Armenia and Artsakh at a crucial juncture - Summer, 2017

We are currently in the final chapter of the Syrian tragedy. I have written about this in previous commentaries. Syria will eventually be either partitioned or federalized and a number of autonomous or semi-autonomous ethnic regions or statelets will eventually be created. It's only a matter of time before this happens. The recent shooting down of the Syrian warplane by the US military (which could very well have been a provocation by anti-Trump elements within the American deep state) and Russia's response to it may have shed some light onto the evolution of Syria's future demarcation lines. In the aftermath of the incident, Russia's Defense Ministry announced the following: "In areas where Russian aviation is conducting combat missions in the Syrian skies, any flying objects, including jets and unmanned aerial vehicles of the international coalition discovered west of the Euphrates River will be followed by Russian air and ground defenses as air targets". 

This statement in my opinion suggests Moscow may be willing to concede territories east of the Euphrates River to Western powers and their Sunni/Wahhabist allies.

What's more, the situation is southern Syria, where Israel continues to rather openly support Islamic terrorists, seems to indicate Moscow may similarly be willing to concede territories bordering Israel and Jordan. And the growing semi-autonomy of Kurds in northern Syria strongly suggests portions of northern Syria will be given up as well. It remains to be seen if Tehran and Damascus will agree to such concessions. Nevertheless, power-brokers overseeing Syria's dismemberment and remodeling will essentially be Russia, Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Anglo-American-Jews. While the aforementioned powers figure out what to do with Syria, the Trump administration will continue its efforts to gather regional support for its main objective in the region - the containment of Iran.

The Trump administration's main objective, essentially a plan to drive a wedge between Russia and Iran, has not yet gained traction in the United States for one simple reason: It envisions better relations with Russia. Simply put: The traditional Russophobic establishment in the Western world will have none of it. There has therefore been a severe backlash, something no one in the Trump camp seemed to have anticipated.

The anti-Russian hysteria playing out in the United States recently has been astounding, intense, relentless and merciless. The  political witch hunt, eerily reminiscent of McCarthy era hysteria, rampaging throughout the United States in recent months has all but extinguished the Trump administration's hope of reaching a détente with Russia. To ensure the continuation of their anti-Russian hysteria indefinitely, they may have even silenced one of the individuals in the United States most probably involved in the DNC email hacking -
The Mysterious Death of Seth Rich - One America News Network 26 Minute Documentary: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5o7rdb
The Mysterious Death of Seth Rich: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAA9Gy2SXdg
But there has been additional twists to the narrative. A prominent Republican donor said to have been involved in the matter has also died under mysterious circumstances -
Republican Who Sought Clinton Emails Did Not Die of Natural Causes: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/07/republican-who-sought-clinton-emails-didnt-die-of-old-age.html
GOP researcher makes shocking claim about Clinton’s deleted emails, dies 10 days later: http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/06/29/gop-researcher-makes-shocking-claim-about-clinton-deleted-emails-dies-10-days-later/
There has been other mysterious deaths as well. I do not think the Trump camp expected things could be this bad. Every one of their initiatives has been under relentless and multi-directional assault from a number of fronts at home and abroad. They are obsessively going after every single one of President Trump's policies. They are obsessively going after every single one of President Trump's advisers. It has essentially been a struggle between globalists and nationalists. As expected, the globalists have been winning. And the Trump administration's alleged ties to Russia has been needless to say at the very forefront of this historic spectacle unraveling in the United States. Russia has once again become the third rail, so to speak, in American politics. Russia has once again been turned into one of America's greatest enemies. This is all being done to stop the Trump administration from conducting its foreign policy, which of course also translates into keeping relations between Europe and Russia adversarial. President Trump's opponents will not tolerate any degree of rapprochement with Moscow for any reason whatsoever. This has many political observers asking -
Former Trump adviser Steven Bannon answered the question posed above in a recent interview: The Trump presidency that we fought for, and won, is over. President Donald Trump never had a chance in my opinion. The American empire is too large, too wealthy, too powerful, too global, too multicultural and finally too set in its ways to change. All in all, what has been happening in the United States in recent times is astonishing. Despite its external luster and boasts of excellence and exceptionalism, the country is actually seriously ill, deeply divided and at war with itself. In fact, the country is in a civilizational decline. Its aliment is thus internal and could therefore prove terminal. Instead of seeking ways to cure its ailments, it is seeking confrontations around the world. Instead of seeking ways to stop its historic decline, it is vandalizing itself. Russia, China or Iran are not America's enemies. America should fear itself -
Rather Than Russia, America Should Fear Itself: https://www.thenation.com/article/rather-russia-america-fear/
Why the obsession with tearing down monuments is dumb & dangerous:  https://www.conservativereview.com/articles/why-the-obsession-with-tearing-down-monuments-is-dumb-dangerous
These photos of vandalized Confederate monuments show the battle over public spaces: https://timeline.com/vandalized-confederate-monuments-3c824c3d588b
American Civil War 2.0: A Bitter Hybrid Conflict With No End in Sight: https://sputniknews.com/politics/201705201053816028-trump-democrats-republicans/
America's Civil War II: https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/05/no_author/americas-civil-war-ii/
The United States is at war with itself. No playwright, no novelist, no movie producer - from Hollywood to Bollywood - could have scripted a work this exciting, this entertaining, this captivating and this thrilling. The corruption, news media lies, bribery, insider deals, scandals, ties to Islamic terrorism, ties to the occult, ties to pedophiles, fire bombing, shooting, abuse of power, vote rigging, voter fraud, illegals voting, hacked electronic voting machines, conspiracies, societal tension, hate, tribal politics, mysterious deaths, calls for authoritarianism, calls to curb democracy, secessionism, polarization, divisions, racial tensions, and insults witnessed in the "greatest democracy on earth" have sent shock-waves around the world. Many around the world are left wondering, what the hell happened to that "shinning city on the hill", that wonderful "leader of the free world", that ever bright "beacon of democracy", that most "exceptional" of nations ever known to humanity? 

There hasn't been this much political tension and infighting inside Washington DC since the Civil War 150 years ago. American society has not been this divided along racial and religious lines since the 1960s. Actually, a lot of what's going on in the US today, like the unrest that took place during inauguration day, is unprecedented in its history. Although there has been dire predictions like civil unrest and major financial collapse or even total societal collapse for the US in recent years, no one could predict the internal political strife we are seeing the Washington DC today. This leads me to believe we may finally be seeing the preliminary stages of the much awaited implosion and/or downsizing of the American empire by forces that remain way beyond our comprehension. The process in question may take years or even tens-of-years, but I do believe it has started. Nevertheless, the facade of American inadvisability and exceptionalism is forever broken. American propaganda and hype, which was the empire's greatest weapon, is now all but gone.

Somebody, somewhere is trying to tear the country apart. The United States has been turned into an ideological battlefield. The next four-to-eight years will be decisive for the country's future. Some of what's been happening in the United States actually reminds me of the Soviet Union's last years. Which brings up an inevitable question: Is the Trump camp struggling against the agenda to sow unrest in the country, or are they actually part of the said  agenda? Is President Donald Trump America's Mikhail Gorbachev (i.e. tasked with downsizing or restructuring the American empire) or is he a selfless patriot trying to save America from the fate that was met by the Soviet Union? Thus far, a case can be made for both arguments in my opinion. After all, globalist forces were behind the rise of the Anglo-American-Jewish world order, the fall of the Russian Empire, the rise of Bolshevism, the fall of communism and the rise of a multicultural Western world.

All in all, it has been an amazing period in the history of the United States. The coming years will be historic, as well as dangerous. Expectedly, it has also gotten a lot of reactions from Russian. Russians, including President Vladimir Putin, have made some stinging comments about the political unrest in the United States -
“On the personal level, Trump clearly wants to improve relations with Russia. The problem is that he is also president of the U.S., head of the state apparatus. This makes it much more difficult to make deals with Russia, Mr. Makarkin said" - Alexei Makarkin
"A change of political elites is currently underway in the US. Financial oligarchy is being replaced with industrialists who were away from politics since the 1940s. Moreover, members of the military and intelligence block are also regaining their positions. They are the backbone of Trump’s team. This is going to be a struggle of life and death." - Viktor Mizin
"I have already spoken to three US presidents. They come and go but politics stay the same at all times. Do you know why? Because of the powerful bureaucracy. When a person is elected, they may have some ideas. Then people with briefcases arrive, well dressed, wearing dark suites, just like mine, except for the red tie, since they wear black or dark blue ones. These people start to explain how things are done. And instantly, everything changes. This is what happens in every administration." - Vladimir Putin
“What surprises me is that they are shaking up the domestic political situation, using anti-Russian slogans. Either they don’t understand the damage they’re doing to their own country, in which case they are simply stupid, or they understand everything, in which case they are dangerous and corrupt” - Vladimir Putin
Russians recently have been more than happy to point out what I have been pointing out in this blog for many years, namely that the Unites States is not "exceptional" and that it is not a Democracy, at least not the kind of which it likes imposing on nations it wants to subjugate or destroy. With the American empire's dirty laundry now fully exposed for all the world to see, Russians have been more than happy to show to the world that the United States is just another overgrown and utterly corrupt bureaucracy. After many years of suffering political meddling by the United States, Russians are now having a lot of fun with all this. For Russian officials, it's been a classic case of we told you so. For American officials, it's a classic case of bad Karma coming back to haunt them. President Putin recently took advantage of the international limelight provided by the International Economic Forum held in Saint Petersburg to candidly speak his mind about the anti-Russian hysteria playing-out in the Unites States. In the process, President Putin also took the opportunity to make one of best known presstitutes in the United States look like the pretty faced airhead that she actually is -
President Vladimir Putin On Russian Election Interference (Full Exclusive) / Megyn Kelly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8AeBAV4EIY
Putin’s best moments while smashing NBC's Airhead Megyn Kelly:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12s_n6F2ZEQ
There is no doubt that the Trump presidency is under siege by the country's mainstream news media, political establishment (both Democrat and Republican) as well as Russophobic elements in the deep state. What we are seeing play-out in the United States, is also, to a great degree, Jewish infighting. At its core, this historic fiasco can be characterized as left wing Jews fighting right wing Jews - with America's goyim left in the middle to choose a side. Even they admit it: Jews are divided over President Trump. Consequently, the United States today had become a deeply divided nation at war with itself. This historic mess, one that has forever tainted the American mystique, can also be characterized as ideological clash between Western globalists (which of course includes the Jewish left) who see Russia as their number one enemy on the global stage and Western conservatives (which of course includes the Jewish right) who see Russia as an entity that should be contained but can also be negotiated with, and perhaps even learn some lessons from as well.

Simply put: While Western conservatives look at Russia with caution, they also look at Russia with envy, if not genuine admiration. Western globalists on the other hand simply hate Russia because Russia has in recent years become an outspoken champion of classical European civilization, conservatism, ethnocentrism, Christianity, traditional family values and the traditional nation-state. In other words, Russia today is the embodiment of anti-globalism. Russia today is also the leader of a growing wave of anti-globalist sentiments around the world. Nevertheless, it's somewhat ironic that in the past Western globalists tended to favor Soviet Russia and Western conservatives were known as the hardcore Russophobes. It's the exact opposite today. As noted above, all the anti-Russian hysteria that the Trump administration, as well as the Western public, is being subjected to recently is primarily designed to stop President Trump from establishing friendly ties with the Kremlin. It is also designed to keep Europe's relations with Russia adversarial. Because Russia poses a serious risks to their globalist agenda, they are doing all they can to keep Russia underdeveloped, under pressure and under isolation. For these Russophobes, Russians must therefore remain the bad guys and official Moscow must not be appeased under any circumstances. And they have been utilizing all their powerful levers of control to make sure this happens. Thus far, it seems to be working. Despite the highly suspicious deaths, the Globalist political/financial establishment in the Anglo-American-Jewish world seem to be winning the battle over the hearts-and-minds of the American cattle -
Russian Meddling in 2016 Election ‘Greatest Attack’ on American Democracy Since Pearl Harbor: http://freebeacon.com/politics/hollywood-director-russian-meddling-2016-election-greatest-attack-american-democracy-since-pearl-harbor/
Definitive Proof Of Donald Trump’s (Russian) Connections Finally Emerges: https://altright.com/2017/05/26/definitive-proof-of-donald-trumps-russian-connections-finally-emerges/
Vladimir Putin will always be America’s enemy: http://nypost.com/2016/12/11/vladimir-putin-will-always-be-americas-enemy/
Donald Trump Doesn’t Need to Be a Russian Agent to Be Dangerous: https://www.thedailybeast.com/donald-trump-doesnt-need-to-be-a-russian-agent-to-be-dangerous
Stephen Cohen - Dems crippling Trump’s plans to cooperate with Russia out of own ambitions: https://www.rt.com/shows/sophieco/388910-trump-scandal-russia-us/
Poll - Over 60% of US voters say Russia is enemy: https://www.rt.com/usa/389840-us-voters-russia-enemy/
Amazingly, Azerbaijan's Jewish lobbyists in Washington DC are also trying to drag Armenia into the mess they have created  -
The political atmosphere in the United States has become utterly toxic. The Trump administration cannot effectively conduct its foreign policy under such circumstances. In the big picture, this essentially means that the Trump administration's desire to establish closer ties with Moscow to make its agenda against Iran (and China) easier will not succeed; at least not for the foreseeable future. The Trump administration may therefore be forced to deal with its foreign policy challenges without first disarming Russia. If so, this will no doubt make the Trump administration's agenda against Iran much more difficult and thus very risky. Official Tehran understands this and they are getting ready for an inevitable showdown -
Foreign Policy: If Trump Wants a Fight in the Middle East, Iran Will Give Him One: https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/06/02/if-trump-wants-a-fight-in-the-middle-east-iran-will-give-him-one/
Consequently, the Trump administration is trying to rally international support behind his anti-Iran policy. In my opinion, this was what President Trump's first official visit overseas all about. 

At the bidding of Zionist and Wahhabist warmongers, and fears in the West that Tehran will one day soon obtain nuclear weapons, Uncle Sam is diligently trying to put together a regional force to counter Iran's growing influence in the Middle East. Iran is the number one problem in the world today for the Anglo-American-Jewish alliance and Saudi Arabia-led Gulf Arab states. Had Iran been an easy target, they would have attacked it a very long time ago. Iran's strength - political, demographic, cultural, military and paramilitary - and thus its ability to hit back forcefully, is the reason why they are still trying to figure out what is the best approach to deal with Iran. Regardless, they will not let off. They will do all they can to either stop the expansion of the Iranian Arc and to stop Tehran's nuclear weapons program. If Tehran does not abandon its regional ambitions willingly, they will sooner-or-later wage war against it. The sword dancing in Saudi Arabia and the prayer at the so-called "wailing wall" in Jerusalem was all about laying the ground work for the agenda against Iran, and it was also meant to send Tehran a stern message. The sudden problem Western and Saudi Arabian leaders have with Qatari leaders suggest that Qatar may have become a weak-link in the budding anti-Iranian alliance. Nevertheless, neoconservative warmonger Charles Krauthammer more-or-less admitted on television what many of us already know, they intend to drag Iran into a regional war. The first shots may have been fired. The recent unprecedented attacks in Tehran has profound implications -
Fatalities and injuries after shootings, bombings at Iranian parliament and Khomeini shrine: https://www.rt.com/news/391183-iran-parliament-shooting-injured/
With Trump on Board, the Saudis Move Against Iran: https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201706081054447069-iran-saudi-arabia-trump/
Pointing the Finger at Saudi? Tehran Attack First Against Iran in 35 Years: https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201706071054407981-tehran-attack-saudi-arabia/
Republican congressman praises ISIS attack in Iran, says US should consider supporting ISIS: https://thinkprogress.org/republican-congressman-calls-isis-attack-in-tehran-a-good-thing-says-maybe-we-should-back-isis-a7e9382dbe1b
Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen are the places where they will do all they can - which includes military intervention - to stop Iran's expansion and smash pro-Iranian entities such as the Houthis and Hezbollah. They will no doubt use terrorist related incidents in the Western world (which in my opinion are orchestrated in one from or another by Western and/or Israeli intelligence agencies) to keep the Western cattle frightened and therefore compliant. They will also use such incidents as an excuse for their military interventions. I have no doubt Anglo-American-Jews and their Sunni Arab allies will invade Syria at one point. Once they reach their objectives in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen, and if the current system of government in Tehran remains in power in the meantime, they will turn their deadly attention onto Iran itself.

 The success or failure of their grand agenda to smash the Iranian Arc hinges upon three fundamental factors: 1) Whether or not the Trump administration is successful in it's effort to bring together Israel and Gulf Arab states. 2) Whether or not President Trump's opponents at home will sabotage the said effort. 3) How will Moscow (and Beijing) react.

Israel and Saudi Arabia may unite. In fact, the two have been cooperating behind-the-scenes for decades. But the hate towards the Trump administration is so raw, so deep rooted and so wide spread in the United States - especially now that one of the major Globalist agendas of the day, The Paris Climate Accord, has been outright rejected by President Trump - that the anti-Trump and anti-Putin hysteria and witch hunt in the country will not be abated any time soon. This therefore will cause problems for all of the Trump administration's agendas, including that against Iran. Getting to Russia: Although Moscow may acquiesce to some of the Trump administration's wishes against Iranian interests in Syria, it will not under any circumstances support a direct attack on Iran itself nor will it take any steps to stop Tehran's nuclear program. Therefore, the Trump administration's agenda in the Middle East is far from being a sure thing. This only means that the agenda against Iran will be very risky. In any case, the desire to enlist Sunni Arab states into the Anglo-American-Jewish campaign against Iran is the reason why the United States will not recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capitol anytime in the near future.

 Lurking behind all this volatility in the Middle East is also the potential of very serious problems occurring inside Turkey. Turkey's belligerent president has been reorienting his country's politics and in doing so alienating his country's traditional supporters in the Western world. Predictably, various Kurdish factions, some of whom are backed by Anglo-American-Jews and some by Russians, have gained from this situation. The growing Kurdish factor in the region has become a major cause of concern for Ankara. The Erdogan government's overly-aggressive behavior in recent times is actually a sign that Ankara is feeling vulnerable. Having failed to overthrow Erdogan's government with a revolution last summer, Western powers will be seeking other means to bring the Turkish state back into the Western orbit. Therefore, the more Turkey's autocratic leader drags Ankara eastward, the more will Anglo-American-Jews pull his country westward. If this tug-of-war over the country's fate continues for any length of time, Turkey's NATO membership - as well as its territorial integrity - will be in serious jeopardy. Turkey can descend into chaos. What happens after that is anybody's guess. In any case, anti-Erdogan voices in the West are on the rise and Moscow continues to conspire against Turkey -
Hey, NATO, Let’s Move Those 50 US Thermonuclear Weapons Out of Turkey: http://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2017/05/dear-nato-get-those-50-us-thermonuclear-weapons-out-turkey/138113/
Kurdish Delegation to Discuss Independence Referendum in Russia: http://www.basnews.com/index.php/en/news/world/354739
As the reader can see, the region where Armenia is located continues to be a volatile tinderbox. The various hot spots in the region are essentially at the doorstep of the small, impoverished and landlocked country surrounded by Turkic/Islamic predators, and the danger of a major war igniting in the south Caucasus remains very real. In the big geostrategic picture I always write about, this is essentially the reason why Armenia's strategic alliance with Russia will be the single most important factor in Armenian politics for the foreseeable future. As the various fires burning in the region get more-and-more intense, the importance of Russian-Armenian relations will increase exponentially, not only for Yerevan but also for Moscow. This is why Russia will remain Armenia's reliable strategic partner and Yerevan's only source of support. This is why Moscow has a significant military footprint inside Armenia.

 The already very tense situation in the greater region where Armenia is located is made worst due to the unresolved conflict between Yerevan and Baku. The historic Armenian province of Artsakh has been an open wound that has been festering for over 25 years now. And now there is growing sense of urgency about it. With changing political and economic tides around the world, many observers think Baku has only a few years (perhaps not even that) to figure out what to do with Artsakh before it runs into serious domestic problems. After 25 years of preparing its population for war against Armenians, Baku is suddenly facing a rapidly shrinking window of opportunity. The Azeri leadership may be fearing that if they do not try to make good on their promises to retake Artsakh, they may lose power in an uprising, especially now that Azerbaijan's economy is very bad shape primarily due to a major slump in global energy prices. Many therefore think that the next couple of years will be dangerous. Although a terrible war of attrition continues to play out along the line of contact between Armenia and Azerbaijan, some predict large-scale military operations. The fighting that took place during early April of last year (many questions about which remain unanswered) may have somehow been related to this calculus. What happened was not a full scale war. It was more like heavy skirmish confined only to border regions. The fighting could have been a trial run to assess Armenia's military capabilities and political resolve. But, like I said, many questions remain unanswered about the fighting. In any case, I believe Moscow's decision to provide highly sophisticated ballistic missile systems to Armenia, its first deployment outside of Russia, is also related to the overall calculus. Moscow's move may have been a message to Baku to back off. Nevertheless, the possibility that a major conflict can erupt in the region is now a serious concern for Moscow. And the last thing Russia needs right now is yet another hot-spot on its already volatile and vulnerable southern periphery.

Our Western-funded political activists and nationalist crazies claim that Moscow is ready to return Artsakh to Azerbaijan and that it wants a war between Armenia and Azerbaijan. This is a Russophobic lie.

Moscow's primary goal in the south Caucasus is not to instigate a major war but to bring all three nations - Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan - into Russia's orbit. Yes, Moscow may use strong-arm tactics to realize this goal. However, after over twenty-five years of sociopolitical unrest, economic depression and disastrous wars in the Caucasus, both north and south, a resurgent Moscow is primarily seeking to reestablish Pax Russica. That is the end game. Russian officials also know that Armenia, being their most reliable ally in the region, is key to achieving Russian dominance in the region. Being that Tbilisi will have fundamental problems with Moscow for the foreseeable future due to Russia's role in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and being that Azerbaijan is a Turkic/Islamic nation, senior policymakers in Russia know that Armenia's is their safest and most long-term center of operation. This fact alone suggests Moscow will never abandon or undermine the Armenian. This does not however mean there will be no disagreements and/or technical problems between Russia and Armenia.

Speaking of technical problems: While the status quo over Artsakh fit Moscow's (and Yerevan's) interests, it is increasingly looking as if this is beginning to change now. This change is in my opinion a direct result of Moscow successfully reestablishing itself as a hegemon in the region. Allow me to once more remind the reader that Russian control over both the north and south Caucasus is of paramount strategic importance for Moscow. For Russia, the Caucasus region has historically been known as its vulnerable underbelly. Controlling it and pacifying it, both north and south, provides Russia with a major defensive buffer against Western, Turkic and Islamic forces. With the situation in and around Artsakh getting progressively worst as a result of tensions in adjacent regions, as well as Baku's increasing desperation, the status quo in Artsakh may no longer be working in Moscow's favor, and this worries many Armenians.

Russian officials know that in the big picture, the south Caucasus is like a three-legged chair: It can't function with one or more legs missing. Russian officials may be seeing that the unresolved dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan is indirectly hurting their plans for Georgia. The thinking may therefore be that once the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan is put to rest, bringing Georgia into Russia's fold, making the three-legged south Caucasus chair whole once again, will become easier. Making the EEU work is also a factor in all this. For the Russian-led economic union to begin  showing life, territorial disputes involving Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan have to be resolved and the region has to come back under Russia's orbit. In my opinion, these are the reasons why Russians officials have been doing their best to maintain levers of control over Baku and Tbilisi and of course Yerevan. These are also the reasons why Russian officials have been engaging in efforts, albeit intermittent, to finally resolve the lingering dispute over Artsakh.

This worries many Armenians today because there is no way of knowing exactly what a final settlement, when we eventually get to it, will look like. The worry Armenians have is being made worst by malicious predictions that "Moscow will betray Armenia once again". Needless to say, such disinformation is being disseminated by nefarious Western-funded sources that are embedded throughout Armenian society. 

Those of us who do not want any change to the status quo in Artsakh may be happy to know that Anglo-American-Jewish, as well as Turkish interests, will do their best to sabotage any unilateral effort by Moscow to resolve the dispute. This is why Baku is being encouraged to remain on the offensive against Armenia and this is why Armenia's fifth-column is being asked to sabotage any Russian-led peace effort. The following is a Western look at the inherent complexities of the south Caucasus -
NATO in the South Caucasus: Present for Duty or Missing in Action?: http://www.fpri.org/article/2017/06/nato-south-caucasus-present-duty-missing-action/
In my opinion, understanding the geopolitical landscape of the south Caucasus at a profound level and appreciating Moscow's role in it is absolutely crucial for us Armenians for doing so will help us better navigate the turbulent waters that the coming years will most probably bring. Better understanding the political world we live in will also help us better recognize opportunities when they present themselves and exploit them when possible. It may be naive of me to wish for this, but I want there to be a political culture among Armenians that is patriotic yet also sober minded, pragmatic and farsighted. I also want Armenians to understand that although the status quo in Artsakh has worked well for us during the past 25 years, we may not be able to afford another 25 years of it. Armenia's main problem today is not its "oligarchs", as our Western-funded activists desperately need us to believe, it's the prevailing dysfunctional situation throughout the south Caucasus brought upon by Western machinations. Even if our oligarchs turned into lovely angels overnight, Armenia would continue having severe problems. I want Armenians to realize that what Armenia needs is lasting peace and stability in the south Caucasus. I want Armenians to understand that peace and stability in the south Caucasus, at least from Armenia's perspective, can only be brought by Russia. Finally, I want Armenians to also understand that Armenia will one day need to settle the dispute over Artsakh, and this may include land concessions as well as stationing Russian troops between Armenians and Azeris. Although that day seems a very long time away today, I have no doubt that day will arrive sooner or later.

It is therefore best to be ready and understand that when that day arrives, the degree of concessions we Armenians will be expected to make will essentially be determined by the capabilities of our diplomatic corps and the depth of our nation's ties with Russia.

The aforementioned thoughts and comments about Armenia and Artsakh will be a reoccurring theme throughout this blog commentary. Helping the reader contemplate about the aforementioned inevitabilities regarding the dispute over Artsakh is the main motivation behind this work. Another motivation is to provide the reader some context to the Artsakh conflict never discussed elsewhere. I would also like to engage in, if at all possible, discussions about what a final negotiated settlement with Azerbaijan can potentially or theoretically look like. There will come a day when Yerevan and Baku will be expected to make land concessions. Needless to say, I understand how sensitive this topic is for us Armenians: How can we negotiate with bloodthirsty animals, let alone pull back from strategically important territories under our control? How can one give back anything that has been painstakingly won by the precious blood of our heroic compatriots?

I fully share such sentiments. I also however understand how politics work. I am also all too familiar with our history, and the many grave mistakes we have made as a people.

I therefore want Armenians to understand that this subject is not a black and white matter. I want Armenians to understand that there is no room for maximalistic attitudes in politics. I want Armenians to understand that this subject needs to be approached without emotions and without preconceived notions. Going forward, I will share ideas but I will also refrain from making absolute statements. I will suggest solutions but I will leave many questions open ended. With the following passages, I will simply try to promote a particular mindset, an attitude - a type of political philosophy if I may - that is in my opinion necessary for Armenians to posses within themselves for when that day arrives to settle the dispute over Artsakh.

 October 27, 1999  

 Some 20 years ago Western interests in the south Caucasus seemed to be on the verge of a historic breakthrough. After several years of actively lobbying Armenian officials, by 1999 Washington seemed to have begun making some headway. At least on the surface, official Yerevan seemed to have begun accepting, at least preliminary, the basic principals of a comprehensive peace plan put forth by the US State Department. This US sponsored plan, known as the Goble Plan (named after it's mastermind, Paul Goble, a State Department official with ties to the CIA), proposed to "internationalize" a 10 kilometer wide corridor along Armenia's entire southern border with Iran so that Western-financed gas and oil pipelines could be passed from Azerbaijan to Nakhijevan and beyond. In return, the plan envisioned giving self-determination for Artsakh and billions of dollars to Armenia in financial aid.

