Tweet
THE ICE BROKE: THE CHANCE SHOULD NOT BE MISSED
Igor Muradyan, Political Analyst
Comments - Wednesday, 09 July 2014, 21:25
Ukrainian politicians are dwelling on the behavior of the
representatives of political parties who visit Kiev to exchange
opinions and collect impressions. Germany is trying to offer its
policy of compromise on Russia which it bid on for its policy aimed
at gaining new positions in Eastern Europe and Europe in general.
The German project for Russia looks consistent but at the same time
Russia cannot use the advantages of cooperation with the first economic
power of Europe. In the meantime, Germany has started fearing such
an open challenge to the United States and Great Britain and several
interested states of the Baltic-Black Sea region and is trying to
replace persistence in the discussion of the actual situation on the
arena of the Western community with increased pressure on Ukraine
for reconciliation with Russia.
The German project on Ukraine has failed, and the Ukrainian politicians
with a pro-German bias are marginalized and failed to use the share
of popularity and image which they had in the result of Maidan. One
way or another, Germany's Eastern policy is moving towards a dead
end because it has not found any partner aside from Russia which is
going deep into international isolation.
However, it would be a mistake to consider the German policy on Ukraine
as one relating to goals relating to Russia. In the long run, this
is not true. One can understand Germany because its Eastern policy in
the 20th century has twice run into the active intervention of Great
Britain which considered isolation and weakening of Germany as its
achievement over a lasting period following the Franco-Prussian war,
as well as prevention of deep relations between France and Germany
and Russia and Germany. In any case, political and historical classics
says so.
Germany felt the signs of the same British policy in the periods
of previous Maidans called color revolutions. Then the goal was to
build a barrier between Germany and Russia, and Ukraine was the main
building material.
We dwelled on Germany's Eastern policy to highlight Germany's
comprehensible policy on NATO's expansion in Eastern Europe, and on
the eve of the NATO summit in Cardiff Berlin intends to insist on its
traditional policy in respect to the Euro-Atlantic community. And
though Germany's position may be criticized heavily by the United
States and Great Britain, as well as the Eastern European partners,
NATO summit will be more significant to the countries of Eastern
Europe than the summit of Chicago but Germany and France which
is humbly following it will insist on a conservative position on
expanding NATO members and mission.
The seminar of the Atlantic Council in Washington devoted to the topic
"NATO-Armenia" held jointly with Policy Forum Armenia highlighted
that the United States is going to the NATO summit in Cardiff with
such a reliable background as full solidarity of countries of Eastern
Europe and the conservative position of Germany and France.
At the same time, the concept of NATO development reflects the
interests and intentions of the alliance which is interested in
expanding cooperation with new partners. Without the participation
of new partners the development of the alliance, implementation of
peacekeeping, as well as logistical actions and tasks is impossible
In this situation and with such expectations the United States has
made an important strategic decision on supply of arms and assistance
to the countries of Eastern Europe, first of all Ukraine, Moldova and
Georgia for which purpose 1 billion dollars is allocated, which is,
apparently, the beginning of the American policy in the region.
Aside from this, Poland and Germany are acquiring an important role
of key providers of the U.S. policy in Eastern Europe. The ice broke,
and it is important not to have Armenia left out of these processes,
and prospects have opened up for NATO members to receive weapons from
the United States. Missing such a chance would be a crime, as well
as an object for accusations against those who conduct a policy of
thwarting the Armenian policy on NATO.
The Armenian military circles are ready and full of understanding
and responsibility to implement their tasks of rapprochement and
cooperation with NATO, and the political government of the country does
not deny these tasks but, one way or another, it is clear that Russia
has successfully created a reliable network of agents in Armenia,
including in the government. This should be understood for correct
assessment of quite strange ongoing developments.
The United States and NATO are discussing two options of resistance and
containment of Russian expansion. The first is isolation and blockade
of Russia, the second involves strengthening the military-political
capacity of Eastern Europe. The Black Sea-Caucasian region is becoming
an arena of high geopolitical dynamics, and though several American
experts claim that the United States will mostly focus on Ukraine,
and even Georgia will not get much attention, in reality these
assessments contradict the analytical calculations of the same experts.
The Black Sea-Caucasian region is not just part of Eastern Europe
but also an important polygon for containment of Russian expansion,
and in this region Russia ran into a dead end for the first time. This
region is not only an arena for operational processes in respect to
Russia but also other states, first of all Turkey and Iran.
Under these conditions and taking into account this prospect, Armenia
will either become a partner of the United States and NATO or will
appear in a miserable and marginal situation, and the destiny of an
object of trade between Turkey and Russia.
