Tweet
UKRAINE, THE CAUCASUS AND FURTHER ON?
Alexander Yegorov
en.fondsk.ru
20.01.2009
It is becoming more evident that a gas war launched by Victor
Yushchenko against Russia, Europe and also against the Ukrainian nation
had been orchestrated from the overseas as part of a large-scale
plan to undermine stability in the post-Soviet states. Ratification
of the Strategic partnership charter between US and Ukraine and the
beginning of the gas war cannot be viewed separately.
Since the end of the 8-day war in South Ossetia, its outcomes being
quite unexpected for the protectors of the Georgian leadership, experts
worldwide have been predicting a new U.S policy in Eurasia. Despite a
change of scenery in the White House, this political course is being
implemented already.
In view of this we may expect the U.S foreign policy to become even
more aggressive, aimed to unfreeze old and stir up new conflicts
everywhere along the Russian borders.
Ukraine is not the only example. Since US and Georgia have signed
a strategic partnership charter, the military cooperation between
Washington and Tbilisi will become more intensive with Georgian trying
to take revenge for its failure in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Almost
each day we receive alarming reports about Georgia speeding up the
militarization of its army and occupying its old positions in Gori
(eastern Georgia) and other places bordering South Ossetia. And the
European ob servers pretend not to be aware of this. But South Ossetia
and Abkhazia are not the only possible hot spots.
The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is very likely to be another U.S
target. After the presidents of Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia had
signed a declaration on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict in Moscow on
November, 2, 2008, there appeared a hope for a quickest solution
to the issue. The sides agreed not to resort to methods of force
while settling the conflict and provide guarantees of a political
dialog. Through that declaration Russia demonstrated its growing
influence in Transcaucasia, which provoked concerns among those being
against it. They wanted the Nagorno Karabakh region back under the
jurisdiction of Azerbaijan because Russia (as any other large country
having its interests in the Caucasus) could have renounced its claims
for the territories which did not belong to it...
Soon these concerns gave way to poorly concealed irritation. Otherwise
how could we explain all the events that happened after the sides had
signed the declaration in Moscow? On the New Year's Eve the leaders
of one of the opposing sides spoke in favor of force in settling the
Karabakh issues and thus provoked a scandal in the Azeri media. In 2008
Moscow had allegedly sold to Yerevan arms and military equipment at
$800 million. The news agencies in Baku reported that the arms Armenia
had received at the Russian base of Gyumri comprised diverse models
of tanks, missiles, canons, grenade guns, mortar guns and small arms.
Acting spokesman for the Russian Defense Ministry Colonel Alexander
Drobyshevsky denied the information and said Russia had not delivered
any weapons to Armenia. "This information is false. We are taking such
reports as provocation", Mr. Drobyshevsky said. He also added that
Colonel Alexander Petrunin, who had been cited by the ANS television
channel in connection with the issue, was not authorized to give
comment at all.
Colonel Seiran Shakhsuvaryan, press secretary of the Ministry of
Defence of Armenia, also denied the information.
Soon after the failure of the disinformation campaign, Azerbaijan's
Foreign Ministry expressed its dissatisfaction and named Russia
responsible for the further development of the situation in
Karabakh. Russia's Ambassador to Azerbaijan Vasily Istratov
was summoned to give explanations, which however did not satisfy
Azerbaijan. Actually, Baku aims to use the story with non-existing
arms as a leverage in its political games (like Ukraine uses its
status of a transit country)...
The disinformation was distributed further on through numerous partisan
media in Russia and in the West. Political observers of the leading
Azeri newspapers simultaneously accused Russia of violating the Moscow
declarations and trying to undermine political stability not only in
Ukraine and Georgia but in Azerbaijan as well.
In view of the threats co ming from the "northern neighbor",
Azerbaijan decided to speed up the work connected with the "Nabucco"
pipe, a military deal with Turkey and deeper cooperation with NATO
and U.S. According to a political expert Mr. Musabekov, "Azerbaijan
used to be too careful with the Nabucco project and NATO but now it's
time to act freely".
It appears that that scandal with the delivery of Russian arms to
Armenia was initiated just in addition to the Ukrainian issue in order
to speed up the accession to NATO of several former Soviet republics.
The Azeri officials unanimously characterized the "arms issue" as
an international scandal and demanded that Russia was excluded from
the OSCE Minsk group. Taking into consideration the national traits,
it is difficult to imagine this huge propaganda campaign invented in
Baku without the U.S.
Instructions...
Amid the attempts to widen partnership, NATO contingents in
Azerbaijan, a country with tons of arms on its territory, are
likely to be increased. In spring of 2006 the alliance deployed the
so-called "interim forces" at the former Soviet bases of Kyurdamir,
Nasosny and Gyulli. The number of troops there is reported from 750
to 1300 soldiers and officers and may be doubled. Among other aims,
the contingent is due to carry out a strategic mission in Georgia
and protect the Azeri-Georgian leg of the Baku-Tbilisi-Djeikhan pipe
line. =0 D If case of success, Ukraine could borrow the experience. The
official Kiev believes Ukraine's gas transportation system to be
"unique wealth of the continent", which requires U.S and NATO
protection from "Russian imperialists".
Now they seem not to pay any attention to the fact that for many years
Russia had turned a blind eye on Ukraine stealing the transit gas,
announced its respect to Georgia's territorial integrity and helped
Azerbaijan not to lose its face in 1994. In politics there is no place
for gratitude. They will pay you nothing for your help. A new war in
Karabakh will completely discredit Russia in South Caucasus.
Amid harsh anti-Russian rhetoric, Moscow can do nothing but establish a
system of military-political balances and get ready to pay any price
for being able to stand for its national interests.
