Tweet
A Resounding Slap to Pro-Russian Armenians
Haikazn Ghahriyan, Editor-in-Chief
Comments - Saturday, 31 May 2014, 12:54
The founding summit of the Eurasian Union in Astana was a heavy brunt
to the traditional Armenian "political" set of values and mentality.
It demonstrated the striking difference between the Armenian
"political" thinking and the reality which the Armenians are reluctant
to acknowledge. Or maybe they acknowledge but there are other
circumstances?
So, what happened in Astana? Nothing strange in terms of real
politics, historical tradition and rules. The host of the summit, the
real leader of Eurasia, showed Armenia to its real place and role in
Eurasia, i.e. subduing to Turkish interests. He read out
demonstratively the letter of the president of Azerbaijan, another
Turkic state, which sets out the conditions for Armenia's membership.
Note that for the time being Azerbaijan is not taking part in the
Eurasian process.
The founding summit was held in Astana, the capital of Kazakhstan, and
Nazabayev has always claimed to authorship of this union so the center
of the union must be in Astana.
The Eurasian Union within its current "borders" is the space of the
Russian-Turkish civilization. The greater part of the Russian
territory is the historical land of Turkic peoples, and the Turkic
peoples are a layer of the Russian state building. They have equal
rights in the future union and they are not likely to share their
rights with others.
The Russians cannot overlook this because they will otherwise lose their state.
The Armenian "political" thought has a stereotype that Russians and
Turks are enemies, hence our ally. This stereotype has grown into a
degenerative thinking in which there is no political component. Moscow
has consistently instilled this mentality in the Armenians, sometimes
gently, sometimes toughly, which allowed using Armenian problems as an
instrument in relations with not only Turks but also others.
The interests of Armenia and Russia never match on any key point. This
is a political and historical reality. Under such conditions states
usually agree on cooperation to bring interests closer or to prevent a
confrontation. There is nothing like this in the Armenian-Russian
relations because Moscow has never considered Armenia a state, while
the Armenian independence was thought to be something funny. Besides,
the Russian Orthodox Church does not consider Armenians Christians,
and the Armenian Apostolic Church is still considered a sect.
These actualities have features at different levels for three
centuries. The developments of the early 20th century, from genocide
to the establishment and end of the First Republic, are the classic
example of the Armenian-Russian historico-political relations where
the abovementioned mechanisms and rules were applied.
Astana clearly demonstrated all this. In particular, it highlighted
that being pro-Russian, having a Russian political bias, means being
pro-Turkish, that is having a pro-Turkish bias. The Armenian
pro-Russians are explicitly pro-Turks, which comes from the logic of
the genre. And it is possible that this is not a misunderstanding but
a conscious choice, i.e. they are pro-Russian because the Russians are
on the side of the Turks. This is a complicated psychological matter
that needs a serious study.
In brief, about 100 years after these developments, Armenia and the
Armenians have appeared in the same "chasm" of history, and history
seems to repeat. And it is known for whom history repeats - the
helpless, scared, self-centered societies.
In addition, over one hundred years no new mechanisms and means have
been needed. It turns out that the thinking and reaction of Armenians
to political actualities have not improved over the past 100 years but
have further crystallized. The same stereotypes, the same degenerative
understanding of politics and particularly of the Armenian-Russian
relations. And this allows the Russians and Turks to "balance" their
own and mutual problems at the expense of the Armenian interests.
In addition, the situation is getting complicated as the carrier of
this mentality (at least formally, which is enough in such cases) is
the "establishment" - the political forces, intelligentsia, the mass
media, political scientists and experts (these notions are used
conditionally because they act in the logic of the fifth column).
Will Astana's slap teach Armenians a lesson? Judging by the reaction
to the summit, it will not. Besides, the Armenians have learned well
from Christianity only one thing: if anyone slaps you on the right
cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.
Perhaps, the Russians are right.