 Yerevan was essentially being asked by Uncle Sam to give up its strategic border with Iran for Artsakh and promises of some cash. Yerevan was also being asked by Uncle Sam to break its ties with Russia and Iran. This controversial proposal was devised in the early 1990s, at a time when Armenia was barely alive, Russia was on its knees and Western powers reigned supreme throughout the post-Soviet world. US officials actively lobbied Armenian officials to convince them about the plan's perceived benefits to Armenia and to the greater region. Some US officials even seemed to have been given the task of winning Diasporan support. I vividly recall attending a public meeting at an ARF community center on the imperial East Coast, where a State Department deputy essentially presented the tenets of Goble Plan and appealed to our community for support. His talk predictably sounded like an infomercial. But what was particularly interesting for me was that during the course of his presentation, the official clearly insinuated that Turkey could be convinced by the United States to return Mount Ararat to Armenia if the proposed plan was accepted by Armenians. It was an amazing thing for me to see an American official dangling Mount Ararat in front of us Armenians as a magical bait, to encourage us to accept their plan.

 Well, the young Irish-American official visiting us from Washington DC was essentially heckled out of the building by the end of his talk. I still remember him, his face reddened by frustration, grabbing his briefcase and rushing off to his black automobile parked in front of the building. Other American officials were said to have experienced similar treatment in their meetings with other ARF chapters in the US. Their failure with the ARF however did not deter them. Uncle Sam was also in the process of lobbying Armenian officials, seemingly with better results. They also knew they had support in the Hovnanian-financed Armenian Assembly of America.

Prime Minister Vazgen Sargsyan and Speaker of the National Assembly Karen Demirjyan (arguably two of the most powerful and influential men in politics in Armenia at the time) had meetings in Washington and Berlin respectively in October, 1999. According to many international news reports at the time, there were strong indications that official Yerevan was seriously considering the proposals put forth by the US State Department.

 Ultimately, we weren't able to see if official Yerevan was indeed preparing to break its fledgling ties with Moscow and Tehran at the time and allow Western powers broker a peace deal between Yerevan and Baku. On the morning of October 27, 1999, barely three weeks after Vazgen Sargsyan was in Washington, Strobe Talbot, a US State Department official was in Yerevan holding a private meeting with him. By the afternoon of that day, Vazgen Sargsyan, Karen Demirjyan and several other Armenian lawmakers were dead. Gunmen had burst into the Armenian Parliament and assassinated eight officials. The controversial Goble Plan was never again publicly discussed by Armenian officials. The following blog commentary reflects my thoughts on the historic event that took place in Yerevan on October 27, 1999. When reading the commentary please pay particular attention to the article written by the former Russian ambassador to Armenia in which he warns Armenians against adopting the Goble Plan. Also read the Wall Street Journal article lamenting the deaths of Vazgen Sargsyan and Karen Demirjyan-
Some Thoughts on the October 27 Killings in Armenia (October, 2010): http://theriseofrussia.blogspot.com/search/label/1999
Some 20 years ago was the closest Washington DC would come to settling the dispute over Armenian Artsakh under its terms. Needless to say, it's a different world today than it was back in 1999 when Russian leader Vladimir Putin's FSB-backed gradual rise to power had only begun to register tangible gains. Today, the Russian Federation is a resurgent superpower. Today, Russia is back being the alpha-and-the-omega of the Caucasus, a role it has dearly earned during the past two hundred years. It is Russia today that stands poised to broker a final peace settlement in Artsakh. Fearing the further lose of their already declining influence throughout the Caucasus region, Western powers are understandably concerned. Understandably, Uncle Sam still wants to remain in the game, especially since Central Asian energy supplies via Azerbaijan is still of great strategic significance to Europe and Israel. Uncle Sam would therefore want's a real say in any settlement process in Artsakh. Western powers will therefore do what they can to sabotage any settlement brokered by Russia. The escalation of violence on Armenia's border with Azerbaijan may be related. Interestingly, the mastermind of the failed Goble Plan never stopped fearing-mongering about Russia -
Paul Goble: "If Baku becomes Moscow’s satellite, it will receive Karabak": http://news.am/eng/news/271991.html
Paul Goble: “Unless Putin is contained or is replaced, the world will be at risk of a war more horrible than anyone can imagine”: http://en.168.am/2014/12/08/1541.html
When Armenia entered the Moscow-led EEU I predicted that Moscow will gradually begin addressing the festering dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan. All the signs from Moscow point in that direction. Resolving the dispute may have taken on an air of urgency in the Kremlin because of the very explosive situations in Syria and Ukraine and the potentially explosive situations in Turkey and Iran. Moscow does not want to have another war-front opening up on its strategic - and still very vulnerable - Caucasian underbelly. Although the status quo in Artsakh is something Moscow can certainly live with, solving the always explosive problem under its terms is more desirable and may better serve Russia's longer-term interests in the region. This is why Western powers are interested in sabotaging Russia's effort. In my opinion, this is also why we had the assault on the police station in Yerevan last summer.

July 17, 2016

When Yerevan shocked Western officials several years ago by announcing Armenia's membership in the Russian-led EEU, I said it's only a matter of time before Western powers begin appealing to the emotions of Armenian nationalists both in the homeland and in the Diaspora in an attempt to drive a wedge between Yerevan and Moscow. And when Moscow began signalling it was ready to broker a final settlement to the Artsakh dispute, I knew something was going to happen. I knew Western powers would try to make life very difficult for Armenia and sabotage any attempts by Moscow to settle the dispute. I wish could say I was wrong. Besides the monstrous and still mysterious murder of an entire family in Gymri by a Russian soldier in the winter of 2015 and the short but intense and still somewhat mysterious war that took place in spring of 2016, there has since been at least two revolution attempts in Armenia recently. The first attempt came during the summer of 2015, when Western-led opposition groups tried to take advantage of mass protests taking place in Yerevan. The effort proved unsuccessful. The second attempt, in my opinion, came on the morning of July 17, 2016. Five days before, on July 12, 2016, I had written the following in this blog's comments section:
"Back in the late 1990s, the US had come very close to brokering a peace deal between Yerevan and Baku. The deal in question would have most probably been a variation of the now infamous "Goble Plan". The parliamentary assassinations that took place on October 27, 1999 put a quick and bloody end to it. Thank God. This time around, if the Russian plan is not fully supported by the West, Western powers will most probably try to sabotage the Russian brokered peace deal by appealing to the emotions and sentiment of our "nationalistic" idiots. We already see our "nationalists" acting hysterical." 17 years ago Russian intelligence services put an abrupt end to the US-led negotiations process. Today, US intelligence services are trying to do the same to the Russian effort."
On the morning of July 17, 2016 a couple of dozen armed men, mostly members of the extremist organization called Founding Parliament, stormed a police compound in Yerevan, killing a policeman and taking several hostages. The gunmen, who more-or-less presenting themselves as disgruntled nationalists, demanded a number of things. Primary among their demands were the following: The resignation of President Serj Sargsyan; the release of their jailed leader Jirayr Sefilian; and an immediate end to any negotiation over Artsakh. The gunmen also used social media to repeatedly call on the general public to rise-up and overthrow their government. It was clearly a coup d'état attempt.

Soon, Armenia's Western-funded news organizations, opposition activists and politicians were out in force spewing anti-government and anti-Russian slogans. They were soon joined by several thousand of their most faithful followers - mainly disgruntled civilians, many of whom are professional demonstrators. The demonstrations also began attracting an assortment of hooligans from slums near Yerevan. Within days, the unsanctioned street show had morphed into a gathering of several thousand Western-funded activists, hardcore nationalists, disgruntled seniors, young liberals and petty hooligans. People who normally would not even be able to locate Artsakh on a map were all of a sudden on the streets shouting,"Aghdam is our homeland". People who hated Armenians from Artsakh more than they hated Turks were suddenly demanding that Armenia withdraw from peace negotiation with Azerbaijan.

Other than the usual number of well-known Western-funded activists and their usual number of faithful followers, at most numbering several thousand, there was no widespread uprising in the country. The unsanctioned demonstrations gradually died down after their initial intensity, and flareups that occurred at times were quickly contained by law-enforcement. The standoff between the extremists and Armenian security officials came to an end when a number of the assailants were deliberately wounded by government marksmen and the rest were persuaded to give up. A number of other individuals who were not involved in the actual takeover of the police compound, some with ties to the Western world, were also apprehended and jailed. 

In the end, Armenians had not taken to the streets en masse in support of the extremists and none of the extremist's demands were met by official Yerevan. However, the damage was done in another sense. Armenia's burgeoning tourism industry, something the country is very dependent on, suffered and Armenia looked like a troubled little third world country on the verge of implosion. American and European officials wasted no time in calling on their Armenian counterparts to abstain from using force against the militants and their supporters - although under similar circumstances they themselves would have resorted to much harsher forms of violence. Official Yerevan looked vulnerable in the eyes of Moscow. Tragically, the only thing the extremists, who were said to have taken up arms to save Artsakh (from imaginary phantoms), managed to do was kill Armenians and make Armenia look like a banana republic on the international stage.

In my opinion, there was more to the unrest in Yerevan last summer than meets the eye. What took place on July 17, 2016 was a version of what took place on October 27, 1999 - but in reverse.

Ever since Armenia first signaled its willingness to join the EEU, Armenian news media and Armenian cyberspace in general has been flooded with slogans like, "Russia is taking over Armenia". More recently, the slogans had morphed into, "now that Putin has fully occupied Armenia, he will give Artsakh back to the Azeris". Moreover, the dangerous notion that Armenians can solve all of Armenia's problems simply by uniting had also been gaining fast traction among Armenia's self-destructive peasantry. It was a medley of these types of attitudes, and most probably tacit support by foreign intelligence services, that led the group of extremists in Armenia to carryout their criminal act.

It should also be noted that the coup came on the heals of a larger US-backed military coup in neighboring Turkey. Being that Jirayr Sefilian and his circle are funded from abroad, most probably by US and/or European intelligence agencies, it's not a stretch of the imagination to conclude that their criminal act last summer was blessed if not outright ordered by Western intelligence agencies. Being that nationalists, in any given society, tend to be predisposed to irrationality and extremism, I have repeatedly warned that Western powers will begin working with our nationalists to drive a wedge between Yerevan and Moscow. I have repeatedly warned that Western powers will begin using our nationalists to derail any Russian-led settlement plan.

In my opinion, Yerevan's "complimentary politics", where Armenian officials try play both sides of the geopolitical fence, got Armenia to this point. I recognize that this approach to East-West relations worked well for Yerevan while the Russian Federation was weak and incapable of imposing its political will within its near abroad. However, what we all now need to recognize is that the geopolitical climate of the south Caucasus, as well as of the world, has changed drastically since the time when Yeltsin the Drunk was in power in Moscow. Today, Russian power and influence has been reinstated throughout much of former Soviet territory. Today, the continuation of complimentary politics, if carried out without Moscow's approval, will keep Armenia stagnant at best and vulnerable to collapse at worst. In my opinion, what happened in Armenia last summer was a direct assault against attempts by Moscow to settle the Artsakh dispute. It's results however are not as discernible as the one that took place on October 27, 1999.

Why do Russians want control over the south Caucasus and what does it mean for Artsakh?

Political predictions are difficult even in the best of times. During times of major political changes around the world, politics can be extremely unpredictable. It's becoming very difficult to write on political matters these days because of the speed with which things are changing and unexpected turns they are taking. At its core, the periodic sociopolitical upheavals we have seen take place in Armenia in recent years has little to do with the dislike Armenians have towards President Sargsyan and even less with democracy or the rule of law in the country. The unrest we have been seeing in Armenia recently has everything to do with Russia's ties to Armenia and the West's desire to drive a wedge between Yerevan and Moscow. For Western powers the problem with Armenia is not that it is not a "democracy" as many of their favorite allies around the world are not democracies. The fundamental problem Western powers have with Armenia is Russia's military presence in the country. If Armenia had been hosting an American military base instead, Armenia's "oligarchs" would do no wrong in the eyes of Uncle Sam. Because Armenia hosts a Russian military presence, Armenia's oligarchs therefore cannot do anything right. It's that simple.

The primary concern in Western capitals is that Moscow is becoming too powerful throughout Eurasia and beyond. This threatens their long-standing strategy of containing a geopolitical behemoth like Russia (as well as rising powers like China and Iran). This also threatens their ability to freely exploit central Asian energy. They are justified in their concerns. Moscow has become the sole power-broker in the south Caucasus. It is therefore expected that it would be devising plans to bring the entire region back under its fold. 

Throughout its one thousand year old history Russia has been surrounded by powerful enemies that have coveted its vast and bountiful territory. Consequently, Russians have been forced to fight-off various invading empires throughout much of their history. Just within the last century alone Russia suffered immense devastation, losing tens-of-millions of its sons and daughters to foreign instigated wars and revolution. More recently, its been forced to face economic collapse, NATO expansion and an Islamic insurgency. Russians know all too well that Russia's enemies still exist and they still covet its territory. Russians also are cognizant of the fact that their enemies still surround them. These are the historic circumstances that have molded the modern Russian mindset - and these circumstances have a direct bearing on political culture/mindset prevalent in the Kremlin today. This is the reason why Kremlin officials look at places like eastern Europe, central Asia and the south Caucasus as strategically important zones that need to remain within the Russian orbit. This is why Russians officials have reacted so forcefully to Western-instigated wars in the Ukraine and Syria. This is why nations like Armenia, Belarus and Tajikistan are members of Russian-led organizations like the CSTO and EEU.

Simply  put: Russians have been bred by historic circumstances they have been subjected to for hundreds of years to be resilient, warlike and patriotic. Russians feel, and rightfully so, that their vast and bountiful country is being besieged by powerful opponents. They are therefore farsighted, proactive, aggressive and always on the defensive. The aforementioned are aspects of the modern Russian psyche that is least understood by non-Russians. Which is why Russian actions always seem to catch Western powers by surprise.

Russia's land borders, which borders 16 nations and stretches for well over 12,000 miles, does not have natural barriers. Russia's southern regions, in particular, which straddles the Turkic/Islamic world, does not have much strategic depth. Dangers in the region have the potential therefore to directly threaten the Russian heartland. Throughout history Russian leaders have therefore sought to establish buffer states around the Russian mainland. This is why Russian leaders have looked at the Caucasus, both north and south, as a strategic buffer protecting the Russian heartland. This is why when Moscow sensed a serious threat in Georgia in the summer of 2008, it did not hesitate to take military action. We have also seen Moscow take similar proactive military stances in Syria and Ukraine more recently. Fundamentally, it all has to do with Moscow's fears over Russia's lack of defensive depth. Maintaining sufficient strategic depth - i.e. stopping threats far from Russia's borders - is a problem that has kept Russian leaders busy for centuries. The matter in question has become a fundamental part of their defense doctrine.

Russians know that losing the south Caucasus will directly threaten Russia's hold over the north Caucasus. Needless to say, Russians know that losing the north Caucasus will directly threaten the Russian mainland. Therefore, we should all have by now come to the realization that Russia's southern border essentially begins in the south Caucasus and Russia will do everything it can to maintain a powerful presence in the region.

For Russian leaders, the importance of controlling the Caucasus cannot therefore be overstated because, as noted above, its loss can lead to the weakening of the Russian state, and even perhaps lead to its fragmentation one day. The Caucasus therefore plays a very vital role for Kremlin policymakers. The problem here is that all of Russia's opponents today - Westerners, Jewry, Turks and Islamists - also know this. After all, wrestling the strategic Caucasus from Russian control was the reason behind the Chechen wars of the 1990s, when virtually all of Russia's opponents mentioned above played a role in it. It is therefore no secret that when it comes to eastern Europe, central Asia and the Caucasus, Moscow will spare no effort in securing the regions militarily and bringing them back into its fold economically and politically.

Recently, Moscow's plan to bring the south Caucasus back into its orbit has been given renewed priority due to three factors: 1) With Russia resurging as a power throughout the region, Russian officials may be thinking it's high time to reinstate their control over the region that that they consider part of Russia's orbit. 2) With the surge of major wars in adjacent regions, Russian officials fear that conflict may also spill into the south Caucasus. 3) Russian officials also fear that Baku's war of attrition against Armenia, as well as its increasing economic problems, may ignite a major war in the south Caucasus. 

Russian officials know that in case of a major war, say in Turkey or Iran, the south Caucasus can act as a forward fortress and provide Moscow the defensive depth that it desperately needs along its vulnerable underbelly. It was therefore expected that Moscow would begin paying more attention to the unresolved disputes that exists within territories that it see as part of its sphere of influence. Needless to say, the dispute over Artsakh is one of the region's main problems at this time.

While the status quo in Artsakh served Moscow's interests during the past two decades, it is now increasingly looking as if this will not be the case much longer. Having returned to the south Caucasus after many years of absence, Moscow will not want an open wound getting in the way of its plans for the region. Moscow may therefore try to force a peace settlement on Yerevan and Baku. Despite opinions to the contrary, the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan will no doubt end one day. It's only a matter of time. And that is when things might get a little complicated for Armenia.

I personally believe that Artsakh's unification with Armenia will eventually happen, and it will happen with Moscow's blessing, be it overt or covert. Russia will continue being Armenia's closest and most trusted partner for well into the foreseeable future. However, while Russian officials look upon Armenia as a reliable ally in a very strategic but anti-Russian environment, they also desire to see Baku come back into Russia's political and economic orbit. Azerbaijan's location - situated on Central Asian energy distribution conduits and acting as a buffer zone between Russia and Iran - makes Baku strategically valuable for Moscow, as well as other regional interests. Russian officials know that Western powers, Turkey, Israel and Iran have been courting Baku for the past 25-plus years. Moscow cannot afford losing Baku to them. This is why Moscow has been doing its best to maintain leverage over Baku, and this is why Moscow has been very cautiously walking a tightrope between Armenia and Azerbaijan in recent years.

While we Armenians can expect Russians to continue securing Armenia's (including Artsakh's) existence on a grander, strategic level, we cannot expect (nor should we want) Russians to turn their backs on Azerbaijan. Moscow cannot risk turning Azerbaijan into a center of Western or Turkic/Islamic operations. This means, while Moscow may ultimately be inclined to support Artsakh's reunification with Armenia, that does not mean Moscow will support Armenian claims over all of the territories taken outside of the internationally recognized boundaries of Artsakh. It also means, Moscow may eventually want to station troops between Armenians and Azeris.
 
Having established leverages over both Armenia and Azerbaijan, Moscow is currently trying to assess how far Armenians and Azeris would be willing to bend to make a final peace settlement possible. A lot of proposals are being thrown around and formulas are being devised. A lot of closed-door meetings are taking place. A lot of trial balloons are being floated. Moscow has not attempted to force the issue thus far because it realizes just how sensitive the matter is in Yerevan and Baku. Imposing a settlement from above runs the risk of toppling both the Armenian and Azeri leadership. Moscow is therefore playing it patiently, but it will remain persistent and may yet make a concerted push if it senses an opportunity. That day may be some time away. 

Nevertheless, in the meanwhile, we need to learn to ignore the fear-mongering being carried-out by Armenia's Western-led political opposition activists and Western-supported propaganda outlets like "Hetq", "Gala", "Lragir", "Azatutyun Radio" and others. In other words: Russia is not getting ready to sell Armenia or Artsakh to anyone, let alone to Turks or Muslims. Moscow is simply working behind-the-scenes to try to settle the dispute between Yerevan and Baku. This is natural. This is expected. This is good. It remains to be seen how successful Moscow will be. The Artsakh knot will not be an easy one to undo because both sides of the dispute essentially claim full ownership to the land, although the Armenian side is, at least ostensibly, open to negotiations.

Putting it mildly, the mood in Baku is not receptive to a peace settlement at this time. And may not be so for a while, because for 25-plus years Azeri officials seeded their country with extreme forms of anti-Armenianism. Azerbaijan's younger generation, in particular, has been raised solely on anti-Armenian propaganda as well as repeated promises that Karabakh will be liberated by Azerbaijan's powerful military. In fact, Azeri officials have used the fear and hate of Armenians among the Azeri population to justify their massive military spending. How can Baku now stop all this and simply tell its people that the time has come to make a peace deal with Armenians without risking serious internal political unrest? Baku is therefore stuck in a very bad situation of its own making.

This is why I think there will be another round of fighting, which the Azeri side will surely lose. But, eventually, inevitably, one way or another, and despite what the Armenian Diaspora wants, there will come a juncture where both Armenians and Azeris will be faced with an opportunity to settle their differences. Until we get to that juncture, how well Armenia's military is able to fend-off Azeri military incursions that will be periodically coming its way will be crucially important to setting the right kind of attitude ahead of any future negotiations. Once we get to that juncture, the political unity of Armenians and the exploitative capabilities of Armenia's diplomatic corps will thereafter be a determinant factor in the dispute's final settlement.

Speaking of manipulating and exploiting circumstances towards political gains, I'd like to add the following: It is no secret that I am often angered by the presence of extremist groups and Western-financed activists in Armenia. I see such pro-Western and/or anti-Russian groups in Armenia as long term risks. I often characterize them as cancerous cells in the Armenian body. But, my intellectual objectivity, as well as my healthy dose of cynicism, allows me to also look at this matter from another angle. I mentioned in one of my previous blog commentaries that there was a "silver lining" to all the political unrest we have seen in Armenia.

In the spirit of, "never let a serious crisis go to waste", I believe last summer's coup attempt can be used by Armenian officials to strengthen Armenia's position during negotiations.

It goes without saying that Founding Parliament, a small but vociferous organization, is a foreign-funded operation. It goes without saying that its rank-and-file is for the most part anti-Russian. It also goes without saying that what its members tried to pull-off last summer was a coup motivated, at least in part, by a desire to sabotage any potential peace talks with Baku that would involve land concessions. However, there is also a good possibility that Armenia's National Security Services (NSS) had informants working in Founding Parliament or that the organization was actually penetrated by NSS agents.

With that in mind, consider this: There were some strange aspects to last summer's coup attempt. This leads me to suspect that elements within Armenia's security apparatus may have somehow been involved in orchestrating the incident. At the very least, they may have simply allowed it to happen. I say this because the leading militants involved in the coup were all well-known to security officials because they were members of Founding Parliament and were constantly making threats against the Armenian government. It was widely known that the organization and its members were under surveillance by Armenia's NSS. I therefore refuse to believe that the militants were able to organize such an operation - involving more than two dozen armed men - without the government's knowledge. Moreover, a number of militants involved in the incident had at the time recently come to Armenia from abroad (including from Russia) and a number of these were quickly released after the two week standoff ended. There was a mysterious death of a policeman. Varuzhan Avetisyan, the commander of the militants seemed to enjoy an unusually warm relationship with security officials. But the most suspicious aspect of the coup attempt in my opinion was security officials allowing the militants to have what seemed to be unrestricted access to social media, which the militants gladly used to make their demands publicly know.

The stranger aspects of last summer's ordeal may not have been due to incompetence of Armenian officials after all. There is a very good possibility that the extremist group was manipulated or goaded into doing what it did by Armenian security officials. At the very least, law-enforcement officials may have stood-down and allowed the militant group to carryout their plan. In hindsight, it is beginning to look as if the militants unwittingly became pawns in a much bigger chess game than they could have possibly imagined. Founding Parliament crazies therefore cannot be given any credit for anything other than being unsuspecting dupes. The credit in my opinion goes to Armenian authorities.

It is very possible that official Yerevan allowed the situation to get to the point that it did to show the world that Armenia cannot risk ceding lands to Azerbaijan. By pointing to the extremists in the country (regardless of who they are funded by) official Yerevan can show Russians, Westerners and Azeris/Turks alike that Armenians are violently opposed to pulling back from any territory in Artsakh that is currently under Armenian control. By making Russian officials know that Western-funded groups in Armenia are growing in strength, official Yerevan can force Moscow's hand and make it play a more proactive role inside Armenia. I admit that this is a very delicate and dangerous game and that it can seriously backfire.

However, the unexpected appearance of the Iskander ballistic missile system in Armenia; the reemergence of highly popular Karen Karapetyan in the country's political scene; the up-tick in Ara Abrahamyan's activities; the Russian-Armenian arms expo; and the flurry of Russian officials visiting Armenia recently are all very positive signs from Moscow. More significantly, they have all come on the heels of last summer's political unrest. This may be evidence that Yerevan's flirtations with Western powers and nationalist extremists may be paying some political dividends - or that everything, including the coup attempt and its aftermath, is being closely coordinated with Moscow.

This reminds of the words of the great German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche: That which does not kill us makes us stronger. So, in a sense, Armenia is stronger today because its extremists and Western-led activists have not succeeded in killing it. Regardless of who or what was behind it, the crisis that afflicted Armenia last summer has the potential now to make the country stronger. Everyone now - including Russians, Americans and Azeris - have gotten a little taste of what can happen if official Yerevan is even perceived as being too giving in terms of land concessions.  I firmly believe that the crisis Armenia endured will at the very least give Armenian officials an upper hand in any negotiations over Artsakh. I also believe that it may force Armenian officials to begin reconsidering their management - or rather mismanagement - of the country.

I am of course speculating. I admit I may be reading too much into the incident. I may therefore be wrong about this. However, I do nonetheless believe that if properly manipulated and exploited by national security officials, extremist groups in the country can be helpful for Armenia in two fundamental ways: By forcing Moscow's to become more active inside Armenia and by helping strengthen Armenia's hand during negotiations over Artsakh. Needless to say, more needs to be done to manipulate existing circumstances and situations today to help bring about and mold circumstances and situations that are more conducive to Armenian interests. More needs to be done to manipulate the political landscape in Moscow to derive benefits for Armenia and Artsakh.

This needs to be done because Armenians cannot expect Russians to uphold every single one of Armenia's interests - especially in the absence of Armenian lobbying efforts in Moscow. Yes, Russia will ensure Armenia's existence as a nation-state, but the particulars of that existence, like exact boundaries, will be determined by how well Armenians are able to manipulate the political process. Therefore, a deep understanding of regional affairs, pragmatic nationalism, disciplined militarism, political foresight and being proactive in Moscow are all essential for a positive outcome.

We Armenians also need to be cognizant of the fact that there is absolutely no room for maximalistic or extremist attitudes in politics. Politics is not a zero-sum game. Such approaches can only lead to defeat and destruction. There are many examples from around the world.

In fact, there are many examples right from our own experience. One such example is the rigidity of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF) during the time of the First Republic. Hoping that the French and the British will eventually come to their rescue from thousands of miles away, the ARF-led government at the time stubbornly refused to negotiate with the newly established Bolshevik government in Moscow. Although Russia's Bolsheviks were essentially Armenia's neighbors and their power was gradually expanding throughout the Caucasus, Armenia's government was instead looking to distant France and Britain for salvation. In other words, Armenians at the time had no real understanding of the political world they lived in. They had therefore hopelessly cornered themselves with their ideological extremism. In fact, not only was Armenia, essentially a failed state at the time, in a state of war with Turkey, Azerbaijan and Georgia, Armenia's leadership was also agitating against Bolsheviks. Needless to say, there was no Western cavalry coming to Armenia's rescue. Needless to say, Armenia were in no condition to fight anyone.  The battle of Sardarapat, by international standards of the time, was a skirmish. Turks would have come back with a larger, more lethal army. In the end, Armenia may have lost more lands than necessary. Thankfully, Bolsheviks took over what was left. Thankfully, due to the Bolshevik presence in the south Caucasus, Turks stayed away. In the big picture, the losses of Kars, Ardahan, Nakhijevan and Artsakh were due to catastrophic failures in Armenia's foreign policy. In my opinion, had we had pragmatic leaders with foresight and a good understanding of the political world they lived in, at least some of those lands would have been saved. It is troubling that even today many Armenians, due to their arrogance, pride and political illiteracy, refuse to learn from their history.

