Tweet
A STORY WITHOUT A TITLE
In fact, we have been deprived of the European future and given a
Eurasian past. Russia cooperated with Armenia for a long time and
understands better than the Europeans and Americans that only Armenia
can be a reliable partner and how heavily Armenia depends on the
situation, at least in the South Caucasus. Russia did not care for
the policy of Armenia as such but for its involvement in the policy
of the West.
The question whether a small state can afford a multi-vector policy
is growing actual. This proved impossible. All kinds of assertions
that Armenia may build up its relations with Russia and the West are
funny in this situation.
Russia did not want a so-called "strategic partner" to get stronger,
it is interested in weakening Armenia in every aspect to make it more
dependent. Russia does not care for defense capability, security and
successful development of Armenia.
Russia blackmailed toughly and posed specific threats to Armenia. It
was enough to look at the faces of Putin and Sargsyan during a
demonstration of full "confidence and mutual understanding" after
the meeting in Moscow.
Recently, the Armenian government has been convinced that the
Association Agreement with the EU would be initialed in Vilnius. For
the time being there is no information on what Russia did to formulate
a specific threat against Armenia but sooner or later or rather soon
it will be found out.
Anecdotal "dowry" in the form of preferences looks highly cynical.
They moved from the construction of the new nuclear power plant to
its renovation, prolonging its life by 10 years, apparently another
10 years of existence of Armenia in line with Russia's plans on its
own survival.
Serzh Sargsyan's statements on continuation of integration with the
European Union look like empty passages while the Europeans have
definitely expressed their opinion on this issue. Perhaps, Serzh
Sargsyan hopes to suffocate in one way the agreement with the EU but
does not hope to, and in this case integration with Europe will be
confined to empty talks.
Armenia has talented negotiators but these talents could be revealed
only when the Western community had the proper disposition. In
international politics they cooperate with independent subjects
but not suspicious state formations. We had one unrecognized state,
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. Now we will have two.
However, the question was not politics and economy as such, the final
product of the European project was the problem of security. There is
a meaning to discuss whether Russia is able to fulfill single-handedly
the tasks of a guarantor of security only in professional circles
therefore it would be a mistake and naivety to build up on this in
the press.
The European politicians and functionaries are fond of repeating the
trite expression that the EU and NATO have different mechanics, and
integration of states with these organizations is autonomous. This
is not so, of course. Development of cooperation with the EU is an
important factor of development of relations with NATO, it is the ABCs,
and no one can ignore this. NATO does not guarantee the security of
non-member states but it is better to cooperate with NATO than not
to cooperate with NATO.
However, different countries that are NATO partners have a different
informal status. As of now, the United States and NATO were interested
in the protection of the interests of Armenia in the Euro-Atlantic
cooperation where Turkey is trying to limit the position of Armenia and
real support to Armenia. In this atmosphere of new relations between
Armenia and the EU and NATO is the Karabakh issue observed by the West.
Will the West be motivated enough to respect the interests of Armenia
(if I'm not mistaken, there was a pronouncement that the EU must deal
with the Karabakh topic seriously)? So far the West has proposed
very little regarding the sovereignty of Armenia but this is the
mechanics of relations and expectations were not bad. Apparently,
Russia's threats were proportionate to western defense support.
In this story without a title there is one interesting circumstance -
the Western community has learned another lesson on what Russia is
able to do in its relations with its "partners".
In 1045 Byzantium demanded annexation of the Kingdom of Ani with the
empire amid Turkish aggression threats. The tsar and the catholicos
agreed. A lot of indignant people gathered in front of the cathedral.
However, it started raining, and people stood a little more and went
away. The Kingdom of Ani stopped existing.
Igor Muradyan 17:28 04/09/2013 Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/30808
In fact, we have been deprived of the European future and given a
Eurasian past. Russia cooperated with Armenia for a long time and
understands better than the Europeans and Americans that only Armenia
can be a reliable partner and how heavily Armenia depends on the
situation, at least in the South Caucasus. Russia did not care for
the policy of Armenia as such but for its involvement in the policy
of the West.
The question whether a small state can afford a multi-vector policy
is growing actual. This proved impossible. All kinds of assertions
that Armenia may build up its relations with Russia and the West are
funny in this situation.
Russia did not want a so-called "strategic partner" to get stronger,
it is interested in weakening Armenia in every aspect to make it more
dependent. Russia does not care for defense capability, security and
successful development of Armenia.
Russia blackmailed toughly and posed specific threats to Armenia. It
was enough to look at the faces of Putin and Sargsyan during a
demonstration of full "confidence and mutual understanding" after
the meeting in Moscow.
Recently, the Armenian government has been convinced that the
Association Agreement with the EU would be initialed in Vilnius. For
the time being there is no information on what Russia did to formulate
a specific threat against Armenia but sooner or later or rather soon
it will be found out.
Anecdotal "dowry" in the form of preferences looks highly cynical.
They moved from the construction of the new nuclear power plant to
its renovation, prolonging its life by 10 years, apparently another
10 years of existence of Armenia in line with Russia's plans on its
own survival.
Serzh Sargsyan's statements on continuation of integration with the
European Union look like empty passages while the Europeans have
definitely expressed their opinion on this issue. Perhaps, Serzh
Sargsyan hopes to suffocate in one way the agreement with the EU but
does not hope to, and in this case integration with Europe will be
confined to empty talks.
Armenia has talented negotiators but these talents could be revealed
only when the Western community had the proper disposition. In
international politics they cooperate with independent subjects
but not suspicious state formations. We had one unrecognized state,
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. Now we will have two.
However, the question was not politics and economy as such, the final
product of the European project was the problem of security. There is
a meaning to discuss whether Russia is able to fulfill single-handedly
the tasks of a guarantor of security only in professional circles
therefore it would be a mistake and naivety to build up on this in
the press.
The European politicians and functionaries are fond of repeating the
trite expression that the EU and NATO have different mechanics, and
integration of states with these organizations is autonomous. This
is not so, of course. Development of cooperation with the EU is an
important factor of development of relations with NATO, it is the ABCs,
and no one can ignore this. NATO does not guarantee the security of
non-member states but it is better to cooperate with NATO than not
to cooperate with NATO.
However, different countries that are NATO partners have a different
informal status. As of now, the United States and NATO were interested
in the protection of the interests of Armenia in the Euro-Atlantic
cooperation where Turkey is trying to limit the position of Armenia and
real support to Armenia. In this atmosphere of new relations between
Armenia and the EU and NATO is the Karabakh issue observed by the West.
Will the West be motivated enough to respect the interests of Armenia
(if I'm not mistaken, there was a pronouncement that the EU must deal
with the Karabakh topic seriously)? So far the West has proposed
very little regarding the sovereignty of Armenia but this is the
mechanics of relations and expectations were not bad. Apparently,
Russia's threats were proportionate to western defense support.
In this story without a title there is one interesting circumstance -
the Western community has learned another lesson on what Russia is
able to do in its relations with its "partners".
In 1045 Byzantium demanded annexation of the Kingdom of Ani with the
empire amid Turkish aggression threats. The tsar and the catholicos
agreed. A lot of indignant people gathered in front of the cathedral.
However, it started raining, and people stood a little more and went
away. The Kingdom of Ani stopped existing.
Igor Muradyan 17:28 04/09/2013 Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/30808