- See more at:
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/32705#sthash.fZ4v9zId.dpuf
Igor Muradyan, Political Analyst
Comments - Wednesday, 09 July 2014, 21:25
Ukrainian politicians are dwelling on the behavior of the
representatives of political parties who visit Kiev to exchange
opinions and collect impressions. Germany is trying to offer its
policy of compromise on Russia which it bid on for its policy aimed
at gaining new positions in Eastern Europe and Europe in general.
The German project for Russia looks consistent but at the same time
Russia cannot use the advantages of cooperation with the first economic
power of Europe. In the meantime, Germany has started fearing such
an open challenge to the United States and Great Britain and several
interested states of the Baltic-Black Sea region and is trying to
replace persistence in the discussion of the actual situation on the
arena of the Western community with increased pressure on Ukraine
for reconciliation with Russia.
The German project on Ukraine has failed, and the Ukrainian politicians
with a pro-German bias are marginalized and failed to use the share
of popularity and image which they had in the result of Maidan. One
way or another, Germany's Eastern policy is moving towards a dead
end because it has not found any partner aside from Russia which is
going deep into international isolation.
However, it would be a mistake to consider the German policy on Ukraine
as one relating to goals relating to Russia. In the long run, this
is not true. One can understand Germany because its Eastern policy in
the 20th century has twice run into the active intervention of Great
Britain which considered isolation and weakening of Germany as its
achievement over a lasting period following the Franco-Prussian war,
as well as prevention of deep relations between France and Germany
and Russia and Germany. In any case, political and historical classics
says so.
Germany felt the signs of the same British policy in the periods
of previous Maidans called color revolutions. Then the goal was to
build a barrier between Germany and Russia, and Ukraine was the main
building material.
We dwelled on Germany's Eastern policy to highlight Germany's
comprehensible policy on NATO's expansion in Eastern Europe, and on
the eve of the NATO summit in Cardiff Berlin intends to insist on its
traditional policy in respect to the Euro-Atlantic community. And
though Germany's position may be criticized heavily by the United
States and Great Britain, as well as the Eastern European partners,
NATO summit will be more significant to the countries of Eastern
Europe than the summit of Chicago but Germany and France which
is humbly following it will insist on a conservative position on
expanding NATO members and mission.
The seminar of the Atlantic Council in Washington devoted to the topic
"NATO-Armenia" held jointly with Policy Forum Armenia highlighted
that the United States is going to the NATO summit in Cardiff with
such a reliable background as full solidarity of countries of Eastern
Europe and the conservative position of Germany and France.
At the same time, the concept of NATO development reflects the
interests and intentions of the alliance which is interested in
expanding cooperation with new partners. Without the participation
of new partners the development of the alliance, implementation of
peacekeeping, as well as logistical actions and tasks is impossible
In this situation and with such expectations the United States has
made an important strategic decision on supply of arms and assistance
to the countries of Eastern Europe, first of all Ukraine, Moldova and
Georgia for which purpose 1 billion dollars is allocated, which is,
apparently, the beginning of the American policy in the region.
Aside from this, Poland and Germany are acquiring an important role
of key providers of the U.S. policy in Eastern Europe. The ice broke,
and it is important not to have Armenia left out of these processes,
and prospects have opened up for NATO members to receive weapons from
the United States. Missing such a chance would be a crime, as well
as an object for accusations against those who conduct a policy of
thwarting the Armenian policy on NATO.
The Armenian military circles are ready and full of understanding
and responsibility to implement their tasks of rapprochement and
cooperation with NATO, and the political government of the country does
not deny these tasks but, one way or another, it is clear that Russia
has successfully created a reliable network of agents in Armenia,
including in the government. This should be understood for correct
assessment of quite strange ongoing developments.
The United States and NATO are discussing two options of resistance and
containment of Russian expansion. The first is isolation and blockade
of Russia, the second involves strengthening the military-political
capacity of Eastern Europe. The Black Sea-Caucasian region is becoming
an arena of high geopolitical dynamics, and though several American
experts claim that the United States will mostly focus on Ukraine,
and even Georgia will not get much attention, in reality these
assessments contradict the analytical calculations of the same experts.
The Black Sea-Caucasian region is not just part of Eastern Europe
but also an important polygon for containment of Russian expansion,
and in this region Russia ran into a dead end for the first time. This
region is not only an arena for operational processes in respect to
Russia but also other states, first of all Turkey and Iran.
Under these conditions and taking into account this prospect, Armenia
will either become a partner of the United States and NATO or will
appear in a miserable and marginal situation, and the destiny of an
object of trade between Turkey and Russia.
- See more at:
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/32705#sthash.fZ4v9zId.dpuf