Tweet
Armenia's Integration In A Different Format
IGOR MURADYAN
14:31 04/03/2013
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index.php/eng/0/comments/view/29162
The discussion on the Russian-Armenian relations has gone beyond the
zone of emotions, and now these relations are a subject of
professional discussions, which was indicated by appearance of
interesting information on the political goals and objectives of
Russia and Armenia. Of course, not the critical mass of information is
the reason for adoption of one political solution or another but
sooner or later fragments transform to mechanics of relations.
The problems in Russian-Armenian relations are not due to foreign
political bias but change of domestic and foreign priorities of Russia
and Armenia. Russia's aspiration to continue to influence the entire
South Caucasian region and other regions and in this context its
supply of weapon to Azerbaijan which threatens Armenia with a war
cannot be the main factor of Moscow's behavior.
Russia has lost and failed to restore its nature and style of a great
power. The policy conducted by Russia since the collapse of the Soviet
Union reminds that of a big but regional power which has not only
limited resources but also limited ambitions of its ruling elite. The
empire disappeared already in the last decade of the Soviet Union
while the new political mentality did not appear.
The Russian political government committed a political and military
crime against its closest ally Armenia though the notion of ally and
especially the notion of strategic partner remained inappropriate
wording used by not so serious and responsible politicians working for
government agencies in conversations with their Armenian colleagues.
In answer to this once can only say that the United States and NATO
have not offered a real alternative.
Moscow's signals on corrections in its behavior regarding Armenia are
nonsense. Russia will continue to supply modern and not so modern
weapons to Azerbaijan. In fact, Russia lacks a political government
and a political class, it has a ruling regime whose main goal is
making money and the state is in the last place. It should be
understood that the relations between Russia and Armenia are highly
limited, and there is no doubt that Russia will not fulfill its
commitments at a U-turn of developments.
Russia cannot fight for different reasons, including the unprecedented
and insurmountable distance between the ruling regime and the armed
forces (not only the generals). The young generals of the Russian
armed forces openly speak about it. It has become known that there
were controversies over the presence of the Russian fleet in the
Mediterranean, over the developments in Syria.
Discussions with Russian experts reveal that they have nothing to
offer except hysteria and embarrassment. They only confess that
despite demonstrative steps Russia is losing its influence along the
perimeter of its borders, and all the states in its area of influence
have a plan on alternative foreign political priorities. The empire is
dying, and nobody wants to save it, everyone wants to benefit from the
disaster of the Russian people. As to the phenomenon of Georgia, its
new government is to accelerate integration with NATO and overcome
obstacles, including the confrontation with Russia.
What has changed in the policy of Armenia? The main change is
Yerevan's efforts to establish political relations with Russia, which
did not exist in the past. The answer to the question whether it is
possible to sit on two chairs is simple, `It is impossible in a
short-term perspective, it is quite possible in a long-term
perspective.' They will try to pull the chair out from under the
partner but soon it will be clear that there is no such an objective
because a lot of identical goals will appear.
At the same time, if earlier before the Armenian presidential election
the Armenian government tried to prevent foreign political isolation
and had no hope for functional rapprochement with the Western
community, now other goals and objectives have occurred. Both coasts
of the ocean admitted that Armenia's integration will take place in a
different format, and some politicians and experts of the United
States and Europe hinted to Yerevan that there is no need to keep too
much distance from Moscow.
This is determined by a number of factors which will be told in the
nearest future but, importantly, NATO has taken into account its
experience of not always successful policy on Eastern Europe. One way
or another, the format of relations between Armenia and the
Euro-Atlantic community has changed, and it should have been expected
earlier when NATO and the EU faced the crisis regarding Turkey's
policy which is the author of all kinds of caprices and idiocy of
Azerbaijan.
Adequacy of partnership is a `rarity' in the modern world when surplus
of contractual relations, manipulation of the phrase `strategic
relations' and the lack of real partnership have occurred both in
small and bid states.
The Armenian government arrived at the line of foreign political
U-turn in public indifference and bankruptcy of experts who did not
even realize the goals of their patrons in and outside Armenia. As a
cynic of Armenian `intellectualism' said, `No one wants to be the
target.' They used to think so in the past, so did they do in recent
past. Later these insurers appeared in the backstage of the Armenian
government. Nothing changes which is good, it is important that they
do not get in the way now.
