Tweet
LACK OF STRATEGY IN RUSSIA
Throughout the history of the Islamic Republic in Iran, that is
since the Islamic revolution in 1979, the Soviet Union and then
Russia tried to pursue a policy of rude and cynical disregard towards
Iran. The purpose was to use the hard international situation of Iran,
subordinate its interests to Russia and sell up such "dependence"
to one of its dubious partners.
Any deal on supply of arms and technologies to Iran was accompanied
by staged performances, undue delays, speculative prices, and
most importantly, by political conditions which were, as a rule,
unacceptable for such a large and influential state. In the Soviet
political and historical literature one could read evaluations by
prominent diplomats and party leaders about the consequences of the
submission style in the foreign policy of the Soviet Union which
tried to treat fairly large states as its vassals.
In Tehran, not only the political circles but also intellectuals,
the scientific and technical corps, the military, journalists and
academics believed that Russia was acting towards Iran as a "senior
partner" without any reason for that, and it will end up in failure.
However, Iran demonstrated calm and restraint, getting sufficient
exhaustive information about Russia's attempts to use the vulnerability
of Iran's situation in its relations with not only the U.S. but also
Israel and Turkey.
Of course, most Iranians were annoyed by the influence Israel's
political circles on Russia and attempts to block not only the
development of Russian-Iranian relations but also the Russian policy on
Iran on the international arena. Perhaps, in Moscow the current state
of Iran, that is the Islamic republic, was considered as something
interim; there may have been some knowledge about the new political
reality in the region but most probably there was a glaring omission
in the strategy that reflected the lack of long-term foreign political
interests of Russia's ruling elite. But is this a basic condition
for such a short-sighted policy towards Iran?
Now when new relationships are forming in the region that will have an
impact not only on the situation in the Middle East but also in a huge
space, Russia is trying to correct its deplorable and rather awkward
situation, trying to rebuild its relationship with Iran. Attempts are
made to agree with Iran on some unimportant issues, such as the barter
of oil with aircraft (which is possible in a blocked state only).
However, even these ordinary attempts ran into a furious reaction
of Israel's friends in Russia who mobilized the most respectable
media, realizing that Russia was facing the prospect of forced
"equal" relations with Iran. Not only political scientists and
politicians, but also economists, sociologists and cultural scientists,
religious leaders and clairvoyants have been mobilized. Moscow-based
propagandists went as far as to declare Shi'a as the ideological
basis of fascism. Moreover, Russia is assigned to the role of the
main responsible for the fate and the security of Israel.
Israel's friends have very serious concerns about the loss of Russia
as the most comfortable living space and habitat. This would be
a breakthrough in a lasting policy of Israel which bid on Russia's
strife for maintaining its status of a "senior partner" to Iran. This
breakthrough means removal of restrictions on supply of materials and
technology to Iran, which will lead to a solution of many problems
in this country in terms of defense and security.
However, it is not even a matter of supplies but the possibility of
Israel's loss of its influence on Russia, which is considered by Israel
not only as a strategic partner but also a country of likely "return"
in the event of a catastrophe. Moscow is at a loss, primarily because
Russia "services" do not interest anyone e in the West, on which
Russia heavily relied not only in the West but also in the Middle East.
The most appropriate way to ensure Israel's national security
is reconciliation and normalization of relations with Iran, not
confrontation with him. This policy of confrontation has spoiled
relations with the United States, and now, apparently , deterioration
of relations with Russia. Iran was not created in 1934 like the Jewish
Autonomous Region, and like Israel, it has a millennial history,
and the two countries will understand each other better than with the
assistance of all kinds of mediators who have fallen from the moon. In
this case, however, the question occurs who controls Russia? It is
said that the FSB does. And who controls the FSB?
Thus, we may state with confidence that strategic relations have
developed between Russia and Israel, which will, of course, lead to
shifts not only in the Middle East, but also in Eastern Europe and the
South Caucasus. Russia has already demonstrated its loyalty to Israel,
playing a major role in the withdrawal of chemical weapons from Syria,
pumping out money from this country that had been provided by Iran,
delivering Russian weapons to Damascus.
It is absolutely clear that such a nature of interests of Russia
and Israel will lead to big problems for Armenia, given its special
interests in Iran and problems with Turkey and Azerbaijan. It would be
interesting to find out (or rather, confirm the versions on) the role
of Israel and Israel's friends in Russia to promote the interests of
Azerbaijan in Moscow. Friendship of peoples is great but what price
will other people have to pay for the friendship of Russia and Israel?
Armenian circles in Moscow (certainly not the ridiculous leaders
of controlled public and other organizations) are well-aware
of the problems and vicissitudes of various attempts to set up
Russian-Iranian strategic relationship in which they had the most
direct and largely productive participation. An example of different
efforts and initiatives of Armenians in Moscow in this aspect was,
for example, th well-known and widely discussed trips of the Russian
Foreign Minister Yevgeny Primakov to Tehran in 1997, which resulted
in a U-turn in this relationship but nonsense in Moscow's policy was
not overcome. At the same time, well-known are the results of the
various influence on Russia's policy on Iran, which had a negative
impact on Armenia.
Arguing about who controls Russia, one can assume that it is run
by Russians but Russia is a highly dependent state, experiencing a
strong deficit strategy.
As you know, the same expression has essentially different contents
if one changes just one dash.
