Tweet
KARABAKH NATIONALISM IS THE MAIN DASHNAK IDEA OF MODERN ARMENIA
Today
http://www.today.az/news/politics/6 6665.html
April 23 2010
Azerbaijan
Day.Az interview with Alexander Dugin, professor, doctor of political
sciences, director of the Center for Conservative Studies at the
School of Sociology of the Moscow State University, Head of the
International Eurasian Movement, a famous Russian political scientist.
Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan on Thursday night issued an address
to the nation, saying that "Armenia has not yet decided to abandon
the process of normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations, but to
suspend the ratification of the protocols." In your opinion, what
does this statement mean? What were prerequisites for this decision?
I was one of those experts who from the outset said that the
Armenian-Turkish protocols will fail. It was a huge geopolitical
project by Americans to drive Armenia under its influence putting
serious pressure on Turkey. And I said that this will result in a
collapse, but the border will not open.
However, I believed that the ratification would be halted by the
Turkish side, and the local parliament will not ratify the protocols
despite pressure from Washington because it undermines the very idea
of Turkey on structure of international politics. But it was halted
by the Armenian side. To tell the truth, the Turks would never ratify
the protocols.
Thing have returned to normal now. I'm very pleased with this,
because the United States must completely leave the region. It should
leave Afghanistan and Iraq and withdraw its Sixth Fleet from the
Mediterranean Sea.
Azerbaijan was against ratification of the protocols even without
the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict...
Right. That is why first of all Russian patriots are happy with what
has happened because from the outset they saw America's hand in this
and realized that this aims to move Armenia away from Russia putting
unprecedented pressure on Turkey and isolate Azerbaijan. Actually,
what has happened is the victory of Russia and Azerbaijan. The latter
was in a very difficult situation because by their actions with regard
to Armenia Turks seemed to recognize the legitimacy of the Armenian
occupation of Nagorno-Karabakh.
Armenia also won rejecting the policy of U.S. influence returning to
the influence of Russia, which promises it more safeguards and care.
Finally, Turkey also benefited from such a decision which can now
put all the blame on the Armenians and their American counterparts
saying that it wanted ratify the accords, but Yerevan stopped it. Thus
Turkey also went out the U.S. zone of influence. Four countries -
Azerbaijan, Russia, Armenia and Turkey - gained benefits from this
decision. Only one country lost - the United States. These are our
problems, our conflicts, which dont concert America.
In your opinion, what will be fate of the U.S.-Turkey and
Armenia-Turkey relations from now on?
The U.S.-Turkish relations are not very good. I think they have the
last step, that is, Turkey's withdrawal from NATO. We need together
with the Turkish, Iranian and Iraqi people "ask" American soldiers
to leave Iraq. People who live in this region should decide their
foreign policy and resolve conflicts themselves.
As to the U.S.-Armenian relations, they will deteriorate. After all,
most Americans were putting pressure on Sargsyan to turn away from
Russia promising access to the world through an open Turkish border
at the expense of Azerbaijan's interests.
I can say that the US-Turkish relations and the US-Armenian will
deteriorate, the U.S.-Azerbaijan will remain the same, but the
Russian-Turkish, Armenian-Russian and Russian-Azerbaijani relations
will improve.
May this somehow affect the settlement of the Karabakh conflict?
I dont think it will. Karabakh conflict will stay with the status
quo for the time being. Those who planned and initiated a new round
of bloody Karabakh conflict are seriously mistaken. The status quo
may slightly change in one direction or another, but the resolution
will not come soon. Most importantly, no bloody decision is expected
any longer. Now it becomes obvious that the solution to the conflict
is entirely dependent on the regional players.
In this case, how soon we can see real progress in settlement of the
Karabakh conflict?
I think it is necessary to change the format of resolving the problem.
A "Group of Five" composed of Armenia and Azerbaijan, as well as
Turkey, Iran and Russia, must be created. These are countries that can
really impact solution to the problem. Not Europeans, who would better
to deal with their own internal problems like volcano eruption, and
not Americans, but these five countries should engage in the Karabakh
conflict resolution and develop a balanced, thoughtful decision.
Is the way the regime was changed in Kyrgyzstan possible in Armenia?
It is possible. It is also possible that Serzh Sargsyan passed a
decision concerning the Armenian-Turkish protocols in an attempt
to preserve and consolidate its hold on power. He realized that in
a difficult political situation he needed support of the Armenian
people. If he was confident of his power and that he was not threatened
by the opposition, he would have continued the game.
However, the opposition and those disgruntled with his policy forced
him to take that step. Both equally played on patriotic feelings
of Armenian people, who believe that opening the border without the
recognition of "genocide" is historic betrayal.
Now Sargsyan's state is more stable, though Robert Kocharian,
a nationalist just like himself, exerts pressure on it. Kocharian
brought Sargsyan to power, however he is not a competitor to Sargsyan.
Yet he puts constant pressure on him, to ensure that Sargsyan will not
deviate from the nationalist line. He put pressure on him in terms
of Armenian, Karabakh nationalism. Karabakh nationalism is the main
Dashnak idea of modern Armenia. As for Ter-Petrossian, this figure
serves America's interests and something like the Orange Revolution
can be staged through his help.