We as a people need to be firm, yet also be willing to bend where needed. We need to be aggressive, yet also seek peace. Most important of all, we need to realize that the south Caucasus needs Russian stewardship if Armenia is to come out of its 25 year nightmare. We Armenians must understand that we cannot afford to live through another 25 years of what we have lived through. This time around, Armenian officials are not my concern. I believe Armenia's foreign ministry is capable of doing the right thing in this regard. I say this because Russian-Armenian ties are now quite deep and for the most part institutionalized. Moreover, I believe Russian forces are in Armenia for the long-term. What concerns me therefore are Armenia's Western-backed political activists and nationalist crazies, as well as our armchair generals in the Diaspora, who from the comforts of theirs homes make daily calls for war against Azerbaijan and Turkey.

We as a people must in principal be ready for serious negotiations with Azerbaijan. We must accept that such talks may entail land concessions. Needless to say, we must enter such talks from a position of strength. In my opinion, a position of strength for Armenia means a very capable military and a very deep alliance with Moscow. While Armenia's military needs to be its tactical advantage on the battlefield, Yerevan's ties with Moscow must be made its strategic advantage on the global chessboard. Nevertheless, we as a people must be willing to talk and seriously consider land concessions if (I emphasize if) there is a genuine opportunity for peace one day. The particulars of land concessions is altogether another topic of discussion, although I touch upon the subject a little later in my commentary. What I am essentially trying to say here is that at least in principle we as a people need to be ready to negotiate a comprehensive peace settlement.

At the end of the day, Armenia must have peace with its neighbors. Yes, I wholeheartedly believe that. The reason why Armenia is as backward and vulnerable as it is today is because the Turkic/Islamic region where Armenia unfortunately finds itself has not had sustained periods of peace for hundreds of years. Anyone that has read this blog knows that I am under no illusions whatsoever about Armenia's neighbors. Moreover, I'm still of the mindset that if Armenia is to ever breakout of its desolate mountainous prison it needs access to the Black Sea and/or common borders with Russia. If the time is right, that is if Azerbaijan, Turkey and/or Georgia descend into serious internal problems, I would wholeheartedly support a war that would bring Armenia to the Black Sea or to the borders of Russia. Needless to say such, if the time comes to embark on such an endeavor, it must be coordinated with Russia. Such an opportunity could have presented itself several years ago. I spoke about it at the time. Such an opportunity may still come. Therefore, it's all in the timing. Geopolitical circumstances of the times will determine whether there will be peace or war. We can't however sit back and simply wait for such a war because it may or may not come. But, what we know for sure is that without peace in the south Caucasus, Armenia will continue to stagnate. If we don't have a major regional war in the nations noted above to try to exploit, we then need to have peace. What I'm simply saying here is that I want Armenians to be as ready for peace as they are for war. I want Armenians to always be politically aggressive yet always seek peace as well. As I said above, my concern is not Armenia's leadership. My concern is our extremists on both sides of the political spectrum: Our nationalist warmongers are a problem just as much as our self-hating liberal peaceniks.

Yes, it is a very difficult/nuanced approach to Armenia's regional challenges, but we don't have any other options in my opinion. Simply put: Too much militarism will hurt Armenia, too much anti-militarism will also hurt Armenia. In the long run, however, peace, normal neighborly relations, has to be somehow achieved in the south Caucasus if only for Armenia's longevity and well being. I know I'm not making friends saying any of this but making friends was never a motivation behind this blog. I simply want the reader to rationally think about what's begin said here even if he or she disagrees.

Since Armenians have a bad habit of comparing Armenians to Jews and therefore Armenia to Israel, allow me to also say this: Even "almighty" Jews were made to withdraw from the Sinai Peninsula and the Gaza Strip by their closest and most faithful ally, the United States. Even Jews cannot outright annex the West Bank because of objections by their American allies. Allow me to remind the reader that Jews also shed their precious blood in the occupation of these lands. Moreover, even Jews, who for the most part control American foreign policy, have not yet been able to get the US to attack their existential threat, Iran. Jews who number in the tens-of-millions around the world and control much of the world's financial wealth, as well as politics in Washington DC, are not maximalistic in their political aspirations in the Middle East and they don't play a zero sum game. Yet, here we are - a tiny, dispersed and disorganized people with a tiny, dependent, impoverished and landlocked country - not only insisting we will not pull back from a single plot of land, but we are also demanding more lands from Azerbaijan (and Turkey), and we waste no opportunity to accuse Russia of treason for not attacking Azerbaijan on Armenia's behalf. So, yes, we Armenians do exhibit crazy mountain people traits.

Success in Artsakh is dependent upon the depth of Armenia's ties with Russia

 I repeat: Even almighty Israel was forced to cede territory to its enemies. Even God's so-called "chosen" has given up territory for peace with neighbors that still hate it. Even Zionists cannot outright annex the West Bank or move the Israeli embassy to Jerusalem. Even organized Jewry has been unsuccessful in getting its most faithful ally attack Iran. Israel also desperately need defensive depth. Yet, of all the territories that the Israeli military occupied in the 1967 war, the only territory Tel Aviv would not give up under any circumstances is the Golan Heights.  Even Russians, who as I pointed out previously are always very concerned about their nation's defensive depth, are at times forced to pull back. Even Russians are at times forced to put their national interests on hold. That is why after liberating Crimea, Moscow did not make a direct move on the rest of Novorossiya. Did Moscow fear Ukraine? No. Did Moscow fear that NATO might get involved? Not really. Simply put: Moscow assessed that the time for bringing Crimea back under its fold was perfect, but it concluded that the time for Donbass was not yet ripe.

We see two of the world's most powerful nations conceding territory to their enemies purely for sound geopolitical reasons. There are many such examples around the world. So, what makes us Armenians think we are different?

We need to put to sleep the Qaj Nazar that dwells inside us. We also need to put to sleep that cat inside us that likes to see a lion every-time it looks into the mirror. Politics is a game of chess. Politics is a game of give and take. Politics is a game that is played by pragmatic people with intelligence, wisdom and foresight. There is no room for maximalistic attitudes in politics. There is no room for emotions in politics. I agree that Baku is currently in a war-footing and cannot therefore be expected to negotiate a genuine peace settlement. I agree that real peace is still far away. As I have said, we may even see another round of major fighting before things finally settle down. However, what I want the reader to understand is that the time for peace will eventually come and when it does it will be brokered by Moscow. When that time arrives, and we'll know when it does, we Armenians will need to be ready for concessions.

When we eventually get to it, the final settlement phase, that which will involve concessions, may prove to be one of the most difficult parts of the decades old dispute over Artsakh. Besides the current wide gap between Yerevan's and Baku's take on the matter, I have no doubt that problems will also be caused by all parties involved: Russians, Westerners, Turks, Azeris, Islamists, Jewry, Iranians, Georgians, Armenian nationalists, Armenia's political opposition, the Armenian Diaspora... as well as Armenians that blame Artsakh (and its people) for all of Armenia's problems (believe me, such garbage exists in bigger numbers than one would think).

Despite it all, we must recognize that Moscow is the primary power-broker in the south Caucasus. Being that Moscow is also Armenia's strategic partner, we must recognize that Moscow holds the keys to Armenia's successes in Artsakh. In other words: if Armenians are smart enough to recognize Moscow's hegemony in the Caucasus region and work to harness the potential of its strategic alliance with the Russian Bear, Artsakh will fair well. If not, we may have to deal with some unpleasant situations.

That said, Baku's ties to Western powers, Israel and Turkey and its hardstand regarding Artsakh will work in Yerevan's favor. Yerevan's flirtations with Western powers and the seeding of anti-Russian hysteria in Armenia may work in Baku's favor. If Yerevan remains firmly within the Russian orbit, begins containing its Western-financed fifth column and begins working on deepening Russo-Armenian relations, then Artsakh proper, all of it, will remain part of Armenia. Regarding the "7 territories" outside of Artsakh proper: From a personal, Armenian perspective, I would rather not want us pulling back from any of the territories in question. The Azeri occupation of Nakhijevan, Shahumyan and parts of Martakert is bad enough. I would actually like to see these territories brought back to Armenia one day. The south Caucasus is very cluttered. Armenia's has virtually no defensive depth. So, yes, territorial expansion (especially towards the Black Sea and/or Russia) should be in the hearts and minds of all Armenians around the world. That said, there may come a time for us to pull back from some of the said territories currently under our control.

If Baku is genuinely interested in ending hostilities with Yerevan, I don't see a problem with Armenian troops, for instance, withdrawing from Aghdam. I am merely suggesting. Aghdam for recognition. Perhaps Fizuli for Shahumyan. From the perspective of realpolitik, such a deal, if achieved, would be a major victory for Armenia. I also don't see any problems with stationing Russians troops between Armenians and the Azeris. As I mentioned, Armenia does not have defensive depth. In real military terms, Armenian control over a region like Aghdam does not in real military terms solve this problem. Russian troops can thus act as Armenia's defensive depth on Armenia's eastern front, as they do on Armenia's western front. I therefore have no problems with having Moscow place its peacekeepers between Armenia and Azerbaijan. I also have no problems with Armenian forces pulling back from some territories - if (I emphasize if) Baku is genuinely willing to reciprocate such a move by Armenia by recognizing Artsakh's reunification with Armenia. 

However, what cannot under any circumstances be discussed (i.e. Armenia's red line) is return of Azeri "refugees" and pulling back from Karvajar and Berdzor regions. There are things that simply cannot be a subject for discussion. The international community needs to know that there things that we as a nation are willing to go to war over.

In principal, the Armenian side must be willing to negotiate and discuss concessions. Why? Essentially because Azeris are not ready or able to do the same. Official Baku has fostered a culture of hate and extremism with regards to Armenians. It will therefore be very difficult, if not outright impossible, for Baku to negotiate anything with Armenians. Baku has therefore cornered itself into a position where it has no choice but to be maximalistic. The political rigidity in Baku is a key advantage for Yerevan. Let Baku look like the party not willing to negotiate. Let Russian officials view Baku as the primary party undermining their ambitions in the south Caucasus. By showing the international community, particularly Moscow, that Yerevan is ready and willing to make a deal whereas Baku is not, the pressure from Moscow will automatically be placed on Baku. If however official Yerevan listens to our armchair generals in the Diaspora and extremist chobans in Armenia and therefore adopts their irrational attitudes, Moscow will place pressure on Yerevan as well.

Ultimately, the important thing for us here of course is getting the kind of deal we want. This in my opinion is contingent upon how effectively we lobby Russians. The key to our success lies in the effort we put into explaining to our Russian partners the importance of keeping Artsakh fully under Armenian administration. An intelligent approach to the matter would be to somehow convince Kremlin officials that Armenian control over all of Artsakh serves Russia's regional interests. In other words: Making Russians believe that it is in their interests to have Armenians not only control Artsakh proper but also its surrounding territories. How this can be done, I'll leave to the talents of Armenia's leadership. However, this is the kind of problem solving we need to engage in as a people. This is the kind of mindset we need in Yerevan and in the Armenian Diaspora.

That said, we will fail miserably if we do what our "nationalistic" idiots tend to do during times like this - which is to turn against Russia and get the self-destructive urge to try to establish a ծովից-ծով Հայաստան. Anti-Russian attitudes in Yerevan will not help us in anyway, not only because it seeds Armenia's younger generations with a cancerous toxicity but also because it will make Moscow distrustful of Yerevan. Why would Russians want to strengthen a nation that exhibits any degree of Russophobic tendencies? 

Instead of Russophobia and illusions of grandeur, this is a time when the Russian Bear has to be fully embraced by Armenians - if we want it to do us any favors. In other words, telling Russians that we will look Westward if it does not do everything we want it to do will not work. In other words, we Armenians need to develop some political sophistication, and do so real fast. In this regard, I'm glad to say Baku is in the worst position because unlike Armenian officials who have repeatedly shown their willingness to negotiate, Azeri officials have raised an entire generation of Azeris to harbor intense hate for Armenians and expect total victory in Artsakh. Therefore, while a land for peace deal may create some unpleasant situations in Armenia (like the one we saw last summer), it may actually topple Sultan Aliyev. Aliyev's ouster, which is a real possibility, has the potential to either bring to power a more aggressive government (one that will upset Moscow) or pro-Russian government (that will upset Western powers and Turkey). Both cases would work in Armenia's favor.

We as a people need to be smart and farsighted about this. This is where a healthy understanding of geopolitics, international relations and an emotionless approach to political matters is essential for a positive outcome. What lands we give back in exchange for peace is ultimately dependent upon the capabilities of our officials and the quality of our relationship with Russia. The most important thing here for us is to understand that organized lobbying efforts in Moscow is an essential need. It therefore concerns me that one of the major flaws in Armenia's foreign policy today is the lack of Armenian lobbying efforts in Moscow. So, if Russians one day make decisions that are against the interests of Armenia/Artsakh, it will essentially be a failure of Armenian diplomacy.

I repeat: Russia will secure Armenia's and Artsakh's existence. There is no doubt about that. Actually, Russian military representatives have in the past suggested Russia will intervene on Armenia's behalf if Azerbaijan launches a war against Armenia or Artsakh. But the particulars of that existence (exact boundaries) will be determined by how well Armenians lobby Armenian interests inside the walls of the Kremlin. We need to lobby Russian officials as obsessively as we lobby Western officials for genocide recognition. Success in Artsakh is contingent upon the quality of Armenia's ties with Russia.

The desire to maintain a close relationship with Western powers - essentially for financial handouts - has made official Yerevan neglect its ties with Moscow. Azerbaijan and Turkey on the other hand have been doing their utmost best to lobby Russian officials. The indifference Armenian officials show in regards to Armenia's relations with Russia is very alarming. In the following two television interviews we see Chairman of Union of Armenians in Russia Ara Abrahamyan and former Armenian National Security Council Secretary Arthur Baghdasaryan raising the alarm about the lack of Armenian lobbying efforts inside Moscow and the inability of official Yerevan today to efficiently exploit its strategic relationship with Moscow -
Ara Abrahamyan (watch from 18:25): http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=rpf0iLdCJmU&feature= youtube_gdata_player

Արթուր Բաղդասարյան (watch from 48:30): https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=GARDQ9WCcko
And this, about the lack of Yerevan's footprint in Armenia's most important neighbor -
Alexander Gusyev: “Iran is building a road through Azerbaijan because of Armenian leadership’s indifference”: http://rusarminfo.ru/alexander-gusyev-iran-is-building-a-road-through-azerbaijan-because-of-armenian-leaderships-indifference/
Amazingly, Armenia, a nation today that is desperately dependent on Russia and to a lesser extent Iran for survival, is not actively engaging in any form of organized lobbying efforts in Moscow or Tehran! It seems that Armenians are too busy searching for easy money and luxury goods in the Western world. And they say Armenians are smart?!?!?! Armenia's diplomatic void in Moscow has been so apparent that Russians themselves are now complaining about it. During a recent press conference in Yerevan, Vladimir Solovyov implied that the Armenian ambassador to Russia is failing to do his job -
Ո՞վ է Ռուսաստանում Հայաստանի դեսպանը, ես չգիտեմ․ Սոլովյով: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03mJkpA3I4M
Within days after Vladimir Solovyov's complaint about the absence of Armenian political activity in Moscow, official Yerevan finally announced some long overdue changes -
Vardan Toghanyan is new Armenian Ambassador to Russia : http://www.mediamax.am/en/news/politics/22544/
Vardan Toghanyan intends to strengthen Armenian lobbying in Russia: http://www.mediamax.am/en/news/politics/22711/
Armenian Ambassador to Russia says one of his major tasks is to make Armenia attractive for investors: https://armenpress.am/eng/news/883594/armenian-ambassador-to-russia-says-one-of-his-major-tasks-is-to-make-armenia-attractive-for-investors.html 
Armenian Ambassador to Russia: No anti-Russian political parties or blocs in Armenia: http://arka.am/en/news/politics
Finally! I have been advocating organized Armenian lobbying efforts in Moscow for well over ten years now. I guess we needed to hear it from Russians themselves. But just think about this for a moment. It was Russians themselves that noticed a void in Armenian diplomacy in Moscow and felt compelled to tell us that we needed to do something about it. Doesn't that say a lot?! Doesn't that suggest Russians are actually concerned about Armenia well being? Doesn't that reveal just how politically incompetent we Armenians tend to be? It's so damn embarrassing for me as an Armenian that we had to wait until a Russian came to our country to tell us something we ourselves should have easily, quickly figured out some twenty-five years ago. In any case, better late than never. 

As unlikely as it may seem right now, there is a very strong chance that a final settlement will be possible in the coming years. When such an opportunity comes, we as a people should be ready to embrace it. If we want to see Armenia resume the development it had begun during Soviet times, we need regional peace. If we want to see Armenians begin repatriating to Armenia once again; we need regional peace. If we want to see peace and stability return to the south Caucasus - then Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan will have to enter the Russian orbit once more and we need to end the Great Game, the international tug-of-war taking place in the region for more than 25 years now. Ultimately, what the the south Caucasus desperately needs is Pax Russica. I believe Georgia will come to terms with Russia, sooner or later, with or without Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Russian officials know that their agenda to bring Georgia back under Russia's fold will become much easier once the dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan is settled. Therefore, the key to establishing Pax Russica in the region is resolving the dispute over Artsakh.


As of now, however, all this talk about "land for peace" is a moot matter. We are not dealing with rational people on the other side of the negotiations table. I do not think Baku will willingly and in good faith negotiate with Yerevan. Knowing how Azeris/Turks are, I'm afraid the only way to settle the Artsakh dispute for once and for all will be through another war. A real war, not like the one we had a year ago. The only other way the dispute can be settled is if Azerbaijan descends into chaos in the next few years, which is also a real possibility. In either case, Moscow will most likely step in and clean-up the mess. Therefore, sooner or later, one way or another, one of the warring parties, perhaps both, will be dragged to the peace table and be forced to sign a settlement agreement. Let's hope that the party that will be dragged to the table is Baku. Actually, let's not hope, let's work towards making that happen. When that day comes, Yerevan can outclass Baku on the battlefield and at the negotiations table through a powerful military, political foresight and deep ties with the Kremlin,

Moscow sells arms to Baku because major powers see the world on a grander scale

I understand that all this is a moot point for a vast majority of Armenians. The thing that Armenians generally speaking have a very hard time understanding is realpolitik. It does not matter how wealthy or how educated an Armenian is, when it comes to serious political matters, the Armenian acts like emotional child. An Armenian can be brilliant in science, medicine, literature, art, business, sports, etc. But somehow when it comes to politics, the Armenian is a self-destructive peasant regardless of his or her social status. I personally think this is a serious matter that has its roots in culture (up bringing) and genetics (i.e. breeding). Political ignorance is so pervasive in Armenian society that there is actually an Armenian word for describing politically ignorant Armenians engaging in serious political analysis: It's called, կոշկակարների քաղաքականութիւն.

Translated, կոշկակարների քաղաքականութիւն means the politics according to shoemakers. In other words: Tradesmen trying to make sense out of stuff that is well above their heads.

And when you add typical Armenian arrogance and emotions to this kind of illiteracy, politics all of a sudden becomes volatile . For such people, politics is like a domestic dispute or a street brawl. And the sad thing about Armenian society today is that it's not only tradesmen but doctors, professors, lawyers, clergymen and even politicians that engage in կոշկակարների քաղաքականութիւն. It is no secret therefore that Western intelligence services and their lackeys embedded throughout Armenian society are on the constant lookout to hijack complex geopolitical matters like the issue of Russian arms sales to Azerbaijan and grossly misrepresent the matter to make it fit neatly into their self-serving political narrative. That narrative, a poisonous cocktail, is then fed to the Armenian sheeple through a number activists and news media outlets. Consequently, discussions about Russia and Artsakh among Armenians inevitably turns into discussions about Russians betraying Armenia -
Armenia: Feeling Betrayed by Russia?: http://www.eurasianet.org/node/71031
Armenia's Fair-Weather Allies: https://www.stratfor.com/geopolitical-diary/armenias-fair-weather-allies
Is Russia a Friend or Foe?: http://www.mirrorspectator.com/2013/06/25/friend-or-foe/#sthash.2kjO7B8l.dpu
Sleeping with Our Enemy: Russia Sells Weapons to Azerbaijan: http://hetq.am/eng/news/58661/sleeping-with-our-enemy-russia-sells-weapons-to-azerbaijan.html
Is Russia Really Armenia’s Ally?: http://armenianweekly.com/2016/04/19/boyajian-russia/
With Friends Like Russia, Who Needs Enemie: http://www.eurasianet.org/node/72616
Russia’s Double Dealing in Armenia and Azerbaijan: https://intpolicydigest.org/2016/12/07/russia-s-double-dealing-armenia-azerbaijan/
Armenian expert fears Russia to betray Armenia: https://news.am/eng/news/1249.html
Paul Goble: Russia will betray Armenians, if needed: http://news.am/eng/news/290706.html
I have lost count of how many times I have reflected on this matter, but I guess one more time won't hurt. To begin with, I present the reader the Russian Prime Minister's comments about this most contentious of matters for us Armenians -
"If we imagine for a minute that Russia has given up this role (of arms seller), we well understand that this place will not stay vacant... They will buy weapons in other countries, and the degree of their deadliness won't change in any way... But at the same time, this could destroy the existing balance of forces (in the region)" - Dmitry Medvedev'
Russia's Prime Minister basically said: If Moscow broke its ties with Baku, then Western, Israeli, Turkish and Islamist interests will inevitably fill the void; the region will not be less militarized; and Armenia will not be able to maintain its military parity with a wealthy Azerbaijan. In other words, PM Medvedev is saying Moscow would lose control of the situation in the region if it stopped dealing with Baku.

From an emotional perspective, I don't like the thought of our allies in Moscow selling weapons to our enemies in Baku. From a political perspective, however, I fully agree with the comments made by the Russian prime minister. I think the situation with Baku could be much worst had Russia not been in the picture in Azerbaijan. Moscow primary concern is to keep Baku within its orbit. In trying to reclaim the south Caucasus as a Russian zone of influence, Moscow is doing its best to keep Baku away from the Turkey, US, Europe, Israel and Islamists - while keeping Armenia protected at the same time. In my opinion, Moscow is executing a very sophisticated political approach to the very complex dispute in question. And Western-activists, like the filthy smut-peddlers that they are, are exploiting Moscow's political predicament and vulnerability to incite Russophobia inside Armenia.

Let's recognize the fact that Baku has the petrodollars to purchase whatever it wants. If Russia does not sell it the weaponry it is seeking, there are a number of nations that are more than willing to do so. Western powers, Turkey and Israel have in fact been providing Baku with billions-of-dollars in arms and training. The US and Britain even train Azeri sharpshooters, those responsible for killing Armenian border guards. Russian arms sales to Baku is not directed against Armenia. Military specialists and political analysts agree that Russian arms sales to Baku and Yerevan are designed to maintain the balance of power between Armenia and Azerbaijan. It may also be a pressure tactic to ensure Yerevan's allegiance to Moscow and allow Russia a greater role inside Armenia and/or Artsakh. This is somewhat similar to how Washington tries to keep its influence over Turks and Greeks and Israelis and Arabs by selling the conflicted parties US made weaponry and mediating between them when problems occur. This was why Azerbaijani forces did not used any of their newly acquired weapons systems against Armenian defense forces in Artsakh during the four day war in April. 

 While Russia sells weaponry to Azerbaijan at market prices, it gives weaponry to Armenia at domestic (insider) prices, and sometimes for free. Azeris have had the luxury - the petrodollars - to purchase whatever they want from whomever they want. Armenia on the other hand does not have the resources for maintaining military parity with Azerbaijan. Russia is therefore giving Armenia whatever arms it needs to counter Azeri aggression. The recent provision of the Iskander ballistic missile system to Armenia is proof of this. We also know that Armenia has a tiny military (so tiny that yearly recruitment quotas aren't even being met). By militarily covering the entire length of Armenia's vulnerable border with Turkey, Russia is giving Armenia the ability to concentrate its meager resources on its more manageable border with Azerbaijan. This is how Russia's military presence in Armenia is the single most strategic factor contributing to Armenia's existence as a nation-state in the south Caucasus.

We also need to recognize that Russia has normal relations with Azerbaijan. Moscow is also trying hard to lure Azerbaijan into its orbit and by selling it the weaponry that Baku wants, Moscow realizes it gains leverage over Baku - which is good for Armenia. Russia will therefore do its best to maintain good relations with Baku while making sure Armenia is protected from Baku. I should also add this: Even though Armenia is allied to Russia and Armenians in general are very pro-Russian, Kremlin officials know very well that Armenians in positions of power can be easily bought by Western money and that Armenia and Armenian society in general is rife with Western operatives. A quick look at Armenian society these days is enough to show one that Russians cannot trust Armenians, even if there was a thing called “trust” in politics. Therefore, Russia will protect its only strategic ally in the south Caucasus but it will also make sure to also have some leverage over Yerevan by arming Baku, just in case. Russia is thus managing the situation on the ground between Yerevan and Baku by making sure that the current status quo, that which benefits the Armenian side, is maintained.

At the end of the day, for Moscow, there is also something called realpolitik: The necessity to keep both Yerevan and Baku dependent on Russia. I am willing to admit that Russian arms sales to Azerbaijan (specifically, the delivery of weapons systems such as the Smerch) is one of the flaws found in Russo-Armenian relations today. Such flaws however are in my opinion a consequence of Yerevan's flirtations with the West and the absence of Armenian lobbying activities in Moscow. In any case, Baku seems more rational in this regard -
President Aliyev: No allergy in Azerbaijan for Russia's selling arms to Armenia: http://en.trend.az/azerbaijan/politics/2543191.html
Nevertheless, Russian arms sales to Baku is not a serious threat to Armenia because, as already noted, Moscow provides Armenia with countermeasures to such arms, and also because most of the weapons systems Moscow sells to Baku, such as warships and anti-aircraft missiles, are in fact not directed against Armenia. Russians have gone out of their way to explains these things to us -
Moscow maintains parity in arms trade with Yerevan, Baku: http://www.panarmenian.net/eng/news/217213/
Russian expert: Armenia should be interested in Russian-Azeri arms deals: http://www.arminfo.am
Moscow’s arming Azeris beneficial to Armenia: Russian news agency chief: http://www.panarmenian.net/eng/news/234333
Most of Baku's recent arms purchases from Russia are defensive weapons meant for their air and sea defenses. One also finds quite a bit of Western and Israeli made weaponry in Azerbaijan's arsenal. In fact, most of the damage inflicted on the Armenian side during the "four day" war came as a result of Israeli made weapons. More importantly, as noted above, for every weapons system Russia sells to Baku it gives Armenia weapons that can counter it on the battlefield. As such, Moscow is maintaining the balance of power between Yerevan and Baku, as it makes sure to keep control over both Yerevan and Baku. Simply put, what Moscow is doing is a pragmatic execution of realpolitik and conflict management. Basically, Moscow is macro-managing the situation on the ground by keeping leverage over both nations and making sure neither nation slips away from its influence. At the end of the day, the big bad Russian Bear is Armenia’s one and only ally, and thank God for that because without Russia, all of the south Caucasus has the potential to be overrun by Turks and Muslims. What Armenians need to be worried about instead is the military support Anglo-American-Jews are giving to Turks and Azeris - 
Azerbaijani lieutenant colonel killed in Karabakh was trained in USA: https://horizonweekly.ca/am/86300-2/
American military contractors MPRI Inc is training Azeri marksmen: http://www.militaryindustrialcomplex.com/contract_detail.asp?contract_id=81
US Naval Special Ops Demos Training in Azerbaijan: http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=26294
The Sunday Times: British special forces carried out secret trainings in Azerbaijan: http://www.panorama.am/en/society/2013/10/21/sunday-times/
Is a US-Financed Azeri Satellite A Threat to Armenia’s Security?: http://asbarez.com/94756/is-a-us-financed-azeri-satellite-a-threat-to-armenia%E2%80%99s-security/
Azerbaijan Has Advantage Over Armenia In U.S. Military Aid: http://www.eurasianet.org/node/78831
Azerbaijan Makes Massive Israeli Weapons: http://www.eurasianet.org/node/65053
Israel Signs $1.6 Billion Arms Deal With Azerbaijan: http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/israel-signs-1-6-billion-arms-deal-with-azerbaijan-1.414916
Israel’s Role In The Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict: http://www.mintpressnews.com/israels-role-nagorno-karabakh-conflict/215684/
Karabakh Fighting Highlights Azerbaijan's New Israeli Weapons: http://www.eurasianet.org/node/78181
Azerbaijan and Israel’s Aerospace Industry. A Worrying Concern for Armenia or Iran?: https://www.bellingcat.com/news/rest-of-world/2015/05/04
Turkish Jets to Deliver American Nuclear Warheads: http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/turkey-given-possession-of-nuclear-warheads-
Similar to how discussions about Russia and Armenia among Armenians inevitably turn into discussions about Russian arms sales to Azerbaijan, discussions about Russian and Azerbaijani or Turkish relations among Armenians inevitably turns into discussions about the controversial Russian political philosopher, Alexander Dugin.

