Tweet
Is The Next To Invite Russian Troops To Armenia?
Member of Karabakh committee Ashot Manucharyan, commenting on Russia's
latest steps relating to Armenia, said the reason is that Armenia has
cast Russia aside. Karabakh committee is believed to be the founder of
independent Armenia, and Ashot Manucharyan's role in it was not
secondary at all. Had someone else made such a statement, we would
have ignored it, but Ashot's statement is symbolic from different
points of view.
What does `casting aside' mean in this case? First of all, it means
that the relations between Armenia and Russia have never had an
interstate and political character. They were `brotherly' relations
hence the elder brother did whatever it wanted with the younger one,
treating Armenia as an outpost.
Russia had all the reasons for such an attitude. The
political-religious-business `elite' of Armenia belongs to it, and it
has never had any problems with pushing forth its intentions and
interests. Moscow has been sure it would not have any issues with
Armenia.
But later it there turned to be issues and they multiplied and
intensified during the years of `cloudless brotherhood'. There have
always been issues, particularly relating to the fact that Moscow has
regularly given territories of its strategic partner with Turkey and
Azerbaijan. It is enough to remember the Moscow agreement of 1921
based on which part of Armenian territories were given to Turkey and
Armenian statehood was destroyed on the remaining part of territories.
During the Karabakh war, Russia launched two punitive campaigns
against Armenia, displacing thousands of Armenians and cleaning the
territory for Azerbaijan. Russia is supplying modern weapon to
Azerbaijan, creating obstacles at international levels for the
recognition of independence of Karabakh and eliminating Armenian
interests. It is now boosting the gas price announcing through
Armenian and Russian experts that it is a political decision. Foreign
minister Lavrov is stating the official position of Russia on Karabakh
and its intentions to hand it to Azerbaijan, like it did in 1921.
What has happened? What determines Russia's hysteric reaction?
Apparently, it is determined by the fact that `brotherhood' has
disappeared, and it is time to set up political relations. The point
is that for the first time Armenia stated about diversification of its
political and economic relations and reproached its `strategic'
partner for supplying arms to Azerbaijan. In other words, it called to
pass to political relations which either will be established or will
be destroyed.
Moscow understands this very well but they are unable to pass to
political relations. It is psychologically difficult for the Russians.
They are used to treating Armenians as second class people who never
create any problems, while Armenia's contribution to the creation of
the empire is immense. This may be the reason of Moscow's complexes
for which losing Armenis is the same as a geopolitical defeat.
Moscow is still unable to adjust to the new situation. It practices
the `stick and stick' policy. There is no carrot and it is still to be
determined who provided the carrot previously. Being inadequate to the
situation, Moscow is blackmailing Armenia with the help of the
advocates of `brotherhood'. On the eve of the presidential election in
Armenia an attempt was made to shatter stability which failed. The
`instructive preaches' also failed just like the political plans
relating to the PAP and Congress.
The most important thing happened. Armenians started revaluating
`brotherhood' and the behavior of Russia at the most decisive
historical moments. This is the most dangerous thing for Moscow since
its rule in Armenia is based on the myth of the `savior and elder
brother'. This myth is losing it vitality.
So, in this situation, Ashot Manucharyan states that Armenia cast
Russia aside when Armenia has always been loyal to its commitments
within the frameworks of the CSTO and `strategic partnership'. It
turns out that Russia had the right to treat Armenia the way it did
and use it fully, and as soon as Armenia tries to resist to such
`occupation', it casts Russia aside. Perhaps, as one of the founders
of this republic who once failed to cast Russia aside and strengthen
the independence of this country, Ashot Manucharyan made this
statement with inner pride.
In order to save the `brotherhood' the next is to invite Russian
troops to Armenia. Such people will also be found, but they are not
required particularly.
Haik Aramyan
12:07 27/05/2013
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/29976
From: A. Papazian
Member of Karabakh committee Ashot Manucharyan, commenting on Russia's
latest steps relating to Armenia, said the reason is that Armenia has
cast Russia aside. Karabakh committee is believed to be the founder of
independent Armenia, and Ashot Manucharyan's role in it was not
secondary at all. Had someone else made such a statement, we would
have ignored it, but Ashot's statement is symbolic from different
points of view.
What does `casting aside' mean in this case? First of all, it means
that the relations between Armenia and Russia have never had an
interstate and political character. They were `brotherly' relations
hence the elder brother did whatever it wanted with the younger one,
treating Armenia as an outpost.
Russia had all the reasons for such an attitude. The
political-religious-business `elite' of Armenia belongs to it, and it
has never had any problems with pushing forth its intentions and
interests. Moscow has been sure it would not have any issues with
Armenia.
But later it there turned to be issues and they multiplied and
intensified during the years of `cloudless brotherhood'. There have
always been issues, particularly relating to the fact that Moscow has
regularly given territories of its strategic partner with Turkey and
Azerbaijan. It is enough to remember the Moscow agreement of 1921
based on which part of Armenian territories were given to Turkey and
Armenian statehood was destroyed on the remaining part of territories.
During the Karabakh war, Russia launched two punitive campaigns
against Armenia, displacing thousands of Armenians and cleaning the
territory for Azerbaijan. Russia is supplying modern weapon to
Azerbaijan, creating obstacles at international levels for the
recognition of independence of Karabakh and eliminating Armenian
interests. It is now boosting the gas price announcing through
Armenian and Russian experts that it is a political decision. Foreign
minister Lavrov is stating the official position of Russia on Karabakh
and its intentions to hand it to Azerbaijan, like it did in 1921.
What has happened? What determines Russia's hysteric reaction?
Apparently, it is determined by the fact that `brotherhood' has
disappeared, and it is time to set up political relations. The point
is that for the first time Armenia stated about diversification of its
political and economic relations and reproached its `strategic'
partner for supplying arms to Azerbaijan. In other words, it called to
pass to political relations which either will be established or will
be destroyed.
Moscow understands this very well but they are unable to pass to
political relations. It is psychologically difficult for the Russians.
They are used to treating Armenians as second class people who never
create any problems, while Armenia's contribution to the creation of
the empire is immense. This may be the reason of Moscow's complexes
for which losing Armenis is the same as a geopolitical defeat.
Moscow is still unable to adjust to the new situation. It practices
the `stick and stick' policy. There is no carrot and it is still to be
determined who provided the carrot previously. Being inadequate to the
situation, Moscow is blackmailing Armenia with the help of the
advocates of `brotherhood'. On the eve of the presidential election in
Armenia an attempt was made to shatter stability which failed. The
`instructive preaches' also failed just like the political plans
relating to the PAP and Congress.
The most important thing happened. Armenians started revaluating
`brotherhood' and the behavior of Russia at the most decisive
historical moments. This is the most dangerous thing for Moscow since
its rule in Armenia is based on the myth of the `savior and elder
brother'. This myth is losing it vitality.
So, in this situation, Ashot Manucharyan states that Armenia cast
Russia aside when Armenia has always been loyal to its commitments
within the frameworks of the CSTO and `strategic partnership'. It
turns out that Russia had the right to treat Armenia the way it did
and use it fully, and as soon as Armenia tries to resist to such
`occupation', it casts Russia aside. Perhaps, as one of the founders
of this republic who once failed to cast Russia aside and strengthen
the independence of this country, Ashot Manucharyan made this
statement with inner pride.
In order to save the `brotherhood' the next is to invite Russian
troops to Armenia. Such people will also be found, but they are not
required particularly.
Haik Aramyan
12:07 27/05/2013
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/29976
From: A. Papazian