Alexander Yegorov
en.fondsk.ru
20.01.2009
It is becoming more evident that a gas war launched by Victor
Yushchenko against Russia, Europe and also against the Ukrainian nation
had been orchestrated from the overseas as part of a large-scale
plan to undermine stability in the post-Soviet states. Ratification
of the Strategic partnership charter between US and Ukraine and the
beginning of the gas war cannot be viewed separately.
Since the end of the 8-day war in South Ossetia, its outcomes being
quite unexpected for the protectors of the Georgian leadership, experts
worldwide have been predicting a new U.S policy in Eurasia. Despite a
change of scenery in the White House, this political course is being
implemented already.
In view of this we may expect the U.S foreign policy to become even
more aggressive, aimed to unfreeze old and stir up new conflicts
everywhere along the Russian borders.
Ukraine is not the only example. Since US and Georgia have signed
a strategic partnership charter, the military cooperation between
Washington and Tbilisi will become more intensive with Georgian trying
to take revenge for its failure in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Almost
each day we receive alarming reports about Georgia speeding up the
militarization of its army and occupying its old positions in Gori
(eastern Georgia) and other places bordering South Ossetia. And the
European ob servers pretend not to be aware of this. But South Ossetia
and Abkhazia are not the only possible hot spots.
The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is very likely to be another U.S
target. After the presidents of Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia had
signed a declaration on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict in Moscow on
November, 2, 2008, there appeared a hope for a quickest solution
to the issue. The sides agreed not to resort to methods of force
while settling the conflict and provide guarantees of a political
dialog. Through that declaration Russia demonstrated its growing
influence in Transcaucasia, which provoked concerns among those being
against it. They wanted the Nagorno Karabakh region back under the
jurisdiction of Azerbaijan because Russia (as any other large country
having its interests in the Caucasus) could have renounced its claims
for the territories which did not belong to it...
Soon these concerns gave way to poorly concealed irritation. Otherwise
how could we explain all the events that happened after the sides had
signed the declaration in Moscow? On the New Year's Eve the leaders
of one of the opposing sides spoke in favor of force in settling the
Karabakh issues and thus provoked a scandal in the Azeri media. In 2008
Moscow had allegedly sold to Yerevan arms and military equipment at
$800 million. The news agencies in Baku reported that the arms Armenia
had received at the Russian base of Gyumri comprised diverse models
of tanks, missiles, canons, grenade guns, mortar guns and small arms.
Acting spokesman for the Russian Defense Ministry Colonel Alexander
Drobyshevsky denied the information and said Russia had not delivered
any weapons to Armenia. "This information is false. We are taking such
reports as provocation", Mr. Drobyshevsky said. He also added that
Colonel Alexander Petrunin, who had been cited by the ANS television
channel in connection with the issue, was not authorized to give
comment at all.
Colonel Seiran Shakhsuvaryan, press secretary of the Ministry of
Defence of Armenia, also denied the information.
Soon after the failure of the disinformation campaign, Azerbaijan's
Foreign Ministry expressed its dissatisfaction and named Russia
responsible for the further development of the situation in
Karabakh. Russia's Ambassador to Azerbaijan Vasily Istratov
was summoned to give explanations, which however did not satisfy
Azerbaijan. Actually, Baku aims to use the story with non-existing
arms as a leverage in its political games (like Ukraine uses its
status of a transit country)...
The disinformation was distributed further on through numerous partisan
media in Russia and in the West. Political observers of the leading
Azeri newspapers simultaneously accused Russia of violating the Moscow
declarations and trying to undermine political stability not only in
Ukraine and Georgia but in Azerbaijan as well.
In view of the threats co ming from the "northern neighbor",
Azerbaijan decided to speed up the work connected with the "Nabucco"
pipe, a military deal with Turkey and deeper cooperation with NATO
and U.S. According to a political expert Mr. Musabekov, "Azerbaijan
used to be too careful with the Nabucco project and NATO but now it's
time to act freely".
It appears that that scandal with the delivery of Russian arms to
Armenia was initiated just in addition to the Ukrainian issue in order
to speed up the accession to NATO of several former Soviet republics.
The Azeri officials unanimously characterized the "arms issue" as
an international scandal and demanded that Russia was excluded from
the OSCE Minsk group. Taking into consideration the national traits,
it is difficult to imagine this huge propaganda campaign invented in
Baku without the U.S.
Instructions...
Amid the attempts to widen partnership, NATO contingents in
Azerbaijan, a country with tons of arms on its territory, are
likely to be increased. In spring of 2006 the alliance deployed the
so-called "interim forces" at the former Soviet bases of Kyurdamir,
Nasosny and Gyulli. The number of troops there is reported from 750
to 1300 soldiers and officers and may be doubled. Among other aims,
the contingent is due to carry out a strategic mission in Georgia
and protect the Azeri-Georgian leg of the Baku-Tbilisi-Djeikhan pipe
line. =0 D If case of success, Ukraine could borrow the experience. The
official Kiev believes Ukraine's gas transportation system to be
"unique wealth of the continent", which requires U.S and NATO
protection from "Russian imperialists".
Now they seem not to pay any attention to the fact that for many years
Russia had turned a blind eye on Ukraine stealing the transit gas,
announced its respect to Georgia's territorial integrity and helped
Azerbaijan not to lose its face in 1994. In politics there is no place
for gratitude. They will pay you nothing for your help. A new war in
Karabakh will completely discredit Russia in South Caucasus.
Amid harsh anti-Russian rhetoric, Moscow can do nothing but establish a
system of military-political balances and get ready to pay any price
for being able to stand for its national interests.