- See more at: http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/32517#sthash.K9gpaJHN.dpuf
From: A. Papazian
Haikazn Ghahriyan, Editor-in-Chief
Comments - Saturday, 31 May 2014, 12:54
The founding summit of the Eurasian Union in Astana was a heavy brunt
to the traditional Armenian "political" set of values and mentality.
It demonstrated the striking difference between the Armenian
"political" thinking and the reality which the Armenians are reluctant
to acknowledge. Or maybe they acknowledge but there are other
circumstances?
So, what happened in Astana? Nothing strange in terms of real
politics, historical tradition and rules. The host of the summit, the
real leader of Eurasia, showed Armenia to its real place and role in
Eurasia, i.e. subduing to Turkish interests. He read out
demonstratively the letter of the president of Azerbaijan, another
Turkic state, which sets out the conditions for Armenia's membership.
Note that for the time being Azerbaijan is not taking part in the
Eurasian process.
The founding summit was held in Astana, the capital of Kazakhstan, and
Nazabayev has always claimed to authorship of this union so the center
of the union must be in Astana.
The Eurasian Union within its current "borders" is the space of the
Russian-Turkish civilization. The greater part of the Russian
territory is the historical land of Turkic peoples, and the Turkic
peoples are a layer of the Russian state building. They have equal
rights in the future union and they are not likely to share their
rights with others.
The Russians cannot overlook this because they will otherwise lose their state.
The Armenian "political" thought has a stereotype that Russians and
Turks are enemies, hence our ally. This stereotype has grown into a
degenerative thinking in which there is no political component. Moscow
has consistently instilled this mentality in the Armenians, sometimes
gently, sometimes toughly, which allowed using Armenian problems as an
instrument in relations with not only Turks but also others.
The interests of Armenia and Russia never match on any key point. This
is a political and historical reality. Under such conditions states
usually agree on cooperation to bring interests closer or to prevent a
confrontation. There is nothing like this in the Armenian-Russian
relations because Moscow has never considered Armenia a state, while
the Armenian independence was thought to be something funny. Besides,
the Russian Orthodox Church does not consider Armenians Christians,
and the Armenian Apostolic Church is still considered a sect.
These actualities have features at different levels for three
centuries. The developments of the early 20th century, from genocide
to the establishment and end of the First Republic, are the classic
example of the Armenian-Russian historico-political relations where
the abovementioned mechanisms and rules were applied.
Astana clearly demonstrated all this. In particular, it highlighted
that being pro-Russian, having a Russian political bias, means being
pro-Turkish, that is having a pro-Turkish bias. The Armenian
pro-Russians are explicitly pro-Turks, which comes from the logic of
the genre. And it is possible that this is not a misunderstanding but
a conscious choice, i.e. they are pro-Russian because the Russians are
on the side of the Turks. This is a complicated psychological matter
that needs a serious study.
In brief, about 100 years after these developments, Armenia and the
Armenians have appeared in the same "chasm" of history, and history
seems to repeat. And it is known for whom history repeats - the
helpless, scared, self-centered societies.
In addition, over one hundred years no new mechanisms and means have
been needed. It turns out that the thinking and reaction of Armenians
to political actualities have not improved over the past 100 years but
have further crystallized. The same stereotypes, the same degenerative
understanding of politics and particularly of the Armenian-Russian
relations. And this allows the Russians and Turks to "balance" their
own and mutual problems at the expense of the Armenian interests.
In addition, the situation is getting complicated as the carrier of
this mentality (at least formally, which is enough in such cases) is
the "establishment" - the political forces, intelligentsia, the mass
media, political scientists and experts (these notions are used
conditionally because they act in the logic of the fifth column).
Will Astana's slap teach Armenians a lesson? Judging by the reaction
to the summit, it will not. Besides, the Armenians have learned well
from Christianity only one thing: if anyone slaps you on the right
cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.
Perhaps, the Russians are right.
- See more at: http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/32517#sthash.K9gpaJHN.dpuf
From: A. Papazian