Alexander Dugin is an extremely intelligent man and he has a strategic vision that needs to be supported. Despite what Western pundits say about him, Dugin is not one of President Putin's closest advisors. He does nonetheless have ties to political and security officials in the Russian Federation. Russian officials have given him the freedom and the task of pursuing his vision. Simply put: Dugin's desire is the repulsion of Western advances in Eurasia by making peace or, if possible, an alliance with Russia's neighboring Turkic peoples. His ultimate desire is to lure Turks (and Azeris) into Russia's orbit. Whether or not this can be done is altogether another topic of discussion. But let's recall that the Bolsheviks failed because of Ataturk's, at the time unknown, intimate ties with the Anglo-American-Jewish world. Perhaps Russians are sensing a better opportunity this time with Erdogan.

The main thing to understand here is that Russians are trying to disarm/defang the region's Turkic peoples because it is the smart thing to do. The alternative to peaceful coexistence with the region's Turkic and Islamic peoples is to have them - one hundred million-plus Turks, Chechens, Azeris, Uzbeks, Tatars, Turkmens, ect. (many millions of whom also live in the Russian Federation itself) - as enemies of Russia. Moscow is trying to avoid a clash of civilization because, unlike Western nations, Russia actually borders the Turkic/Islamic world. What Russians are trying to do is therefore strategically wise. I wish them success, because I do not see what they are doing as a threat to Armenia. Russian officials, as well as influential men like Alexander Dugin, know that a fundamental element in trying to establish leverage over Turkic peoples in the region is to have a solid alliance between Russia and Armenia. Russians know all too well that Turkic peoples and Muslims can't be trusted. They therefore look at Armenia as their strategic stronghold and their insurance policy. In a nutshell, the following is more-or-less Alexander Dugin's agenda -
Dugin: "Our goal is the liberation of Turkey from American influence; Armenia is our greatest ally": http://www.fort-russ.com/2015/11/dugin-our-goal-is-liberation-of-turkey.html
Better Russian-Turkish or better Russian-Azeri relations does not pose an existential threat to Armenia. On the contrary, in the big picture, it would be better for Armenia if Turks and/or Azeris did indeed have better relations with Russia. While Alexander Dugin may not be Armenia's friend, but he is not Armenia's enemy either. Alexander Dugin is simply a Russian nationalist, and he is also someone that Armenians need to embrace and engage. I find it troubling and somewhat strange that we Armenians are always upset with the man, but there has never been an effort on our part to connect with him. When was the last time Armenian officials invited him to Armenia for meetings? When was the last time a Diasporan organization invited him for meetings? Have we had closed door meetings with the man? As far as I'm aware, at least on a public level, Armenians have not been in touch with him. Here we have an influential man in Russian politics and Armenians have not attempted to establish ties with him. Why? Because we Armenians have mastered the art of sitting back and just whining and complaining about things we don't like.

To recap: Russian arms sales to Baku does not mean Russia is abandoning Armenia (Moscow would sooner occupy Armenia than abandon it). Russia is not taking sides against Armenia (had Russia taken sides against Armenia, we would not have an Armenia today). Remember that we are talking about a tiny, impoverished and blockaded nation that would not be able to defend itself against any of its predatory neighbors had it not been for the military and economic support it receives from Russia. The same actually applies to Artsakh. Had Russia actually been against Artsakh being under Armenian control, the situation there would have been a whole lot different today. This is the bottom line: Oil rich Baku has the money to purchase whatever it wants from whoever it wants. Armenia does not have that luxury. Russia therefore sells Baku what its military wants to purchase, and Moscow gives to Yerevan what Armenia's military needs to counter what Baku has purchased. In doing so, it maintains levers over both parties. It's that simple.

Russia has been the only reason why an impoverished, landlocked and blockaded Armenia has been able to maintain military parity with an oil rich Azerbaijan. Moreover, Russia is the only factor keeping western Turks on their side of the border, thereby allowing us Armenians to concentrate our limited resources on the Azeri threat. 

Ironically, those who are warning Armenians about Russia are those who are directly or indirectly serving Western and Turkish interests. The point is, Armenia is too small and too weak to have influence even over its territory. The Armenian nation-state is within the Russian orbit, it's part of the Russian world. If Russian influence in Armenia is weakened, American influence will increase by default. Needless to say, falling under Western influence will prove catastrophic for Armenia. Thankfully, Russia will never betray Armenia nor will it ever abandon the south Caucasus. Russian-Armenian relations has historically been based on very firm geostrategic foundations. The two centuries old friendship between the peoples of Russia and Armenia have passed the test of time. Yes, there are flaws in the relationship as there are flaws in any relationship. But instead of fear-mongering about Russia (which is becoming a popular pass time in some circles of Armenian society), Armenians should embark on a pan-national effort to fix the existing flaws between Moscow and Yerevan.

Russia is a massive nation bordering Europe, the Middle East, the Caucasus, Central Asia the Far East and the United States. Russia is a superpower. As with all superpowers, Moscow carefully/meticulously formulates geostrategy and implements them cautiously, systematically and professionally. As we saw in the aftermath of the downing of the Russian warplane over the border between Syria and Turkey by the Turkish air force, there is absolutely no room for emotions or knee-jerk reactions in superpower politics. Major powers like Russia see the world on a much grander scale than would a small ethnic group like us Armenians. Russians therefore look at a issue like the dispute over Artsakh or Syria, or even Novorossiya for that matter, not from an emotional, cultural or historical perspective, as we Armenians love to do, but from a legal, political and geostrategic angle as major powers do. It's time we as a people start understanding all this if we want to safely navigate the periodic storms that afflicts the south Caucasus - and exploit opportunities when they present themselves.

Why Armenia needs to remain close to the Russian Bear

The flames ignited by Western powers are slowly getting closer to Armenia's borders. There are troubling signs that the flames will be getting more intense in the coming years. Ukraine, Syria and Iraq will remain very volatile. Turkey, Lebanon, Georgia and Azerbaijan will remain unpredictable, The situation may unexpectedly worsen in any one of these countries. Iran, thus far stable, may find itself in a major war sometime in the next few years. The Azerbaijani leadership will most likely continue its war of attrition, hoping to foment a political uprising inside Armenia. Western-funded activists operating throughout Armenia will continue stirring trouble in the country. Simply put: The situation around Armenia is highly volatile and it may get much worst before it subsides. Armenia's neighborhood is living up to its terrible reputation.

Dangerous neighborhoods, like the one in the south Caucasus, as well as dangerous periods in human history, like the times we are living in, should underscore the strategic importance of maintaining close ties with Russia. Times like this is ultimately why Armenia needs the Russian Bear. Times like this is also why Russia needs Armenia. For Armenians, however, nature of Armenia's ties with Russia is a matter of life and death.

It is therefore a matter that is existential in nature; so much so that Armenia's ties to Russia is in my opinion more important than its ties to the Armenian Diaspora. I am saying this as a Diasporan Armenian. And I am saying this for a very simple and logical reason: Only the Russian Bear can help Armenia defend itself from regional predators. 

If Armenia's existence was ever threatened, which is a mathematical inevitability for a place like the south Caucasus, the best that the Armenian Diaspora would be able to do is send some money, a few hundred military volunteers, and of course organize a lot of rallies in Western capitals. In other words, the Armenian Diaspora would be utterly useless for Armenia in times of a major war. Note: What happened in Artsakh in the 1990s was not a major war, Azerbaijan did not even have a standing army until very late in the war, and the Armenian Diaspora was not instrumental in wining the war for Armenia. Artsakh was liberated because of the fighting spirit of Armenians in the region and because of direct military support from Russia which began arriving starting in 1992, after a post-Soviet Moscow had regained its geopolitical composure. I therefore am a Russophile just as much as I'm an Armenian nationalist. I therefore take heart in knowing that Russia and Armenia today are as close as they have ever been -
Defense Minister Vigen Sargsyan: Russian military base in Armenia is responsible for country’s security matters: https://news.am/eng/news/374787.html
President Sargsyan calls Russia Yerevan's top economic partner: https://sputniknews.com/business/201703141051550076-armenia-russia-to-economic-partner/
Presidential advisor Vazgen Manukyan says development of military industry is moving force of EEU progress: https://www.armenpress.am/eng/news/882157/vazgen-manukyan-says-development-of-military-industry-is-moving-force-of-eeu-progress.html
Russia-based ethnic Armenian entrepreneurs promise to invest $300 million in homeland this year: http://arka.am/en/news/economy
Armenia, Russia to launch joint investment fund: http://www.tert.am/en/news/2017/03/15/fund/2308968
Russia and Armenia may switch to settlements in national currencies: http://tass.com/economy/935670
Armenia is joining forces with Russia: http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/11/29/armenia-is-literally-joining-forces-with-russia/
Pew Research Center: 83% of Armenians look to Russia to counter the West: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/05/10/9-key-findings-about-religion-and-politics-in-central-and-eastern-europe
Although Armenians are by nature very pro-Russian, as a recent Pew Research poll clearly revealed, had it been for the so-called "democratic process", in which most political activists are financed by Western interests, Armenia would have been torn from Russia a long time ago, and the country would have been thoroughly ravaged by regional predators as a result. Armenia has stayed under Russia's protection thanks to a handful of people known to Western activists as the "Karabakh clan". Despite the current Armenian leadership's flaws, both real and perceived, they need to be at least commended for keeping Armenia within Russia's orbit. Armenia's Հանրապետական Կուսակցություն (Hanrapetakan) therefore continues being the lesser evil in the country's decrepit political landscape.

On the wake of Armenia's recent parliamentary elections, I'd like to point out that the popularity enjoyed by unsavory characters like Gagik Tsarukyan, Raffi Hovanissian, Levon Ter Petrosian and Nikol Pashinyan is ample proof that Armenia's electorate remains emotionally unstable and politically illiterate. Armenia's citizenry cannot be trusted with the thing called democracy. Gagik Tsarukyan's Բարգավաճ Հայաստան կուսակցություն (Barkavaj Hayastan) is arguably the most popular political party in Armenia today. Why? Simply because Gagik Tsarukyan gives out handouts. In other words, he is popular because Armenia's electorate is full of beggars with no dignity or self-respect. Don't believe the nonsense about Armenians hating their oligarchs. In the depths of their hearts Armenians actually admire their oligarchs. This is why Armenia's oligarchs are warmly received everywhere they go in the country. This is why not one of them have in any way been harmed by any Armenian (including nationalist crazies) during the past 25-plus years. Armenians are merely envious of their oligarchs. In any case, democracy and capitalism for a politically immature and materialistic people like Armenians is a painful road to national suicide. Most Armenians do not yet understand this. A growing number however are beginning to. One is Markar Melkonian (Monte Melkonian's brother). Markar Melkonian has been warning Armenians about democracy, capitalism and Russophobia for some years now.

I would also like to say that Armenia's Hanrapetakan party pulled off a very impressive win during the parliamentary elections. The voting process was very well organized, relatively orderly and surprisingly modern. Approximately 60% of all registered voters participated, which is also impressive for a country like Armenia where political apathy rules. Hanrapetakans were able to secure about 50% of the votes. The runner-up was Gagik Tsarukyan's Barkavaj Hayastan party, and they got 30% of the votes. More significantly, the losing parties did not object to the final tally. This in itself is no small miracle. Are Armeniams growing up? Perhaps. I nonetheless give Prime Minister Karen Karapetyan the credit for all this. A lot changed in Armenia's political landscape since his return last autumn.

I also have to add this: Armenia's Western activists finally got their wish, but with a little, ironic twist.

Armenia's political system now fully resembles the Western model: Armenia today has a top heavy political system, where the country's citizenry is allowed to participate in limited forms of democracy and where a handful of mainstream political parties are tightly controlled from above by an unseen elite. What Armenia's Western activists were not expecting however is that Moscow is that unseen elite controlling the political process from above. Thank God.

 This election cycle showed that Moscow has also begun paying more attention to Armenia. The Kremlin has been actively pulling the political strings in the country right now. Levon Petrosyan, Seyran Ohanyan and Gagik Tsarukyan and several others were playing the role of controlled opposition. Raffi Hovanissian and Vartan Oskanian were allowed to exist for show, like political stage props. Regarding Vartan Oskanian: They put him up on charges in 2012 for not disclosing the millions of dollars he was receiving from a John Huntsman in the United States. He never fully recovered from that ordeal since. Regarding Raffi Hovanissian: Remember when he was boycotting President Sargsyan's win in 2012? Remember when he stopped his nonsense? One minute he was on a hunger strike, next minute he was suddenly flying to Moscow to have closed-door meetings with undisclosed individuals. Raffi more-or-less retired from Armenian politics after his return from Moscow. A similar thing had happened to Gagik in 2007. In any case, as I said, by the latest election cycle in Armenia, men like Raffi and Vartan had become political stage props. The only real political opposition in the country today is, or rather was, Founding Parliament and Paruyr Hayrikian's handful of zombies.

In other words, there is no real political opposition in the country anymore. In other words, Armenia is now a country with two main political parties, Hanrapetakan and Bargavaj Hayastan and they both serve one master. In other words, Armenian politics resembles the American model. Armenia's Western-funded activists should be happy, but they are not. Russia's growing role in the political process in Armenia has become so obvious that even the Washington DC based Stratfor has picked up on it. The following is an excerpt from one of their recent articles -
"But no matter which party comes out on top, Russia can't lose. Karapetyan, Ohanyan and Tsarukyan alike all have close ties with Moscow, whether through business contacts or personal relationships with high-ranking Russian politicians. The prime minister, for example, has ties with several influential figures in Moscow and, as a former executive of the company's Armenian branch, a deep rapport with Gazprom. These relationships are an asset for Russia: The country has a vested interest in the upcoming election, since the party that emerges victorious will have the most say over Armenia's foreign policy. And because the RPA is leading the polls, Moscow isn't worried about keeping anti-Russian parties from taking over. Instead, it is focused on promoting alternative pro-Russian politicians who could eventually challenge Sarkisian or his successor (probably Karapetyan) if necessary. The Kremlin hopes that a future administration of its engineering could quell persistent concerns in Armenia about Russia's stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute and its arms deals with Azerbaijan"
Basically, they are admitting to the obvious; the obvious begin that Moscow has more political control over Yerevan today than at any time during the post-Soviet period. The closing of CIA agent John Hugh's ArmeniaNow office in Yerevan a year ago was a good omen. After his dismal showing in the latest election cycle, the American agent Vartan Oskanian has officially abandoned his activities in Armenia and has gone back to his homeland in the United States. Rumors are that Raffi Hovanissian may follow his footsteps. One by one, Uncle Sam's agents are dropping out of the political scene in Armenia essentially because they have been, as President Trump would say, total losers.

For reasons I outlined in several previous blog commentaries, generally speaking, the so-called Armenian street cannot be trusted to do what is in the best interest of Armenia. Let's not fool ourselves, we Armenians today are a mere shadow of what we used to be. The overall quality of the Armenian electorate today is frighteningly low. Armenians continues being Armenia's worst enemy. The situation in the graveyard known as the Armenian Diaspora is no better. We have already seen the dangers of allowing the ignorant masses partake in the political process in 2008 and 2013. Armenia does not need a replay in 2018. I am in no way insinuating that the current leadership is ideal. It is however the lesser evil. It is the devil we know. What I hope to see in Armenia someday is an authoritarian government led by well educated, pragmatic and nationalistic leaders with very close ties to Moscow. Anything else will be a painful road to eventual ruin. This is why I continue to believe that the current leadership remains Armenia's safest choice, and men like Prime Minister Karen Karapetyan remain the country's only hope.

Armenia has survived the past twenty-five years in the south Caucasus (as well as the past two hundred years to be exact) not because of capitalism, democracy, the nation-building talents of Armenians or the "almighty" Armenian Diaspora - but because of Armenia's intimate ties to the Russian nation. Russians laid the foundations of today's Armenia. Russians continue keeping Armenia alive. Armenians need to profoundly understand this. Armenians also need to find comfort in knowing that the Russian Bear needs Armenia and will continue needing Armenia for as long as the Caucasus region and its surrounding areas remain Turkic and Islamic. This is why Russian forces are in Armenia to protect the country's western border. This is why despite Armenia's flirtations with Western powers; despite the fact that Armenian politicians today cannot be trusted; despite the fact that a majority of Armenians today are ready to flee their homeland - Moscow gives Yerevan the economic help to keep Armenia afloat and the military resources to defend itself against regional predators.

As to the matter of Russian arms sales to Azerbaijan: Moscow does it essentially because it wants to stop Azerbaijan from drifting too far from its center of geopolitical gravity. Maintaining ties with Azerbaijan enables Moscow to have some leverage over Baku. This keeps other nations like Turkey and Israel from further deepening their ties with Azerbaijan. Do we Armenians really want Baku to fall fully under Turkish and/or Islamic influences or would we rather have Moscow hold at least some sway over it? As long as Russia is providing Armenia the proper military countermeasures (often times free of charge) to defeat what Azerbaijan is purchasing with its petro-dollars from a number of countries around the world, is it really smart for Armenians to throw temper-tantrums every time Moscow sells anything to Baku? By engaging both Yerevan and Baku, Moscow manages to maintain control over both Armenia and Azerbaijan. From a Russian perspective, it's essentially conflict management, and it's something that is also in Armenia's interest.

Nevertheless, although there remains some flaws in the relationship (in my opinion mostly due to the absence of Armenian lobbying efforts in Moscow) Russia's goodwill towards Armenia is genuine and long-termed. When it comes to a number of geostrategic matters, there is a lot of convergence of interests between Russia and Armenia. Russia and Armenia are therefore natural allies and will remain so for the foreseeable future. Also, while Western powers are in decline, Russia is on the rise politically, militarily and economically - and will remain so for the foreseeable future. Russia is therefore a historic opportunity for Armenia as well. However, many Armenians today seem incapable of fully comprehending any of this because in my opinion there are large numbers of professionals working hard to distort reality, dirty the atmosphere and sow toxicity and Russophobia throughout Armenian society. The following American agent with an Armenian last name is one such individual -
Agent Richard Giragosian: Ունենք գաղտնի «զենք», որը կփրկի Հայաստանը աշխարհաքաղաքական իմաստով. Ռիչարդ Կիրակոսյան: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVGA_cKP5Ss
Because Armenian society today is saturated by Western operatives, Armenians, generally speaking, seem incapable of fully appreciating Russia as a historic opportunity. Because of Armenian materialism, in addition to its Western agents, Armenian attention is naturally being drawn towards Western countries (US, Canada, Britain, France, Germany, etc.), Western goods (cars, electronic gadgets, clothing, music, etc.) and Western concepts (democracy, globalism, feminism, gay rights, etc.). For such people, Western products and Western lifestyles are worth risking life and limb, as well as Armenia's well-being. I found that one of the main concerns about worsening Russian-West relations several years ago among Armenians in Armenia was the fear that Western products, such as American and German made cars, would be difficult to import into the country as a result. I would tell such people, why don't you instead drive Russian cars that cost a lot less and are much more reliable? I would get either blank stares or laughs in reply. And they say Armenians are smart? Related to this discussion is language: It is very worrying for me that the younger generation in Armenia speak better English than Russian (at least from what I see in Yerevan). This serious problem, strategic in nature, is now being noticed by other observers as well -
It is said that political power travels on the coattails of cultural influence. Movies, television programming, music, cuisine, clothing, literature and language are some of the more potent tools of cultural influence found in the Western arsenal. It is through these tools that Western powers are capable of penetrating through even the hardest of national borders. These are the tools used to subjugate peoples around the world. What makes these tools of cultural influences so dangerous is that those who fall victim to them do not know it. Think of it in this way: If we want to sing their songs, watch their films, eat their foods, drive their cars, trade in their money, wear their clothing and speak their language, how can we then ever think of them as the enemy? If we have our eyes on the West, how can be keep our attention to deepening our ties with our natural allies in the East? If we are thralled by Western culture, how can we stop them from embedding their agents in our societies?

Simply put: By willingly importing their culture into our land, they have already won half the battle against us. Who today understands this? Sadly, not many, which is why Armenians continue singing and dancing to impress imperial officials -
HAPPY YEREVAN: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbZZttoWJn0

U.S.-Armenia FLASH MOB (Official Video): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdmyDhsuucU
The US and British embassies regularly sponsor these types of "cultural" events in Armenia. It's essentially is part of their "soft power" approach to dealing with backward tribes around the world. Armenians in particular are very susceptible to soft power approaches because Armenians in general love handouts, they love singing and dancing and they love to be told just how wonderful they are. While many Armenians today tend to praise the new generation we have in the country today, I tend to say: Let's wait and see how they turn out. The signs, in my opinion, are not all that encouraging. In any case, these types of Western sponsored events basically showcase the cultural/civilization hold the Anglo-American-Jewish world order has over humanity.

Allow me to put it this way: When you get barbarians to willingly sing and dance to your music, you have already more-or-less defeated them.

Again, I want to remind the reader that I do not speak Russian. I am an Anglophone because I have lived in the West for most of my life. In fact, I have a better command of the English language than a vast majority of its native speakers. However, my intellectual honesty and objectivity, as well as my ability to think out of my skin, helps me see the English language for what it really is. English today is the catalyst upon which Globalization (where everybody speaks English and, trades in Western currency and where there are no genders, religions, borders or nationalities) travels on. English is also the vehicle upon which Westernization (the spread of materialism and the worship of Anglo-American-Jewish-African pop culture) is disseminated around the world. It would be wise for us to recognize that language imparts outlook and mentality on its speaker. Every language has a value system of its own. Every language is a world of its own. English today may be the language of international trade, but it is also the language of idiots, perverts and Western-financed activists. For a poor, remote and isolated nation like Armenia, learning English is also the first steppingstone for either leaving the country permanently or working for some Western-financed NGO that is trying to undermine Armenia's statehood.

As such, the most powerful weapon Western powers have in their military arsenal is by-far the cultural influence they have over humanity. And it is we the sheeple, and the choices we make, that give them their power over us. By far, the most important language in Armenia today (after Armenian of course) has to be Russian. Again, I say this as an Anglophone. I look at this matter logically: Russian is the language of Armenia's largest and most affluent diaspora, largest investor, largest trade partner, largest energy provider, largest number of tourists visiting Armenia, largest arms supplier and ONLY military ally. Armenia today lives because of its close ties to Russia. Yet, young people in Armenia are striving to learn English instead?! And they say Armenians are smart?!

I reiterate: Russia is Armenia's most important partner and Russia is home to the world's largest and most affluent Armenian Diaspora. In fact, Armenians of Russia are disproportionately represented in the highest layers of Russian society. Yet, there is no discernible agenda to promote Armenian interests in Moscow today. Turks and Azeris on the other hand do their best to lobby Russian officials. Armenians in contrast are no where to be seen in the Kremlin. Yet, Armenians can be in Moscow what Jews are in Washington DC - but Armenians are too busy begging for handouts and genocide recognition in the West. And they say Armenians are smart?!?!

Although English is the language of international trade, it is always much more effective to speak with business partners in their native languages. In other words, an Armenian businessman will gain a lot more attention and sympathy in places like China, Iran, India, Germany, France, etc., if he converses with his counterparts in their language. After Russian, I believe German, French, Iranian, Chinese and Turkish should also be taught in Armenian schools. English should be part of this tertiary group of languages. When I share these thoughts with fellow Armenians, I mostly get blank stares or laughs in reply. And they say Armenians are smart...

I have learned that Armenians can be very capable in many fields of profession, but when it comes to truly understanding the political world they live in or planning for Armenia's future, Armenians can be very idiotic and self-destructive, like spoiled children. Study of Armenian history suggests this may be a result of genetic traits compounded by Armenian folk culture. This is essentially why Russians feel they have to break with diplomatic protocol to talk sense into Armenians -
Head of Russia’s Institute of Oriental Studies: Russia won’t allow anyone to attack Armenia: https://www.armenpress.am/eng/news/882120/russia
Fyodor Lukyanov deems Russia-Tukey-Azerbaijan alliance as ‘impossible’:  http://www.panorama.am/en/news/2017/03/13/Lukyanov-Russia-Tukey-Azerbaijan-alliance/1743484 
Lavrov: Armenia doesn’t need to fear Russian-Turkish rapprochement: http://www.mediamax.am/en/news/foreignpolicy/22632/
Russian news agency chief: Moscow’s arming Azeris beneficial to Armenia: http://www.panarmenian.net/eng/news/234333/Moscows_arming_Azeris_beneficial_to_Armenia_Russian_news_agency_chief
Ռուսաստանը երբեք թույլ չի տա, որ Արցախի խնդիրը ուժով լուծվի. Վլադիմիր Սոլովյով: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yr_0q9Tcvkw
To be frank, it's very embarrassing for me as an Armenian to see Russians publicly explaining the above to our people. These types of talks usually takes place behind closed doors. I find it troubling that we Armenians are so emotional and out of touch with reality that Russians feel the need to explain to us even the simplest of things. Think for a moment: Do we really need Russians to explain to us that EU membership is very dangerous for Armenia? Do we really need Russians to explain to us that Russia needs Armenia as an ally and vice-versa? Do we really need Russians to explain to us that Russia having good relations with Turkey or Azerbaijan is not a bad thing for Armenia? Do we really need Russians to explain to us that they are actively protecting Armenia from regional predators? These are things Russians would rather not talk about in public because it can undermine Moscow's overall regional strategy. This kind of talk therefore has the potential to adversely effect Moscow's relations with Baku. The fact that Russians feel the strong need to do so is proof that Armenians are politically ignorant and out-of-tough with reality. It's also proof that the pursuit of democracy in a place like Armenia is a toxic affair.

