Tweet
ARMENIA WALKING ON A TIGHTROPE
Editorial 6-14
Mirror Spectator
By Edmond Y. Azadian
Azerbaijan and Turkey have been able to isolate Armenia from all
regional development projects by blockading its borders. While
Armenia's accession to the Eurasian Union seems to provide some
relief from that isolation, many recent developments in the region
indicate otherwise.
Russia, after having hampered major economic deals between Armenia
and Iran, at this time is trying to take Armenia under its wings
through the creation of the Eurasian Union, where, at best, Armenia
will become a silent partner, not necessarily an equal one, because
of the paucity of its resources and its Karabagh baggage. Nursultan
Nazarbayev, Kazakhstan's president, seems to be more the spokesman
of the new union, rather than President Vladimir Putin himself.
After his remarks at the inaugural ceremony of the Eurasian Union,
slapping Armenia on the face figuratively on Azerbaijan's behalf, he
has further continued his pan-Turkic campaign by inviting Azerbaijan
and Turkey to join the Eurasian Union.
Turkey's accession seems less probable, given the fact that for
centuries it has been Russia's rival for influence in the Caucasus.
But Azerbaijan's case may be different. After all, it is solidly
anchored in all strategic, economic and political structures of the
west. Baku may join the union as a spoiler on behalf of the west,
very similar to Turkey's drive to join the European Union for the
very obvious plan to weaken it. The strong US support for Ankara's
accession to the EU derives from that very strategic move, because,
after the collapse of the Soviet Union, which created a unipolar power
structure in the world, Europe was in the process of weaning itself
from its dependence on Washington to develop a new independent pole
which could end up balancing the US global hegemony.
Azerbaijan, indeed, can play the same spoiler role in the Eurasian
Union, despite its energy deals with the West and its strategic
partnership with Israel.
At the present time, Europe is far from forming a new and independent
pole, given its crippling economic woes and recent parliamentary
elections, which introduced a self-destructive element in its
structure. Therefore, the race is between the US and the rising Russia
for the control of the Asian landmass with its abundance of natural
resources and strategic significance, per Zbigniew Brzezinski, the
former national security advisor to President Carter.
Azerbaijan may play a crucial role in this superpower chess game and
even if its leadership is not mature enough to realize that potential,
its Turkish mentor can guide it through this political maze.
The above realization seems to boost the Baku leadership's recent
aggressive posture vis-a-vis Armenia.
Up until now, the confrontation with the Armenian forces was on the
Karabagh contact line. But in contrast, on June 5, Azeri forces made a
strategic move to create more panic in Armenia: they began hostilities
on the Nakhijevan-Armenia border. That was perhaps encouraged by
Turkish forces which were brought to Nakhijevan under the guise of
holding joint military exercises. Two Armenian soldiers were killed
and angry statements were issued by Armenia's Defense Ministry about
"serious consequences."
Azeris are even thinking about the unthinkable: On November 21, 2012,
the director of the Azerbaijan Center for Political Innovation and
Technology, Mubariz Ahmadoglu, stated that the bombing of Metsamor
nuclear plant in Armenia by Azerbaijan is a rather logical act within
the framework of the Karabagh war and is an even more effective step
for "the liberation" of the territories. Earlier, in February 2010,
Azerbaijan's military expert Uzeyir Jafarov had stated that Azerbaijani
troops may use "retaliation over Metsamor."
This situation begs for a new question: all along when Azeri forces
broke the ceasefire agreement on the Karabagh border, our strategic
partner, Russia, kept a very revealing silence, indicating that
the umbrella of Russian military presence in Armenia does not cover
Karabagh as a disputed territory. Then what about the incident on
Armenia's border with Nakhijevan, which is not under any dispute as
far as Russia is concerned? Also, Azerbaijan has been violating the
ceasefire agreement in the Tavoush region of Armenia, again without
hearing any word of anger from Moscow.
But Russia's actions speak louder than its silence; delivery of
sophisticated military hardward is not business as usual, as some
pundits try to convince us. Rather, it is an existential threat to
the very future of Armenia.
