Tweet
Anti-Turkey Conspiracy On Syria
Igor Muradyan, The Golos Armeniy
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/comments27121.html
Published: 11:11:06 - 20/08/2012
The category of conspiracy has always been and will be a component of
the operational policy, and currently the importance of non-public
policy has become even more significant, including that on quite
visible and evident developments.
No conspiracy exists relating to Syria, it is not necessary. The game
is quite cynical, hypocritical and rather silly but it does not bother
the initiators and players. The Syrian issue has quite direct causes
related to certain geopolitical and geo-economic goals. For decades
the U.S., France, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Russia, Turkey and
Israel has been struggling for Syria.
The elimination of the strong Arab country in the area of the `Fertile
Crescent', following the elimination of Iraq, leads to full
destruction of the geopolitical construction which many Arab states
consider archaic and obsolete, as well as it leads to full obedience
of the Arab world to the U.S. and its partners, and to the
strengthening security of Israel, to the possible integration of
Israel with the Arab community.
No large-scale political operation by the U.S. for the last 20 years
in the Middle East was carried out without agreeing it with Arab
countries. The Arab states except Syria recognized the U.S. as the one
and only guarantor of their security. The hostile attitude of Arab
countries to Syria is caused by this circumstance, and repression of
the Shia factor is a uniting factor for the Sunni Arab states.
The U.S. and France, as well as the Great Britain are interested in
preserving the territorial integrity of Syria for the following
reasons. Having lost influence on the Syrian territory, France is
losing the only strategic `area' in the Middle East, including
Lebanon.
The U.S. will face the threat of formation of a radical-Islamic Sunni
state, which will have a destructive influence on Iraq. The U.S. and
Great Britain view Syria as a direction of transportation of the Iraq
oil (of approximately 200 million tons) which ensures `bypaths' of the
Strait of Hormuz, the Suez Canal and Turkey's territory. By the way,
such emasculated and overly pragmatic goals and tasks need different
approaches. Such issues cannot be solved by way of `alienated
approaches' but Obama's administration is hardly able to understand
this.
However, the main victim of this adventure is not Syria but Turkey to
which the following cynical requirements are puts forth, namely Turkey
can actively contribute to blockade, pressure and elimination of
Assad's regime; Turkey maintains intelligence, communication,
adaptation of Saudi Arabia assets; it develops pseudo-democratic
rhetoric staying loyal to the principles of pseudo-humanism; Turkey
cannot expect military aid and NATO intervention and has no right to
military intervention even with the escalating situation in the
Kurdish regions; Turkey has no right to any intervention in northern
Iraq, including in the oil projects (it is not its share of global
business and its zone of influence, it can only deal with trade and
construction).
Hence, until the solution of the Syrian crisis Turkey will be facing
the prospect of geopolitical blockade and isolation in the direction
of the Middle East, which was expected. Hillary Clinton's visit to
Ankara was a gravestone for the doctrine of neo-Ottomanism. Turkey was
told the following: `You were offered a very meaningful partnership at
the condition of coordination and harmonization of efforts. You
refused that and sought independence. Now you have all the
opportunities for `free floating' but, of course, at certain
conditions which are not agreed with you but introduced to you.'
The aforementioned visit is certainly aimed at defining the `rights
and freedom limits' of Turkey in the Middle East, rather than
discussing its relations with Syria. At the same time, it is necessary
to take into account that the Obama administration in which no
significant expert or functionary on Turkey has ever appeared holds a
tough position.
What could the Republicans and their large groups of experts on Turkey
and Middle East have done? Turkey is pushed towards Eurasia, that is
Central Asia, but at the same time, the South Caucasus is pointed out
by the Americans as a restricted area for Turkey's interests. This is
the end.
It is noteworthy that the U.S., France and the main lobbyist of Turkey
Great Britain have joined efforts for the geopolitical blockade of
Turkey. France and the UK direct a large squadron to the Eastern
Mediterranean, thus repeating the trick used in Lebanon where Turkey
was denied access. At the same time, Turkey cannot turn either to
Russia or China to which it introduced itself not as a U.S. tool but
as an independent player the interests of which contradict to the
interest of the Eurasian superpowers. Iran and Israel are not
delighted with its policy either. Next in line is the international
recognition of the genocide of 1915. The trap closed catching Turkey.
This is the plot.
