The Coming Russian Defeat in the Caucasus
[ 2009/09/28 | 12:19 ]By David Boyajian
Russia will be well along the road to total defeat by the US and NATO in the Caucasus and beyond if the recently proposed Armenian – Turkish “Protocols” are ratified.
Within two months after ratification, Turkey would be required to open its border with Armenia. Subsequently, or perhaps simultaneously, the Azerbaijani – Armenian border will open if, as appears increasingly possible, an Artsakh (Karabagh) peace agreement is signed.
Regardless of whether the Azeri border opens, a fully open Turkish – Armenian border would inevitably result in US and NATO penetration and subjugation of Armenia.
Let us look at US and Russian policy in the Caucasus, both past and present.
The West’s Goal: Domination
For two decades, the West, as well as Israel, has dreamt of dominating the Caucasus, which is the gateway from Europe and Turkey into the oil and gas-rich Caspian Sea region. To do so required ripping the Caucasus’ three ex-Soviet countries – Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia – from the Russian bear’s claws.
The US and NATO have largely succeeded in doing so. The West has already built two major gas and oil pipelines – BTE and BTC – from Azerbaijan’s Caspian coast, through Georgia and Turkey. The US insists that all pipelines bypass Russia and Iran.
Though Georgia and Azerbaijan are under continual Russian pressure, both are NATO candidates and have aligned themselves with the US.
That left Armenia, perhaps Russia’s only real ally in the world, as the sole obstacle to total American domination of the western land route into the Caspian.
By coaxing Turkey to open its border, Washington is now trying to lure Armenia away from Russia and into the infinitely richer and more modern, attractive, and democratic Western/NATO bloc.
Wealthier, stronger, and about thirty times larger and more populous than its small, besieged eastern neighbor, Turkey has been picked for the lead role in the West’s seduction of Armenia.
Armenia’s Importance to US Strategy
Until last year’s Georgian – Russian war, the US had been silently pleased with Turkey’s blockade of Armenia. Washington hoped the blockade, imposed mostly due to the Artsakh war, would create economic pressure on Armenians to resolve that conflict.
Note that only an Artsakh peace agreement could fully pry open the Azeri-Armenian-Turkish corridor that NATO and Washington craved. [See the author’s “Why Artsakh Matters to the West and Russia” on Armeniapedia.org.]
But the war in Georgia cast doubt on that country’s ability to continue hosting western-bound pipelines. For the US, the only alternative to unstable Georgia is Armenia. This explains why Washington has been dramatically stepping up pressure – and the “Protocols” are part of that pressure – on Turkey, Armenia, and Azerbaijan to resolve their differences and thereby create a new American path into the Caspian.
How does Russia feel about Armenia’s border issues?
Russia’s Fatal Mistakes
The Kremlin had long been silently pleased with the closed Turkish – Armenian border and the Artsakh stalemate. After all, these prevented the US from penetrating Armenia and dominating all three Caucasus countries.
Now, however, confidential and other sources indicate that Moscow favors both the Turkish-Armenian “Protocols” and an Artsakh peace agreement.
Russia reportedly hopes that trade across the Turkish – Armenian border would enable it to profit from its ownership of Armenian industry, particularly electricity production and transportation.
However, given Armenia’s small economy and size, the extra revenue for Russia would not be considerable.
The Kremlin is also reportedly worried that a new Russian – Georgian war would hurt Armenia’s economy since most Armenian imports/exports must now go through Georgia.
Thus, Russia allegedly hopes that an open Turkish – Armenian border would give its Armenia ally an alternative import/export route in case of a war. Yet, given its alliance with Georgia, Turkey might well close its border with Armenia in such an eventuality. Conversely, were the Turkish-Armenia-Azeri corridor to remain open, this would partly defeat the very purpose of a Russian attack on Georgia.
Moscow and Ankara have developed significant economic and political relations in recent years. And Russia supplies most of Turkey’s natural gas. Thus, the Kremlin apparently believes that it can dictate to Ankara. The Kremlin is wrong. Regardless of how friendly it becomes with Russia, Turkey will stay within NATO, its only protection against its historic, nuclear-armed Russian enemy.
