Tweet
TROJAN HORSE FOR THE EAEU
Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
July 10 2014
10 July 2014 - 10:27am
By Alexander Fomenko
It seems the establishment of the Eurasian Economic Union by Russia,
Kazakhstan and Belarus should be insignificant to humanity. There are
many other more important problems. The confrontation between Western
and Russian (which is turning into Eurasian) civilizations is growing.
The confrontation defines the differences in approaches to a
settlement of the Arab issue, including the Syrian crisis. It turned
into a real conflict after the February overthrow of the Ukrainian
government. Meanwhile, other countries play a static role, or an
active static role, as with China.
But is not so.
Sooner or later life in the Middle East will get back into a routine.
Ukraine will sooner or later return to its native coast. And the EaEU
has every chance of going into the history of humanity as the starting
point of a turn toward a new balance of forces in the world. The
initiators of the Union believe that it will radically change moral
directions and reconsider human values. And in the future this will
help people to avoid global disasters.
Whether the initiators have enough wisdom and political will to use
the chance thoughtfully, we will know in late June. The intrigue will
be maintained till the end and tensions will rise. The atmosphere is
tense already. All facts confirm that the battle for the Eurasian space
is as heavy as the battles in Ukraine. Russia is almost economically
isolated. And the whole EaEU is under siege.
A Trojan horse can't wait to enter the EaEU. Will presidents Nazarbayev
and Lukashenko let him in? We will know on July 1st. The decision
was made in Astana in May.
Of course the Trojan horse is Armenia. Armenia is a vicious force,
which is able to ruin "Troy," i.e. the EaEU at the initial stage.
Armenia insists on its membership of the EaEU common economic space
with the illegally-occupied territories of a neighboring state.
Azerbaijani resources have been being stolen for years; the
infrastructure of the occupied Azerbaijani lands (20% of the whole
territory of Azerbaijan) is interwoven into the Armenian economy
by thousands of invisible threads. Nursultan Nazarbayev insists on
accession of Armenia to the EaEU only within the borders which are
defined by the UN, without the occupied territories. But it would
be impossible to control this. To control this, they will need more
resources than Armenia could earn in the EaEU. Nobody will agree to
this. Moscow, Minsk and Astana are able to count. And what can be
said about following moral and peaceful principles in the situation?
Even representatives of the state authorities in Armenia call for the
accession of the occupied Azerbaijani territories into Armenia. And
they don't speak about Nagorno-Karabakh only, which is considered
to be native Armenian territory by Yerevan; however, this is quite
doubtful. Today Armenia discusses the accession of all the occupied
regions. Obviously they want to join the Lachin District, which is
situated between Armenia and NK. There is no border between Armenia
and Nagorno-Karabakh, even by air.
If NG joins Armenia, a war will be started. If Azerbaijan still has
hopes that the international community will somehow make Armenia
withdraw its troops from the occupied Azeri territories, then when
the hopes turn into illusions, Azerbaijan will send all its military
capacities accumulated during the years to restore its territorial
integrity. And the question of Armenia's membership of the EaEU will
be irrelevant. Armenia won't deal with losing NK and become a place
of instability in the South Caucasus. Does the EaEU need this? In
case of a war Yerevan couldn't count on its allies in the CSTO, as
Azerbaijan wouldn't cross any border established by the UN. Azerbaijan
wouldn't invade a territory of the sovereign Armenian state. Mothers of
soldiers who serve in Russia and other CSTO countries can sleep tight.
If the Armenians hinted that they had religious ties with Russia,
we would say that Georgia and Ukraine were much closer to us in this
sense... Until they crossed a red line. And why should Russia shed the
blood of its and foreign citizens for the groundless whims of Armenia?
Russia gave a lot of lands for the settlement of Armenians on its
territory. Should it help Yerevan to occupy new lands of foreign
states? As for other foreign military support, Armenia cannot count
on anything. To prove it, we should simply look at the map of the
South Caucasus and neighboring territories.
Russia has already clearly explained its position on the settlement of
the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict through its representative in the OSCE
Minsk Group. Strange as it is, but it completely coincides with the
position of the two other members of the OSCE MG - France and the USA.
The position is: if it doesn't belong to you, return it. The
Azerbaijani side is generally satisfied with the mediators' view.
Armenia isn't. But why should we coax Armenia?
Many Armenian politicians, political scientists, journalists and
bloggers criticize the Supreme Board of the EurAsEC - Russia with
Crimea has a right, and Armenia with Karabakh doesn't. Let's analyze
the situation and start with Crimea.