I think Syria should have shown the entire world, us Armenians in particular, the importance of having the Russian Bear on the global arena today. Recent developments in the Middle East should have again reminded us Armenians of the cruel and unforgiving nature of the region in which Armenia is unfortunately located in. A reminder to our westernized Russophobes and nationalist chobans: Armenia's neighbors are not Italians, Greeks, Spaniards, Danes, Germans, Poles or Swedes. Armenia's neighbors Turks, Azeris, Kurds, Iranians, Islamists and backstabbing Georgians. Any degree of "independence" from Russia will automatically, by-default, increase Armenia's dependence on its Turkic/Islamic neighbors. Armenia therefore does not need "independence" from Russia. Speaking of "independence from Russia", I ask: What has independence from Russia gotten Ukrainians and Georgians? After its Western-financed Maidan, Ukraine is economically much worst off, Kiev has no chance of joining NATO or the EU, Crimea has been reunited with Russia, south-eastern Ukraine is a war zone and thousands of Ukrainians have died as a result. After the Western-backed dictator came to power in Tbilisi in 2003, Georgia lost 20% of its territory, poverty and emigration is still a major problem and Turks are everywhere -
Georgia: Anti-Turkish Sentiments Grow as Election Date Nears:  http://www.eurasianet.org/node/65933
Georgians Wary of Turkey’s Rising Influence in Batumi: http://www.eurasianet.org/node/82751
Kiev and Tbilisi are in terrible situations today. Despite enjoying very good relations with Turks and Azeris; despite enjoying very good relations with Western powers; despite enjoying full access to the Black Sea, Ukraine and Georgia today are hurting economically, politically and demographically - essentially because they ruined their relationship with the Russian Bear essentially to blindly appease Western powers. Now, I ask my Armenian readers to imagine how much worst it would have been for Armenia had it also fallen victim to its pro-Western activists and politicians. I ask: How well would have "independence" from Russia work out for our tiny, impoverished, remote, landlocked and blockaded nation surrounded by Turks and Muslims? Can't even think of it.

Simply put: No Russia in Armenia means no Armenia in the south Caucasus. Armenians need Russian boots on the ground in Armenia as much as Armenians need statehood. At the end of the day, Russia is the only choice and only hope Armenia has in the south Caucasus. I say only hope because, if God forbid Armenia is ever threatened by a much larger power in the region, the only nation that is ready and willing to come to its aid is the Russian nation. After Armenians, Russians are the only nation on earth that would willingly spill blood for Armenia. It is not me saying these things, Russians themselves have been saying this for many years.

In an article appearing in Russia Today, Mikhail Aleksandrov, a political analyst working for the Institute of CIS made the following comment about Moscow's military presence inside Armenia -
“Armenian-Russian ties support a balance of forces. With its presence in the South Caucasus, Russia is creating a counterbalance to Turkey, Iran and preventing the West from getting access to the region, including military. If it wasn’t for Russia, the South Caucasus would be in a similar situation as we are observing in Syria or Libya today.”
In another article produced by Russia's Pravda, Vice President of the Academy of Geopolitical Issues Konstantin Sivkov is quoted as saying - 
“If Turkey attacks Armenia, it will be treated as an attack on Russia. Russia would fight on Armenia's side with all its might. If necessary, Russia could use nuclear weapons against Turkey, both tactical, and if need be, strategic. This is defined in the military doctrine of the Russian Federation. Armenia is fully protected with the Russian umbrella of both conventional forces as well as strategic nuclear forces.”
Alexsei Arbatov, the former deputy chairman of the Russia State Duma's Defense Committee defined Russian-Armenian relations with the following words - 
“Armenia is our only classic military-political ally...Armenia will not survive without Russia, while, without Armenia, Russia will lose all its important positions in the Caucasus...Even though Armenia is a small country, it is our forepost in the South Caucasus.  I would say that Armenia is more important to us than Israel is to the Americans.”
In describing what Russia's reaction would be to a possible invasion of Armenia by Turkey or Azerbaijan, Alexander Khramchikhin, Director of the Institute for Political and Military Analysis said - 
This comment by the former Russian ambassador to Armenia,  Vladimir Stupishin - 
“In my view, the true settling of the Karabakh conflict suggests complete rejection by Azerbaijan of the primal Armenian lands. It is possible to resolve the problem of the refugees by providing them with opportunities in places where they live now. How come in almost every discussion on Karabakh the only refugees that are being consistently mentioned are the Azeri refugees? Why can’t the Armenians return to Baku, Gyandja, Sumgait, Artsvashen, Getashen, etc.?”
This comment by Alexander Dugin, the political philosopher many Armenians accuse of being pro-Turkish and anti-Armenian -
"Armenia is the single most serious ally of Russia. It is part of the Eurasian Economic Union and the Collective Security Treaty Organization, that is, we should have a unitary system of missile and air defenses and integration on all levels, including nuclear defense and the nuclear umbrella which we guarantee Armenia. Accordingly, these actions take place in the framework of deploying a system of strategic security around Russia in relying on its allies. Armenia belongs to this first and foremost. But this is not because we are planning some kind of aggravation of Turkey or, moreover, a war."
This comment by a Russian-Muslim political analyst, Ilqar Mammadov -
"When Azerbaijani officials, including the president, predict that Armenia will collapse as a state, they are mistaken. Nobody will let Armenia collapse. Even if only 100,000 people lived in Armenia, Russia would protect it as it regards Armenia as its outpost."
This comment by head of Russia's Institute of Oriental Studies, Vitaly Naumkin -
"Russia will never allow Armenia to be harmed or attacked. If anyone attacks Armenia, Russia will take part in defending Armenia, this is absolutely obvious.”
This comment by a senior researcher of the Institute of World Economy and International Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Viktor Nadein-Rayevsky - 
“Russia will never cede Armenia for improving its relations with Turkey. This is a matter of principle. There are things one can sacrifice, but there are things one cannot. The point is not so much that two million Armenians live in Russia and many of them are Russian citizens. For Armenia Russia’s steps must never be bad. The point is that even the Yeltsin Russia perfectly realized that it must not waive Armenia’s interests, not mentioning Putin, who clearly sees the national interests, at least, the clear ones. He is trying to extrapolate them for the future. I simply can’t imagine that Russia may yield Armenia – if Russia does this it will lose all of its positions in the Caucasus. Russia should understand one most important thing – there are partners and allied countries with whom one should keep up the sense of alliance and duty.”
The following is an excerpt from a 1996 analysis by the well respected director of the Carnegie Moscow Center, Dmitri Trenin -
“The purely military interest which Russia has had in the Caucasus appears to have receded in importance in comparison with the Imperial or Soviet periods. It is now essentially defensive in nature and precludes any large-scale strategic penetration, including the supply of military assistance, arms supplies, etc., to any third party. To prevent any potential Turkish opportunism at the time of the Soviet Union's disintegration, Marshal Shaposhnikov, then Commander-in-Chief of the Joint Armed Forces of the CIS, warned of a "Third World War" if Turkey were to interfere militarily in the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. In March 1993, General Grachev, Russia's Defence Minister, made Russia's own military co-operation with Turkey conditional on Ankara's discontinuing its military assistance to Baku.”
And the following are the comments of the Russian Ambassador to Armenia -
"It is impossible to imagine modern Russian history without Armenians"
The men I quoted above couldn't be more candid or more accurate in their assessments of the current geopolitical situation in the south Caucasus, nor could they have been more pro-Armenian in their sentiments. These men basically outlined the 0geostrategic importance of Russia's presence in the south Caucasus, as well as Armenia's strategic importance in the eyes of Kremlin officials. More importantly, the rhetoric expressed by these men is similar to the kind of rhetoric we often hear expressed by American officials about the Zionist state. Regardless of what weapons Russians sell to whom, the quotes I outlined above is more-or-less the prevailing pro-Armenian political culture in Moscow today. Russia today is a very fertile ground in which Armenians can but are not promoting their country's interests. I suggest we stop admiring Jews for their political acumen and start acting like them.

We Armenians need to be farsighted enough and intelligent enough to begin exploiting the opportunity the Russian Federation is providing us. We need to be lobbying Armenian matters in the Kremlin as obsessively and as persistently as we pursue Armenian Genocide recognition in the United States. We need to be cultivating deeper Russian-Armenian relations. We need to be laying the foundations of a permanent Armenian presence within the highest offices of the Kremlin. While Armenia's military may be its tactical advantage on the battlefield, Armenia's presence within the walls of the Kremlin must be made its strategic advantage on the global chessboard. We therefore should not be giving any of Uncle Sam's whores in Armenia a political platform to spew their dangerous agendas. We should not allow modern slave-masters such as the IMF, World Bank or the USAID or troublemakers such a George Soros funded organizations any foothold inside Armenia.

I reiterate: At a fundamental level, Russian officials see Armenia the same as Western powers see Israel. Similar to Jews in the United States, the Armenian Diaspora in Russia is by-far the largest and most affluent in the world and Russian-Armenians are well represented in all layers of Russian society, including its  highest layers. The following is a partial list -
Sergei Lavrov (Foreign Minister of Russia) 
Artur Chilingarov (Duma spokesman, Scientist, Hero of Russia)
Sergey Avakyants (commander of Russia's Pacific Fleet)
Margarita Simonyan (director of Russia Today, married to film director Tigran Keosayan)
Tigran Keosayan (film director, actor, writer, married to Russia Today director Margaret Simonyan)
Michael Pogosian (director of Russia's United Aircraft Industry) 
Andranik Migranyan (PhD, political scientist, author, professor, director of Institute of Democracy and Cooperation)
Armen Oganesyan (CEO of Voice of Russia radio broadcasts) 
Ashot Eghiazaryan (Russian State Duma member)
Karen Shakhnazarov (CEO of Mosfilm, Russia's largest studio)
Karen Karapetyan (vice President at Gazprom)
Albert Avdolyan (telecommunications tycoon) 
Sergey Galitsky (billionaire owner of Magnit)
Karen Brutents (author, historian, Communist Party Central Committee member, senior KGB operative)
Ruben Vardanyan (billionaore former CEO of Troika Dialog Group)
Ruben Aganbegyan (millionaire owner Renaissance Capital Micex)
Danil Khachaturov (billionaire chairman of RosGosStrakh)
Sergey Khachaturov (billionaire, brother of Danil Khachaturov)
Oleg Mkrtchyan (billionaire industrialist, football kingpin)
Gennady Melikiyan (deputy chairman of Bank of Russia) 
Samvel Karapetyan (billionaire owner of Tashir group) 
Sergey Sarkisov (billionaire owner of RESO-Garantia insurance company)
Nikolay Sarkisov (billionaire commodities trader, brother of Sergey Sarkisov)
Gagik Gevorkyan (president of Estet Jewelry House and new head of the prestigious Russian Jewelers Guild)
Tigran Khudverdyan (CEO Yandex)
Artur Janibekyan (television producer and head of Russia's most successful Comedy Club)
Ara Abrahamyan (billionaire businessman, president of the Union of Armenians in Russia)
As I have been saying for over ten years now, Armenians can be in Moscow what Jews are in Washington DC. What's more, I agree with Alexsei Arbatov when he says: Armenia is more important to Russia than Israel is to the United States. Without an Armenia, Russia's position in the already volatile Caucasus will be seriously compromised. The disappearance of Israel, on the other hand, will have no tangible effects on the United States. In fact, the United States can do much better globally without the Israeli or Jewish monkey on its back. If the United States is closer to Israel than Russia is to Armenia, it's only because American Jews are farsighted enough and intelligent enough to have concentrated all their efforts in recent decades on manipulating American officials into adopting an "Israel first" policy. 

In stark contrast to Jews, we Armenians, numbering in the millions in Russia and represented in the highest layers of Russian society, engage in virtually no lobbying efforts inside the Kremlin. Armenia's diplomatic void in Moscow has been so apparent that even Russians have been complaining about it. It therefore concerns me that one of the major flaws in Armenia's foreign policy today is the lack of Armenian lobbying efforts in Moscow. This is why I said if Russians one day make decisions that are against the interests of Armenia, it will essentially be a failure of Armenian diplomacy. That said, I do not believe Moscow will take any steps that are detrimental to Armenia or Artsakh.

Nevertheless, being that Armenians will remain politically illiterate and out-of-touch with reality, I am under no illusions. Chances are that a majority of Armenians will simply continue concentrating on kissing the asses of Western officials either for easy money (bribes disguised as financial aid) or for genocide recognition - with the help of sickly homosexuals nonetheless. Chances are, Armenians by-in-large will continue neglecting the promotion of Armenian interests in Russia, as well as in Iran and China. Chances are, Western officials will continue having an easy time of manipulating and exploiting Armenians by keeping our self-destructive peasantry preoccupied with nonsense like gay rights, feminism, civil society, free speech and free elections. Allow me to remind the reader once more: While they keep our idiots preoccupied with their bullshit, their ultimate plan is to keep Armenia politically isolated and economically backward. It would therefore be wise to look past the lofty rhetoric of professional mercenaries and street whores serving Western powers throughout Armenian society and instead assess their words and actions within the following geostrategic context -
George Friedman: “Russian presence in Armenia is bad for Turkey”, "Keep Armenia isolated": http://theriseofrussia.blogspot.com/2010/11/arye-gut-israeli-jewish-expert-in.html
Hurriyet Dauily News: Armenian diaspora, focus on Russia rather than Turkey!: http://www.hurriyetdailynews. com/armenian-diaspora-focus- on-russia-rather-than-turkey
The ultimate goal of high-level Western officials continues to be either the strangling of Armenia (through their NATO blockade) and/or severing it from Russia. Thus, it could be said that the West's ultimate intention is to either destroy Armenia or place it under the mercy of their Turkic and Islamic allies. After all, the primary reason why Western powers are in the south Caucasus to begin with is to push Russia and to a lesser extent Iran out of the region so that their economic/energy interests can exploit Central Asian gas and oil without Moscow's meddling. Western powers realize that without Russia in the picture in the Caucasus, the strategic region will be their playground. We Armenians however need to be sober enough to realize that without a Russian presence in Armenia there won't be an Armenian presence in the south Caucasus.
  
Any Armenian today that wants "independence" from Russia or wants to shutdown Russia's military bases in Armenia is a filthy traitor to Armenia regardless of his or her intention. Regarding Russia's military presence in Armenia, I can say it is the single most important factor contributing to Armenia's existence as a nation state in the south Caucasus; it is the only deterrence Armenia's has against regional predators like Turkey. Intelligent people who are truly concerned about Armenia's future understand this -
Ռազամաբազան պետք է լրացնի անվտանգության համակարգը. Վահան Շիրխանյան (տեսանյութ): http://www.panorama.am/am/news/2015/01/24/v-shirkhanyan/126807
With a major war looming on the horizon this is the time to stick as close to the Bear as possible. I would like to repeat once more that Armenia's ties to Russia is immeasurably more important to the Armenian state's survival in the south Caucasus than Armenia's ties to the Armenian Diaspora. Moreover, lobbying Armenian interests in Moscow in my opinion is incalculably more important to Armenia's long-term welfare than pursuing Armenian Genocide recognition in the Western world. I realize these words may be very difficult for most Armenians to digest. But this is our reality today. Disregard the nonsense spewed by our Western-financed mercenaries, lunatics posing as nationalist and disgusting Russophobes and recognize a certain, albeit uncomfortable reality when it comes to Armenia. The Russian presence in the south Caucasus has been the fundamental historic reason behind why we have an Armenia today and will continue to have an Armenia tomorrow. In other words, had Ivan not come down to the south Caucasus some two hundred years ago - and stayed - our nationalistic Russophobes today would still be herding goats or making donkey saddles in the mountains of eastern Turkey or northern Iran.
  
Allow me to put all this in an another way to help the reader better understand: Imagine the south Caucasus as a political/economic table where Russians, Armenians, Persians, Georgians, Turks, Azeris, Islamists and Anglo-American-Jewish energy interests sit and discuss various regional matters. Now imagine this table without its Russian occupant. In another words, imagine the Caucasus without a powerful Russia. Now imagine the challenges our tiny, impoverished, remote, landlocked, inexperienced, embattled and blockaded homeland would have at that table. To be honest, I find it very difficult imagining an Armenian state in the South Caucasus without having a strong Russian presence in the south Caucasus. It is very troubling for me that there are many Armenian today, especially in the Diaspora, that do not understand this. So, once more: No Russia in the south Caucasus means no Armenia in the south Caucasus. Without Russian lordship in the south Caucasus, the region would no doubt be overrun once more by Turkic and/or Islamic hordes.

The need to be pragmatic and negotiate from a position of strength

Now, for the most important part of this discussion: When the day finally arrives, what could or should a peace settlement between Armenia and Azerbaijani look like? Foremost, any settlement that is to take place has to be agreed to not only by Yerevan but also by Stepanakert. Armenians of Artsakh MUST have the ultimate say in the end and the rest of us have to be ready to support WHATEVER they decide. Moreover, Moscow must be made to understand that there is in deed a - red line - that Armenians will not hesitate to go to war over. As I already mentioned, that red line is bringing Azeri refugees into Artsakh and returning the regions of Karvajar and Berdzor to Azerbaijan. And Armenian officials for their part need to understand that if they agree to Azeri refugees and/or put Karvajar or Berdzor on the negotiations table, they will run the risk of getting killed.

We still do not know exactly what panned on April 2, 2016. The four day war may or may not have been orchestrated, it may or may not have been a trial run. It nevertheless was not a major war. There may be one more bout - a quick, decisive and most probably a predetermined battle between Yerevan and Baku - that will settle the matter for once and for all. And the side that is closest to Moscow will inevitably derive the most benefits. The side that has the deepest ties with Moscow will come on top. This is why Yerevan's decision to enter the Russian-led EEU and CSTO were important strategic steps to secure Armenia's vital interests within the Kremlin. More needs to be done to looby Russian officials. 

Nevertheless imagine what would have happened if Armenia abstained from entering the EEU and/or the CSTO and Baku instead took that first step. It would most probably be a catastrophic  political disaster for Armenia and suicide for Artsakh. In fact, any lessening of Russian support for Armenia will prove catastrophic for Armenia. With all due respects to all the brave men and women serving in the Armenian armed forces today, without direct Russian support, Armenians would simply be unable to mount a long-term defense of Artsakh if Armenia's larger and wealthier neighbors to its east and west decided to resort to sustained violence once again. Needless to say, placing hope on the political West to come to Armenia's aid is like placing hope on the tooth-fairy.

And to our nationalistic idiots who say Armenians will fight alone and win just like they did 25 years ago, I only say this: As my favorite Wall Street saying goes - past performances do not guarantee future results.

Armenians were able to liberate Artsakh during the chaotic years following the Soviet Union's collapse. Even then Armenians began winning only after Russian support began coming into Armenia starting in early 1992 when the Soviet Union had collapsed and a new Russian state was born. Armenian society today is demoralized, largely thanks to the country's Western-led doom-and-gloom campaign carried out by the country's opposition freaks, and Armenia today is impoverished, tiny, remote, landlocked and blockaded by enemies in one of the most volatile geographic regions of the world. And the traditional Armenian Diaspora (the diaspora comprising of Ottoman-Armenian genocide survivors) is simply too busy obsessing over genocide recognition in Washington, too busy assimilating in their beloved countries, too busy fighting "corruption" in Armenia and too busy complaining about dirty toilets in Yerevan. With the following article we see where Diasporan priorities lie today -
While the oil rich dictatorship in Baku is busy spending billions of Dollars acquiring a large arsenal of modern weaponry from around the world, many of us Armenians are busy infighting, spreading Russophobia, turning our backs to our homeland, attacking Armenia's leadership, pursuing dangerous Western fairytales, pathetically crying at the feet of Western officials every April 24 and, of course, bravely championing gay rights! Official Yerevan cannot therefore afford to be under any illusions today. In other words, in times of war, there will be no Diasporan cavalry galloping to the rescue. My suggestion therefore is to know our enemy well and to know ourselves well. This is a military wisdom Armenians must learn well. We cannot make the grave mistake of overestimating our capabilities and underestimating that of our enemies.

Azerbaijan's military has gotten stronger in recent years because of its oil and gas revenues. If for some reason Moscow stopped providing military support to Armenia and/or gave Baku a green light to attack, Armenians will sooner-than-later lose the territory of Artsakh - if not more. We as a people need to wake-up from our illusions of grandeur and recognize this cold hard reality. Instead of fear-mongering about our dependence on Russia, we need to see it as a historic opportunity to use Armenia's alliance with the Russian Bear to strengthen Armenia's position in the south Caucasus. The key to Armenia's success in Artsakh is therefore found in the highest offices of the Kremlin.

I reiterate: While our military is our tactical advantage on the battlefield, our ties to Russia is our strategic advantage on the global battlefield. Armenians must be a constant presence in the Kremlin.

The reality is that Armenia and Artskah today play a very major geostrategic role for Moscow. Artsakh's existence as a Russia-friendly Armenian fortress overlooking Azerbaijan, Georgia, Turkey and Iran serves the Kremlin's geostrategic interests in the region. Equally important for Russians is the simple fact that the dispute over Artsakh also ensures Yerevan's and Baku's political dependence on Moscow. Moreover, Artsakh is essentially an arms depot with a battle-ready population that will not bow down to anyone and the Artsakh-Armenian military leadership enjoy a very close relations with their Russian counterparts. Therefore - strategically, economically, culturally, tactically and practically - Moscow will not do anything that will drastically change the status quo in Artsakh. Armenian sovereignty over Artsakh is therefore set in stone. With that said, now that Yerevan's allegiance has been secured via Armenia's ascension to the Moscow-led Customs Union, I expect Moscow to earnestly begin pursuing bringing Baku under its fold as well. Of course a best case scenario, from an Armenian perspective, would be if Baku continues to remain inflexible in its dealings with Moscow and Yerevan and continues its flirtations with Turkey, Israel and the Anglo-American world.

Nevertheless, as already suggested, we might see a short, choreographed war to convince both sides to come to the negotiation table and settle the Artsakh dispute for once and for all. In a final negotiated settlement with Baku, Yerevan may be expected to return some of the "seven regions" taken outside of Artsakh proper. I do not have any concerns about the fate of the territories west and south of Artsakh, namely the strategic regions between Karvajar in the north-west and the Iranian border in the south-east. In return for Armenian concessions, Baku would be expected to recognize Artsakh's independence or its reunification with Armenia and perhaps return some areas of Artsakh currently under its control.

Although Russia is the alpha and the omega of the Caucasus region, Armenians can still use their God-given talents to win hearts-and-minds in the Kremlin. It is therefore crucially important to show Russian officials that Armenians are ready to negotiate but Armenians are also united behind their leadership and that the entire population of Artsakh is fully mobilized and ready for war.

As it has been for hundreds of years, the inability of Armenians to effectively unite as a people behind an Armenian leadership continues to be Armenia's main problem today. Let's recall that major powers only respect power, not victim-hood and not constant whining. Over a century ago one of our most beloved clergymen, Mkrtich Khrimyan, popularly known as Khirmyan Hayrik, warned Armenians about the paramount importance of Iron Ladles. Today, the proverb is as important for Armenia as it has ever been. In today's Armenia, however, the Iron Ladle should looked at from the context of Armenia's alliance with Russia.

Sadly, however, I do not see much of an effort being put into this vital strategic matter by money hungry Armenians in Armenia and democracy obsessed Armenians in the Diaspora. On one side, we have Western mercenaries doing their best to spread Russophobia inside Armenian society. On the other side, we have chobans-in-Armani-suits sitting back and expecting Russian officials to decide everything for Armenia. Sadly, we seem stuck between self-hating morons and self-destructive chobans. There is a deficit of farsighted and pragmatic mindsets in Armenian society today.

There is currently no pan-national effort being made by Armenians to tap into the opportunities Russia's alliance provides. Everything that Moscow does with regards to Armenia is essentially a by-product of Russian calculations. Thus far we Armenians have been lucky because our national interests and that of Russia's coincide for the most part. But this unsettling reality is one of the reasons why I have been preaching Russian-Armenian relations for well over a decade. Russian-Armenian relations have to set deep roots and become institutionalized. We cannot sit back and expect - let alone demand - that Russians to do the right thing for Armenia. Armenians need to embark on a collective, cohesive and pan-national effort to make a case for Artsakh's territorial integrity. Armenians need to figure out a way to turn Armenian lordship over Artsakh into a strategic asset for policymakers in Moscow. Official Yerevan needs to work towards making sure it will have a major say in whatever the final settlement over Artsakh will look like.

I reiterate: The secret to Armenia's and Artsakh's success is the following: A modern and highly efficient military to defend territory and fight off Azeri incursions that will be coming periodically; a politically unified population to show the world that Armenians speak with one voice; a diplomatic corps that is farsighted, patriotic and pragmatic; effectively lobbying Russian officials and establishing a closer, deeper alliance with the Russian bear. Moreover, we as a people also need patience.

Disregard all the Russophobic fear-mongering coming from our Western-funded smut peddlers. Moscow is not going to sell Armenia or Artsakh to anybody and time is on our side. If Yerevan does what I suggested above, there is a good chance that in a matter of few years Azerbaijan will descend into serious internal unrest. If Yerevcan does what I suggested above, Armenia will clearly come on top in any final peace settlement. That said, we as a people must also understand that the south Caucasus desperately needs peace and stability. We also need to understand that peace and stability will come at a price. We also need to understand that peace and stability can only be brought by Russia. In my opinion, the above are the fundamentals of our success in the Artsakh dispute.

Closely observing the Russian weather vane

For a nation to truly become a global power, it must champion some sort of an ideology. For a nation to be looked up to by people around the world, it must have a higher calling. The Russian Empire championed Orthodox Christianity. The Soviet Union championed Marxism. Russian Federation was totally devoid of an ideology (that is if we discount crony capitalism as an ideology) during much of its post-Soviet period. The last decade or so saw a historic transformation in Russia. It seems that Moscow found itself a new calling and is on path to becoming a true global power people around the world will look up to. Perhaps unwittingly, perhaps by divine providence, Russia today is looking a lot like the world's only champion of traditionalism, conservatism, ethnocentrism, family values, apostolic Christianity, the traditional nation-state and multipolarity in global politics. Russia has become the last front against Globalism and Westernization. I dare the reader to imagine the political state of world today without the existence of the Russian Federation. I dare my Armenian readers to imagine what Armenia's plight would have been like today had there not been a strong Russian factor in the south Caucasus today. President Putin has been, and I say this literally, a God sent not only for Russia but also for Armenia and the rest of humanity. This is being better understood today, even by Westerners -
Russia today is leading a global crusade against globalism. Russia today is the embodiment of anti-Americanism. And people around the world are responding. Millions of people around the world are beginning to see Russia as the antidote to the toxicity known as globalism and westernization. Millions around the world see Russia as the long awaited counterbalance to American global hegemony. Millions around the world, including myself, are hoping to see a Byzantine revival. Moscow has a historic opportunity on its hands. Will Russian officials be wise enough or capable enough to use it effectively? Time will tell. 