Moreover, Turkey – and Georgia, which also depends on Russian gas – will eventually develop alternative energy sources and no longer be vulnerable to Russia pressure. In the meantime, Russia will lose Armenia to the West.
Russia is also trying to buy up future production from Azerbaijan’s oil and gas fields in hopes that, in so doing, the West will lose interest in Azerbaijan. In return, Russia is apparently pressuring Armenia to, in effect, hand Artsakh to Azerbaijan.
This is a grave error. Historically, Azeris have betrayed Russia, as happened in WW I when they sided with Turkey, and will do so again. In the meantime, Armenian anger at Russia for selling out Artsakh, combined with the lure of Western wealth, will permanently drive Armenia away from Russia. Only a true Russian alliance with, not economic and military bullying of, Armenia, will keep Armenia as a friend. Armenia’s fear of Turkey is not enough.
Russian Policy Blunders
Russia has a long history of disastrous policies. In the space of 75 years, Russia lost two empires – Czarist and Soviet – and the Cold War. Russia allowed false prophets – Bolsheviks – to impose the inefficient and inhumane political and economic system of Communism upon it. Russians let a deranged Georgian, Josef Stalin, maim and murder countless millions of them. Even today, most of Russia’s wealth comes not from human productivity but courtesy of Mother Nature: oil and gas.
Recent Kremlin policy has been deeply influenced by Aleksandr Dugin, an extreme nationalist ideologue. His political philosophy, Neo-Eurasianism, advocates a Russian led alliance of Asian and Slavic countries. Like most Russian analysts, Dugin saw Armenia as a barrier against Turkey, Russia’s historic enemy. Dugin then changed his mind. He now thinks that Turkey is a Russian ally. This is a clear sign of Neo-Eurasianism’s immaturity.
The Kremlin – this time with Medvedev and Putin at the helm – is once again listening to false prophets. Turkey’s arm can indeed be twisted, but not broken, by Russia. Moreover, Turkey is tougher than Russia. During the Cold War, genocidal Turkey would have annihilated Russia had it, rather than the Soviets, possessed nuclear weapons.
While Turks make Russians think they’ve become friends, Russians foolishly throw their only ally, Armenia, to the Turkish wolf. Russia will lose Armenia but will not win Turkey over. Pan-Turkism will continue, pushed by the West for its own purposes.
Moreover, as I noted two years ago, once NATO enters the Caucasus, it “could then jump across the Caspian Sea and march straight into Muslim Central Asia, posing a possibly mortal threat to Russia.”
Reject the Dangerous Protocols
Armenians must openly reject the “Protocols.” Besides abrogating long-standing Armenian rights vis-à-vis its genocidal neighbor, they are a formula for Turkish hegemony over Armenia.
If the Turkish – Armenian border is to open, it must be in a way that does not permit Turks to infiltrate, buy up, Ottomanize, and eventually control Armenia.
Armenians must now publicly and bluntly emphasize to their Russian ally that the “Protocols” will result in Russia’s being surrounded by NATO and ultimately, along with Armenia, destroyed.
The author is an Armenian American freelance writer. Many of his articles are archived at Armeniapedia.org
September 29th, 2009 at 00:41
Mr. Boyajian is right on — again!
The West and Israel are just interested in capturing Armenia to promote and exploit their myopic energy, security and trade interests in the South Caucasus and beyond. Worse, they are continuously displaying utter disrespect towards Armenian statehood and democracy by backing unelected, pluto-autocratic presidents and parliaments. And, Turkey and Azerbaijan are dying to seize this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to strangle Armenia and to eventually wipe it off the map.
Considering our nations both face existential threats, it is in Russia’s interest to become a true ally of Armenia by: paying some rent for its military base in Gyumri; helping Armenia enhance civil liberties; recognizing Artsakh’s independence, or at least speaking favorably about the right to self-determination; condemning the Armenian Genocide and genocide denial in international fora; denouncing Georgia’s recent adventures along the Armenian-Georgian border, etc. This is a win-win for both Russia and Armenia!
And, thank you Mr. Boyajian for your keen analysis and conclusions! I always enjoy reading your articles. They are a breath of fresh air and very important for the Armenian Cause, especially at a time when the Armenian Nation’s future, well-being and security is at stake!