On March 16th Crimea became independent through people's free will.
Simultaneously, residents of Crimea decided to merge to Russia. Russia
responded to the request. What's the problem? It should be noted that
no Crimean resident of any nationality was forced to leave the region.
And the fact that Russia could have deported all Ukrainians from the
peninsula several years before the process is absurd.
Now let's look at the Armenia of the late 1980s and early 1990s.
Thousands of Azerbaijanis were forced from the country. Didn't this
provoke the Armenian massacre in Sumgait? Didn't this lead to the
launch of Soviet troops into Baku in January 1990?
The Azerbaijanis had no developed international communication network,
unlike the Armenians, and information on ethnic cleansing in Armenia
wasn't spread all over the world. Even in the USSR few people knew
about it. But when the Armenian massacres started, after indiscriminate
expulsion of the Azerbaijanis from Soviet Armenia, the whole Armenian
world stirred up and cried: Help! They are killing us!
And the world heard them and was furious. But how does the murder of
an Armenian differ from the murder of an Azerbaijani? Why is one act
perceived as recompense and another as a crime?
It should be noted that in self-declared South Ossetia and Abkhazia
there are Georgian villages; ethnic Moldovans are a significant
part of the population in the unrecognized Transdniestrian Moldavian
Republic; even in Albanian Kosovo there are Serbian villages; but in
Nagorno-Karabakh no Azerbaijanis are living. I mean there are several
dozen Azerbaijanis who are citizens of Iran. Of course there are not
so many Armenians in Azerbaijan. Most of them are women and their
children. And all of them are citizens of Azerbaijan.
In the late 1980s Armenian militants and international terrorists
came to the Nagorno-Karabakh region from all over the world. Armenian
terrorist organizations acted on the territory of the region. And
these people who organized many terrorist attacks were connected
with the former and current presidents of Armenia. Did these people
use such methods in NK to provide free will of the population? And
now remember how Russian soldiers who were cantoned there on legal
grounds acted in Crimea.
So what? Will we continue the talks on fulfillment of international
laws by self-declared Nagorno-Karabakh? On the right of a nation
to self-determination? What will be the result? I hope we won't be
dealing with guns in the end.
http://vestnikkavkaza.net/analysis/politics/57486.html
Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
July 10 2014
10 July 2014 - 10:27am
By Alexander Fomenko
It seems the establishment of the Eurasian Economic Union by Russia,
Kazakhstan and Belarus should be insignificant to humanity. There are
many other more important problems. The confrontation between Western
and Russian (which is turning into Eurasian) civilizations is growing.
The confrontation defines the differences in approaches to a
settlement of the Arab issue, including the Syrian crisis. It turned
into a real conflict after the February overthrow of the Ukrainian
government. Meanwhile, other countries play a static role, or an
active static role, as with China.
But is not so.
Sooner or later life in the Middle East will get back into a routine.
Ukraine will sooner or later return to its native coast. And the EaEU
has every chance of going into the history of humanity as the starting
point of a turn toward a new balance of forces in the world. The
initiators of the Union believe that it will radically change moral
directions and reconsider human values. And in the future this will
help people to avoid global disasters.
Whether the initiators have enough wisdom and political will to use
the chance thoughtfully, we will know in late June. The intrigue will
be maintained till the end and tensions will rise. The atmosphere is
tense already. All facts confirm that the battle for the Eurasian space
is as heavy as the battles in Ukraine. Russia is almost economically
isolated. And the whole EaEU is under siege.
A Trojan horse can't wait to enter the EaEU. Will presidents Nazarbayev
and Lukashenko let him in? We will know on July 1st. The decision
was made in Astana in May.
Of course the Trojan horse is Armenia. Armenia is a vicious force,
which is able to ruin "Troy," i.e. the EaEU at the initial stage.
Armenia insists on its membership of the EaEU common economic space
with the illegally-occupied territories of a neighboring state.
Azerbaijani resources have been being stolen for years; the
infrastructure of the occupied Azerbaijani lands (20% of the whole
territory of Azerbaijan) is interwoven into the Armenian economy
by thousands of invisible threads. Nursultan Nazarbayev insists on
accession of Armenia to the EaEU only within the borders which are
defined by the UN, without the occupied territories. But it would
be impossible to control this. To control this, they will need more
resources than Armenia could earn in the EaEU. Nobody will agree to
this. Moscow, Minsk and Astana are able to count. And what can be
said about following moral and peaceful principles in the situation?