As the Western world slowly commits suicide via - genetically modified foods, sex tourism, pop culture, psychiatric drugs, celebrity worship, junk foods, multiculturalism, overtaxation, underage drinking and drug abuse, proliferation of pharmaceuticals, institutionalized atheism, overregulation, dwindling natural resources, epidemic of suicides, over-entertainment, overeating, undereducation, modern art, Holocaust worship, feminism, Satan worship, abortion, low birth rates, culture of violence, glorification of war, consumerism, commercialism, individualism, mass homicides, child prostitution, child pornography, interracialism, illegal immigration, third world immigration, sexual debauchery, breakdown of traditional family, governmental corruption and the promotion of homosexuality - others in the world are slowly plotting course for a new period in human history. As the Umited States and Western Europe go into political, economic and cultural decline, the 21st century is increasingly looking like a Eurasian century. Moscow has weathered the worst and has proven its mettle -
What Does Not Kill You Will Make You Stronger – The Russian Economy 2014 – 2016, the Years of Sanctions Warfare: https://www.awaragroup.com/blog/russian-economy-2014-2016-the-years-of-sanctions-warfare/
There’s no good explanation for the Russian ruble’s rise: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/theres-no-good-explanation-for-the-russian-rubles-rise-2017-02-16
Reality or PR: Russia's Rising 'Soft Power' Clout: http://thediplomat.com/2016/06/reality-or-pr-russias-rising-soft-power-clout/
Sanctions against Russia are already as good as dead, but reverse sanctions from Moscow working just fine: https://www.roguemoney.co/stories/2017/2/9/sanctions-against-russia-are-already-as-good-as-dead-but-reverse-sanctions-from-moscow-working-just-fine
Russia Survived Sanctions, And BlackRock Goes Overweight: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2017/01/27/russia-sanctions-putin-economy/#758b04fbe957
Russia Is Running on More Than Just the Black Stuff: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-07/russia-is-running-on-more-than-just-the-black-stuff
EU Sanctions 'Helped, Rather Than Harmed' Russian Economy: https://sputniknews.com/europe/201702081050469988-eu-sanctions-problems
Sanctions and the ‘Gold Ruble’: Russia’s Gambit For Full Financial Sovereignty: http://russia-insider.com/en/gold-ruble-russias-struggle-financial-sovereignty/ri18989
Russia's banking system has SWIFT alternative ready: https://www.rt.com/business/382017-russia-swift-central-bank/
“Made in Russia”: http://www.globalresearch.ca/what-does-russia-produce-made-in-russia/5576616
Russia is making inroads everywhere — the U.S., Europe and Eurasia: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/russia-is-making-inroads-everywhere-the-us-europe-and-eurasia-2016-12-01
Israeli Ambassador: ‘Russia, Iran and Syria Defeated America’: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/171846
After a mere 25 years, the triumph of the West is over: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions
Russians officials have a historic opportunity on their hands. I hope they are able to fully embrace their new calling. Thus far they have been doing so masterfully. I hope it continues indefinitely. All signs nevertheless suggest Russia will be in the driver's seat in the twenty-first century. My hope as an Armenian is to see Armenia in its passenger seat. Related to all this is a recent Pew Research Center study that revealed some pleasantly surprising results. It seems that after 25-plus years of being subjected to social engineering by the Anglo-American-Jewish alliance, the moral compass and survival instincts of Central and Eastern Europeans, Armenian in particular, remains alive and well. Please thoroughly review the following document -
Religious Belief and National Belonging in Central and Eastern Europe:  http://www.pewforum.org/2017/05/10/religious-belief-and-national-belonging-in-central-and-eastern-europe/
I would like to make some additional comments about this Pew study: Prior to designing social engineering projects (such as the worldwide promotion of so-called free press, democracy, interracialism, multiculturalism, global warming, feminism, homosexuality and holocaust awareness through political podiums, social activism, television, literature, cinema, music and school curriculum) senior policymakers in the Western world get Western institutions, like the Pew Research Center for instance, to conduct in-depth studies of peoples around the world. This is done to basically help imperial interests to better understand nations of interest. This is how they evaluate, assess and gauge societal and political conditions in countries; in this case nations that were formerly within the orbit of the Soviet Union. They then use such findings to basically custom design their social engineering programs for societies they are interested in exploiting/manipulating. In any case, Russians must be very happy with these findings, some of which even surprised me. It seems that decades of Western propaganda has not been able to brainwash a majority of people in central and eastern Europe. But Moscow can't rest. Despite the good news, the fact remains that so-called "millennials" are for the most part compromised. As we all know, younger generations are the future of any given nation. We also know that social engineering takes time to show tangible results. Therefore, while the results look somewhat promising today, in a generation or two it may not be the case.

After an absence of a few years Russia is back in the south Caucasus, and it's there to stay. Those who adjust to this reality will do well. Those who observe the Russian weather vane will do well. Moscow has serious plans for the greater Caucasus region. Naturally, this plan is not meant to turn the Russian Federation into a benevolent entity. Moscow is implementing projects, both military and economic, that are meant to serve long-term interests in the region. Moscow's strategic allies will be the first to benefit from these. The better we as a people understand Moscow's long-term plans for the region the better will Armenia be off. We as a people therefore have the urgent need to closely observe the political climate in Moscow and adjust our foreign relations policies accordingly.

The first blow to Western inroads in the south Caucasus came in 2008. Western powers have been in retreat from the region ever since. Today, Russia is back in its traditional sphere of influence as its main power-broker and its power and influence is expanding with each passing year. But Moscow cannot fully realize its ambitions with the presence of unresolved disputes in the region. There will therefore most probably be a push by Moscow to settle the Artsakh dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan, as well as the dispute Moscow itself has with Georgia. Eventually, there will come a time for peace. There has to come a time for peace. And we Armenians need to be ready for that eventuality. And we need to hope that Azerbaijan will have descended into sociopolitical unrest by that time. With a weakened Azerbaijan, the peace process will be significantly less painful for Armenia. With things being the way they are in Azerbaijan, I hope to see Baku dragged to the peace table kicking and screaming. However, knowing how uncompromising Armenian mindsets can be, and knowing how politics work, the peace process in question will most probably be painful for Armenians as well.

When that day comes, and it will sooner or later, I personally would like to see a comprehensive peace deal reached between Yerevan and Baku - even it it entails some land concessions.

I am not one of your typical Diasporan armchair generals calling for war from Los Angeles, Beirut or Montreal, nor am I under any illusions about Armenian military strength. I also believe that despite its current warlike attitude, Baku will eventually, perhaps after another round of fighting or after sociopolitical unrest in Azerbaijan, reluctantly come to the peace table. Nevertheless, the dispute over Artsakh has to be resolved if we want Armenia's 25 year old stagnation to end. We have to have peace in the south Caucasus if the region is to prosper once again after a quarter of a century of destruction. Armenia in particular needs lasting peace to develop and reach its potential.

Back in the late 1990s, the US had come very close to brokering a peace deal between Yerevan and Baku. The deal in question would have most probably been a variation of the now infamous "Goble Plan" that envisioned literally cutting Armenia off from Iran. The parliamentary assassinations that took place on October 27, 1999 put a quick and bloody end to the madness. Russia has since reemerged as a world power and the Caucasus region's only hegemon. It is Moscow's turn to settle the dispute under its terms. The intent is to bring the south Caucasus back under its fold and reestablish Pax Russica. This time around, it will be the West's turn to try to sabotage a Russian-brokered peace deal. As it was during the Cold War, Armenian nationalists will once again be called upon by foreign powers to raise arms against their state. That may have been what we saw take place in Yerevan last summer. If Armenia's national security officials are not vigilant and execute their duties well, more unrest may come. Armenia therefore faces internal and external dangers in a very volatile area of the world and in very dangerous times. 

Official Yerevan better begin closely observing the Russian weather vane, lest it gets caught in a bad storm without a reliable shelter. If in a final peace settlement Armenia gets less than what its national security needs require, it will ultimately be the fault of its officials. And speaking of Armenian officials, they should also be aware of Artsakh's red lines. They need to understand that if they dare crossing it they will risk assassination. However, at the end of the day, I know only one thing: Another 25 years of what we have already endured during the past 25 years may put Armenia permanently in a third world category and on the very edge of being a failed state. Sooner or later, one way or another, peace and stability has to come to the south Caucasus. And we must understand that peace and stability will have a price. And the price that we pay as a people will ultimately be determined not by our political illiteracy or Russophobia but by the capabilities of our military, the foresightedness of our diplomatic corps and the depth of our ties with Russia.

Arevordi
Summer, 2017

***

National Interest: The Next Crisis You're Not Watching: Don't Ignore the South Caucasus


Paris and Syria share the headlines today, but worrying developments in the South Caucasus raise alarm bells about weak governance and the risk of war. The countries of the region—Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia—have chosen diverging domestic and foreign policy paths, but all face intense pressures from Russia to expand its influence. The West should act now to diminish the likelihood of a new war and press for greater political pluralism. The most serious concerns are internal developments in Azerbaijan and prospects for a resumption of hostilities between Azerbaijan and Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh, an area populated and militarily controlled by Armenians but located within Azerbaijan.

For the past eighteen months, Azerbaijan has consistently repressed press and media freedom and basic human rights. Rigged parliamentary elections on November 1 produced an overwhelming vote for the ruling party and its satellites with the opposition shut out. There was no credible monitoring, as the OSCE and European Parliament cancelled missions when the government did not allow them to operate according to international standards. Key opposition voices remain imprisoned or exiled with the only ray of light being the recent transfer to house arrest from prison of the prominent human rights activist, Arif Yunus, for health reasons. International calls for the release of his wife Leyla Yunis, Ildar Mammadov and other political prisoners have fallen on deaf ears. 

Anti-Western and pro-Russian rhetoric is increasing from official sources, focusing on alleged efforts by the West, especially the United States, to repeat the Maidan popular uprising of Ukraine in Baku. With oil and gas prices falling, Azerbaijan is experiencing hits to its budget, the banking system is in crisis due to questionable loans to regime loyalists, and speculation about another currency devaluation is rife. The recent removal of the powerful Minister of Security and eighty of his colleagues, and the Minister of Communications with overtones of massive corruption are signs of division within the circle of the autocratic President Aliyev and his lack of control over key security ministries.

Concurrently, the situation on [5]the ceasefire line [5] with Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh threatens to deteriorate, as the number of sniping deaths and attacks with sophisticated weaponry is mounting. Bilateral and international peace efforts remain frozen as the respective leaders make no effort to prepare their publics for compromise and Moscow enables both sides with arms deliveries. A key risk is a major escalation resulting from a series of smaller clashes, a scenario which could eventuate as Aliyev’s popularity falls and he resorts to a military strike to unify the nation. Aliyev, of course, must weigh Armenia’s defense pact with Russia and the probability of a military defeat. Yet he is using paranoia, populism, and unpredictable, bold strikes to build public support. He is also undermining the OSCE Minsk Group process—the only hope for a peaceful resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

The Armenian political situation is relatively quiet. After buckling under Russian pressure and joining the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) in lieu of an Association Agreement with the EU, Armenia and the EU are now to begin negotiations to salvage part of the old Association Agreement and reconcile it with Armenian EEU membership. This effort by Yerevan to maintain some balance in its foreign policy and gain more access in a rich market may yet run into difficulties with Russia. Armenia continues its hostile narrative vis-à-vis Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh, even as the continuing state of war with Azerbaijan saps its economy, reinforces its semi-authoritarian political system and provides Russia with leverage regarding the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

Georgia’s reputation as a leader in democratic growth and judicial reform in the former Soviet Union is now coming into question. The immediate issue is a battle over the ownership and control of Rustavi 2 [6], an independent television broadcaster and leading media voice critical of the ruling Georgia Dream government.

The legal maneuvering has been anything but judicially sound and transparent. A lower court ruling in the middle of the night contradicted the Constitutional Court and turned the station back to a previous owner, who supports the government. The latter argues that he had been forced by the prior government of President Mikheil Saakashvili to sell his asset at a giveaway price. The latest turn is that the lower court judge has altered his original ruling to now leave control of the station to the present owners until their appeal process is completed.

Many in the West and in Georgia see this evident judicial abuse as a direct attack on freedom of the press, at a time when the government’s popularity is falling due to Georgia’s weak economic performance and alleged indecisive leadership. To thicken the plot, intercepted tapes of alleged phone conversations between Saakashvili, now governor of the Odessa region in Ukraine, and several of his supporters in Georgia, record his calling on them to use the Rustavi 2 issue to develop a “revolutionary” scenario to challenge the current government. Parliamentary elections will be held in October 2016, and right now, undecided voters are in the majority.

The development and export to world markets of Caspian energy remains a Western strategic interest. But with the emergence of alternative global sources of energy, the drop in oil and gas prices, and the reduced need for logistical support to NATO forces in Afghanistan the South Caucasus may become less important in these dimensions.

The pivotal location between Russia, Turkey, Iran and the Middle East, however, requires that the West pay more policy level attention to the South Caucasus. Peacemaking with Armenia and Azerbaijan has long been frustrating for the West and Russia, but it remains worthwhile to reduce the risk that Nagorno-Karabakh will erupt into a hot war. It could even ensnare Turkey, Russia and Iran in wider tensions. This requires the parties to decide that face-to-face negotiations under Minsk Group mediation are the way forward. Second, the West should pursue tough love with Azerbaijan to counter its authoritarian spiral and free the remaining political prisoners. Finally, the West ought to conduct a more direct dialog with the Georgian government and opposition about democratic principles and freedom of the press, and how they may affect its Euro-Atlantic aspirations.

 Source: http://nationalinterest.org/feature/the-next-crisis-youre-not-watching-dont-ignore-the-south-14366

Stephen Blank: The danger of ignoring Russian interference abroad

http://thehill.com/sites/default/files/styles/thumb_small_article/public/vladimirputin.jpg?itok=R6EjbCfM

Recent meetings between the heads of Georgia and Azerbaijan with the most senior American officials should alert Washington to the importance of strengthening peace and security in the troubled South Caucasus.

For over 20 years, the Minsk Group (created by the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe) that was established in the wake of the war over Nagorno-Karabakh between Armenia and Azerbaijan, has accomplished virtually nothing while the risk of a renewed war grows steadily along with the quality of weapons that both sides possess. Recently Russian-made missiles locked on to an Azerbaijani helicopter carrying the Defense Minister and Azerbaijan hit these launchers with an Israeli-made missile. But it was the missiles, not the initial locking onto the helicopter, that aroused this group’s consternation. Indeed, the U.S. does not even appoint a senior-level individual to the Minsk Group — not even at the ambassadorial level — so it clearly does not rate highly in Washington.

Nevertheless, preventing renewed hostilities is very much in America’s interest. Since Moscow not only sells high-grade weapons to both sides, it pressures Azerbaijan to renounce its independence and join Moscow’s Eurasian Economic Union, while it obtains a 99-year lease for bases in Armenia. It is clear that Russia seeks to manage, not resolve, this conflict. Meanwhile the threat of war grows with thousands of casualties and refugees because both sides now possess high-tech weapons. Moreover, Azerbaijan is rebuilding its forces in Nakhichevan, the province that is both the ancestral seat of the ruling Aliyev family and the territory closest to Armenia, in growing anticipation of a potential war.

A war would almost certainly lead to the full Russian takeover of the Armenian forces as Yerevan and Moscow have agreed to create joint forces that Russia will control in case of war. Since Russia already has a major base at Gyumri and has fortified it with troops and advanced weapons, a war would amount to Russian occupation of Armenia as well as a likely Russian military intervention against Azerbaijan, perhaps even an invasion. And given the closeness and long-standing historical and cultural affinities between Turkey and Azerbaijan this war would also raise the specter of Turkish involvement.

These are not idle speculations. The level of violence and number of incidents in and around Nagorno-Karabakh have steadily risen over the last few years while nothing has been done to arrest the drift to a new war that benefits only Moscow. But preserving peace and security in an increasingly important zone is not our only interest here. Moscow has steadily encroached upon Georgia’s territories and relentlessly tried to subvert both Azerbaijan and Georgia from within. Russian influence has led to new political parties based on diaspora figures in Russia to stand in those countries’ elections, while inciting ethnic minorities against the governments in Tbilisi and Baku.

Apart from Russia’s ingrained imperialism, the West has concrete strategic interests here. In Georgia, Russia is sending a message not to join NATO lest Georgia’s integrity and sovereignty be destroyed. Meanwhile Russian troops are annexing parts of Abkhazia and South Ossetia and planning these territories’ incorporation into the Russian Federation. Furthermore, as Azerbaijan’s joint pipeline with Turkey from Baku through Anatolia to the Balkans and the Adriatic Sea approaches completion, Russia is pulling every trick in the book to prevent an energy rival from competing with it in the Balkans.

Thus, Russia’s aggressive policies are as evident here as they are elsewhere. And its tactics are the same everywhere. Russia creates “frozen conflicts”, invades states that resist its pressure, prevents them from exercising their sovereign right to look to Europe, occupies their territory and declares “independent states” there that then are incorporated into Russia. It also continues to use its energy as a weapon, which is precisely why Secretary of State Rex Tillerson met with Azerbaijan’s President, Ilham Aliyev in Istanbul. Therefore, it is clear what we need to do to advance our own interests and those of states who wish to work with us.

Rather than tolerate the Minsk Group’s inactivity, Washington should launch a mediation of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Since our stated policy is to cooperate with Russia wherever feasible, and Russia reiterates its desire for peace there (even if its actions are contradictory) this is an excellent opportunity to call Putin’s bluff. And if he shuns mediation, we should do it ourselves and show our interest in regional peace. Second, we should make clear our support for unhampered flow of Azerbaijan’s energy to Europe and freer and more diversified routes of energy supply for Europe. Third, if we wish to encourage democratization in Azerbaijan as we have in Georgia we ought to take Baku’s security concerns seriously for that is the only way to achieve progress on human rights. Fourth, we ought to bolster Georgia’s security with action — rather than verbal proposals.

Moscow’s aggressive and imperial tactics in the Caucasus are just as visible as they are in Ukraine and equally dangerous to international security. Neglect, which can only be malign neglect here, does not advance American interests or promote regional security. Therefore, we should not continue contributing to that neglect because as the signs already show, that means not only more wars. But the ones to come will have greater repercussions and are likely to spread to Europe and our allies.


International Crisis Group Report: Armenian Military Planning To Push Deeper Into Azerbaijan

http://cdn2.img.sputniknews.com/images/103738/65/1037386578.jpg

Armenia has decided that if fighting again breaks out with Azerbaijan, it will attempt to take the offensive and seize more Azerbaijani territory. That's the scoop from a new report from the International Crisis Group.

The report, Nagorno-Karabakh’s Gathering War Clouds, summarizes the political, diplomatic, and military developments since last year's "April War" between Armenia and Azerbaijan. It convincingly makes the argument that "Armenia and Azerbaijan are closer to war than at any point since the 1994 ceasefire." From The Bug Pit's perspective, the most intriguing news from the report is that: "[d]e facto Nagorno-Karabakh has even declared its readiness, if attacked, to advance deeper into Azerbaijan’s densely populated territory along the Line of Contact to gain a new security belt and strengthen its hand in future negotiations."

Recall that last April's fighting saw the first time territory has changed hands between the two sides since 1994, when Azerbaijan seized the strategic heights of Lala Tapa on the southern edge of the line of contact. Now, apparently, Armenia -- though it fully controls Nagorno Karabakh, as well as a security zone two-and-a-half times as large around the disputed region -- may want to push its advantage.

"Toward the end of the winter, an internal consensus emerged within the de facto Nagorno-Karabakh leadership that – in the event of an Azerbaijani attack – the Armenian side should not only defend their positions, but also attempt to advance deeper into Azerbaijan," the report said, citing unnamed government and military officials from the de facto Nagorno Karabakh government.

"Preliminary planning by Nagorno-Karabakh-based military suggests advancing 15km beyond the established Line of Contact, which, they believe, would force the enemy to abandon hostilities, or at a minimum establish a new buffer zone that could break the enemy’s will to conduct regular attacks and become a new negotiating bargaining tool," the report adds.

In another bit of news, the report also cited Russian officials -- again unnamed -- acknowledging that they wanted to have a military presence in Karabakh. While both Armenians and Azerbaijanis have long suspected that motive behind Russian offers to set up international peacekeeping, it's still noteworthy to hear it from a Russian official. (One of the few areas on which the two sides agree is that neither wants a Russian military presence in the region.)

The report also provides a little glimpse at the effect that the war had on daily life in Karabakh, where news on the ground is hard to come by. "During the escalation, the de facto authorities called up the vast majority of Nagorno-Karabakh’s male population, most of whom remained in the trenches for at least the next two months," the report notes. Anyway, you don't need The Bug Pit to tell you that the whole report is an essential read for getting up to date on the biggest security threat in the region. Read it here.
  

European Council on Foreign Relations: Nagorno-Karabakh: The edge of Russia’s orbit

Frontier Post on Russian-Georgian Border

The flare-up in Nagorno-Karabakh in April 2016 again raised questions as to the extent of Moscow’s influence and role in the South Caucasus. It is quite clear that Karabakh is the only post-Soviet de facto state that is not under Russia’s control. There is no common border, no Russian troops in Karabakh, and no direct relations with Moscow. But even so, the simmering conflict provides Russia with tremendous leverage in the South Caucasus – a region Moscow considers to be its backyard. It was again Moscow’s diplomatic intervention that ended the fighting in April.

After the collapse of the Tsarist regime in Russia, Karabakh became a disputed territory between Armenia and Azerbaijan. In 1921, Stalin decided to place the entity, predominantly inhabited by ethnic Armenians, under Baku’s control as a way to divide and rule the South Caucasus. This uneasy arrangement lasted until the Soviet Union started to disintegrate in the late 1980s. Serious inter-ethnic clashes erupted in 1988 after the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast voted to join Armenia. Moscow rejected this decision and sent troops to Yerevan to calm the situation but to no avail. As the Soviet Union collapsed, Nagorno-Karabakh declared independence in September 1991. Inter-ethnic clashes intensified and, by early 1992, Armenia and Azerbaijan were at war. While there were several attempts to end the fighting, it was Russia that managed to mediate a ceasefire, in May 1994.

Today, Russia remains the main mediator in the conflict. Russia, together with the United States and France, are co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group but, in this trio, it is clearly Russia that has the most dominant role. Yet its actual interest in resolving the conflict is dubious. While Russia does not want a major outbreak of hostilities, it is questionable whether it actually wants a resolution to the conflict. The status quo – in which Karabakh’s status remains unsolved – suits Russia well. It provides Russia with the greatest leverage it could hope for in this part of the South Caucasus. In order to maintain this status quo, Moscow strives for parity between the Azeri and Armenian sides, in part by selling arms to both – all this while being allied with Armenia.

The Russian security presence and the absence of diplomatic relations

Ever since the ceasefire in 1994, analysts have discussed the possibility of deploying international peacekeepers to the conflict zone. Although there is an understanding among the three co-chairs that none of them would provide peacekeepers in the event of a settlement, Russia has eyed-up the possibility of deploying troops. This would provide Moscow with increased leverage over Armenia and Azerbaijan and influence in the region.

It is for this reason that the sides are sceptical of the prospect of Russian troops in the enclave. Although Russia has some 5,000 troops in Armenia, the Karabakhis have never demonstrated any wish to host peacekeepers, saying that only the Karabakh army can be the guarantor of their own security. Until now the only forces on the frontline are Armenian – a portion of them being transported over from Armenia itself and doing their two years of compulsory military service.

The four-day battle in April, when Azerbaijan took Karabakh positions on the Line of Contact, raised the possibility once more of deploying peacekeepers. But Karabakh’s negative perception of peacekeepers – Russian or otherwise – has not changed. Moreover, neither of the active parties nor the US or France would accept a contingent of Russian peacekeepers alone in the conflict zone.

Even without boots on the ground, Moscow retains considerable leverage over both sides. Russia is Armenia’s strategic ally. It has two military bases in Armenia and sells arms to Yerevan at reduced prices. In addition, both Russia and Armenia are members of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) – a Russia-led organisation that includes Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan. Although it does not cover Karabakh, the territory can still benefit indirectly, receiving cheap weaponry through Armenia.

But Russia sells weaponry to Azerbaijan as well, arming both sides in the conflict. In 2013, Baku signed $4 billion worth of arms deals with Russia – considerably more than it has signed with Armenia. In response to Armenian criticism, the CSTO’s secretary general, Nikolai Bordyuzha, said the sales were “simple business deriving from our economic interests”. By selling weapons to both sides, Russia keeps them dependent on Moscow, which can pull different strings to control the security balance in the region. This criticism increased after the recent fighting in April, when Azerbaijan used weaponry purchased from Russia.

Nagorno-Karabakh has no official political or diplomatic ties with Russia. But some members of the Russian State Duma have visited Karabakh to observe elections or attend other events. However, there is Karabakhi representation in Moscow, even though it does not have diplomatic status. This office maintains contact with Karabakhis in Russia, works with local businessmen and experts, and organises educational and cultural events. Russia has no diplomatic presence in Karabakh.

Economic ties with Russia via the Armenian bridge

Since Karabakh is unrecognised, it has no official ties with any state except Armenia. For that reason, Stepanakert trades through Armenia. This means that Karabakh-made products are stamped as “Made in Armenia”. The same process was taking place when Armenia joined the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) in 2015, meaning that the doors of the EEU were effectively opened to Karabakhi products too. Nagorno-Karabakh exports mostly agricultural products, as well as textiles and mining products.

This means that there are import and export relations between Russian and Karabakhi companies. Russia is Karabakh’s second-largest export market after Armenia. In the past three years, it made up 3–4 percent of all exports ($2 million). Imports from Russia are relatively low too at around 1.2 percent in 2015 ($3 million). Though there was a rapid increase in 2015 probably due to Armenia entering the EEU.

Russian foreign direct investment in Karabakh has increased in recent years. In 2014, Russian investments had increased to 58.6 percent of all foreign direct investment. It is largely Russian Armenians that are the source of these investments, mostly in tourism, agriculture, mining, and hydroelectric power. In recent years, Karabakh has recorded 8–10 percent GDP growth, but also an increase in tourism, which has grown annually at over 10 percent. In 2015, Karabakh had around 17,000 foreign tourists, nearly half of whom were Russian, and mostly of Armenian origin.

Russians in Karabakh, Karabakhis in Russia

In 1992, after the establishment of a land corridor with Armenia, the Karabakh authorities allowed national minorities to choose whether to stay or move elsewhere, and provided government assistance in accordance with people’s desires. As a result, in 1992, a considerable number of Russians and Greeks left Karabakh. But those Russians and Ukrainians who stayed in Karabakh later officially established an organisation to represent themselves. Currently, the community has around 200 members who are either Russian or Ukrainian. Including the children of mixed marriages, they number over 700.

The Ministry of Culture gives this community €6,000 per year to organise national events, and covers their costs if they make trips to Russia for events. The community gets no support from the Russian government, the only exception being a couple of years ago, when Yuri Luzhkov was mayor of Moscow. He funded the Russian community to hold Russian traditional ceremonies and keep their cultural identity. The Karabakh government funds a Russian “Sunday school”. There is also a religious organisation called the Russian Orthodox Church of Artsakh, established in 2009. Stepanakert municipality provided the community land to build a church and a cultural centre.

The overwhelming majority of Russians living in Nagorno-Karabakh have Armenian citizenship. This is because many of the people who live in Karabakh have done so since the Soviet period, and had to claim a national passport again in the 1990s. The largest Armenian diaspora in the world is in Russia, at around two million people. This obviously includes Armenians from Karabakh. The majority of them have some family ties to Karabakh, though few would likely send remittances.

Russian language and culture in Karabakh

In Stepanakert, there is one school that provides education in Russian for the most part, but which follows the Armenian curriculum. The school accepts only children whose parents are Russian citizens or are foreigners that have lived and studied in Russia for some time. At all other schools in Karabakh, the operational language is Armenian. Children are also taught two foreign languages – Russian, and English, French, or German. In the early 1990s, there were more Russian TV channels broadcasting in Karabakh than Armenian ones. But today the Armenian media is more influential at the expense of the Russian media.

In the Soviet period, the Russian language was strong in Karabakh because the Armenian language was repressed by the Soviet Azeri authorities, and the population did not want to study or use Azeri. As there were so few good Armenian schools, parents preferred to send their children to Russian schools. Nowadays, as in Armenia and Azerbaijan, Russian is perceived as a foreign language with regional importance but little more.

Given the Soviet Russian legacy and the impact of Russian media and language, Russian culture had a strong presence in Karabakhi life in the 1990s. However, in parallel with the development of the country and the strengthening of Armenian culture, language, and media, the influence of Russian culture has decreased. Moreover, cultural events have diversified, including more Armenian and Western influence. As a result, more and more world-known artists visit Karabakh and hold concerts and master classes there. On the other hand, it is also obvious that Russia’s traditionally strong position in the near abroad gives Moscow an opportunity to affect developments mostly through security tools, its strategic alliance with Armenia, and its position as one of the three co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group.

Source: http://www.ecfr.eu/article/essay_nagorno_karabakh_the_edge_of_russias_orbit

Carnegie Europe: The Threat of a Karabakh War in 2017

Добровольцы из Армении в Нагорном Карабахе

Every year, as the spring thaw is awaited in the mountains of Armenia and Azerbaijan, the small coterie of scholars and experts who keep an eye on the Nagorny Karabakh conflict ask, “Will there be war?” This year, Karabakh watchers are especially gloomy. Twenty-sixteen was a bad year, and 2017 could yet be worse.