Adding insult to injury, Russian Foreign Ministry's spokesman,
Alexander Lukashevich said at a recent press conference that
"Azerbaijan is Russia's strategic partner in the south Caucasus"
and that Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov would be heading to Baku
on June 17-18 for the fourth meeting of the year. Russia has been
playing a double game at the expense of Armenia. Whether Azerbaijan
joins the Eurasian Union or not, it will remain an important factor
in determining Armenia's fate by its other partners.
Armenian officials are optimistic that Armenia's accession to the
Eurasian Union will also benefit Karabagh. The chairman of the National
Assembly's Standing Committee on Financial Affairs, Gagik Minassian,
said he is confident that Karabagh will become a de facto member of
the Eurasian economic space without joining the union. He further
noted that "Armenia and Nagorno Karabagh form a common economic space
and that there can be no customs checkpoint between the two."
Some analysts even use the analogy of Moscow's agreement with other
unrecognized regions, such as Abkhazia and South Ossetia, which will
benefit from the activities of the Union through Russia. But what is
permissible for Russia may not necessarily be permissible for Armenia.
With all these external political woes, Armenia also faces
insurmountable internal problems, including economic decline,
depopulation, political stagnation and desperation.
Former President Levon Ter-Petrosian recently published an article
titled "Serge Sargisian's Road Map for Armenia's Destruction." He made
some sensible and valid points but if he could overcome his rancor,
he could have a larger audience.
Surrogates of the western media campaign combined with some voices
in the diaspora call for a regime change in Armenia. However, the
west conspired to bring down the corrupt regime of Viktor Yanukovych
in Ukraine only to install another oligarch, Petro Poroshenko. The
outcome will not benefit the Ukrainian people. Any change in Armenia
will be the same -- different faces, same end game.
The government, through its insensitivity to the plight of its
desperate populace, is continuing to destroy Armenia's future, in
an inadvertent, unholy alliance with its detractors in Armenia and
the diaspora.
Armenia is walking on a tightrope. We have to watch its march with
trepidation, expecting the worst and hoping for the best.
From: A. Papazian
Editorial 6-14
Mirror Spectator
By Edmond Y. Azadian
Azerbaijan and Turkey have been able to isolate Armenia from all
regional development projects by blockading its borders. While
Armenia's accession to the Eurasian Union seems to provide some
relief from that isolation, many recent developments in the region
indicate otherwise.
Russia, after having hampered major economic deals between Armenia
and Iran, at this time is trying to take Armenia under its wings
through the creation of the Eurasian Union, where, at best, Armenia
will become a silent partner, not necessarily an equal one, because
of the paucity of its resources and its Karabagh baggage. Nursultan
Nazarbayev, Kazakhstan's president, seems to be more the spokesman
of the new union, rather than President Vladimir Putin himself.
After his remarks at the inaugural ceremony of the Eurasian Union,
slapping Armenia on the face figuratively on Azerbaijan's behalf, he
has further continued his pan-Turkic campaign by inviting Azerbaijan
and Turkey to join the Eurasian Union.
Turkey's accession seems less probable, given the fact that for
centuries it has been Russia's rival for influence in the Caucasus.
But Azerbaijan's case may be different. After all, it is solidly
anchored in all strategic, economic and political structures of the
west. Baku may join the union as a spoiler on behalf of the west,
very similar to Turkey's drive to join the European Union for the
very obvious plan to weaken it. The strong US support for Ankara's
accession to the EU derives from that very strategic move, because,
after the collapse of the Soviet Union, which created a unipolar power
structure in the world, Europe was in the process of weaning itself
from its dependence on Washington to develop a new independent pole
which could end up balancing the US global hegemony.
Azerbaijan, indeed, can play the same spoiler role in the Eurasian
Union, despite its energy deals with the West and its strategic
partnership with Israel.
At the present time, Europe is far from forming a new and independent
pole, given its crippling economic woes and recent parliamentary
elections, which introduced a self-destructive element in its
structure. Therefore, the race is between the US and the rising Russia
for the control of the Asian landmass with its abundance of natural
resources and strategic significance, per Zbigniew Brzezinski, the
former national security advisor to President Carter.
