Tweet
PURCHASING 'NEW ARMS' AZERBAIJAN REMOVES STUFF FROM UKRAINE
By David Stepanyan
ArmInfo
2009-05-11 13:16:00
Exlcusive interview of Arkady Ter-Tadevosyan, Major General, Karabakh
Hero, (nickname Commandos), with ArmInfo
Mr. Major General, 18 years have passed since the operation
'Koltso'. What was the real reason of those tragic events?
Operation 'Koltso' was launched on April 29 in 1990 by the forces in
Moscow that tried not to prevent the collapse of the USSR by all means
in their hand. Then, three Baltic states as well as Armenia and Georgia
came out with an initiative of withdrawal from the USSR. Therefore,
an active agitation campaign was launched in the Soviet Union against
the leaderships of those states that were accused of extremism and
formation of armed gangs in their territories. Actually, enlisting the
support of the Soviet army, the Azerbaijani leadership tried to take
advantage of the general Soviet hysteria about the 5 ' breakaway '
states in the context of Karabakh people's claims. Azerbaijanis were
crossing the border to Armenia, stealing cattle, felling. When all
this seemed insufficient to them, they began taking hostages. Operation
'Koltso' was conducted throughout the Armenian-Azerbaijani border from
Goris to Noyemberyan, Azerbaijani OMON backed by the Soviet army fired
at peaceful Armenian population since they were charged=2 0by Moscow
to liquidate the people arousing suspicion of involvement in armed
gangs. Thus, a bus with 13 Armenian militiamen bearing no relations
to 'armed gangs' was blasted. Hereby Moscow tried to repress the
liberation movement in the 5 breakaway states. For this purpose the
operation 'Koltso' was conducted and part of Nagorno Karabakh seized.
In Karabakh, the operation was conducted under a sly name 'inspection
of passport regime'. People have not understood yet the essence of
that operation and its numerous victims. It seems to me that human
lives have never been valuable in the USSR either during the Great
Patriotic War or the whole history. The operation 'Koltso' was the
last proof of my words.
Would you tell about some details of the ceasefire signed in Bishkek
in 1994?
First of all, it were the Azerbaijanis that made us fight. At first
we had neither desire nor possibilities to fight. We got all this
later. What we learned at first was to fight back inside our country
during occupation of Nogorno Karabakh by the Soviet troops and the
Azerbaijani OMON. Later, when the USSR collapsed and the Soviet troops
were withdrawn from Azerbaijan, Azerbaijanis were no longer able to
fight against us since they could no longer fire at our soldiers backed
by Russians. We could fight them down but our leadership in 1994 was
persuaded to sign ceasefire, which I think was a big mistake. The
following took place then: Aliyev asked Yeltsin, Nazarbayev and the
remaining leaders of CIS to do their best to prevent the all-out
offensive of the Armenian forces. As a result, Levon Ter-Petrosyan
was forced to accept the persuasions by the presidents of Russia
and Kazakhstan.
Did we have enough potential in 1994 for further offensive?
To say we had potential is to say nothing. That time the Azerbaijani
army was fully paralyzed then and was simply unable to fight. We had no
problem for further attacking them. However Bishkek treaty gave time to
the Azerbaijanis to turn down. I think we had to fight the enemy down
further attacking Azerbaijan and then make the lodgment we could really
make. But we failed hereby short-selling the Talish people that are
still striving to establish Talish republic. It is quite another point
that the defense line we have today is optimal for us from the point of
view of defense. We used to speak of Azerbaijan and the Azerbaijanis,
but generally speaking there are no Azerbaijanis in that Azerbaijan.
You mean that pursuing offensive we would make it possible for the
oppressed national minorities in Azerbaijan to get self-determination
and put an end to 'Azerbaijan existing for centuries'?
Actually, our army would put an end to oppression of the national
minorities in Azerbaijan. Of course, Aliyev would later try to unite
them at lea st in an autonomous region and would succeed since he
has always been tricky. Now, the Constitution of Azerbaijan has no
provision on autonomy.
So, the 'high level of autonomy' they are allegedly going to provide
to Nagorno Karabakh has no single basis even in their legislation.