Over four days last April, up to 200 Armenians and Azerbaijanis died in the worst fighting since 1994 across the so-called line of contact that divides their two armies east of the disputed territory of Nagorny Karabakh and cuts across Azerbaijani territory that the Armenians captured as they secured a victory in the conflict of the 1990s. The violence precipitated a flurry of diplomatic activity over the summer. The Azerbaijanis tentatively agreed to measures to strengthen the 1994 ceasefire regime, and the Armenians assented to a more comprehensive negotiating process. But in the last six months, the deals provisionally concluded in the summer have slowly unraveled. The Karabakh situation has defaulted to a familiar and depressing mix of mutual accusations of bad faith, Azerbaijani frustration, Armenian inertia, and diplomatic wrestling over tiny details.

Of course, as U.S. Founding Father Benjamin Franklin said, a bad peace is better than a good war. A new conflict in the Caucasus could lead to thousands of casualties and economic devastation—without resolving the core issues of the dispute. But there is a danger that the parties could miscalculate and end up fighting anyway, despite their better judgment.

The arrangements made in 1994–1995 after the ceasefire was signed look less and less sustainable: no peacekeepers, a tiny Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe monitoring mission with a limited mandate, and a process that has managed the situation but not resolved it. In 1994, the 250-kilometer (155-mile) line of contact was a string of hastily dug trenches separating the two armies, across which conscript soldiers took occasionally potshots—and sometimes met to chat and exchange cigarettes. Now, it is the most militarized zone in Europe, bristling with artillery, long-range missile launchers, attack helicopters, and military drones. Azerbaijan has spent billions of dollars of oil revenues on new weaponry. The Armenians have spent less but maintained a credible defensive capability, thanks to buying Russian weapons at discounted prices.

In the four-day war in April 2016, the Azerbaijani side recaptured two small pockets of territory. The psychological boost the Azerbaijanis received was far bigger. The perception of a successful military offensive helped reverse two-decades-old feelings of humiliation, and an upsurge of patriotism helped distract the Azerbaijani population from a shrinking economy and falling currency. Now that the latest diplomatic initiative, spearheaded by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, has stalled, there is a temptation for Baku to retry what might be called military leverage—to launch another operation to recapture territory and put pressure on the Armenian side.

The risk is that a small operation would inevitably escalate into something even more serious than last time. The Azerbaijani authorities would be under pressure to capture substantial amounts of territory, rather than the small slivers they took last time. The Armenians would be under pressure from their public to fight more strongly than they did last April and reverse any gains made by the other side.

Both sides almost certainly overestimate their military prowess. Both also have newly acquired deadly weaponry. The Armenians have obtained Iskander missiles from Russia that they exhibited at an Independence Day parade in September 2016. The weapons have a range of 280 kilometers (174 miles) and could be targeted at urban centers or oil and gas infrastructure in Azerbaijan. This would be a desperate option, but possible if a larger-scale Azerbaijani were launched. Such a move would also be in line with Armenia’s 2015 military strategy, which permits preemptive action in the name of deterrence. The Azerbaijanis have made big weapons purchases from Israel, including an Iron Dome missile-defense system and military drones.

If the military context is dangerous, the political one is no better. Azerbaijan’s oil boom has ended and the economy has declined further over the last year, shrinking by around 4 percent in 2016, with the manat having lost 57 percent of its value since January 2015. In Armenia, President Serzh Sargsyan faces a tricky parliamentary election on April 2. When the vote is completed, his country is due to make the transition to a new constitution in which executive power switches from the president to the parliament. This is widely perceived as a gambit by Sargsyan, whose second and last presidential term ends in 2018, to find a way of shoring up his own power. The switch is controversial and the opposition will use the election to challenge him in all ways possible.

A final factor of instability is international turbulence—the election of Donald Trump as U.S. president, ongoing crises in the EU—which is being felt in the South Caucasus and could encourage the parties to behave more irresponsibly and believe they can get away with more.

If there is fighting, it will be hard to manage. In April 2016, Moscow negotiated a verbal ceasefire between the parties. But it is a misconception that Moscow is pulling the strings in the Karabakh conflict. Moscow has never been in control since the dispute broke out in 1988, having tried variously to back one side or the other or to mediate. Currently, Russia is highly distrusted in both countries and neither Baku nor Yerevan will allow it to impose its own agenda on their number one national issue.

In short, the threat of preemptive violence over Karabakh needs to be met with intense preemptive diplomacy. A descent into new conflict in the South Caucasus is the last thing anyone wants—least of all the ordinary Armenians and Azerbaijanis who will be caught in the middle of it.

Source: http://carnegieeurope.eu/strategiceurope/67774

The national Interest: A Frozen War in Russia's Backyard Heats Up

Armenian soldiers at the 2015 Victory Day parade. Kremlin.ru

More than two months ago, an escalation in the Azerbaijan-Karabakh conflict without precedent since 1994 occurred in Nagorno-Karabakh. From the night of April 1 to April 2, combat operations continued until April 5, having begun in two parts of the contact line between the Nagorno-Karabakh Defense Army and the Azerbaijani Armed Forces. On that day, the parties agreed to an armistice, signed in Moscow. The four-day war answered many questions regarding military balance, while posing new ones. Since the threat of another escalation is not excluded, it makes sense to analyze the condition of the armed forces of Armenia, the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic and Azerbaijan, taking into account the results of the short but bloody April war. But first, we must talk about the early history of the Azerbaijan-Karabakh conflict.

Roots of the Conflict: The Early Twentieth Century

Bloody collisions occurred between Armenians and Azerbaijanis twice at the beginning of the twentieth century: from 1905 to 1907 and from 1918 to 1920. During those years, after the end of the First World War, the Soviet Union was taking shape. During this process, in 1921 the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, approximately 90 percent of its population Armenians who practiced the Christian religion, was allocated to the Azerbaijan Soviet Socialist Republic. Some years later the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region (NKAR) was created, and was deprived of any direct land connection with the Armenian SSR.

During the years of the USSR’s decay in the late 1980s, a reunification movement arose in Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia. It was fueled by the policy of pushing Armenians out of the NKAR; by 1989, the share of the Armenian population in the NKAR was down to 76.9 percent. Additionally, in 1988 the local Muslim population in the Azerbaijani city of Sumgait implemented the most brutal programs regarding the Armenian population, at which the Soviet leadership completely lost control over the processes underway. The NKAR declared its independency from Azerbaijan, resulting in the outbreak of war in 1991. The war continued until May 12, 1994, when three parties—Armenia, the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic and Azerbaijan—signed a provisional cease-fire agreement. The Armenians gained victory in this war, having established control over the NKAR and the territories around it by renewing the land connection with Armenia.

Upon signing the armistice, the parties led negotiations within the framework of the OSCE Minsk Group. However, this process did not yield any actual results. In recent years, violations of the state of cease-fire and constant losses from both sides have become regular occurrences.

The Four-Day War Is a Bloody Stalemate without Hope of Success

As a result, in April 2016, Azerbaijan attempted to resolve the conflict through military means. About one hundred men from the Armenian side, and more than one hundred from the Azerbaijani side, died during these four days (despite the fact that Azerbaijan officially recognized thirty-one losses, only fifty dead bodies were found on Armenian territory, and the opposition media counted more than one hundred killed persons, some neutral media even spoke of some three to eight hundred casualties). A significant quantity of armor was destroyed, and villages near the border met with significant harm.

As for the results, Azerbaijan was able to move forward three to four kilometers in two directions during the first day, because of the suddenness of attack and the posting of a detachment of special forces in the village of Talysh. However, from the moment the Nagorno-Karabakh Defense Army began its full-scale military operation, the attackers’ successes withered. The detachment of special forces was almost completely annihilated in Talshyn, together with its commander, and some of the lost positions were forcibly retaken. By the time the armistice was signed, Azerbaijan was able to occupy several hills, with an overall area of about eight hundred hectares. Nevertheless, there are no signs of serious success—any attempt at blitzkrieg had no real chance, and by the second day, the war already had the character of a bloody stalemate, with dozens of people dying to advance or retreat by one hundred meters.

The Existing Balance of Forces Will Not Allow Azerbaijan to Attack

Before the conflict, the media often advanced the opinion that Azerbaijan, having purchased billions of dollars in arms from Israel, Russia, Ukraine and Turkey, could tilt the balance in its favor. Azerbaijani officials said they would be able to retake Nagorno-Karabakh by force in the space of one or two weeks. Nevertheless, as we have already said above, any attempted blitzkrieg had no chance in April. Let us see what existing balance of forces we are left with. Regarding manpower, there are approximately sixty to seventy thousand men in the armed forces of Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh. Approximately seventy thousand men are in the Azerbaijani army; however, it has a higher mobilization potential, taking into account Azerbaijan’s larger overall population.

All parties are armed with a “classic” rifle for post-Soviet countries: different series of Kalashnikov guns. The special detachments also have some Western models of arms—for example, Azerbaijan has purchased a number of Israeli assault rifles TAR-21. The variety of sniper rifles is great; almost all basic Western and Russian models appear. As for antitank means, both parties have a large number of antitank missile systems of Soviet and Russian manufacture, and Azerbaijan has also purchased modern Israeli Spike systems, which proved their quality during the four-day war. As for Armenia, the country was able to purchase some number of Franco-German Milan antitank missile systems by an unknown supplier. Both parties to the conflict are armed with hundreds of man-portable “Igla” air defense systems.

As for armor, here Azerbaijan possesses a qualitative advantage, having purchased a large batch of armaments in Russia: Baku has obtained approximately one hundred modern T-90C tanks and one hundred BMP-3 mechanized infantry combat vehicles. That said, altogether the parties have approximately four hundred tanks each; in the case of Armenia these are generally Soviet T-72Bs. The situation is similar with regard to conventional artillery—but, to tell the truth, it is almost impossible to count the exact number of armaments: a great number are located in Nagorno-Karabakh, where much information is classified. However, Azerbaijan has eighteen “Msta-C” self-propelled 152-millimeter howitzers.

Today, Azerbaijan has obtained the most sensible advantage in the field of heavy multiple-launch rocket systems (MLRS). The country has thirty “Smerch” three-hundred-millimeter MLRS that are able to fire at a distance of up to ninety kilometers, and eighteen TOC-1A “Solntsepyok” reactive flamethrower systems . There is some information about Azerbaijan’s contract with Turkey for the delivery of three-hundred-millimeter Kasirga MLRS. As for Armenia, regarding heavy MLRS, today the country has, according to different sources, four to eight Chinese WM-80 systems that fire at a distance of up to 120 kilometers, as well as, according to some sources, six Chinese copies of the “Smerch” AR1A. However, this difference will be soon nullified: Armenia has ordered a number of “Smerch” MLRS and TOC-1A “Solntsepyok” units from Russia.

It is interesting that Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh were able to obtain a sensible advantage in the field of ballistic missiles. Armenian soldiers are armed with a significant number of “Tochka-U” Tactical Ballistic Missile Systems (SS-21 Scarab A according to NATO classification) that can fire at a distance of up to 120 kilometers. Besides, Armenians have at least eight R-17 launchers (SS-1c Scud B according to NATO classification) with thirty-two missiles that are able to fly to any target in Azerbaijan; its maximum launching range is three hundred kilometers.

Let us now look at the potential enemies’ air forces. In spite of the visible and serious advantages of Azerbaijan, the parties are nearly equal here. And that is because both have powerful antiaircraft defense systems, preventing the use of aviation in the conflict. This was partially confirmed by the four-day war—almost at once, Azerbaijan lost one Mi-24G attack helicopter (two, according to Armenian sources), after which aircraft did not participate in the conflict at all. Armenia’s antiaircraft defense system is armed at least with six battalions of S-300 air-defense missile systems (ADMS—NATO reporting name SA-10 Grumble). This is a huge number for a country with relatively little territory. Azerbaijan also has S-300s and other antiaircraft defense systems that are almost impossible to be suppressed by the Soviet Su-25 attack aircraft and  MiG-29 fighters that the parties own.

Finally, we shall turn to unmanned aerial vehicles. Both parties used them widely during the recent escalation. Azerbaijan uses a wide range of Israeli unmanned aerial vehicles (reconnaissance as well as kamikaze IAI Harop UAVs), while Armenia relies on models of its own manufacture. A comparable number of unmanned aerial vehicles has probably not been lost in any other conflict in such a short period of time. Azerbaijan lost a minimum of ten unmanned aerial vehicles (some “landed” by means of electronic warfare, some were brought down by “Osa-AKM” short-range air-defense missile systems and twenty-three-millimeter  “Shilka” antiaircraft guns) while Armenia lost at least two.

In spite of some qualitative advantage, as we see, it is impossible to say that Azerbaijan has any overwhelming dominance. Assuming that it will attack, and that Armenia continuously fortifies its positions and constructs new fortifications, a war will be very difficult and long without any breakthroughs, which will make it senseless for Baku. Besides, taking into account the existence of the serious long-range MLRS and ballistic missiles of the enemy, there is a high risk of the destruction of large settlements and infrastructure, including gas and oil facilities. It is almost impossible to forecast the results of the stalemate, somewhat similar to the First World War.

Source: http://nationalinterest.org/feature/frozen-war-russias-backyard-heats-17085

Chatham House: Violence in Karabakh a Reflection of Azerbaijan’s Security Dilemma

https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/files/chathamhouse/styles/main_image_800x460/public/images/2016-04-22-Baku-Putin.jpg?itok=lZBu7PmT

As the equilibrium between Azerbaijan and Armenia breaks down, Baku is left with an unpalatable choice: increasingly losing control of the situation or being drawn further into Russia’s orbit. After the end of the ‘four-day war’− a brief but violent outbreak of hostilities between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorny Karabakh − there are muted hopes for a renewal of peace negotiations. This bodes poorly for Baku – despite Azerbaijan’s military advantage over Armenia, it has increasingly limited diplomatic choices.

Timing


Azerbaijan’s offensive was clearly the result of planning and training but it was not a blitzkrieg aimed at liberating territories under Armenian occupation – once the mission was completed, Azerbaijan announced a unilateral truce. Baku gambled on psychological factors such as a demonstration of the technological advancement of its armed forces. The timing of escalation led to speculation that the Azerbaijani authorities used the conflict chiefly to distract the population from domestic factors – such as the country’s economic decline and corruption scandals revealed in the Panama Papers. But were this truly a factor, the offensive would likely have taken place in January, amid the regional protests against price hikes, or immediately following the revelations of the Panama Papers.

The more likely scenario is that Armenia’s declaration in February that it would pursue a deterrence strategy including the possibility of a preemptive strike became strategically problematic for Baku. Such a policy could limit Baku’s abilities along the Line of Contact. Thus, a carefully controlled escalation served to raise international awareness of the fragility of a status quo which Azerbaijan regards as unfavourable, in order to galvanize the international mediators and put pressure on Yerevan to be constructive at the negotiating table.

In addition, the military escalation also destroyed any expectations Armenia might have harboured for support from the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). Its response was fragmented, with Belarus, for example, openly supporting Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity.
 
Non-military goals

But Baku’s ultimate goal was diplomatic, to put pressure on the Armenian side. A stalemate in negotiations is unpalatable, and the military offensive helped to show Baku’s military muscle with offensive weapons of a higher technological capability than Yerevan’s. While both countries are reliant on Russian exports for conventional arming, Baku has used its larger state budget to acquire military equipment from other sources such as Israel and Turkey.

There has been a stalemate over Nagorny Karabakh since the failure of the 2011 Kazan meeting under Moscow’s auspices, which was intended to produce a framework agreement on conflict resolution. At that point, Azerbaijan offered to support the re-opening of the Turkish-Armenian border in exchange for partial liberation of territories. Previously it had opposed the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations without full liberation as a prerequisite. At the Munich Security Conference in February 2015, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev stated that ‘de-occupation of some of these districts, assuming negotiations continue, will immediately change the picture’.

The offensive has two further non-military goals. First, Baku needs to secure international investment − primarily for its gas projects, to compensate for the effect on its economy of the decline in oil prices. Baku does not have the luxury of engaging in military adventurism with the risk of a full-blown war. Meanwhile, Azerbaijan hopes that the situation will encourage potential investors to return.

The second is to consolidate army and military reform. Baku’s military budget has increased from $175 million in 2004 to $4.8 billion, which the population has thus far tolerated because of symbolic military successes. But without results in diplomatic negotiations, and with continuing troop losses, the public will turn against the government. More importantly, the effectiveness of Baku’s strategy depends not merely on deterring Armenian troops on the frontline through a war of attrition, but on the Azerbaijani army’s resolution to use its military power as a deterrent during negotiations. The reaction of Armenia is crucial; recent events could provoke a more pro-active Armenian position on Azerbaijan. Further escalation could harm the already pitifully thin modicum of trust between the two societies and their respective leaders.
 
The Russian factor

The short war has shone a light on Russia’s actions in the region. Moscow was previously uninterested in stopping the skirmishes. While most people in Armenia and Azerbaijan perceive Russia’s hand in the escalation, Russia’s pretense of being a mediator of the conflict has been exposed, with the unwelcome publicity that it has been selling arms to both sides.

The short war has increased the need to revive the negotiations and Russia is most likely to utilize the opportunity. Russia would like to return to the failed Kazan accords, which would entail returning five or six territories and then resolving key sticking points including the political future of Nagorny Karabakh. Russia hopes that with a resolution of the conflict, it can compel Azerbaijan into joining the CSTO and Eurasian Economic Union. This is Azerbaijan’s dilemma: submitting itself into the Russian sphere is a high price to pay, even for conflict resolution. However, in the absence of diplomatic negotiations, Baku could see increasing levels of domestic unrest. Thus, if tangible results do not come soon, more devastating military action may lie ahead.


The Jamestown Foundation: Azerbaijan’s War of Attrition: A New Strategy to Resolve the Karabakh Conflict?

http://en.azeridefence.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/rpq.jpg

he escalation of tensions between Armenian and Azerbaijani armed forces along the line of contact (LOC) saw the outbreak of a five-day exchange of fire, the bloodiest since the 1994 ceasefire agreement. The latest clashes ended with a mutually agreed ceasefire on April 5. According to official estimations from both sides, the Azerbaijani side lost 31 soldiers (Azadliq.org, April 6), while Yerevan’s last official statement—not updated—says they lost 20 men, with 26 soldiers missing (Panarmenian.net, 5 April). Both countries have also lost military equipment, including tanks and military helicopters.

The outbreak of clashes prompted speculation about the timing—both the Azerbaijani and Armenian presidents were in Washington, DC, for the Nuclear Summit. Russia’s approach also led to questions: Moscow contented itself with a statement calling for an end to the violence, rather than the expected intervention to demonstrate Russia’s key role in the Karabakh conflict. This is precisely what happened back in August 2014, when hostilities were cut short by Moscow’s involvement. It was suggested at the time that Moscow had manufactured the escalation of tensions in order to show off its mediation capacity to the West, emphasizing Russia’s regional influence on the eve of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO) September 2014 summit in Wales (Caucasus Analytical Digest, September 17, 2014).

But Moscow did not attempt such an intervention during the recent clashes, despite their devastating outcome. Moreover, the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), the Moscow-led military bloc in which Yerevan has placed its hopes, limited itself to calls to end the fighting. It did not support the Armenian position. On the contrary, one member state, Kazakhstan, released a statement of neutrality, while another, Belarus, declared that the conflict should be resolved based on international legal principles of territorial integrity, creating deep bewilderment in Yerevan (Euro Belarus Information Service, April 4). These two developments undercut early speculation by some analysts that Moscow had also manufactured this month’s skirmishes, in order to punish Azerbaijan for attempting to revitalize relations with the United States and the West, following a long period of relative disengagement.

Azerbaijan’s military offensive and its policies during the period of escalation may have been precipitated by a “gentlemen’s agreement” between Baku and Moscow; or Russia could have given Azerbaijan a kind of “green light” for military action, as long as the latter refrained from pushing Armenia to question its strategic alliance with Moscow. Whether or not such an understanding was reached, clearly Baku did not cross Moscow’s red line—i.e. April’s military operation did not lead to a full-fledged war. At the same time, Russia benefits financially from this situation and so is taking a business-like approach. The Azerbaijani army’s military offensive means that Baku will need to negotiate the purchase of replacement military equipment from Moscow in the future. At the same time, Yerevan is also requesting help to arm its military. This situation strengthens Russia’s role in conflict management.

However, Azerbaijan’s military strategy suggests this was not just a case of displaying military muscle. Rather, Baku apparently hoped to open up the way for the diplomatic resolution of the conflict, bringing Armenia to the negotiations table by militarily changing the status quo along the LOC.

The overall situation shows that Azerbaijan’s military commanders had planned in advance for their army units—with some degree of support from the air force—to be prepared to react to an Armenian violation of the LOC. Armenia’s strategy was to rely on a hazardous landmine zone on its side of the LOC. This zone would be much harder to penetrate for Azerbaijani forces, and would result in devastating personnel losses (Crisis Group, Europe Briefing no. 71, September 26, 2013). If they succeeded in getting through the second echelon of defense, Azerbaijani army units would face mobilized Armenian units.

The aim of the Azerbaijani forces was to isolate Armenian units that had been cut off near the various fortifications along the contact line, and operations were launched in five directions (Anadolu Agency, April 2). With that, the initial goal was to take strategic heights—providing an important advantage in terms of targeting military infrastructure. By April 3, when Baku declared a unilateral truce, Azerbaijani forces had taken Lele Tepe, a small peak in occupied Fuzuli region; a hill around the Talish village in the Aghdere region; and the Seysulan settlement (APA, April 2). Azerbaijani forces calculated that Armenian troops would mobilize to take back these lost territories, and Azerbaijan would respond by deploying Orbiter 2M weaponized drones with the Spike-LR missiles system. This response also enabled Azerbaijani troops to capture other nearby strategic locations. In total, Armenia lost three positions in the southern direction and three in the northern direction (Armenianow.com, April 4).

By not pursuing a limited war strategy, Baku demonstrated its strategic approach—a short, sharp intervention. This can be described as a policy of attrition: wearing down the enemy to the point of compromise through continuous losses. The idea is that Armenian defense forces will now be more vulnerable to targeting by Azerbaijani offensives from higher ground, leading to greater losses in the future, and/or a forced retreat.

However, the ultimate goal of Azerbaijan’s attrition strategy is actually to bring Armenia back to the negotiations table, as maintaining the military status quo along the LOC will now be more costly for Yerevan and could spark domestic turbulence in Armenia. The latest clashes destroyed the belief that Azerbaijan is not prepared to use force. Whether or not Baku’s strategy will work depends on the international environment, how the mediators and Yerevan react, and whether the situation achieves anything in terms of the diplomatic resolution of the conflict. This strategy also holds disadvantages for Baku: First of all, it will require the purchase of more armaments, which in the current economic conditions is problematic. Also, it may incur further losses on the front line, especially if Armenia tries to retake the military positions that Azerbaijan gained. Yerevan might also launch a preventive attack at any time. During the recent clashes, the majority of the population was very supportive of the government’s military actions. But more troop fatalities in the absence of a resolution could damage public backing.

In sum, the strategy of attrition warfare seems to demonstrate a new approach by Baku toward conflict resolution. It may achieve short-term success, if international mediation efforts capitalize on the current momentum to push for a resolution. Otherwise, in the long term, this strategy could spark a full-blown war.


Washington Times: Russian missiles in Armenia threaten western interests

Russian Iskander Missiles in Armenia Illustration by Greg Groesch/The Washington Times

The Caucasus Mountains that run between the Black and Caspian Seas could soon turn into a nuclear flash point because of dangerous saber-rattling by Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan. Armenia has illegally claimed territory in western Azerbaijan, an assertion backed by military offensives against Azerbaijan, including a massacre of 600 citizens in 1992. Sadly now, Armenia may be taking the region to the brink of nuclear war.

Armenia received the Iskander missile system from Russia last autumn, a major provocation meant to send a message to Azerbaijan and NATO ally Turkey. This is consistent with Moscow’s policy of using missile deployments in Eurasia and the Middle East to threaten western interests. The Iskander short-range ballistic missile system is designed to destroy small targets at up to 300 miles. This means that Iskander missiles deployed in eastern Armenia could reach targets all over Azerbaijan, including the capital of Baku. Alarmingly, Iskander missiles are capable of being fitted with nuclear warheads.

As if the presence of the missiles were not a clear enough menace, Mr. Sargsyan visited the improperly held territories and bragged that his government possessed a “state-of-the-art, powerful striking force.” He went on to identify potential targets in Azerbaijan — “the most important infrastructure” — and followed up with a chilling pronouncement about his intentions as head of the Armenian military. “If needed, the commander in chief of the Armenian forces will without batting an eyelid order volley fire by Iskander,” he said.

This new round of warmongering is troubling in several respects and raises tensions in Baku and throughout the region. In addition to unnerving Armenia’s neighbors, Mr. Sargsyan’s statements raised concerns in Washington, D.C. The Jamestown Foundation recently held a panel discussion on Capitol Hill to address the danger posed by Armenia’s deployment of the Iskander missiles, writing that the new weapons “threaten European stability, put U.S. allies at risk and potentially violate the 1988 [Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces] Treaty.”

Mr. Sargsyan’s inflammatory rhetoric destroys the myth propagated by separatists that the Armenian-seized Azerbaijani territory is an independent republic. Rather, the region occupied Azerbaijan and is now a staging area for missiles pointed at the rest of Azerbaijan. It is also clear that Mr. Sargsyan is using the missiles as a political weapon. Armenia’s president is seeking to stir his nationalistic supporters against Azerbaijan to increase voter turnout in elections. He is rejecting bids from more sober leaders in Armenia, including former President Levon Ter-Petrossian, for a plan that would reduce tensions between the two nations.

And then there’s the Russia question. Armenia is the only nation that has received the Iskander system from Russia. Why Armenia? Possibly because “the most important infrastructure” in Azerbaijan that could be targeted by the missiles includes companies owned and operated by Western entities, including American ones, that ensure Europe’s energy security. Natural gas from Azerbaijan flows by pipeline from the Caspian Sea west through Georgia and into Turkey and Europe. Should that flow be disrupted by military conflict, Europe would be at the mercy of Russia for its energy needs.

Another possibility: Russia might be attempting to rebuild its Soviet-era footprint in the Lesser Caucuses as it has done in Crimea and is attempting in Eastern Ukraine. It’s no secret that Russia and Armenia recently established a joint air defense pact. If Mr. Sargsyan’s troubling boasts about his willingness to deploy his new Iskander missile system were the only such noise coming from Armenia, it would be worrisome enough. But in the past six months, top members of his administration have made more than a dozen similar statements.

Azerbaijan has more than twice as many people as Armenia yet its Gross Domestic Product is nearly seven times greater. While Armenians have watched their leaders diminish their economy, Azerbaijan has prospered. Much like North Korea, military posturing is all Armenia has left. This is a dangerous time for Azerbaijan and the entire region because of Armenia’s reckless pursuit of offensive weapons and incendiary rhetoric. Azerbaijanis at home and in the United States have depended on America as a good friend and strong ally. The world can only hope that that will continue under the new Trump administration.

• Lloyd Green is a former staff secretary to the George H.W. Bush campaign’s Middle East Policy Group in 1988 and served in the Department of Justice between 1990 and 1992.  

Source:http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/apr/17/nuclear-turmoil-possible-in-caucuses/

National Interest: Why Armenia Needs the Iskander System

Iskander-M SRBM system. Wikimedia Commons/Creative Commons/Vitaly V. Kuzmin

On April 17, the Washington Times published an article by Lloyd Green, in which the author describes the Karabakh-Azerbaijani conflict, and its consequences for the whole region and international community. Many theses of my colleague are distorted and, therefore, readers may get the wrong understanding of both the real causes of the conflict and the current geopolitical situation in Transcaucasia. The first misconception is that Armenia occupied the territories of neighboring Azerbaijan. The reality is that Nagorno-Karabakh—a historical territory of the Armenian people—was transferred to Soviet Azerbaijan, which was created by the Bolshevik government for political purposes. The Soviet Union was striving for territorial expansion against Iran; creating a republic with the name Azerbaijan, Moscow expressed its claims to the Iranian provinces of East and West Azerbaijan. Thus, transfer of the Armenian territories of Nagorno-Karabakh and Nakhichevan to Azerbaijan was based on pragmatic geopolitical calculations by the Soviet leadership.

