Tweet
IF WAR ISN'T 'LARGE SCALE', WHAT IS IT?
Igor Muradyan
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/comments26513.html
Published: 16:23:54 - 11/06/2012
The Armenian commentators claim for whatever reason that there will
not be a large-scale war. In addition, it is not clear whether the
possibility of war is denied or whether a format is offered.
No doubt there is no need to fall into a military psychosis and
instill in public the consciousness of imminence of war. In addition,
the question is what if there is no war in the region and to what
extent Armenia will be involved in the war and whether the war between
Armenia and Azerbaijan is a priority in a row of non-military actions
which are taking place in the region.
The next Armenian-Azerbaijani war will detonate a larger war
or a larger regional war will lead to a war between Armenia and
Azerbaijan. The international propaganda links the beginning of a
big war in the Near East with the problems of Iran and it would be
good to distinguish the centers of initiative of this propaganda from
possible comments, repetitions, copying.
A war linked to the problems of Iran is used to intimidate the entire
region, boost pressure on a number of states in the regions of the Near
East and the South Caucasus. In any case, the war between Amrenia and
Azerbaijan cannot be linked with the military actions by an Iranian
scenario. The given war is possible only in relation to the goals and
interests of Turkey which is increasingly acting as a restraint to
the armed conflict, knowing that the inevitable defeat of Azerbaijan
will put it in an ambiguous position.
At the same time, Turkey is increasingly appearing in a situation of
geopolitical isolation and blockade. Despite the favorable development
of relations between the United States and Turkey over the past 18
months, as well as the colorful perspectives declared by both sides,
the fact is that the U.S.-Turkish relations are getting worse, and
it has a key role to further developments in a number of regions.
After the NATO summit in Chicago Turkey has definitely firmed its
foothold in the newly created global security system and its role
in the Euro-Atlantic Alliance looks more than destructive. Earlier,
before the summit in Chicago, the Americans declared to the Turks that
they did not accept their proposals and now they are free to move in
any direction. It is possible that it was said in a different wording,
more delicately, or even less delicately.
Immediately after the Chicago summit Turkey applied to Shanghai
Cooperation Organization quite demonstratively. What happened in the
result of the Arab revolutions was a foreign political disaster for
Turkey, not just a failure but real disaster because it had a long-term
and irreversible importance, at least in a medium-term perspective.
Ankara had expectations from Iraq which appeared in isolation from
Turkey, and this isolation is intensified by the United States,
Iran and Saudi, which is not paradoxical.
Syria is the main hindrance on the way of Turkish expansion to the
Near East. Egypt with its re-growing role in the Arab world will do
everything it can to keep Turkey away from the region. In the Eastern
Mediterranean a small but principally interested bloc of states is
formed which are opposed to France. During the operation in Libya
the French-British alliance presupposed the ineligibility of Turkey
for participation in those events.
The European states, not only France and Germany, which used to be
opponents to the United States regarding the Turkish issue are becoming
locomotives to the United States which is now considering Europe as
the main direction of restraint of Turkish ambitions. The relations
between Turkey and Russia have not become closer despite the worsening
of the U.S.-Turkish relations. It should be noted that the Americans
did not have a significant role in preventing the Turkish-Russian
rapprochement. Turkish-Russian problems are "individual" and
"self-sufficient" and practically do not need additional initiatives.
In the Balkans the European Union is increasingly dissatisfied with
Turkey's unilateral support to Muslim states and communities which
it used to ignore.
What has Turkey achieved in the Caucasus in the past decade? Even
relations with Azerbaijan are questioned due to efforts to "improve"
relations with Armenia. Only Georgia was a light stop in Turkey's
regional policy. Georgia is an important element and partner of the
policy of pan-Turkism and is consistently transforming to a satellite
of Turkey and Azerbaijan, and it can be saved only by NATO membership,
which is doubted. So, the Georgians should hide in NATO from Turks,
not from Russians.
Turkey's problems relating to isolation can be broken down to
dozens of sub-problems and issues but it is understood that Turkey
will demonstrate its role and capacity in the regions. Will in this
connection its main reserve Azerbaijan be used which will be probably
sacrificed for the interests of Turkish policy? A signal from Ankara
will come one way or another, and Turkey will try not to participate
in the war.
Ankara may hope for the military success of Azerbaijan in the war with
Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan's defeat could definitely become a favorable
result for Turkey because it could play an important role in preventing
military actions and occupy a more important position in the region
and in international politics.
Turkey obviously dislikes the geopolitical arrangement of forces in
the regions and it is set to change not only the balance of forces but
also to correct political positions of different states. Nothing but
war may lead to this new situation. Besides, one should be mindful
that the leading states presume that this war will be controlled,
and Turkey likes it, as it is trying to become a conductor in the
regions, or maybe even the only conductor.
However, the United States has certain interest in involving Turkey,
if not in a war, at least in an acute confrontation in different
regions, including Russia, which will not be understood fully and
will be difficult to predict. By the way, recently the Armenian
commentators said that accidental eruption of war is impossible. Now
it is understood that military units of the Azerbaijani armed forces
are led by morons who "declare war" by their own judgment.
So, what about the "large-scale war" which is possible?
