
problems every day after breakfast?
Should we consider Saakashvili's policy and conduct to be an example
for us?
What has he gained? Can't we understand the difference between
effectiveness and showiness?
Today Russia is able to hold the entire Europe in leash until
there is alternative energy supplies. At the same time, it is not
important whether a cubic meter of gas or a million of cubic meters
are transported there. After the President of Azerbaijan launched the
gas pipeline, which is pumping the gas to Greece, the situation has
changed. The Kremlin realized that they are not the only suppliers
and if there is an alternative gas pipe to Europe, this will mean
that there is the only step left to the opening of a branchy gas
infrastructure. This step is even not political but technical,
which weakens Russia's influence on Europe and the entire world. It
seems that for Russia it is a vital issue, while the alternative gas
pipeline is of vital importance for the West.
And now we are witnessing that both western and Russian officials
speak of the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and call us good,
wise and kind.
I do not even want to analyze the external policy of our country
and the policy of our neighbors, which is unambiguous, just with
different vectors.
Some of them are oriented for the West and the others for the North.
Now I am speaking of effectiveness or of what has remained more
effective in the historical realities. Should we be called a beacon of
democracy, an outpost or maintain normal relations, preserve influence
and (without any exaggeration) calmly influence destinies?
And also along with economic price there is another price, which
is Karabakh.
It is clear that we will have to make a serious choice. Today the
events are proceeding faster, so fast that Mr.Medvedev called our
President at the moment when Mr.Cheney was visiting Baku...
Anar Mamedkhanov Deputy of the Milli Medjlis of Azerbaijan
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Today.Az
16 September 2008 [15:38]
Every time when some events directly or indirectly affect the
interests of our country, our analysts start to burst out emotional
and analytically doubtful comments, instead of consistent and calm
analysis.
This time our political scientists have become anxious with the visit
of Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev to Moscow. They started to put
forward proposals that probably we are moving towards Russia and,
in the result, we do not proceed towards the West. This naive logics
could have contained amusing things, if they have not been voiced by
the journalists, whom I personally consider to be philosophers.
When I read the works of Morris Druon, I lost any interest to
conspiralogic theories. I think it is inadmissible to think that
we will be seized by anyone, when the protection and defense of the
vital interests of our country is obvious and when multi-directional
and balanced policy is fruitful. Why should we think so? Do only the
authors of these forecasts read about or watch the world processes? Or
do only the respected political scientists know that a unilateral
policy leads a country to a deadlock, regardless of whose side you
have taken?
The theories of our reported intention to side the Kremlin, as Moscow
ignores the situation with democracy, are absurd. Did Dick Cheney, who
visited our capital recently, picket our presidential administration
in connection with democracy? Or perhaps Nicholas Sarkozy and Gordon
Brown send messages to each others in connection with any of our
problems every day after breakfast?
Should we consider Saakashvili's policy and conduct to be an example
for us?
What has he gained? Can't we understand the difference between
effectiveness and showiness?
Today Russia is able to hold the entire Europe in leash until
there is alternative energy supplies. At the same time, it is not
important whether a cubic meter of gas or a million of cubic meters
are transported there. After the President of Azerbaijan launched the
gas pipeline, which is pumping the gas to Greece, the situation has
changed. The Kremlin realized that they are not the only suppliers
and if there is an alternative gas pipe to Europe, this will mean
that there is the only step left to the opening of a branchy gas
infrastructure. This step is even not political but technical,
which weakens Russia's influence on Europe and the entire world. It
seems that for Russia it is a vital issue, while the alternative gas
pipeline is of vital importance for the West.
And now we are witnessing that both western and Russian officials
speak of the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and call us good,
wise and kind.
I do not even want to analyze the external policy of our country
and the policy of our neighbors, which is unambiguous, just with
different vectors.
Some of them are oriented for the West and the others for the North.
Now I am speaking of effectiveness or of what has remained more
effective in the historical realities. Should we be called a beacon of
democracy, an outpost or maintain normal relations, preserve influence
and (without any exaggeration) calmly influence destinies?
And also along with economic price there is another price, which
is Karabakh.
It is clear that we will have to make a serious choice. Today the
events are proceeding faster, so fast that Mr.Medvedev called our
President at the moment when Mr.Cheney was visiting Baku...
Anar Mamedkhanov Deputy of the Milli Medjlis of Azerbaijan
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress