Tweet
RUSSIAN EXPERTS MUST BE SENT OFF
JAMES HAKOBYAN
Lragir.am
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/comments22412.html
28/06/2011
During the Yerevan-Moscow television discussion on the results of the
three-party meeting for the Karabakh issue, held at the press hall
of Novosti Agency, the Russian political scientist Vladimir Zakharov
said the United States needs Nagorno-Karabakh to use its territory
for flying planes and bombing Iran. Vladimir Zakharov who says this
is the director of the institute of political and social studies for
the Black Sea- Caspian region.
His statement is almost similar to a recent pronouncement by an
Armenian political scientist on the Public Channel who said that only
Azerbaijan's government needs the status quo.
Although one could argue which statement is more illogical!
Such statements on the Public Channel are news, whereas the hypothesis
of the Russian political scientist Vladimir Zakharov is not news. The
Russians have been trying to convince the society in Armenia that
Russia is not forcing Armenia to return territories to Azerbaijan to
settle the issue. The United States is interested in it, while they
want to maintain the status quo. Several months ago, another Russian,
Maxim Shevchenko, neither a political scientist, nor a TV host, visited
Yerevan and tried to persuade the Armenians that the west is interested
in changing the status quo because there is a problem with Iran.
In reality, this is a primitive trick which the Russians are playing
with the Armenians to convince them that the United States demands
our territories, while the Russians keep them. The point is that the
thesis of using the territory of Karabakh against Iran is invented.
First of all, if land use is meant, there are several problems with
it. Most importantly, the U.S. military and political leadership
is not so stupid to launch a land-based action against Iran,
especially compared to Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran is neither Iraq nor
Afghanistan. This war will mark the start of the global chaos in the
region, which is not in the interests of the United States because
a chain reaction may jeopardize the achievements which are reported
in the Arab states in the form of reforms.
At best the United States may use missiles or air force against Iran
not earlier than 2013 because the U.S. presidential election is in
November 2012. A pre-election war would hardly be helpful to the U.S.
President Barack Obama's campaign, given the social and economic
problems and the immense military expenditure in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Certainly, the U.S. economy may stand this but the American voters
will hardly stand another costly war.
In this case, if the United States decides to hit Iran with missiles,
which would be done but in a large-scale international coalition, it
will hardly need the territory of Karabakh, perhaps a single aircraft
carrier would be enough to hit Iran.
The problem is that the Russian propaganda in Armenia gets enough
public resonance and even sufficiently intellectual layers of the
Armenian society are convinced that the United States needs Karabakh
for an offensive on Iran.
The problem is that the Americans do not have a distinct vision of
developments regarding Iran. In this context, they also lack a clear
vision of how they could use Karabakh against Iran. Maybe it needs
Karabakh together with the Armenians, and the Armenian force. In
other words, they may find that an effective solution of the Iranian
issue requires the current military and political balance in the
South Caucasus.
The issue is not that of Karabakh but that of the South Caucasus. And
the issue of the South Caucasus is complicated when the regional status
quo is changed in favor of Azerbaijan because the Caucasian region
with its ethnic and political peculiarities demands considerable
balance. The change of status quo means change of the balance. And
as long as the regional race continues, the change of this balance
is not in anyone's strategic interests. At best, they may fight for
the right to change it but in this case both the United States and
Russia may be equally interested, and they may be equally interested
in keeping the status quo.
Apparently, Russia has also realized this, therefore it has been trying
to influence the Karabakh issue through the Armenian-Turkish process
and thereby gaining the right to change the status quo together with
all the emanating results. However, Medvedev realized in three years
that it was a great risk for Russia, and even if the United States
with its significant economic and political potential is not trying
to change the status quo, Russia must be limited to the effort of
maintaining the current situation.
Armenia is required to feel the importance of its mission rather
than feel unnecessary. After all, important military victories in
important regions make think about one's mission but in Armenia most
people are obsessed with thoughts about being unnecessary.
JAMES HAKOBYAN
Lragir.am
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/comments22412.html
28/06/2011
During the Yerevan-Moscow television discussion on the results of the
three-party meeting for the Karabakh issue, held at the press hall
of Novosti Agency, the Russian political scientist Vladimir Zakharov
said the United States needs Nagorno-Karabakh to use its territory
for flying planes and bombing Iran. Vladimir Zakharov who says this
is the director of the institute of political and social studies for
the Black Sea- Caspian region.
His statement is almost similar to a recent pronouncement by an
Armenian political scientist on the Public Channel who said that only
Azerbaijan's government needs the status quo.
Although one could argue which statement is more illogical!
Such statements on the Public Channel are news, whereas the hypothesis
of the Russian political scientist Vladimir Zakharov is not news. The
Russians have been trying to convince the society in Armenia that
Russia is not forcing Armenia to return territories to Azerbaijan to
settle the issue. The United States is interested in it, while they
want to maintain the status quo. Several months ago, another Russian,
Maxim Shevchenko, neither a political scientist, nor a TV host, visited
Yerevan and tried to persuade the Armenians that the west is interested
in changing the status quo because there is a problem with Iran.
In reality, this is a primitive trick which the Russians are playing
with the Armenians to convince them that the United States demands
our territories, while the Russians keep them. The point is that the
thesis of using the territory of Karabakh against Iran is invented.
First of all, if land use is meant, there are several problems with
it. Most importantly, the U.S. military and political leadership
is not so stupid to launch a land-based action against Iran,
especially compared to Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran is neither Iraq nor
Afghanistan. This war will mark the start of the global chaos in the
region, which is not in the interests of the United States because
a chain reaction may jeopardize the achievements which are reported
in the Arab states in the form of reforms.
At best the United States may use missiles or air force against Iran
not earlier than 2013 because the U.S. presidential election is in
November 2012. A pre-election war would hardly be helpful to the U.S.
President Barack Obama's campaign, given the social and economic
problems and the immense military expenditure in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Certainly, the U.S. economy may stand this but the American voters
will hardly stand another costly war.
In this case, if the United States decides to hit Iran with missiles,
which would be done but in a large-scale international coalition, it
will hardly need the territory of Karabakh, perhaps a single aircraft
carrier would be enough to hit Iran.
The problem is that the Russian propaganda in Armenia gets enough
public resonance and even sufficiently intellectual layers of the
Armenian society are convinced that the United States needs Karabakh
for an offensive on Iran.
The problem is that the Americans do not have a distinct vision of
developments regarding Iran. In this context, they also lack a clear
vision of how they could use Karabakh against Iran. Maybe it needs
Karabakh together with the Armenians, and the Armenian force. In
other words, they may find that an effective solution of the Iranian
issue requires the current military and political balance in the
South Caucasus.
The issue is not that of Karabakh but that of the South Caucasus. And
the issue of the South Caucasus is complicated when the regional status
quo is changed in favor of Azerbaijan because the Caucasian region
with its ethnic and political peculiarities demands considerable
balance. The change of status quo means change of the balance. And
as long as the regional race continues, the change of this balance
is not in anyone's strategic interests. At best, they may fight for
the right to change it but in this case both the United States and
Russia may be equally interested, and they may be equally interested
in keeping the status quo.
Apparently, Russia has also realized this, therefore it has been trying
to influence the Karabakh issue through the Armenian-Turkish process
and thereby gaining the right to change the status quo together with
all the emanating results. However, Medvedev realized in three years
that it was a great risk for Russia, and even if the United States
with its significant economic and political potential is not trying
to change the status quo, Russia must be limited to the effort of
maintaining the current situation.
Armenia is required to feel the importance of its mission rather
than feel unnecessary. After all, important military victories in
important regions make think about one's mission but in Armenia most
people are obsessed with thoughts about being unnecessary.