Today
http://www.today.az/news/politics/6 6665.html
April 23 2010
Azerbaijan
Day.Az interview with Alexander Dugin, professor, doctor of political
sciences, director of the Center for Conservative Studies at the
School of Sociology of the Moscow State University, Head of the
International Eurasian Movement, a famous Russian political scientist.
Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan on Thursday night issued an address
to the nation, saying that "Armenia has not yet decided to abandon
the process of normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations, but to
suspend the ratification of the protocols." In your opinion, what
does this statement mean? What were prerequisites for this decision?
I was one of those experts who from the outset said that the
Armenian-Turkish protocols will fail. It was a huge geopolitical
project by Americans to drive Armenia under its influence putting
serious pressure on Turkey. And I said that this will result in a
collapse, but the border will not open.
However, I believed that the ratification would be halted by the
Turkish side, and the local parliament will not ratify the protocols
despite pressure from Washington because it undermines the very idea
of Turkey on structure of international politics. But it was halted
by the Armenian side. To tell the truth, the Turks would never ratify
the protocols.
Thing have returned to normal now. I'm very pleased with this,
because the United States must completely leave the region. It should
leave Afghanistan and Iraq and withdraw its Sixth Fleet from the
Mediterranean Sea.
Azerbaijan was against ratification of the protocols even without
the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict...
Right. That is why first of all Russian patriots are happy with what
has happened because from the outset they saw America's hand in this
and realized that this aims to move Armenia away from Russia putting
unprecedented pressure on Turkey and isolate Azerbaijan. Actually,
what has happened is the victory of Russia and Azerbaijan. The latter
was in a very difficult situation because by their actions with regard
to Armenia Turks seemed to recognize the legitimacy of the Armenian
occupation of Nagorno-Karabakh.
Armenia also won rejecting the policy of U.S. influence returning to
the influence of Russia, which promises it more safeguards and care.
Finally, Turkey also benefited from such a decision which can now
put all the blame on the Armenians and their American counterparts
saying that it wanted ratify the accords, but Yerevan stopped it. Thus
Turkey also went out the U.S. zone of influence. Four countries -
Azerbaijan, Russia, Armenia and Turkey - gained benefits from this
decision. Only one country lost - the United States. These are our
problems, our conflicts, which dont concert America.
In your opinion, what will be fate of the U.S.-Turkey and
Armenia-Turkey relations from now on?
The U.S.-Turkish relations are not very good. I think they have the
last step, that is, Turkey's withdrawal from NATO. We need together
with the Turkish, Iranian and Iraqi people "ask" American soldiers
to leave Iraq. People who live in this region should decide their
foreign policy and resolve conflicts themselves.
As to the U.S.-Armenian relations, they will deteriorate. After all,
most Americans were putting pressure on Sargsyan to turn away from
Russia promising access to the world through an open Turkish border
at the expense of Azerbaijan's interests.
I can say that the US-Turkish relations and the US-Armenian will
deteriorate, the U.S.-Azerbaijan will remain the same, but the
Russian-Turkish, Armenian-Russian and Russian-Azerbaijani relations
will improve.
May this somehow affect the settlement of the Karabakh conflict?
I dont think it will. Karabakh conflict will stay with the status
quo for the time being. Those who planned and initiated a new round
of bloody Karabakh conflict are seriously mistaken. The status quo
may slightly change in one direction or another, but the resolution
will not come soon. Most importantly, no bloody decision is expected
any longer. Now it becomes obvious that the solution to the conflict
is entirely dependent on the regional players.
In this case, how soon we can see real progress in settlement of the
Karabakh conflict?
I think it is necessary to change the format of resolving the problem.
A "Group of Five" composed of Armenia and Azerbaijan, as well as
Turkey, Iran and Russia, must be created. These are countries that can
really impact solution to the problem. Not Europeans, who would better
to deal with their own internal problems like volcano eruption, and
not Americans, but these five countries should engage in the Karabakh
conflict resolution and develop a balanced, thoughtful decision.
Is the way the regime was changed in Kyrgyzstan possible in Armenia?
It is possible. It is also possible that Serzh Sargsyan passed a
decision concerning the Armenian-Turkish protocols in an attempt
to preserve and consolidate its hold on power. He realized that in
a difficult political situation he needed support of the Armenian
people. If he was confident of his power and that he was not threatened
by the opposition, he would have continued the game.
However, the opposition and those disgruntled with his policy forced
him to take that step. Both equally played on patriotic feelings
of Armenian people, who believe that opening the border without the
recognition of "genocide" is historic betrayal.
Now Sargsyan's state is more stable, though Robert Kocharian,
a nationalist just like himself, exerts pressure on it. Kocharian
brought Sargsyan to power, however he is not a competitor to Sargsyan.
Yet he puts constant pressure on him, to ensure that Sargsyan will not
deviate from the nationalist line. He put pressure on him in terms
of Armenian, Karabakh nationalism. Karabakh nationalism is the main
Dashnak idea of modern Armenia. As for Ter-Petrossian, this figure
serves America's interests and something like the Orange Revolution
can be staged through his help.