September 29th, 2009 at 01:18
What does everyone think of Israel’s silent approval and behind-the-scenes machinations with Turkey and the US to bring about the final downfall of Armenia? The following catch-phrases, cornerstones of Zionist ideology, apply only to Israel:aptly demonstrate the double standards of Israel:
“The right to exist” does not apply to Armenia/ians, Palestine/inians, or others who struggle to persist on their native lands.
“The right of return” does not apply to Armenia/ians, Palestine/inians, or others who have been forcibly removed from their native lands.
The outlawing of Holocaust denial applies only to Israel and the Jews, as it is considered to be “hate speech. Any other denial of genocides, however, is permitted, as it is considered “free speech.”
The adage, “Never Forget” applies only to Israel and the Jews. For Armenians, Palestinians and others who have endured unpunished genocides, they are urged to “Forgive and Forget.”
Preventing one’s nation from being “wiped off the face of the earth” is a term used by Israel to justify its pre-emptive attacks masquerading as self-defense. All the while, dominated Armenia and Palestine must stand by and watch their nations be destroyed lest they be named extremists or worse.
Need we go on?
September 30th, 2009 at 23:50
My intention is not to write a counter-article but to add just few quick comments in order to express my dismay:
You claim that Artsakh peace undoubtedly would support Azeri-Armenian-Turkish corridor? But is this again, something bad? Isn’t it what consecutive Armenian governments have striven for? What is your vision for Armenia? To be an eternally blockaded country? I remember the conversations on Armenia assuming a function of a crossroad of economic-commercial routes. And this is not a conversation that your “sinister West and imperialistic US” have advanced. This has been dreamt by the founders of the Armenian statehood, and among other things, has supplied ample fuel for the Armenian ego. Why has something that we have boasted about (as the crossroad of civilizations, the traders of the Silk Road, intersection of East-West and North-South corridors, blah blah blah) somehow become a subject for such passionate paranoia?
1) It is ridiculous to suggest that for two decades the West and Israel (Huh? Where did Israel come from? Is this passage symptomatic of something else?) have tried to dominate Caucasus, more importantly Armenia. If anything, the West has demonstrated that Armenia is not of strategic interest to her and has taken an approach of “we don’t want your death, but your well-being is not of particular concern to us.”
2) How does a desire of laying down pipelines, bypassing Russia and Iran, manifest itself as a dominance of a country or a region? Isn’t it natural that those who pay the bill decide where the pipeline is passing through? Is Risk Management such a vague concept? Does risk management manifest dominance?
3) The suggestion of the alignment of Azerbaijan with NATO is a highly suspect statement. When has Azerbaijan become NATO candidate? Are you confusing the Partnership for Peace program, of which Armenia is a participant as well, with membership candidacy?
4) Regardless of my comments about the US or Western “dominance of the western land route to the Caspian”, which by the way implies that US already dominates Turkey, one has to notice that Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Turkey and Ukraine are member countries of TRACECA (and Russia is not). This is a voluntary platform of a transportation corridor between Europe and Central Asia and is in the interest of all member countries. There is no need to dominate any of them. Each of these countries dreams of serving its function of a corridor and even pays dues for membership in the organization.
5) Armenia does not need further Western seduction. It was already seduced even in the Soviet era. A manifestation of it is Armenia’s membership in the EC. Besides, is it bad to lure someone “into the infinitely richer and more modern, attractive, and democratic Western/NATO bloc?” You make it sound as if there is a sinister attempt here, yet you also describe it as ascending into a heaven. If that is what it is, who wouldn’t want it? [To calm down the possible heating of the undue passions – no, I am not for Armenia’s membership in NATO.]
6) Washington has exerted pressure on turkey to open the borders with Armenia since the day they have closed. And again, you make it sound that to wish have Armenia’s borders open is something of a sinister magnitude.
7) To claim that US was silently pleased with the closed borders of Armenia and Turkey is to presume first, that you have the ability to read someone’s silent thoughts. If the alleged “saliency” is simply a metaphor, I challenge you to bring one compelling and rational argument that it is in the interest of the United States to have these borders closed. However, wouldn’t such argument contradict your assertion that the US was trying to “dominate Armenia over the last two decades?” Wouldn’t have the open borders helped the US to accomplish such goals almost two decades earlier?
9) Have any of the three Armenian administrations not striven to resolve the differences with its neighbours? Is Armenia against providing a path for whomever to wherever? Or is it your desire for Armenia to be at the end of the road to nowhere?
10) That Russia (again silently) was pleased with the closed border because of its desire not to see US penetration in Armenia is a gross misinterpretation to put it softly. Doesn’t Russia have its own reasons not to see the borders open? Doesn’t it subjugate (speaking of subjugation) Armenia to Russia and devastate the Armenian demography by turning Armenia into a country where the only meaningful export is qualified or unqualified labor? Is that your vision for the future of Armenia? What kind of twisted logic is it to neglect the Russian drive for the dominance of the region and exploitation and deepening of the conflicts, if not at their instigation, and to insinuate that Russia simply doesn’t want American dominance? Does even America have the will, the capacity and the opportunity to dominate this or any other region?
11) Now, you disclose to us that the “Protocols” are supported by Russia. As before, you either read someone’s silent thoughts or are a recipient of confidential information. But aren’t you glad that they support it? IS it possible that Russia has no serious problem with Turkey? And the relevance of that historic animosity in today’s politics exists as a figment of your imagination? Don’t Russia and Turkey have significant mutual interests? What is in your opinion the underlying driver of the alleged animosity? It seems to me that Russia has stopped supporting the Kurdish insurgence in the south of Turkey, while Turkey has stopped instigating insurgence in North Caucasus. It seems to me both represent markets that everyone has a passionate desire to penetrate and none of them can afford to neglect the market of the other. What is the problem between Russia and Turkey? Can you reference one serious problem?
12) You are alleging that Russia owns Armenian industry, in particular the energy generation assets, thus would benefit from the cross border trade and supply of electricity to Turkey. Your information is incomplete and because of that you make inadequate conclusions. It is true that Russia owns substantial percentage of generation assets in Armenia. Some of these assets are not functional. Overall, Armenia’s current installed capacity is about 3,300 MW, while the internal demand is met by approximately 1,300 MW capacity. True, much of the excess capacity is redundant or will become redundant in the near future. Armenia has excess capacity to produce electricity and has quite a bit of renewable energy resources. All of the countries of the region experience growing and substantial deficit of electric energy. This is one of Armenia’s strategic strengths and the most strategic and large scale export in perspective. Why is it wrong for Armenia to export what it has ample supplies of? Who cares who owns these assets, if they can be exploited and it would benefit the Armenian treasury because of the profit taxes, transmission fees (the high voltage transmission lines are state property) and from the revenue generated from the generation assets which are still under state ownership (and there are substantial numbers of state owned generation assets in Armenia, yet – most notably the nuclear station and the Vorotan Cascade)? Is selling electricity generated in Armenia to whomever is willing to buy it not in the best interest in Armenia? But no, you see something sinister in it.
13) But then, again, you go ahead and negate your own argument, claiming that the Russian revenue would be too negligible to be motivation for the Russian support of the opening of the borders. If it is an incorrect argument, why make it in the first place, and then negate it? Are you being paid an honorarium per the number of the words used in your article? I presume no. But does it make a compelling article to advance a hypothesis than to negate your own hypothesis? What purpose does it serve other than making an illusion of an argument?
14) Now the most ridiculous argument of yours is that the Kremlin is worried that another war with Georgia would hurt the economy of Armenia. This argument, at best, is cartoonish. Since when does Russia have such an overwhelming concern for the Armenian economy? If she is concerned, let her first open the land corridor between Georgia and Russia through the Caucasus Mountains which was shut down about three years ago due to the “maintenance” of the customs facility on the Russian side of the border. To this day, that only land road connecting Armenia with Russia is closed due to “maintenance”. Or where was Russia throughout the last 15 years, when the Armenian economy was in shambles – starting from the Russian policy of the “Ruble Zone” of early 90s to the impediments created for the supply of natural gas from Iran to Armenia? Or while even UK forgave Armenia’s foreign debt to her, Russia took away a number of what was considered to be strategic assets from Armenia against a $100 mln debt – assets which do not generate production to this day. Why was Armenia’s transit capacity of natural gas shipments from Iran blocked?
15) By the way, since you have the ability to read people’s silent thoughts and get confidential information, explain please why Iran doesn’t give Armenia free or at least fair access to its markets? After all, it is our strategic ally, right? But this might be a topic of its own and I will not dwell in it. Yes, by the way, what’s the position of Iran on Nakhidjevan? If you ever read their silent thoughts on it, please don’t hesitate to write it somewhere where we could all read it.
September 30th, 2009 at 23:53
to be continued
October 1st, 2009 at 02:28
16) You also imply that Russia is so stupid that their fatal mistakes can be exposed in your one-sentence pronouncements. Fortunately, they don’t need to have your ability to read minds or receive information from confidential sources, since they have the opportunity to read your article instead. And here is one of the cornerstones of your article: “Conversely, was the Turkish-Armenia-Azeri corridor to remain open, this would partly defeat the very purpose of a Russian attack on Georgia.” Now I get it. I finally get why Russia attacked Georgia…the corridor was not open!
17) Now, you claim next that by supplying natural gas to Turkey, Russia would be able to dictate [policy, I presume] to her. Explain please what your underlying assumption here is? That Russia will cut the supply of gas to Turkey? OK, they cut it to Turkey. Then they cut it to Ukraine, and thus to EU, then to Georgia, thus Armenia… May I ask where does the Russian treasury fill its coffers from? If Russia supplies natural gas to Turkey, and furthermore invests in the corresponding pipeline, doesn’t it make Russian dependent on Turkey as well? But hold on. A sentence or two later, you would negate your own argument that because of the natural gas supply to Turkey [and Georgia] Russia may dictate its will to her.
18) “In the meantime, Russia will lose Armenia to the West.” With all due respect, you make it sound like Armenia is some kind of whore. Russian people are keen on us. We share some of the same history, we share significant cultural values and we have a good connection with the Russian people in general. That is to be preserved, enhanced and advanced. But what you write, sir, contains hidden contempt for the Armenian sovereignty. As a result, I find what you write offensive and lacking in dignity.
19) For about 300 years, Armenians have developed this naive mentality that the foreign powers, –who are good enough to dominate vast regions or even continents–don’t understand the issues properly and once we, “the oppressed” explain it to them, then they will understand things properly. And then, a miracle will happen – their generous and strong arm will descend on our collective head with a gesture of blessing and lift us up to lead us through the gates of heaven. This mentality pervades your article, which perhaps could be simply titled “Russians are stupid” or “Geopolitical eye-opener for dummies.”
20) Your contemplation on the lack of loyalty of Azerbaijan towards Russia and, I presume, to the contrary, positioning of Armenia as a loyal country should be extremely offensive to any Armenian who cherishes the ideals of Armenian sovereignty.
21) Your referencing of Stalin’s ethnic origin as Georgian implies his ethnicity had something to do with how he governed the Soviet Union. If that is not what you are trying to say, then be aware that the reference is misleading. If, however, that is what you are trying to say, that means you have no clue what types of Armenians, per se, have operated on the Bolshevik scene and how brutal they would have been if they had the same opportunity as Stalin did. Some immediate examples are Atharbekov or Athearbekyan.
22) You reference Dugin and ascribe to him a statement that Armenia is a barrier against Turkey. You claim that this is what most of the Russian analysts claim. Unless you agree with it, I presume you would not reference it. Now, please explain to me: In what capacity is Armenia a barrier or has ever been one for Russia against Turkey? Militarily, geographically? How does Armenia stop Turkey from its alleged aggression against Russia?
23) “During the Cold War, genocidal Turkey would have annihilated Russia had it, rather than the Soviets, possessed nuclear weapons,” you say. Is it really what you wanted to say or by some irony you mistyped something? Because if I read it correctly, my only reaction is “O, boy.”
24) After long discourse and explaining all there is for us, you finally lay out your main point… reject the “Protocols.” You motivate it by the possibility of the hegemony of Turkey over Armenia. Just how do you envision it.? Please explain. What is the instrument of exercise of hegemony by Turkey over Armenia? Perhaps you see something that those who support the opening of the borders don’t see. Perhaps you have read the minds of those “genocidal neighbors” of ours. Please give an explanation in 5 bullet points of how that can be exercised and through what mechanisms..