Do you share the ARFD's stand on the Armenian-Turkish relations? Do
you think it possible for Karabakh to become a map, at least a road-map
on the negotiating table?
I am non-party but has always sympathized with Dashnaktsutyun, which
is the oldest Armenian party. However, I think that at such important
historical moment for Armenia they shouldn't leave the coalition. Serzh
Sargsyan has repeatedly declared that the Karabakh conflict cannot
be a precondition to the Armenian-Turkish relations. The president
has repeatedly said the same also about Genocide. The same did our
foreign minister. I agree with the ARFD that Turks will never make
peace with us. I don't trust in them since they have always subjected
Armenians to oppressions and persecutions.
So, we must always be on guard in the relations with them. But it does
not mean that we should abandon normalizing relations with Turkey,
which is just one of the dangers threatening us.
What do you think about the current situation in Karabakh?
I have returned from Karabakh quite recently and I am going to visit
it for a few days again. I'd like to highlight that dramatic changes
are taking place there. The state building in the NKR has grown
so that the country is able to protect itself against any external
threats. The only negative feature of the Karabakh people is that they
do not strive for peaceful work. Instead, they just wait for a call
for war to show what they are able to. If the Karabakh people worked
as good as they fight, it would be excellent. But they are working in
this dimension and finding feed. I was in Mardakert region, in Shushi,
Stepanakert. A big work is being carried out there and something is
also being prepared for Azerbaijanis.
If nevertheless we manage to agree with Turkey and open the border
without preconditions, would it deprive Azerbaijan of the last chance
to unleash new aggression against Karabakh?
Opening of the border to Turkey has no importance or influence on
Karabakh issue. Armenia's blockade by Azerbaijan and Turkey does not
affect our fighting efficiency. The only thing Baku can rely on in
the fight against us is the principle of territorial integrity that
is opposed by another Equivalent principle of the international law
- the people's right to self-determination. These two rights do not
and will never meet each other.
So the format of negotiations should be changed. I do not think that
the situation may change from this point of view in the nearest future.
Nevertheless, Turkey will never betray Baku even=2 0if the border
to Armenia is opened. The processes in the relations of Armenia
and Turkey can be explained by the interest of Russia and the USA
in establishment of the diplomatic relations between Yerevan and
Ankara. And against this background Baku can be unalarmed.
Is it possible to say that the current status-quo is in favor
of everyone and no one including Azerbaijan needs new aggression
against NKR?
The point is that Azerbaijan has always bluffed and keeps on bluffing
when threatening with resumption of military actions. Let's Aliyev
unleash new war. What will it bring to him except thousands of
new victims on both parties? It is the only circumstance that
explains our unwillingness to be involved in the new adventure of
Baku. They are well aware that we are afraid of war as much as we want
it. Azerbaijan is not ready for war today and Aliyev does not need it
either. The oil-dollars belonging to the Azerbaijani people go to his
pocket. Moreover, Aliyev receives only 10-15% of the proceeds from oil,
the remaining belong to foreign companies that have invested billions
in recovery of oil and now wait for return. From this point of view
Aliyev is bound hand and feet.
So why Aliyev buys arms and proclaims it to the whole world?
Because it remains for Aliyev just to make military rhetoric, buy
and produce arms. Azerbaijan has rather big program on purchase and
production of w eapons. Baku is even going to produce helicopters
'Uragan' etc.
However we should not forget that it is also business of generals. If
someone really studies out what Azerbaijan has recently purchased,
it will turn out that Azerbaijan removed the whole stuff accumulated
in Ukraine after withdrawal of Soviet troops from the GDR. Business
is business. One should not forget about defeatist syndrome that
originated in Azerbaijan after Karabakh campaign. For instance,
a similar syndrome exists in Turkey with regard to Russia.
This defeatist syndrome is one of the reasons of Aliev's bellicose
sentiments. Aliyev tries to replace in Azerbaijan the spirit
of Karabakh army that is unbreakable. In addition, there is
also the military theory of generating combat power in the chief
direction of supposed breakthrough. In compliance with this theory,
the attacking party must prevail over the defending one three or
even four times. There is also the moral aspect requiring similar
prevalence i.e. Azerbaijan needs at least 250,000 manpower even for
theoretical breakthrough which is impossible since Azerbaijani army
does not exceed even 125,000 people and has no special reserves.