From: Baghdasarian
Igor Muradyan, The Golos Armeniy
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/comments27121.html
Published: 11:11:06 - 20/08/2012
The category of conspiracy has always been and will be a component of
the operational policy, and currently the importance of non-public
policy has become even more significant, including that on quite
visible and evident developments.
No conspiracy exists relating to Syria, it is not necessary. The game
is quite cynical, hypocritical and rather silly but it does not bother
the initiators and players. The Syrian issue has quite direct causes
related to certain geopolitical and geo-economic goals. For decades
the U.S., France, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Russia, Turkey and
Israel has been struggling for Syria.
The elimination of the strong Arab country in the area of the `Fertile
Crescent', following the elimination of Iraq, leads to full
destruction of the geopolitical construction which many Arab states
consider archaic and obsolete, as well as it leads to full obedience
of the Arab world to the U.S. and its partners, and to the
strengthening security of Israel, to the possible integration of
Israel with the Arab community.
No large-scale political operation by the U.S. for the last 20 years
in the Middle East was carried out without agreeing it with Arab
countries. The Arab states except Syria recognized the U.S. as the one
and only guarantor of their security. The hostile attitude of Arab
countries to Syria is caused by this circumstance, and repression of
the Shia factor is a uniting factor for the Sunni Arab states.
The U.S. and France, as well as the Great Britain are interested in
preserving the territorial integrity of Syria for the following
reasons. Having lost influence on the Syrian territory, France is
losing the only strategic `area' in the Middle East, including
Lebanon.
The U.S. will face the threat of formation of a radical-Islamic Sunni
state, which will have a destructive influence on Iraq. The U.S. and
Great Britain view Syria as a direction of transportation of the Iraq
oil (of approximately 200 million tons) which ensures `bypaths' of the
Strait of Hormuz, the Suez Canal and Turkey's territory. By the way,
such emasculated and overly pragmatic goals and tasks need different
approaches. Such issues cannot be solved by way of `alienated
approaches' but Obama's administration is hardly able to understand
this.
However, the main victim of this adventure is not Syria but Turkey to
which the following cynical requirements are puts forth, namely Turkey
can actively contribute to blockade, pressure and elimination of
Assad's regime; Turkey maintains intelligence, communication,
adaptation of Saudi Arabia assets; it develops pseudo-democratic
rhetoric staying loyal to the principles of pseudo-humanism; Turkey
cannot expect military aid and NATO intervention and has no right to
military intervention even with the escalating situation in the
Kurdish regions; Turkey has no right to any intervention in northern
Iraq, including in the oil projects (it is not its share of global
business and its zone of influence, it can only deal with trade and
construction).
Hence, until the solution of the Syrian crisis Turkey will be facing
the prospect of geopolitical blockade and isolation in the direction
of the Middle East, which was expected. Hillary Clinton's visit to
Ankara was a gravestone for the doctrine of neo-Ottomanism. Turkey was
told the following: `You were offered a very meaningful partnership at
the condition of coordination and harmonization of efforts. You
refused that and sought independence. Now you have all the
opportunities for `free floating' but, of course, at certain
conditions which are not agreed with you but introduced to you.'
The aforementioned visit is certainly aimed at defining the `rights
and freedom limits' of Turkey in the Middle East, rather than
discussing its relations with Syria. At the same time, it is necessary
to take into account that the Obama administration in which no
significant expert or functionary on Turkey has ever appeared holds a
tough position.
What could the Republicans and their large groups of experts on Turkey
and Middle East have done? Turkey is pushed towards Eurasia, that is
Central Asia, but at the same time, the South Caucasus is pointed out
by the Americans as a restricted area for Turkey's interests. This is
the end.
It is noteworthy that the U.S., France and the main lobbyist of Turkey
Great Britain have joined efforts for the geopolitical blockade of
Turkey. France and the UK direct a large squadron to the Eastern
Mediterranean, thus repeating the trick used in Lebanon where Turkey
was denied access. At the same time, Turkey cannot turn either to
Russia or China to which it introduced itself not as a U.S. tool but
as an independent player the interests of which contradict to the
interest of the Eurasian superpowers. Iran and Israel are not
delighted with its policy either. Next in line is the international
recognition of the genocide of 1915. The trap closed catching Turkey.
This is the plot.
From: Baghdasarian