25) Also explain please, what does “infiltration” of Turks mean? Not issuing visa to them? Turning back from the border? Or utilizing the services of the glorious Armenian National Security Service by attaching two Security officers to each Turkish citizen or businessmen arriving to Armenia. What will Turks buy up in Armenia? Matenadaran? The National Art Gallery? Nairit? What will they do next? Dissassemble them and take them to Ankara? By the way, how many Diaspora Armenians have tried or been successful in buying up Armenia? Are you saying Turks are more resilient or their strategy is better?
26) Speaking of Ottomanization… The cultural identity of Armenians living in Armenia is rather robust. I would even venture to say it is entrenched. You do not have to go to Armenia to observe Ottomanized Armenians in a “post-Protocol” era, Sir. I can take you to an Armenian Church in the United States and show them to you three generations after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.
27) Now, from what I understand, we should finally explain to these “stupid” Russians that “the “Protocols” will result in Russia’s being surrounded by NATO and ultimately, along with Armenia, destroyed. So, basically, it doesn’t matter if Armenia gets destroyed, or perhaps Armenia is just an insignificant collateral effect. The important thing is that these “stupid” Russians understand that they will be destroyed if the “Protocols” are signed. So, we should say a resolute no to the “Protocols” for the sake of Russia and have Russia stop their signing.
28) Your article perhaps takes several pages. I cannot estimate it due to its online format. But the crux of the article is that the “Protocols” are bad for Russia. Maybe it is. I don’t know, though I don’t see the validity of your arguments in most of the cases. But can you finally explain, please, why is it bad for Armenia? What is the danger to it, other than same blanket insinuations, and what mechanisms can be potentially exercised to make that bad outcome materialize. And finally, what is your vision for the future growth of Armenia? Do you even have one?
October 4th, 2009 at 00:55
This was an excellent answer to a typical baseless and paranoid article so common in certain parts of the world. What passes for geopolitical analysis is just a collection of ridiculous arguments and the usual confidential sources that of course do not exist. Perhaps they should be renamed, imaginary sources. Bravo MJ!
October 8th, 2009 at 03:42
I have yet to see a sensible analysis regarding what is occurring in the Caucasus… To imply that Russia is about to undermine their only ally in the south Caucasus, after they have successfully defeated the American, Turkish, Israeli and European backed regime in Tbilisi is absurd to say the least. The entire Caucasus region is now in Moscow’s hands and now they are using Armenia to project their power beyond the Caucasus. To imply that Turkey will outsmart Russians, Armenians and Iranians in the Caucasus when they are in reality dependent on Russian trade, gas and oil is, simply put – stupid. You folks seriously need to study geopolitics and monitor what is occurring in the Russian Federation today. Armenia has not been in a better position, politically speaking, in perhaps a thousand years. Those against the “protocols” are against them for emotional, ignorant and/or selfish reasons. The diaspora’s sick obsession with the genocide has cornered it psychologically. So much so that now it can’t think outside of the “genocide” perspective. And the only one putting a wedge between the diaspora and Armenia is us diasporans. Shame on you for ‘demanding’ things from authorities in Yerevan when it is the natives of Armenia that are to live with the consequences of politics and not you. Shame on you all for being so selfish and narrow minded. Want to complain, move to Armenia first.
October 8th, 2009 at 22:02
Looking at Armenian-Turkish Relations – Without the Paranoia, Obsessions or the Hysteria
October, 2009
The so-called “protocols” have been discussed at length. Many approaches, be it ideological, political, ethical or spiritual, have been taken into full account. Thus far, the picture painted by many of us in the diaspora looks utterly bleak, bordering on apocalyptic. One thing, however, that I have yet to see seriously scrutinized is the crucially important factor of geopolitics, or the thing we call realpolitik. The links provided below are regarding some interesting geopolitical and economic developments occurring, somewhat under the radar, within the Caucasus. The information that I am providing you here is crucial for better understanding what is occurring in the Caucasus today. Thus, they definitely deserve a serious look. I urge you all to make some time and read them. But before that, I have a few comments to make…
Basing my opinion on what I have been observing in regional developments for the past several years, it is quite obvious that there are serious plans for the greater Caucasus region, plans in which Armenia may take center stage. The mastermind of this new agenda is Vladimir Putin’s Moscow. And one of the most obvious manifestations of this agenda has been the warming of relations between Turkey and Armenia; of course under the watchful eyes of the Kremlin.
