Tweet
VAHAN HOVHANNISYAN: RUSSIA LACKS EXACT POLICY IN SOUTH CAUCASUS AND MIDDLE EAST
Ashot Safaryan
arminfo
Wednesday, February 15, 13:59
ArmInfo's interview with Vahan Hovhannisyan, Head of ARF Dashnaktsutyun
Party Faction in the Parliament
Mr. Hovhannisyan, Azerbaijani parliamentarians have come out with an
idea of renaming the country into Northern Azerbaijan. How far may
they go in their intrigues? Can they rely on the U.S. support given
the latter's efforts to weaken Iran?
The attempts to speculate on the geographical name of northern Iran
were made yet in 40s of the last century when the Red Army entered
Northern Iran that was called Azerbaijan in the Soviet historiography.
Then the Soviet leadership intended to rename the Azerbaijani SSR into
"Northern Azerbaijan" taking into account the fact that "Southern
Azerbaijan" already existed as the northern part of Iran. It was
inherently an imperialistic and invasive plan of the USSR against Iran,
which was prevented thanks to the efforts of the Iranian people and
Britain. Will the U.S. try to enforce that idea now? No, I think.
But Turkey may do that.
It obvious that the ruling Justice and Development Party of Turkey
is departing from the idea of Kemalism to Neo-Ottomanism relying on
many political currents and organizations in that country. We can see
that the political doctrine of the ruling regime "zero problems with
neighbors" implies weakening of these neighbors and bringing them to
naught, and not good-neighbored relations with them. The key threat
to Turkey's plans is Iran and not Greece or Cyprus. Hence, Iran's
splitting is the cherished dream of Turkey's incumbent authorities. As
for the U.S., it should not allow Turkey's hegemony in the region. One
should not confuse democratization inside Iran and splitting of Iran.
The last scenario is very dangerous for Iran and the region.
Actually, West's efforts to democratize Iran may have a boomerang
effect?
Well, it is quite possible. I don't think that the European democracy
schemes based on the Christian world perception are applicable to
of Syria, Iran and other Muslim countries. The developments in the
Arab world, taken by the Europeans like the process of democracy
establishment, actually are too far from it. The democracy by the
Western receipt in Libya resulted in the situation when the rebels
first violated the half dead leader of the country Muammar Caddafi and
the women allegedly protecting his regime and then killed them. We
also see that the situation in Egypt has not been stabilized. The
"revolutionary" forces, which came to the power thanks to mediation of
the Christian West, by their first decree obliged Christians to pay
jizya, started robbing and firing Christian churches just the same
way as it happened , for instance, in the "democratic" Iraq. The
democratic election in Afghanistan led to the power of Talibs,
and this dangerous tendency of democratizing has been developing. I
think that in the Muslim countries processes should develop on quite
another scenario and other rules. Progress is possible there, but this
progress should not be artificial or inculcated by external forces.
Probably, Moscow that has traditional influence on Iran is not going
to stay aside of the processes there...
Frankly speaking, Russia's stance is not clear to me. In its actions
Moscow runs to extremes, there is no logic in its actions. On the
one hand, Moscow is in the wake of the western policy and refuses to
deliver the air defense missiles "C-300" to Iran. But on the other
hand, it directs military ships and weapon to Syria and shows political
and diplomatic aid to President Bashar Asad. Moreover, Russia risked
much when in UN Security Council along with China it set a veto upon
the resolution directed against Asad's regime. Russia's policy in
the South Caucasus including in the relations with Armenia is also
contradictory.
Should one pin hopes with revision of that policy with Vladimir
Putin's possible return to the Kremlin?
I suppose that some if not profound but at least partial changes
may happen in the actions of Moscow if Vladimir Putin comes back
to the Kremlin. In particular, the pragmatic policy regarding the
neighbors may be drawn out. The Russians will perhaps stress their
attention to the idea of creation of the EurAsian Union suggested by
Putin. They will try to give impulse to the integration processes at
the post-Soviet territory. One should not lose the fact that there
are still forces in Russia, which watch the former Soviet republics
not like independent states but like part of their country, which
is temporarily out of their control. I think that in this context we
shall take certain efforts to come closer to them.