IGOR MURADYAN
14:31 04/03/2013
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index.php/eng/0/comments/view/29162
The discussion on the Russian-Armenian relations has gone beyond the
zone of emotions, and now these relations are a subject of
professional discussions, which was indicated by appearance of
interesting information on the political goals and objectives of
Russia and Armenia. Of course, not the critical mass of information is
the reason for adoption of one political solution or another but
sooner or later fragments transform to mechanics of relations.
The problems in Russian-Armenian relations are not due to foreign
political bias but change of domestic and foreign priorities of Russia
and Armenia. Russia's aspiration to continue to influence the entire
South Caucasian region and other regions and in this context its
supply of weapon to Azerbaijan which threatens Armenia with a war
cannot be the main factor of Moscow's behavior.
Russia has lost and failed to restore its nature and style of a great
power. The policy conducted by Russia since the collapse of the Soviet
Union reminds that of a big but regional power which has not only
limited resources but also limited ambitions of its ruling elite. The
empire disappeared already in the last decade of the Soviet Union
while the new political mentality did not appear.
The Russian political government committed a political and military
crime against its closest ally Armenia though the notion of ally and
especially the notion of strategic partner remained inappropriate
wording used by not so serious and responsible politicians working for
government agencies in conversations with their Armenian colleagues.
In answer to this once can only say that the United States and NATO
have not offered a real alternative.
Moscow's signals on corrections in its behavior regarding Armenia are
nonsense. Russia will continue to supply modern and not so modern
weapons to Azerbaijan. In fact, Russia lacks a political government
and a political class, it has a ruling regime whose main goal is
making money and the state is in the last place. It should be
understood that the relations between Russia and Armenia are highly
limited, and there is no doubt that Russia will not fulfill its
commitments at a U-turn of developments.
Russia cannot fight for different reasons, including the unprecedented
and insurmountable distance between the ruling regime and the armed
forces (not only the generals). The young generals of the Russian
armed forces openly speak about it. It has become known that there
were controversies over the presence of the Russian fleet in the
Mediterranean, over the developments in Syria.
Discussions with Russian experts reveal that they have nothing to
offer except hysteria and embarrassment. They only confess that
despite demonstrative steps Russia is losing its influence along the
perimeter of its borders, and all the states in its area of influence
have a plan on alternative foreign political priorities. The empire is
dying, and nobody wants to save it, everyone wants to benefit from the
disaster of the Russian people. As to the phenomenon of Georgia, its
new government is to accelerate integration with NATO and overcome
obstacles, including the confrontation with Russia.
What has changed in the policy of Armenia? The main change is
Yerevan's efforts to establish political relations with Russia, which
did not exist in the past. The answer to the question whether it is
possible to sit on two chairs is simple, `It is impossible in a
short-term perspective, it is quite possible in a long-term
perspective.' They will try to pull the chair out from under the
partner but soon it will be clear that there is no such an objective
because a lot of identical goals will appear.
At the same time, if earlier before the Armenian presidential election
the Armenian government tried to prevent foreign political isolation
and had no hope for functional rapprochement with the Western
community, now other goals and objectives have occurred. Both coasts
of the ocean admitted that Armenia's integration will take place in a
different format, and some politicians and experts of the United
States and Europe hinted to Yerevan that there is no need to keep too
much distance from Moscow.
This is determined by a number of factors which will be told in the
nearest future but, importantly, NATO has taken into account its
experience of not always successful policy on Eastern Europe. One way
or another, the format of relations between Armenia and the
Euro-Atlantic community has changed, and it should have been expected
earlier when NATO and the EU faced the crisis regarding Turkey's
policy which is the author of all kinds of caprices and idiocy of
Azerbaijan.
Adequacy of partnership is a `rarity' in the modern world when surplus
of contractual relations, manipulation of the phrase `strategic
relations' and the lack of real partnership have occurred both in
small and bid states.
The Armenian government arrived at the line of foreign political
U-turn in public indifference and bankruptcy of experts who did not
even realize the goals of their patrons in and outside Armenia. As a
cynic of Armenian `intellectualism' said, `No one wants to be the
target.' They used to think so in the past, so did they do in recent
past. Later these insurers appeared in the backstage of the Armenian
government. Nothing changes which is good, it is important that they
do not get in the way now.