Don’t believe ignorant talk concerning the rapprochement between Turkey and Armenia being a “Western” agenda. It is far from it. The West is currently powerless in the Caucasus. In a sense, the West is forced to go along with the political/economic process set in motion by Moscow. Let’s remember that the warming of relations between Ankara and Yerevan was started in Moscow just before the Russian-Georgian war. This process then reached a climax when Turkey’s Gul visited Armenia in the immediate aftermath of Russia’s war against Georgia – a war that saw the decisive defeat of the American-European-Turkish-Israeli backed regime in Tbilisi. According to international political analysts, Georgia’s defeat more-or-less eliminated Western and Turkish (and by extension, Israeli) interests from within the Caucasus region.
For those who are unfamiliar with the geopolitics of the region, a simple explanation – For the past twenty years or so the West, in-tandem with Turkey and Israel, has been attempting to wrestle the strategic region of the Caucasus away from Russian control. The bloody Islamic insurgency in Chechnya and the arming of Georgia had been a part of the greater anti-Russian agenda of the West. However, we Armenians need to be mindful of the fact that without a Russian presence in the Caucasus the entire region in question will no doubt turn into a Turkic/Islamic cesspool and a playground for various intelligence services. Needless to say, Armenia cannot live as a state in the Caucasus without an effective Russian presence there.
With the Caucasus now effectively in their hands, and at their mercy, Moscow seems to be embarked on long term plan to essentially remake the Caucasus in its image. And, for better or for worst, Moscow has decided that it will use its regional strategic partner, Armenia, as its staging-ground for deeper relations with regional nations. Simply put, Armenia, as its only ally in the region, is expected to project Russian power in the south Caucasus and Asia Minor. And due to Europe’s severe dependency on Central Asian gas and oil (the distribution of which Moscow now fully controls) coupled with the economic crisis that currently engulfs them, the West is more-or-less going along with Moscow’s plans. In other words, they can’t stop Moscow and they need the energy and Moscow is more than happy to sell them what they want through their regional stronghold, Armenia.
Nonetheless, before we figuratively speaking hang our nation’s leadership for some vague wordage used on some meaningless piece of paper, let’s all realize that a tiny, impoverished nation surrounded by enemies in the Caucasus has very limited leverage on an international negotiation table. We must realize that Armenia is not, nor can it be under its current geopolitical circumstances, a truly an independent state. What we need to be grateful about, however, is the simple fact that for once in our recent history we as a nation serve the strategic interests of a regional superpower. And what we can take pride in is the simple fact that as a result of its strategic relationship with Moscow Armenia’s (as well as Artsakh’s) borders have never been stronger. As a matter of fact, Turkey agreeing to open borders with with Armenia while Artsakh remains under Armenian control has been a major victory for the Armenian side.
Anyway, don’t worry folks, even if Armenia’s leadership were all a bunch of traitors and they all wanted to sell Armenia to the Turks, Russians would not allowed it, nor would Iranians for that matter. Let’s not forget what happened to Vazgen Sargsyan and Garen Demirjyan when they got too close to the West back in 1999… Therefore, don’t kid yourselves folks, if the Kremlin thought that the southern Caucasus would be penetrated by Turks as a result of “open borders” with Armenia there would be no Turkish-Armenian relations to speak of today.
I personally do not believe that our leadership in Yerevan is stupid, in that they do not understand politics, nor do I believe that they are treasonous, in that they have been bought by Turks. Our leadership in Yerevan is forced to go along with the greater agenda that has been placed on the table as they try to extract some benefit from it. Let us also take into serious consideration the cold realization that Armenia is stagnating politically and economically due to its isolation and poverty. If nothing is done about this predicament, in a generation or two the landlocked and resource-less country may forever sink into a Third World oblivion. Our leadership needs to do anything and everything, within proper boundaries of course, to ensure Armenia’s prosperity and longevity.