Armenia's reaction at such a policy will depend on those who will
come to the power after the parliamentary elections.
Thank you
Ashot Safaryan
arminfo
Wednesday, February 15, 13:59
ArmInfo's interview with Vahan Hovhannisyan, Head of ARF Dashnaktsutyun
Party Faction in the Parliament
Mr. Hovhannisyan, Azerbaijani parliamentarians have come out with an
idea of renaming the country into Northern Azerbaijan. How far may
they go in their intrigues? Can they rely on the U.S. support given
the latter's efforts to weaken Iran?
The attempts to speculate on the geographical name of northern Iran
were made yet in 40s of the last century when the Red Army entered
Northern Iran that was called Azerbaijan in the Soviet historiography.
Then the Soviet leadership intended to rename the Azerbaijani SSR into
"Northern Azerbaijan" taking into account the fact that "Southern
Azerbaijan" already existed as the northern part of Iran. It was
inherently an imperialistic and invasive plan of the USSR against Iran,
which was prevented thanks to the efforts of the Iranian people and
Britain. Will the U.S. try to enforce that idea now? No, I think.
But Turkey may do that.
It obvious that the ruling Justice and Development Party of Turkey
is departing from the idea of Kemalism to Neo-Ottomanism relying on
many political currents and organizations in that country. We can see
that the political doctrine of the ruling regime "zero problems with
neighbors" implies weakening of these neighbors and bringing them to
naught, and not good-neighbored relations with them. The key threat
to Turkey's plans is Iran and not Greece or Cyprus. Hence, Iran's
splitting is the cherished dream of Turkey's incumbent authorities. As
for the U.S., it should not allow Turkey's hegemony in the region. One
should not confuse democratization inside Iran and splitting of Iran.
The last scenario is very dangerous for Iran and the region.
Actually, West's efforts to democratize Iran may have a boomerang
effect?
Well, it is quite possible. I don't think that the European democracy
schemes based on the Christian world perception are applicable to
of Syria, Iran and other Muslim countries. The developments in the
Arab world, taken by the Europeans like the process of democracy
establishment, actually are too far from it. The democracy by the
Western receipt in Libya resulted in the situation when the rebels
first violated the half dead leader of the country Muammar Caddafi and
the women allegedly protecting his regime and then killed them. We
also see that the situation in Egypt has not been stabilized. The
"revolutionary" forces, which came to the power thanks to mediation of
the Christian West, by their first decree obliged Christians to pay
jizya, started robbing and firing Christian churches just the same
way as it happened , for instance, in the "democratic" Iraq. The
democratic election in Afghanistan led to the power of Talibs,
and this dangerous tendency of democratizing has been developing. I
think that in the Muslim countries processes should develop on quite
another scenario and other rules. Progress is possible there, but this
progress should not be artificial or inculcated by external forces.
Probably, Moscow that has traditional influence on Iran is not going
to stay aside of the processes there...
Frankly speaking, Russia's stance is not clear to me. In its actions
Moscow runs to extremes, there is no logic in its actions. On the
one hand, Moscow is in the wake of the western policy and refuses to
deliver the air defense missiles "C-300" to Iran. But on the other
hand, it directs military ships and weapon to Syria and shows political
and diplomatic aid to President Bashar Asad. Moreover, Russia risked
much when in UN Security Council along with China it set a veto upon
the resolution directed against Asad's regime. Russia's policy in
the South Caucasus including in the relations with Armenia is also
contradictory.
Should one pin hopes with revision of that policy with Vladimir
Putin's possible return to the Kremlin?
I suppose that some if not profound but at least partial changes
may happen in the actions of Moscow if Vladimir Putin comes back
to the Kremlin. In particular, the pragmatic policy regarding the
neighbors may be drawn out. The Russians will perhaps stress their
attention to the idea of creation of the EurAsian Union suggested by
Putin. They will try to give impulse to the integration processes at
the post-Soviet territory. One should not lose the fact that there
are still forces in Russia, which watch the former Soviet republics
not like independent states but like part of their country, which
is temporarily out of their control. I think that in this context we
shall take certain efforts to come closer to them.
Armenia's reaction at such a policy will depend on those who will
come to the power after the parliamentary elections.
Thank you