Tweet
Mystery but Fact
Igor Muradyan, Political Analyst
Comments - 07 January 2015, 16:13
In NATO there will not be formats other than "membership" and
"partnership". Armenia successfully cooperates with NATO under the
well-known programs. The Individual Partnership Plan enables
submission of proposals on participation in implementation of
different objectives.
These opportunities still exist. Sweden is not a NATO member and
cooperates with the alliance under this plan, implementing objectives
which exceed the contribution of most NATO members in the operations
of the alliance by their scope and importance.
The scope of participation in the NATO activities depends not only on
the status of the country in the alliance but its level of economic
and democratic development. NATO respects Armenia for its balanced
foreign policy and willingness to participate in the actions, with
correct estimation of our own possibilities and the level of
preparedness of the armed forces.
In NATO there are no official evaluations of conflict sides but
Azerbaijan is perceived as an aggressor, while Russia is perceived as
Russia's former and relative ally and a vivid example of how Russia
betrays its partners. Strange though it may seem, the example of
Armenia demonstrated how CSTO and Russia's alliance collapses.
In addition, NATO understands that Armenia has always postured as
Russia's reliable and loyal ally. In NATO this factor is used for
purposes of propaganda in conversations with NATO member states.
Armenia could hope for receiving arms from NATO member states under
certain conditions: similar goals in the sphere of defense, sufficient
funds, reliable relations, guarantees to use weapons.
Though supply of arms is the sovereign affair of states, cooperation
with NATO is a key factor and condition for supply of arms by NATO
member states.
The United States would hardly be able and wish to supply arms to
Armenia and Azerbaijan but NATO may always have arguments that Turkey
supplies arms to Azerbaijan and Azerbaijan's possibilities are bigger.
One way or another, the United States has considerable possibilities
to enhance Armenia's defense capability unless Armenia is too obedient
to Russia. The Western community has the experience of cooperation
with Armenia in the sphere of defense, including in supply of
technology, which is certainly related to NATO to some extent.
NATO is thoroughly studying the possibility of supplying weapons to
Armenia, and what weapons Armenia is interested in. One way or
another, NATO must approve the decision of separate states to supply
weapons to Armenia. One of the key issues of security in the Black Sea
and the Caucasus - the maintenance of the real balance of forces -
will depend on this.
NATO member states are rather independent in regard to supply of
weapon to different countries but these supplies cannot be determined
by the interests of the alliance and separate members, especially when
modern offensive weapons are concerned.
NATO must arm the new partners if there are certain prospects for
cooperation with them after the summits in Chicago and Wales and the
developments in Ukraine. The United States is ready to cooperate with
Russia because the Americans hope to play a more visible role in the
region if Turkey is too aggressive.
This is a mystery but a fact. It will be useful for Russia in a
certain aspect because in this case Azerbaijan and Turkey will try to
get closer. However, the Americans are apparently betting on major
controversies between Russia and Turkey. It is not known whether these
controversies will persist but now Russia is not fully aware of these
prospects.
It is known that the United States blocks Turkey's attempts, causing
Turkey's dissatisfaction. Turkey's role in development of NATO-Armenia
cooperation can be demonstrated in the following way:
1. France and Greece are for the discussion of the Armenian-Turkish
relations in the sphere of NATO;
2. Greece confirms that Armenia must demand solution of issues
relating to Turkey, just like Greece insisted on Greek-Turkish
relations;
3. The United States and other NATO member states have oral agreement
with Turkey that Turkey will not hinder development of NATO-Armenia
relations;
4. The participation of Armenia in peacekeeping actions in Kosovo and
Afghanistan has a big importance in integration with NATO and
strengthening relations, which does affect development of NATO
assistance and support to Armenia;
5. NATO supports the Minsk Group-mediated Karabakh settlement but
finds that development of relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan
should not be limited to the circumstances of this issue;
6. NATO is against single-handed peacekeeping actions of Russia in the
area of the Karabakh conflict. There are obvious controversies among
NATO member states: the United States is reluctant to discuss
political issues in NATO while France and Greece would like to use
these circumstances to counteract Turkey, NATO member states could
supply arms to Armenia, apparently the United States would be
reluctant but means other states.
However, the question occurs whether supply of arms is a key factor
for cooperation with NATO. Of course, the key factor is large-scale
cooperation in different directions, and this can be a factor for new
and sequential supplies of arms.