Thank you.
By David Stepanyan
ArmInfo
2009-05-11 13:16:00
Exlcusive interview of Arkady Ter-Tadevosyan, Major General, Karabakh
Hero, (nickname Commandos), with ArmInfo
Mr. Major General, 18 years have passed since the operation
'Koltso'. What was the real reason of those tragic events?
Operation 'Koltso' was launched on April 29 in 1990 by the forces in
Moscow that tried not to prevent the collapse of the USSR by all means
in their hand. Then, three Baltic states as well as Armenia and Georgia
came out with an initiative of withdrawal from the USSR. Therefore,
an active agitation campaign was launched in the Soviet Union against
the leaderships of those states that were accused of extremism and
formation of armed gangs in their territories. Actually, enlisting the
support of the Soviet army, the Azerbaijani leadership tried to take
advantage of the general Soviet hysteria about the 5 ' breakaway '
states in the context of Karabakh people's claims. Azerbaijanis were
crossing the border to Armenia, stealing cattle, felling. When all
this seemed insufficient to them, they began taking hostages. Operation
'Koltso' was conducted throughout the Armenian-Azerbaijani border from
Goris to Noyemberyan, Azerbaijani OMON backed by the Soviet army fired
at peaceful Armenian population since they were charged=2 0by Moscow
to liquidate the people arousing suspicion of involvement in armed
gangs. Thus, a bus with 13 Armenian militiamen bearing no relations
to 'armed gangs' was blasted. Hereby Moscow tried to repress the
liberation movement in the 5 breakaway states. For this purpose the
operation 'Koltso' was conducted and part of Nagorno Karabakh seized.
In Karabakh, the operation was conducted under a sly name 'inspection
of passport regime'. People have not understood yet the essence of
that operation and its numerous victims. It seems to me that human
lives have never been valuable in the USSR either during the Great
Patriotic War or the whole history. The operation 'Koltso' was the
last proof of my words.
Would you tell about some details of the ceasefire signed in Bishkek
in 1994?
First of all, it were the Azerbaijanis that made us fight. At first
we had neither desire nor possibilities to fight. We got all this
later. What we learned at first was to fight back inside our country
during occupation of Nogorno Karabakh by the Soviet troops and the
Azerbaijani OMON. Later, when the USSR collapsed and the Soviet troops
were withdrawn from Azerbaijan, Azerbaijanis were no longer able to
fight against us since they could no longer fire at our soldiers backed
by Russians. We could fight them down but our leadership in 1994 was
persuaded to sign ceasefire, which I think was a big mistake. The
following took place then: Aliyev asked Yeltsin, Nazarbayev and the
remaining leaders of CIS to do their best to prevent the all-out
offensive of the Armenian forces. As a result, Levon Ter-Petrosyan
was forced to accept the persuasions by the presidents of Russia
and Kazakhstan.
Did we have enough potential in 1994 for further offensive?
To say we had potential is to say nothing. That time the Azerbaijani
army was fully paralyzed then and was simply unable to fight. We had no
problem for further attacking them. However Bishkek treaty gave time to
the Azerbaijanis to turn down. I think we had to fight the enemy down
further attacking Azerbaijan and then make the lodgment we could really
make. But we failed hereby short-selling the Talish people that are
still striving to establish Talish republic. It is quite another point
that the defense line we have today is optimal for us from the point of
view of defense. We used to speak of Azerbaijan and the Azerbaijanis,
but generally speaking there are no Azerbaijanis in that Azerbaijan.
You mean that pursuing offensive we would make it possible for the
oppressed national minorities in Azerbaijan to get self-determination
and put an end to 'Azerbaijan existing for centuries'?
Actually, our army would put an end to oppression of the national
minorities in Azerbaijan. Of course, Aliyev would later try to unite
them at lea st in an autonomous region and would succeed since he
has always been tricky. Now, the Constitution of Azerbaijan has no
provision on autonomy.
So, the 'high level of autonomy' they are allegedly going to provide
to Nagorno Karabakh has no single basis even in their legislation.
Do you share the ARFD's stand on the Armenian-Turkish relations? Do
you think it possible for Karabakh to become a map, at least a road-map
on the negotiating table?