(Article is based on information from open sources.)
Igor Muradyan
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/comments26513.html
Published: 16:23:54 - 11/06/2012
The Armenian commentators claim for whatever reason that there will
not be a large-scale war. In addition, it is not clear whether the
possibility of war is denied or whether a format is offered.
No doubt there is no need to fall into a military psychosis and
instill in public the consciousness of imminence of war. In addition,
the question is what if there is no war in the region and to what
extent Armenia will be involved in the war and whether the war between
Armenia and Azerbaijan is a priority in a row of non-military actions
which are taking place in the region.
The next Armenian-Azerbaijani war will detonate a larger war
or a larger regional war will lead to a war between Armenia and
Azerbaijan. The international propaganda links the beginning of a
big war in the Near East with the problems of Iran and it would be
good to distinguish the centers of initiative of this propaganda from
possible comments, repetitions, copying.
A war linked to the problems of Iran is used to intimidate the entire
region, boost pressure on a number of states in the regions of the Near
East and the South Caucasus. In any case, the war between Amrenia and
Azerbaijan cannot be linked with the military actions by an Iranian
scenario. The given war is possible only in relation to the goals and
interests of Turkey which is increasingly acting as a restraint to
the armed conflict, knowing that the inevitable defeat of Azerbaijan
will put it in an ambiguous position.
At the same time, Turkey is increasingly appearing in a situation of
geopolitical isolation and blockade. Despite the favorable development
of relations between the United States and Turkey over the past 18
months, as well as the colorful perspectives declared by both sides,
the fact is that the U.S.-Turkish relations are getting worse, and
it has a key role to further developments in a number of regions.
After the NATO summit in Chicago Turkey has definitely firmed its
foothold in the newly created global security system and its role
in the Euro-Atlantic Alliance looks more than destructive. Earlier,
before the summit in Chicago, the Americans declared to the Turks that
they did not accept their proposals and now they are free to move in
any direction. It is possible that it was said in a different wording,
more delicately, or even less delicately.
Immediately after the Chicago summit Turkey applied to Shanghai
Cooperation Organization quite demonstratively. What happened in the
result of the Arab revolutions was a foreign political disaster for
Turkey, not just a failure but real disaster because it had a long-term
and irreversible importance, at least in a medium-term perspective.
Ankara had expectations from Iraq which appeared in isolation from
Turkey, and this isolation is intensified by the United States,
Iran and Saudi, which is not paradoxical.
Syria is the main hindrance on the way of Turkish expansion to the
Near East. Egypt with its re-growing role in the Arab world will do
everything it can to keep Turkey away from the region. In the Eastern
Mediterranean a small but principally interested bloc of states is
formed which are opposed to France. During the operation in Libya
the French-British alliance presupposed the ineligibility of Turkey
for participation in those events.
The European states, not only France and Germany, which used to be
opponents to the United States regarding the Turkish issue are becoming
locomotives to the United States which is now considering Europe as
the main direction of restraint of Turkish ambitions. The relations
between Turkey and Russia have not become closer despite the worsening
of the U.S.-Turkish relations. It should be noted that the Americans
did not have a significant role in preventing the Turkish-Russian
rapprochement. Turkish-Russian problems are "individual" and
"self-sufficient" and practically do not need additional initiatives.
In the Balkans the European Union is increasingly dissatisfied with
Turkey's unilateral support to Muslim states and communities which
it used to ignore.
What has Turkey achieved in the Caucasus in the past decade? Even
relations with Azerbaijan are questioned due to efforts to "improve"
relations with Armenia. Only Georgia was a light stop in Turkey's
regional policy. Georgia is an important element and partner of the
policy of pan-Turkism and is consistently transforming to a satellite
of Turkey and Azerbaijan, and it can be saved only by NATO membership,
which is doubted. So, the Georgians should hide in NATO from Turks,
not from Russians.
Turkey's problems relating to isolation can be broken down to
dozens of sub-problems and issues but it is understood that Turkey
will demonstrate its role and capacity in the regions. Will in this
connection its main reserve Azerbaijan be used which will be probably
sacrificed for the interests of Turkish policy? A signal from Ankara
will come one way or another, and Turkey will try not to participate
in the war.
Ankara may hope for the military success of Azerbaijan in the war with
Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan's defeat could definitely become a favorable
result for Turkey because it could play an important role in preventing
military actions and occupy a more important position in the region
and in international politics.
Turkey obviously dislikes the geopolitical arrangement of forces in
the regions and it is set to change not only the balance of forces but
also to correct political positions of different states. Nothing but
war may lead to this new situation. Besides, one should be mindful
that the leading states presume that this war will be controlled,
and Turkey likes it, as it is trying to become a conductor in the
regions, or maybe even the only conductor.
However, the United States has certain interest in involving Turkey,
if not in a war, at least in an acute confrontation in different
regions, including Russia, which will not be understood fully and
will be difficult to predict. By the way, recently the Armenian
commentators said that accidental eruption of war is impossible. Now
it is understood that military units of the Azerbaijani armed forces
are led by morons who "declare war" by their own judgment.
So, what about the "large-scale war" which is possible?
(Article is based on information from open sources.)