Even representatives of the state authorities in Armenia call for the
accession of the occupied Azerbaijani territories into Armenia. And
they don't speak about Nagorno-Karabakh only, which is considered
to be native Armenian territory by Yerevan; however, this is quite
doubtful. Today Armenia discusses the accession of all the occupied
regions. Obviously they want to join the Lachin District, which is
situated between Armenia and NK. There is no border between Armenia
and Nagorno-Karabakh, even by air.
If NG joins Armenia, a war will be started. If Azerbaijan still has
hopes that the international community will somehow make Armenia
withdraw its troops from the occupied Azeri territories, then when
the hopes turn into illusions, Azerbaijan will send all its military
capacities accumulated during the years to restore its territorial
integrity. And the question of Armenia's membership of the EaEU will
be irrelevant. Armenia won't deal with losing NK and become a place
of instability in the South Caucasus. Does the EaEU need this? In
case of a war Yerevan couldn't count on its allies in the CSTO, as
Azerbaijan wouldn't cross any border established by the UN. Azerbaijan
wouldn't invade a territory of the sovereign Armenian state. Mothers of
soldiers who serve in Russia and other CSTO countries can sleep tight.
If the Armenians hinted that they had religious ties with Russia,
we would say that Georgia and Ukraine were much closer to us in this
sense... Until they crossed a red line. And why should Russia shed the
blood of its and foreign citizens for the groundless whims of Armenia?
Russia gave a lot of lands for the settlement of Armenians on its
territory. Should it help Yerevan to occupy new lands of foreign
states? As for other foreign military support, Armenia cannot count
on anything. To prove it, we should simply look at the map of the
South Caucasus and neighboring territories.
Russia has already clearly explained its position on the settlement of
the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict through its representative in the OSCE
Minsk Group. Strange as it is, but it completely coincides with the
position of the two other members of the OSCE MG - France and the USA.
The position is: if it doesn't belong to you, return it. The
Azerbaijani side is generally satisfied with the mediators' view.
Armenia isn't. But why should we coax Armenia?
Many Armenian politicians, political scientists, journalists and
bloggers criticize the Supreme Board of the EurAsEC - Russia with
Crimea has a right, and Armenia with Karabakh doesn't. Let's analyze
the situation and start with Crimea.
On March 16th Crimea became independent through people's free will.
Simultaneously, residents of Crimea decided to merge to Russia. Russia
responded to the request. What's the problem? It should be noted that
no Crimean resident of any nationality was forced to leave the region.
And the fact that Russia could have deported all Ukrainians from the
peninsula several years before the process is absurd.
Now let's look at the Armenia of the late 1980s and early 1990s.
Thousands of Azerbaijanis were forced from the country. Didn't this
provoke the Armenian massacre in Sumgait? Didn't this lead to the
launch of Soviet troops into Baku in January 1990?
The Azerbaijanis had no developed international communication network,
unlike the Armenians, and information on ethnic cleansing in Armenia
wasn't spread all over the world. Even in the USSR few people knew
about it. But when the Armenian massacres started, after indiscriminate
expulsion of the Azerbaijanis from Soviet Armenia, the whole Armenian
world stirred up and cried: Help! They are killing us!
And the world heard them and was furious. But how does the murder of
an Armenian differ from the murder of an Azerbaijani? Why is one act
perceived as recompense and another as a crime?
It should be noted that in self-declared South Ossetia and Abkhazia
there are Georgian villages; ethnic Moldovans are a significant
part of the population in the unrecognized Transdniestrian Moldavian
Republic; even in Albanian Kosovo there are Serbian villages; but in
Nagorno-Karabakh no Azerbaijanis are living. I mean there are several
dozen Azerbaijanis who are citizens of Iran. Of course there are not
so many Armenians in Azerbaijan. Most of them are women and their
children. And all of them are citizens of Azerbaijan.
In the late 1980s Armenian militants and international terrorists
came to the Nagorno-Karabakh region from all over the world. Armenian
terrorist organizations acted on the territory of the region. And
these people who organized many terrorist attacks were connected
with the former and current presidents of Armenia. Did these people
use such methods in NK to provide free will of the population? And
now remember how Russian soldiers who were cantoned there on legal
grounds acted in Crimea.
So what? Will we continue the talks on fulfillment of international
laws by self-declared Nagorno-Karabakh? On the right of a nation
to self-determination? What will be the result? I hope we won't be
dealing with guns in the end.
http://vestnikkavkaza.net/analysis/politics/57486.html