With some concerns and reservations I remain hopeful that something good will come out of the current political process. I am looking at what’s occurring in Armenian-Turkish relations objectively and rationally, without the paranoia, hysteria or obsessions expressed by many in our diaspora. And for Armenia’s sake, I hope you prophets of doom are wrong and I am right. In final analysis, we in the diaspora, as long as we choose to remain in the diaspora, have no right to ‘demand’ anything from officials in Armenia because it is the natives of Armenia that will have to live with the consequences of politics – not us. Armenia cannot be the diaspora’s test tube nor can it be held hostage to its ideological whims.
I ask you again to read the information from the following sources to better understand what is happening in the Caucasus today.
Arevordi
The Caucasus: Small War, Big Damage: http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/t…6.php?CID=1176
That Was No Small War in Georgia — It Was the Beginning of the End of the American Empire: http://donvandergriff.wordpress.com/…erican-empire/
Caucasus Is Real Citadel of Russian Power: http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinio…le/383525.html
A Northern Neighbor Growls, and Azerbaijan Reassesses Its Options: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/23/wo…i.html?_r=1&em
RUSSIA: MOSCOW MULLS CONSTRUCTION OF ARMENIA-IRAN RAILWAY LINK:
http://www.eurasianet.org/department…v093009b.shtml
ARMENIA: RAILWAY PREPARES TO GO TO TURKEY: http://www.eurasianet.org/department…v092909c.shtml
Seven-thousand kilometer project is awaiting parliamentary approval: http://www.sabahenglish.com/news/8386.html
Turkish press: EU to involve Armenia in Nabucco project at Georgia’s expense: http://news.am/en/news/3805.html
Asian Bank To Fund Road Projects In Armenia, Georgia: http://www.azatutyun.am/content/article/1839958.html
Alexey Miller: Iran, Turkey to do gas swaps through Armenia: http://news.am/en/news/3883.html
Gasprom considers possible construction of oil refinery in Armenia: http://www.arka.am/eng/energy/2009/06/23/15426.html
Russia signs deal to build Turkey’s first nuclear power plant: http://en.rian.ru/business/20090806/155747143.html
Azerbaijan: The Stark New Energy Landscape: http://www.turkishforum.com.tr/en/co…rgy-landscape/
YEVSEYEV: TURKISH-ARMENIAN DIALOGUE TOWARDS RUSSIAN INTERESTS:
http://www.historyoftruth.com/news/y…ests-3978.html
Turkish-Armenian Reconciliation Is Possible – and Necessary: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p…t=va&aid=10083
Turkey in tight spot between Russia and NATO: http://www.reuters.com/article/reute…BrandChannel=0
Turkey Plays to Russia in Caucasus: http://www.kommersant.com/p1022936/r…rkey_Caucasus/
Shifting Geopolitics- The Rise of Russia and Turkey: http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article9509.html
October 10th, 2009 at 05:55
Boyajian needs to take a few courses in political science, history and geopolitics before he continues writing political essays. Perhaps he can also begin to pay closer attention to developments in Eurasia and work on stopping his fears and emotions from dictating his thoughts. When the big guys begin to get involved in a dispute the smart little guy stays silent, listens and tries to work out something positive for himself. This is what official Yerevan is doing today. Anyone here that thinks Armenians can “strong arm” or “explain” things to the Kremlin is delusional. Trust me, Kremlin officials know what is going on in the Caucasus better than all of us Armenians combined. Sleep well knowing that for the foreseeable future their national interests will correspond with ours. And I have more trust in them to keep the Caucasus free of a Turkish infestation than on us Armenians. Boyajian, when you pray at nights (if you pray) make sure to say a prayer for Mother Russia because the only reason why we have an Armenian republic in the Caucasus today is because two hundred years ago drunk “Ivan” decided to go to the Caucasus. Without a Russian presence in the Caucasus all of us would still be living like Kurds.
May 21st, 2010 at 04:18
I truly appreciate this blog.Much thanks again. Will read on…
July 14th, 2010 at 13:27
Assessing the cash flow is one more important element within the organization technique format, so as to sustain a regular cash flow to meet the important capital requirements. Probability of monetary crisis and also the methods of crisis management should be mentioned in the structure. The company strategy must consist of the marketing plans and strategy leading to the expansion from the company.