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/33384#sthash.kh00vg3M.dpuf
From: A. Papazian
Igor Muradyan, Political Analyst
Comments - 07 January 2015, 16:13
In NATO there will not be formats other than "membership" and
"partnership". Armenia successfully cooperates with NATO under the
well-known programs. The Individual Partnership Plan enables
submission of proposals on participation in implementation of
different objectives.
These opportunities still exist. Sweden is not a NATO member and
cooperates with the alliance under this plan, implementing objectives
which exceed the contribution of most NATO members in the operations
of the alliance by their scope and importance.
The scope of participation in the NATO activities depends not only on
the status of the country in the alliance but its level of economic
and democratic development. NATO respects Armenia for its balanced
foreign policy and willingness to participate in the actions, with
correct estimation of our own possibilities and the level of
preparedness of the armed forces.
In NATO there are no official evaluations of conflict sides but
Azerbaijan is perceived as an aggressor, while Russia is perceived as
Russia's former and relative ally and a vivid example of how Russia
betrays its partners. Strange though it may seem, the example of
Armenia demonstrated how CSTO and Russia's alliance collapses.
In addition, NATO understands that Armenia has always postured as
Russia's reliable and loyal ally. In NATO this factor is used for
purposes of propaganda in conversations with NATO member states.
Armenia could hope for receiving arms from NATO member states under
certain conditions: similar goals in the sphere of defense, sufficient
funds, reliable relations, guarantees to use weapons.
Though supply of arms is the sovereign affair of states, cooperation
with NATO is a key factor and condition for supply of arms by NATO
member states.
The United States would hardly be able and wish to supply arms to
Armenia and Azerbaijan but NATO may always have arguments that Turkey
supplies arms to Azerbaijan and Azerbaijan's possibilities are bigger.
One way or another, the United States has considerable possibilities
to enhance Armenia's defense capability unless Armenia is too obedient
to Russia. The Western community has the experience of cooperation
with Armenia in the sphere of defense, including in supply of
technology, which is certainly related to NATO to some extent.
NATO is thoroughly studying the possibility of supplying weapons to
Armenia, and what weapons Armenia is interested in. One way or
another, NATO must approve the decision of separate states to supply
weapons to Armenia. One of the key issues of security in the Black Sea
and the Caucasus - the maintenance of the real balance of forces -
will depend on this.
NATO member states are rather independent in regard to supply of
weapon to different countries but these supplies cannot be determined
by the interests of the alliance and separate members, especially when
modern offensive weapons are concerned.
NATO must arm the new partners if there are certain prospects for
cooperation with them after the summits in Chicago and Wales and the
developments in Ukraine. The United States is ready to cooperate with
Russia because the Americans hope to play a more visible role in the
region if Turkey is too aggressive.
This is a mystery but a fact. It will be useful for Russia in a
certain aspect because in this case Azerbaijan and Turkey will try to
get closer. However, the Americans are apparently betting on major
controversies between Russia and Turkey. It is not known whether these
controversies will persist but now Russia is not fully aware of these
prospects.
It is known that the United States blocks Turkey's attempts, causing
Turkey's dissatisfaction. Turkey's role in development of NATO-Armenia
cooperation can be demonstrated in the following way:
1. France and Greece are for the discussion of the Armenian-Turkish
relations in the sphere of NATO;
2. Greece confirms that Armenia must demand solution of issues
relating to Turkey, just like Greece insisted on Greek-Turkish
relations;
3. The United States and other NATO member states have oral agreement
with Turkey that Turkey will not hinder development of NATO-Armenia
relations;
4. The participation of Armenia in peacekeeping actions in Kosovo and
Afghanistan has a big importance in integration with NATO and
strengthening relations, which does affect development of NATO
assistance and support to Armenia;
5. NATO supports the Minsk Group-mediated Karabakh settlement but
finds that development of relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan
should not be limited to the circumstances of this issue;
6. NATO is against single-handed peacekeeping actions of Russia in the
area of the Karabakh conflict. There are obvious controversies among
NATO member states: the United States is reluctant to discuss
political issues in NATO while France and Greece would like to use
these circumstances to counteract Turkey, NATO member states could
supply arms to Armenia, apparently the United States would be
reluctant but means other states.
However, the question occurs whether supply of arms is a key factor
for cooperation with NATO. Of course, the key factor is large-scale
cooperation in different directions, and this can be a factor for new
and sequential supplies of arms.
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/33384#sthash.kh00vg3M.dpuf
From: A. Papazian