Igor Muradyan,Political Analyst 12:12 27/01/2014 Story from Lragir.am
News: http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/31804
From: Baghdasarian
Throughout the history of the Islamic Republic in Iran, that is
since the Islamic revolution in 1979, the Soviet Union and then
Russia tried to pursue a policy of rude and cynical disregard towards
Iran. The purpose was to use the hard international situation of Iran,
subordinate its interests to Russia and sell up such "dependence"
to one of its dubious partners.
Any deal on supply of arms and technologies to Iran was accompanied
by staged performances, undue delays, speculative prices, and
most importantly, by political conditions which were, as a rule,
unacceptable for such a large and influential state. In the Soviet
political and historical literature one could read evaluations by
prominent diplomats and party leaders about the consequences of the
submission style in the foreign policy of the Soviet Union which
tried to treat fairly large states as its vassals.
In Tehran, not only the political circles but also intellectuals,
the scientific and technical corps, the military, journalists and
academics believed that Russia was acting towards Iran as a "senior
partner" without any reason for that, and it will end up in failure.
However, Iran demonstrated calm and restraint, getting sufficient
exhaustive information about Russia's attempts to use the vulnerability
of Iran's situation in its relations with not only the U.S. but also
Israel and Turkey.
Of course, most Iranians were annoyed by the influence Israel's
political circles on Russia and attempts to block not only the
development of Russian-Iranian relations but also the Russian policy on
Iran on the international arena. Perhaps, in Moscow the current state
of Iran, that is the Islamic republic, was considered as something
interim; there may have been some knowledge about the new political
reality in the region but most probably there was a glaring omission
in the strategy that reflected the lack of long-term foreign political
interests of Russia's ruling elite. But is this a basic condition
for such a short-sighted policy towards Iran?
Now when new relationships are forming in the region that will have an
impact not only on the situation in the Middle East but also in a huge
space, Russia is trying to correct its deplorable and rather awkward
situation, trying to rebuild its relationship with Iran. Attempts are
made to agree with Iran on some unimportant issues, such as the barter
of oil with aircraft (which is possible in a blocked state only).
However, even these ordinary attempts ran into a furious reaction
of Israel's friends in Russia who mobilized the most respectable
media, realizing that Russia was facing the prospect of forced
"equal" relations with Iran. Not only political scientists and
politicians, but also economists, sociologists and cultural scientists,
religious leaders and clairvoyants have been mobilized. Moscow-based
propagandists went as far as to declare Shi'a as the ideological
basis of fascism. Moreover, Russia is assigned to the role of the
main responsible for the fate and the security of Israel.
Israel's friends have very serious concerns about the loss of Russia
as the most comfortable living space and habitat. This would be
a breakthrough in a lasting policy of Israel which bid on Russia's
strife for maintaining its status of a "senior partner" to Iran. This
breakthrough means removal of restrictions on supply of materials and
technology to Iran, which will lead to a solution of many problems
in this country in terms of defense and security.
However, it is not even a matter of supplies but the possibility of
Israel's loss of its influence on Russia, which is considered by Israel
not only as a strategic partner but also a country of likely "return"
in the event of a catastrophe. Moscow is at a loss, primarily because
Russia "services" do not interest anyone e in the West, on which
Russia heavily relied not only in the West but also in the Middle East.
The most appropriate way to ensure Israel's national security
is reconciliation and normalization of relations with Iran, not
confrontation with him. This policy of confrontation has spoiled
relations with the United States, and now, apparently , deterioration
of relations with Russia. Iran was not created in 1934 like the Jewish
Autonomous Region, and like Israel, it has a millennial history,
and the two countries will understand each other better than with the
assistance of all kinds of mediators who have fallen from the moon. In
this case, however, the question occurs who controls Russia? It is
said that the FSB does. And who controls the FSB?
Thus, we may state with confidence that strategic relations have
developed between Russia and Israel, which will, of course, lead to
shifts not only in the Middle East, but also in Eastern Europe and the
South Caucasus. Russia has already demonstrated its loyalty to Israel,
playing a major role in the withdrawal of chemical weapons from Syria,
pumping out money from this country that had been provided by Iran,
delivering Russian weapons to Damascus.
It is absolutely clear that such a nature of interests of Russia
and Israel will lead to big problems for Armenia, given its special
interests in Iran and problems with Turkey and Azerbaijan. It would be
interesting to find out (or rather, confirm the versions on) the role
of Israel and Israel's friends in Russia to promote the interests of
Azerbaijan in Moscow. Friendship of peoples is great but what price
will other people have to pay for the friendship of Russia and Israel?
Armenian circles in Moscow (certainly not the ridiculous leaders
of controlled public and other organizations) are well-aware
of the problems and vicissitudes of various attempts to set up
Russian-Iranian strategic relationship in which they had the most
direct and largely productive participation. An example of different
efforts and initiatives of Armenians in Moscow in this aspect was,
for example, th well-known and widely discussed trips of the Russian
Foreign Minister Yevgeny Primakov to Tehran in 1997, which resulted
in a U-turn in this relationship but nonsense in Moscow's policy was
not overcome. At the same time, well-known are the results of the
various influence on Russia's policy on Iran, which had a negative
impact on Armenia.
Arguing about who controls Russia, one can assume that it is run
by Russians but Russia is a highly dependent state, experiencing a
strong deficit strategy.
As you know, the same expression has essentially different contents
if one changes just one dash.
Igor Muradyan,Political Analyst 12:12 27/01/2014 Story from Lragir.am
News: http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/31804
From: Baghdasarian