I am non-party but has always sympathized with Dashnaktsutyun, which
is the oldest Armenian party. However, I think that at such important
historical moment for Armenia they shouldn't leave the coalition. Serzh
Sargsyan has repeatedly declared that the Karabakh conflict cannot
be a precondition to the Armenian-Turkish relations. The president
has repeatedly said the same also about Genocide. The same did our
foreign minister. I agree with the ARFD that Turks will never make
peace with us. I don't trust in them since they have always subjected
Armenians to oppressions and persecutions.
So, we must always be on guard in the relations with them. But it does
not mean that we should abandon normalizing relations with Turkey,
which is just one of the dangers threatening us.
What do you think about the current situation in Karabakh?
I have returned from Karabakh quite recently and I am going to visit
it for a few days again. I'd like to highlight that dramatic changes
are taking place there. The state building in the NKR has grown
so that the country is able to protect itself against any external
threats. The only negative feature of the Karabakh people is that they
do not strive for peaceful work. Instead, they just wait for a call
for war to show what they are able to. If the Karabakh people worked
as good as they fight, it would be excellent. But they are working in
this dimension and finding feed. I was in Mardakert region, in Shushi,
Stepanakert. A big work is being carried out there and something is
also being prepared for Azerbaijanis.
If nevertheless we manage to agree with Turkey and open the border
without preconditions, would it deprive Azerbaijan of the last chance
to unleash new aggression against Karabakh?
Opening of the border to Turkey has no importance or influence on
Karabakh issue. Armenia's blockade by Azerbaijan and Turkey does not
affect our fighting efficiency. The only thing Baku can rely on in
the fight against us is the principle of territorial integrity that
is opposed by another Equivalent principle of the international law
- the people's right to self-determination. These two rights do not
and will never meet each other.
So the format of negotiations should be changed. I do not think that
the situation may change from this point of view in the nearest future.
Nevertheless, Turkey will never betray Baku even=2 0if the border
to Armenia is opened. The processes in the relations of Armenia
and Turkey can be explained by the interest of Russia and the USA
in establishment of the diplomatic relations between Yerevan and
Ankara. And against this background Baku can be unalarmed.
Is it possible to say that the current status-quo is in favor
of everyone and no one including Azerbaijan needs new aggression
against NKR?
The point is that Azerbaijan has always bluffed and keeps on bluffing
when threatening with resumption of military actions. Let's Aliyev
unleash new war. What will it bring to him except thousands of
new victims on both parties? It is the only circumstance that
explains our unwillingness to be involved in the new adventure of
Baku. They are well aware that we are afraid of war as much as we want
it. Azerbaijan is not ready for war today and Aliyev does not need it
either. The oil-dollars belonging to the Azerbaijani people go to his
pocket. Moreover, Aliyev receives only 10-15% of the proceeds from oil,
the remaining belong to foreign companies that have invested billions
in recovery of oil and now wait for return. From this point of view
Aliyev is bound hand and feet.
So why Aliyev buys arms and proclaims it to the whole world?
Because it remains for Aliyev just to make military rhetoric, buy
and produce arms. Azerbaijan has rather big program on purchase and
production of w eapons. Baku is even going to produce helicopters
'Uragan' etc.
However we should not forget that it is also business of generals. If
someone really studies out what Azerbaijan has recently purchased,
it will turn out that Azerbaijan removed the whole stuff accumulated
in Ukraine after withdrawal of Soviet troops from the GDR. Business
is business. One should not forget about defeatist syndrome that
originated in Azerbaijan after Karabakh campaign. For instance,
a similar syndrome exists in Turkey with regard to Russia.
This defeatist syndrome is one of the reasons of Aliev's bellicose
sentiments. Aliyev tries to replace in Azerbaijan the spirit
of Karabakh army that is unbreakable. In addition, there is
also the military theory of generating combat power in the chief
direction of supposed breakthrough. In compliance with this theory,
the attacking party must prevail over the defending one three or
even four times. There is also the moral aspect requiring similar
prevalence i.e. Azerbaijan needs at least 250,000 manpower even for
theoretical breakthrough which is impossible since Azerbaijani army
does not exceed even 125,000 people and has no special reserves.
Thank you.