Azerbaijan may play a crucial role in this superpower chess game and
even if its leadership is not mature enough to realize that potential,
its Turkish mentor can guide it through this political maze.
The above realization seems to boost the Baku leadership's recent
aggressive posture vis-a-vis Armenia.
Up until now, the confrontation with the Armenian forces was on the
Karabagh contact line. But in contrast, on June 5, Azeri forces made a
strategic move to create more panic in Armenia: they began hostilities
on the Nakhijevan-Armenia border. That was perhaps encouraged by
Turkish forces which were brought to Nakhijevan under the guise of
holding joint military exercises. Two Armenian soldiers were killed
and angry statements were issued by Armenia's Defense Ministry about
"serious consequences."
Azeris are even thinking about the unthinkable: On November 21, 2012,
the director of the Azerbaijan Center for Political Innovation and
Technology, Mubariz Ahmadoglu, stated that the bombing of Metsamor
nuclear plant in Armenia by Azerbaijan is a rather logical act within
the framework of the Karabagh war and is an even more effective step
for "the liberation" of the territories. Earlier, in February 2010,
Azerbaijan's military expert Uzeyir Jafarov had stated that Azerbaijani
troops may use "retaliation over Metsamor."
This situation begs for a new question: all along when Azeri forces
broke the ceasefire agreement on the Karabagh border, our strategic
partner, Russia, kept a very revealing silence, indicating that
the umbrella of Russian military presence in Armenia does not cover
Karabagh as a disputed territory. Then what about the incident on
Armenia's border with Nakhijevan, which is not under any dispute as
far as Russia is concerned? Also, Azerbaijan has been violating the
ceasefire agreement in the Tavoush region of Armenia, again without
hearing any word of anger from Moscow.
But Russia's actions speak louder than its silence; delivery of
sophisticated military hardward is not business as usual, as some
pundits try to convince us. Rather, it is an existential threat to
the very future of Armenia.
Adding insult to injury, Russian Foreign Ministry's spokesman,
Alexander Lukashevich said at a recent press conference that
"Azerbaijan is Russia's strategic partner in the south Caucasus"
and that Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov would be heading to Baku
on June 17-18 for the fourth meeting of the year. Russia has been
playing a double game at the expense of Armenia. Whether Azerbaijan
joins the Eurasian Union or not, it will remain an important factor
in determining Armenia's fate by its other partners.
Armenian officials are optimistic that Armenia's accession to the
Eurasian Union will also benefit Karabagh. The chairman of the National
Assembly's Standing Committee on Financial Affairs, Gagik Minassian,
said he is confident that Karabagh will become a de facto member of
the Eurasian economic space without joining the union. He further
noted that "Armenia and Nagorno Karabagh form a common economic space
and that there can be no customs checkpoint between the two."
Some analysts even use the analogy of Moscow's agreement with other
unrecognized regions, such as Abkhazia and South Ossetia, which will
benefit from the activities of the Union through Russia. But what is
permissible for Russia may not necessarily be permissible for Armenia.
With all these external political woes, Armenia also faces
insurmountable internal problems, including economic decline,
depopulation, political stagnation and desperation.
Former President Levon Ter-Petrosian recently published an article
titled "Serge Sargisian's Road Map for Armenia's Destruction." He made
some sensible and valid points but if he could overcome his rancor,
he could have a larger audience.
Surrogates of the western media campaign combined with some voices
in the diaspora call for a regime change in Armenia. However, the
west conspired to bring down the corrupt regime of Viktor Yanukovych
in Ukraine only to install another oligarch, Petro Poroshenko. The
outcome will not benefit the Ukrainian people. Any change in Armenia
will be the same -- different faces, same end game.
The government, through its insensitivity to the plight of its
desperate populace, is continuing to destroy Armenia's future, in
an inadvertent, unholy alliance with its detractors in Armenia and
the diaspora.
Armenia is walking on a tightrope. We have to watch its march with
trepidation, expecting the worst and hoping for the best.
From: A. Papazian