During Soviet rule, Nagorno-Karabakh had autonomous status. According to the constitution, it had the right to declare its independence, as did all national republics. In 1988, Karabakh deputies asked the central authorities to consider and positively resolve the issue of transferring the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region to the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic. After that moment, widespread killing of the Armenian population took place in the Azerbaijani cities of Baku and Sumgait. Incidentally, it was the United States that reacted first to these acts of aggression. Senators Claiborne Pell (chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee at that time) and Robert Dole (the Senate’s Republican leader), as well as John Kerry and Joseph Biden, sent a letter to Mikhail Gorbachev demanding a stop to the violence against Armenians. In response to the lack of reaction from Moscow, Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh, who had survived the 1915–23 genocide in Ottoman Turkey, announced their withdrawal from Azerbaijan.

In response, the authorities of Baku led their troops to Armenian territory, committing an act of aggression. The fact that it was an act of aggression by Azerbaijan against Nagorno-Karabakh is evidenced by Washington’s official and consistent position throughout the period of conflict. Thus, meeting with Soviet foreign minister Eduard Shevardnadze in 1990, Senator Pell conveyed America’s concern over the Azerbaijan’s aggression against Armenian Karabakh. Moreover, Pell sent a letter to the minister in which many influential senators demanded that Moscow transfer Nagorno-Karabakh to Armenia. During the acute phase of the armed conflict, Congress adopted Section 907, which prohibited any possible assistance to Azerbaijan from the United States because of its aggressive actions and illegal blockade of the borders of Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh. Moreover, Nagorno-Karabakh, on an equal footing with Armenia, was included in the official list of countries to which until today America has provided annual financial aid. Believing Green’s statements means that America has supported “aggressors”: Armenia and Karabakh. Is this even possible?

Today, the United States, Russia and France are the permanent cochairs of the OSCE Minsk Group for the settlement of the Karabakh-Azerbaijani conflict. Numerous statements of this group note that there is no alternative to a peaceful solution of the issue. The only country that does not share this position of international community, as represented by the Minsk Group, is Azerbaijan. The leadership of this state openly declares that Armenians around the world are enemies of Azerbaijan, regardless of what their political views are and what countries they are citizens of. The entire civilized world condemned President Ilham Aliyev for granting state honors to Ramil Safarov, a lieutenant who murdered the sleeping Armenian officer Gurgen Margaryan with an axe during NATO’s Partnership for Peace program in Budapest.

During Azerbaijan’s massive aggression last April, the most dangerous types of weapons were used against peaceful villages and cities, including the TOS-1 heavy flamethrower system. This aggression was once again condemned by the White House, which stated that the conflict should be resolved by respecting the right of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh to self-determination. Ed Royce (the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee), Adam Schiff (the ranking Democrat on the Intelligence Committee), Senator Robert Menendez and other legislators also spoke out against Azerbaijan’s military aggression.

If we carefully analyze Azerbaijan’s aggressive rhetoric, coupled with systematic violation of the cease-fire and diversionary actions against the civilian population, we can understand why Armenia purchased the Iskander system from Russia. Green is deeply mistaken that the Armenian side seeks to use these systems against Western energy infrastructure. Besides that, statements of high-ranking politicians, which can easily be verified, are taken out of context. Iskander systems are viewed by official Yerevan not as an element of intimidation, but as a system for restraining the aggressive plans of Baku. Realizing the existing realities, I would like to ask my colleague Lloyd Green a question: Does Christian Armenia have the right to ensure the safety of its people, while its nearest neighbor every time claims the need to wipe out the Armenian people from the face of the Earth?

Source: http://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-armenia-needs-the-iskander-system-20499

Stratfor: Armenian-Russian air defense system to put brakes on Azerbaijan’s claims to Nagorno Karabakh
https://cdn5.img.sputniknews.com/images/103221/87/1032218776.jpg
A joint missile Russian-Armenian air defense system will put the brakes on Azerbaijan’s goal of retaking Nagorno-Karabakh and seven adjacent territories, Stratfor said as it analyzed the motives behind the Russian-Armenian air defense deal. Excerpts from the analysis are provided below. On Nov. 11, Russian President Vladimir Putin instructed his government to sign an agreement with Armenia to create a joint missile air defense system in the region. Not long after, the Armenian government confirmed that Russian Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev is expected to visit Armenia in late November to officially sign the air defense system deal.

The move, though reminiscent of Moscow’s actions in Central Asia and Belarus in previous years, comes at a time when Russia is being forced to respond to a wider array of challenges than ever before. Threats are rising from the Near East, while the West is ramping up its military activities in Georgia and Nagorno-Karabakh moves closer to changing its political status. And as Russia increases its military presence in Armenia, its competition with major regional powers for influence in the South Caucasus will intensify, adding to the growing list of issues Russia must contend with outside its borders. An expanding military presence will put Russia in direct competition with Turkey’s ambitions in the South Caucasus and Georgia’s cooperation with NATO and U.S. forces. It will also put the brakes on Azerbaijan’s goal of retaking Nagorno-Karabakh and seven adjacent territories.

For Armenia’s part, the joint air defense deal comes at an opportune time. Its government has received mounting criticism from Armenian politicians and media amid a growing belief that the country’s membership in the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty Organization and its reliance on Russia as a security guarantor have yielded few results, particularly as Azerbaijan pursues a more assertive military posture around Nagorno-Karabakh.

Under the new agreement, Armenian air defenses will be strengthened, and the country will likely see new air defense equipment, radios, radar systems and combat helicopters deployed to its territory. Armenian Minister of Territorial Administration and Emergency Situations Armen Yeritsyan also recently announced that the Stepanavan Airport, located a mere 20 kilometers (about 12 miles) from the Armenia-Georgia border, will host Russian Mi-24 and KA-32 heavy helicopters starting in 2016. While these aircraft do not amount to a projection of Russian force because of their limited range, they do reflect the Kremlin’s broader policy of boosting its air capabilities in Armenia — a process that dates back to January 2014, when Russia announced that it would strengthen Armenia’s Erebuni Airport with Mi-24P, Mi-8MT and Mi-8SMV helicopters. Along a similar vein, Nagorno-Karabakh’s president has said Russian forces may use his region’s Stepanakert Airport for air operations, an offer that may be in response to the recent uptick in air cooperation between Armenia and Russia.

Russia’s growing military presence in the South Caucasus will be especially worrisome to Turkey and Azerbaijan, Armenia’s longtime rivals in the region. The two countries have ramped up their joint military exercises with Georgia over the past year, posing a heightened threat to Armenia, whose strategic position is already weak. Since Turkey already had less ability than Russia to project power into the South Caucasus, the Kremlin’s recent moves will only increase the gap between Russian and Turkish influence there, thus intensifying their competition for sway in the wider region.

Meanwhile, Russia’s stronger aerial presence in Armenia could alter the military balance of power between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Azerbaijani politicians have already voiced concerns about the air defense agreement, and on Nov. 11 — the same day Putin gave his orders to sign the deal — Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev visited his country’s S-300 anti-aircraft missile brigade, the unit responsible for Azerbaijan’s aerial defenses.

The timing of the deal is significant for a number of reasons. First, it signals Russia’s response to recent developments in the ongoing standoff between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh. As talks progress on Armenia handing over to Azerbaijan several regions adjacent to the breakaway territory, Russia will boost its military presence in the South Caucasus to ensure the security of Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh and to make any further territorial concessions more politically palatable to Yerevan. Second, as Russia becomes more involved in the Syrian conflict, Moscow is keen to increase its ability to monitor its southern borders — a goal that a military presence in Armenia, with its proximity to the Middle East, is ideally suited to achieve.

 Source: https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/motives-behind-russian-armenian-air-defense-deal-0


No, Russia Does Not Want War in Nagorno-Karabakh

http://www.theasian.asia/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/NISI20160620_0011829505.jpg
In a recent op-ed in Al Jazeera, Caucasus political analyst Richard Giragosian argued that Russia, desperate to retain its influence in the former Soviet space, seeks to spark an armed conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh (Artsakh). Specifically, he asserted that the military build-up between Armenia and Azerbaijan has “greatly enhanced Russian power and influence” and that “the looming risk of ‘war by accident’ may be a tempting tool for Moscow to consolidate its leverage in the region by provoking, promoting and then exploiting renewed hostilities.”

The move, wrote Giragosian, could “garner greater dividends for Russian hard power.” He added that this “stems from the Russian desire to further project its power in the South Caucasus by seeking to spark further military confrontation in order to deploy Russian peacekeepers to Nagorno-Karabakh.”

The notion that Russia aims to purposefully instigate a war between Armenia and Azerbaijan is illogical and conflicts with the basic realities of the Caucasus region. The allegation by Giragosian is an extreme version of the idea of Russia using the Nagorno-Karabakh issue as a “divide and rule” mechanism to retain Armenia and Azerbaijan in its sphere of influence. This concept is derived from a flawed historical understanding of the origins of the dispute, which attributed the assignment of Nagorno-Karabakh to Azerbaijan to the cynical interests of Stalin and Soviet Russia.

However, this myth has recently been put to rest. The historical research of the scholar, Arsene Saparov, persuasively argued that Nagorno-Karabakh was assigned to Soviet Azerbaijan based on the fact that it was, despite its overwhelming Armenian majority, controlled by Azerbaijan at the time of Sovietization. Simply put, it was easier for the Bolsheviks to sanction the pre-existing situation on the ground while giving the Armenians the concession of political autonomy, a solution that satisfied neither side. Stalin, far from the height of his power, played only a minor role.

This debunked divide-and-rule premise notwithstanding, the idea that Russia would want a war in Nagorno-Karabakh also runs contrary to Russia’s strategic interests in the region. Russia’s primary interest is stability and security, not war and chaos. This is especially important given Russia’s concerns with the rise of Islamic extremism in the North Caucasus. Specifically, Moscow wants to shore up its position in the region by having a secure buffer of friendly states south of the Caucasus Mountains that will help it contain and isolate this threat.

Armenia, Russia’s main military ally in Transcaucasia, is a key part of this strategy. Georgia, which has its own problem with Islamic extremists, is likewise an important component of it. However, Russo-Georgian tension, especially during Mikheil Saakashvili’s presidency, has hindered these efforts. The current Georgian government, led by the pragmatist prime minister Irakli Garibashvili, seeks to mend Russo-Georgian ties—and with good reason.

Georgia’s Pankisi Gorge, home to a Chechen subgroup known as the Kists, has become a prime target for ISIS recruiting efforts. One of its natives is Omar al-Shishani (born Tarkhan Batirashvili), a veteran of the 2008 war in Georgia and now a top ISIS commander.  This has raised much concern in Moscow, which faces a similar problem across the border in the North Caucasus.  In a recent 60 Minutes interview with Charlie Rose, Russian President Vladimir Putin noted that “more than 2,000 fighters from Russia and Ex-Soviet Republics” are fighting on Syrian territory.

This only underscores the need for cooperation between Tbilisi and Moscow. Both share a common interest in combating the spread of terrorism and Islamic extremism in Pankisi and in the Caucasus generally. Yerevan too shares this interest. In fact, for both Armenia and Georgia, the presence of ISIS in the neighborhood has reawakened bad historical memories. Having a large country like Russia nearby to ward off such threats is a major advantage for the security of both states.

Russia’s concerns in the Caucasus are not just limited to Islamic extremism. Moscow is also troubled by efforts, led by the United States, to expand NATO, to promote Western-backed energy projects, and to encourage pro-Western “color revolutions” in the region. Russia is perplexed by these moves, which it regards as a continuation of Cold War containment. These measures are also viewed by the Kremlin as creating the conditions for instability in the region, as the 2008 war in Georgia demonstrated.

Given this, a war in Nagorno-Karabakh, especially in light of recent events in Ukraine and Syria, is the absolute last thing that Russia wants or needs. This explains the reason for the Russian-backed Sochi summit on Nagorno-Karabakh in August 2014. Hostilities on the ceasefire line between the sides reached alarming levels and Russian President Putin sought to calm tensions between Baku and Yerevan. If Russia really wanted a war, it would have permitted the ceasefire violations to escalate until a major conflict erupted. Instead, Russia sought to avert that prospect.

In Giragosian’s view, “Russia has largely benefitted from the unresolved nature of the conflict” over Nagorno-Karabakh since the 1994 ceasefire. This is not the case. Although the tenuous ceasefire has maintained some peace and stability in the region, in the long term, Russia is not interested in seeing any renewed hostilities over Nagorno-Karabakh. At the same time, long-term solutions to the issue have been elusive; Putin and other Russian officials acknowledge this.

Nevertheless, Giragosian is correct on one point; Russia has indeed supplied both sides with weapons. It is true that Moscow has cautiously supplied weapons to Azerbaijan, in part to entice it to join the Eurasian Union.  However, the political reality is that Armenia remains Russia’s major military ally and most reliable partner in Transcaucasia. Russia’s major military infrastructure in the region, including the 102nd military base at Gyumri, is located in Armenia.  Further, Moscow’s military obligations and security guarantees to Yerevan remain firm.

The Russian-Armenian relationship, determined by hard political factors and security interests, is mutually beneficial for both countries. For Armenia, Russia remains the strongest guarantor for its security against potential threats and concerns from its hostile neighbors, Turkey and Azerbaijan. For Russia, Armenia remains an important and friendly pillar in a strategically vital region.

The conclusion of Giragosian’s piece is that, “…the danger of a ‘war by accident’ over Nagorno-Karabakh necessitates much more strategic scrutiny and greater attention by the West. This remote and fairly removed conflict can no longer be so easily ceded to Russian control. Moscow has been afforded too much room as a primary actor for far too long.” This conclusion is based on another troubling premise. The West, he wrote, “can no longer so easily cede” the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute to Russia. However, is the dispute the West’s to “cede” at all? Conflicts, such as the one in Nagorno-Karabakh, are not pieces in a “great game” between the “great powers” on a “grand chessboard” (to quote Zbigniew Brzezinski). Instead, they are international disputes that require international cooperation, not competition.

In addition, the view that the West can “cede” the dispute to Moscow also implies that Armenia, Georgia, and other post-Soviet countries are objects that can be “ceded” from one power to another. According to this perspective, Yerevan, Baku, Tbilisi, Kiev, Astana, and others are not independent political players, whose relations with Moscow and the West are determined by savvy, pragmatic interests. In this view, they cannot decide for themselves what kind of future or political system they should have. This problematic position also arises from an outlook based on international competition, not cooperation. However, the Caucasus needs much more of the latter and much less of the former if is to find peace, security, and stability.

Pietro A. Shakarian is a PhD Candidate in Russian History at The Ohio State University in Columbus. He earned his MA in Russian, East European, and Eurasian Studies at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. In addition to The Armenite, he has written analyses on Russia and the former USSR for The Nation, Russia Direct, and Hetq. He is also an Associate Editor at the Gomidas Institute.


Hetq: Moscow Intends to Deploy Peacekeepers in Nagorno Karabagh - 6 Facts

https://cdn5.img.sputniknews.com/images/102399/93/1023999376.jpg

The regional military and political events of the recent week raise a number of questions, the most important of which is related to Russia’s intentions. While some try to claim that the recent tensions could have been possible without Russia’s permission and that Baku had attacked Nagorno Karabagh upon its own initiative, the events of the last few years bear witness of a different trend.

In particular, the Russian-Azerbaijani military trade, the fact that till today Armenia has not received the loan amount of 200 million USD (the loan agreement was signed in the summer of 2015) intended for purchasing arms, Azerbaijan’s protest against the loan and the apologizing response of Russian Foreign Ministry’s official representative Maria Zakharova prompt Aliev that he will not run the risk of being scolded by the Russian big brother in case of provoking war. The diplomatic statements of the recent days also testify that Kremlin did not mind such developments. The following events show that Moscow has changed its approach not only in regard with arms sales, but diplomacy as well. One of the indicators was the act of moving the meeting of the EAEU prime ministers from Yerevan to Moscow by using war as an excuse. In reality, this was a message to Baku implying that the EAEU does not stand by Armenia in this difficult situation. Another indicator was Medvedev’s decision to cut short his visit to Yerevan in order to be able to visit Baku as well. Moreover, the Russian prime minister also visited the monument dedicated to the so-called martyrs in Baku and laid a wreath in memory of Azerbaijani soldiers who died in the battles against the Armenian forces.

Naturally, Russia’s main aim is the deployment of Russian peacekeeping troops in Nagorno Karabagh. There is no doubt that Nagorno Karabagh conflict is the main lever for Russia to keep its influence in the South Caucasus. Hence, the resolution of the conflict (in favor of any of the sides) is not in the interests of Russia. Whereas the deployment of Russian peacekeepers would solve the issue of submitting Armenia to Russia’s will whenever Armenia would dare not to obey Kremlin. The circumstances mentioned below serve as testimony of such intentions of Russia:

1. The agreement on ceasing the fire was reached by Chiefs of General Staff of the Armed Forces of Armenia and Azerbaijan in Moscow on April 5. This means that the agreement is not a diplomatic but a military one because the issue was discussed by Chiefs of Staff of the Armed Forces, not Foreign Ministers. Thus, a question arises… What did the sides discuss during that meeting in Moscow and why was it a secret meeting?

2. On April 7, Armenian President Serj Sargsyan gave an interview to the German Deutsche Welle, in which he stated that Armenia had never objected to the deployment of Russian peacekeepers in Nagorno Karabagh. Taking into account the fact that Nagorno Karabagh has strongly opposed the deployment of peacekeepers in in its territory ever since 1994, we get the impression that Serj Sargsyan is paving the way for the news to come.

3. The Russian-Armenian relations have sharply deteriorated during the recent days. It was expressed in multiple ways: starting from the change of rhetoric of official Yerevan when referring to its “strategic ally” and ending with the fact that Dmitri Medvedev was accompanied to the Armenian Genocide Memorial only by Yerevan Mayor Taron Margaryan. This change may both be related to the fact of arms sales to Azerbaijan and some diplomatic coercion.

4. There is also an activation of discussion about the mystical Kazan Document which was suggested by Russia during the meeting of Armenian and Azerbaijani presidents in 2011. Armenia had agreed to accept the document and Azerbaijan had refused. At that time there was speculation that according to that document Armenia had agreed to return part of the regions outside the territory of former Nagorno Karabagh Autonomous Oblast (some speculated about 5 of them, others – about all the 7), and Nagorno Karabagh had to receive a special status. In the first place, it is doubtful whether the document is beneficial for the Armenian side. Nevertheless, an even more doubtful statement was recently made by Sergey Lavrov in Baku. Namely, he had stated that the Russian side has suggestions regarding the conflict settlement and the sides are close to accepting those suggestions. In response to this statement, Spokesman of the Armenian Foreign Ministry Tigran Balayan had mentioned that the Kazan document submitted in 2011 is on the negotiating table.

It is unclear what document the sides are close to adopting (the Kazan document or another one). Nevertheless, it is more than clear that if Kremlin forces a suggestion on Armenia according to which part of the territories will be passed to Azerbaijan and the rest will receive a special status under peacekeepers’ control, we will have clear diplomatic evidence that Baku’s last attack was carried out with Russia’s permission or even provocation.

5. There are already political forces in Armenia which are in favor of deployment of peacekeeping troops in Nagorno Karabagh. Particularly, such an opinion has been expressed by head of ANC faction of the RA National Assembly Levon Zurabyan. Head of the ruling party faction has also announced that they would not mind the deployment of peacekeepers.

6. On April 11, we learnt that the “National Guard”, which was created according to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s decree, will receive authorization of carrying out foreign peacekeeping mission. And though that structure is based on the Russian police forces, it is going to operate beyond the Russian borders and have a “peacekeeping mission”. This means that in case Russian peacekeeping troops are deployed in Nagorno Karabagh, these are going to be the same forces that disperse protests in Russia.

Fort Russ: The US wages 'Hybrid War' in Armenia


The militants who seized the police station in Yerevan had demanded concessions from the authorities. Five hostages are still in the hands of the bandits. The deputy head of the Armenian police, Major-General Vardan Yeghiazaryan and Deputy Chief of Yerevan Police, Colonel Valery Osipyan, are among the hostages. A group of radicals unsuccessfully tried to join militants at Monday.



Criminals



On Saturday-Sunday night, the police station in the capital of Armenia was captured by militants associated with the group "The Constituent Parliament”. They are demanding the release of their leader Jirair Sefilian, who is under arrest on charges of illegal acquiring and possessing weapons. One policeman was killed during the building’s seizure.



Ringleaders



 Jirair Seiflian is a native of Lebanon who arrived in Armenia to take part in the Karabakh war in the early 1990’s. He has experience from fighting in Lebanon. In Karabakh, he became one of the most famous military leaders and enjoys the support of the Armenian diaspora and war veterans of Karabakh. He is harshly critical of official Yerevan's position on the Karabakh issue. Seiflian calls for the resumption of hostilities against Azerbaijan after the April 2016 war. On June 20th, 2016, he was arrested on suspicion of smuggling and possessing weapons.



 Sefilian created "The Constituent Parliament”, the radical opposition organization. In 2015, he joined the board of the opposition campaign "New Armenia" which attempted a color revolution using as a pretext that the authorities had initiated a referendum on transitioning to a parliamentary form of government. At the head of the opposition force is Raffi Hovannisian who at the presidential elections of 2013 received more than 36% of the vote. He was born and lived his first 31 years in the US. After the collapse of the USSR Raffi Hovannisian became the first Minister of foreign Affairs in Armenia. "New Armenia" actively uses the Karabakh problem to accuse authorities of surrendering national positions.


The forces connected to seizing the police station (New Armenia) earlier organized protests against Russian military base in Armenia, supported coup d’etat in Ukraine and took active participation in the protest in the Armenian capital last summer. They are closely connected to the US embassy and the Open Society (Soros Foundation) in Armenia.



 The purpose of the operation



 These events in Armenia are part of the strategy of hybrid war used by the US against Continentalist forces, and primarily against Russia. The goal is changing the government or policies of the Armenian authorities to ones less pliable for Russia. Currently, the Russian government is trying to find a formula of compromise between Armenia and Azerbaijan in order to ensure long-term peace, which naturally requires concessions from the Armenian side. The United States, in turn, is using its agents of influence in Armenia and Azerbaijan in order to derail the peace process and kindle war, which would naturally draw in Russia and Turkey.


 The activities of armed radicals are a natural element of this hybrid war strategy. The recent attack has multiple objectives: exerting pressure on the Armenian leadership with an eye on preventing compromise on Karabakh; creating a pole of attraction for radical discontent elements which will then be used in a color revolution; using military operations by paramilitary formations to demonstrate the weakness of the government and its inability to control the situation; and strengthening overall opposition sentiment.

 Source: http://www.fort-russ.com/2016/07/the-us-wages-hybrid-war-in-armenia.html

Russia Direct: How Russia could succeed in Nagorno-Karabakh

http://www.usnews.com/dims4/USNEWS/ebe4973/2147483647/thumbnail/970x647/quality/85/?url=%2Fcmsmedia%2F4e%2Fe63b46b8f53af0ffbdb8eb68a0e6e4%2Fresizes%2F1500%2Fmedia%3A93421f41c2b3467f9680ef3d992b0b7aAzerbaijanArmenia.JPEG

Moscow is uniquely positioned to bring peace to Nagorno-Karabakh, due to its deep historical knowledge of the South Caucasus region and the emergence of fledgling institutions such as the Eurasian Economic Union.

The negotiated solution to the protracted conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh appears to be entering a new phase with the active involvement of Russia. It was Russian President Vladimir Putin who stopped the four-day war in Nagorno-Karabakh in early April, leading to speculation that a peace agreement could be reached soon. It now appears that ongoing tensions between Russia and the West over Syria and Ukraine might compel Moscow, Baku and Yerevan to take the plunge for a major breakthrough in the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process. 

Russia aims to assume a leading role in the peace settlement while increasing its economic engagement and political rapprochement with both Armenia and Azerbaijan. Considerable military might, a rich legacy that dates back to Tsarist Russia, as well as shrewd tactics and relatively flexible diplomacy that allows Russia to keep the West out of the South Caucasus (mainly through a multidimensional partnership with Turkey and a strategic alliance with Iran) are among the key factors that can help the Kremlin stabilize the situation. 

In the absence of a greater Western assertiveness, both President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and President Serzh Sargsyan of Armenia consider Russia as the closest mediator, which realizes much better than others what should be done, and which has enough political will to alter the status quo, and materialize peacekeeping initiatives.

Armenia and Azerbaijan face complex political, economic, and social processes that inevitably affect the security of Russia itself. For this reason, Russia’s mediating role in the region is firmly rooted in common security interests. With the lack of Western resources to actively interfere in the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process, Russia now has carte blanche for breaking the deadlock. The Kremlin seeks to cope with the mission singlehandedly, trying to bring Baku and Yerevan to the negotiating table by convincing them to reach a compromise. 

In principle, Russia’s activist role has become particularly relevant against the backdrop of regular ceasefire violations, border skirmishes and an increased number of casualties. Moscow finds further escalation unacceptable, calling for the restoration of the political dialogue. That is why the Nagorno-Karabakh issue was thoroughly discussed during the one-day visit of Aliyev and Sargsyan to St. Petersburg where they met with Putin for closed-door talks on June 20. Consequently, Baku and Yerevan understand very well that it will be difficult to find a way forward for a lasting agreement by ignoring Russian national interests. 

In turn, the West seems to agree with the Russian leadership role, albeit the U.S. and the EU remain very worried about Russian hegemony extending to South Caucasus and the Caspian Sea region. Even though the Western powers possess considerable peacekeeping potential, they lack factual knowledge of the history of the South Caucasus, and have little understanding of the national interests pursued by nations of the former Soviet Union.

For this reason, the U.S. and the EU proved to be unprepared for procuring information in this conflict-torn region. Together, all these factors testify to Russia’s much stronger position in the region and explain why the West fears Moscow’s greater involvement in regional security issues directly influencing the rapidly changing geopolitics of the South Caucasus. Strikingly, Moscow started promoting the idea of resolving the conflict within a single, integrated organization like the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU). Russia is indeed viewed as a powerful player to initiate this process. Both Armenia and Azerbaijan are members of the EEU, the political and economic dimensions of which are still developing.

Baku and Yerevan expect the Kremlin to present a road map for peace that will best suit the national interests of the two conflicting parties in the region. For example, Armenia already joined the Eurasian Economic Union to secure the Kremlin’s support on the Nagorno-Karabakh issue, and to enhance its pivotal relationship with Moscow. Azerbaijan’s importance for Russia is likewise quite obvious. But the tougher challenge facing the Kremlin leader is how to solve the Gordian knot that binds Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan together.  

Many in Russia believe that integration into the EEU holds great promise for Azerbaijan, arguing that an energy-rich country can also act as a bridge for the Union’s wider cooperation with Iran and Turkey. While hoping for a renewed impetus to the conflict settlement, Azerbaijan may well consider the possibility of joining the EEU, but as yet sees challenges for the membership in the Russia-led bloc. Instead, Baku seems to focus on boosting bilateral-level cooperation within the Eurasian organization.

However, the Kremlin may try out some new tactics based on a well thought-out peace proposal leading to a change in the situation. Such a settlement would need to take into account the deep-seated territorial disputes that surround Nagorno-Karabakh. By doing so, Moscow could demonstrate how obstacles may easily turn into opportunities. While pursuing a very subtle two-pronged policy of delicate signaling to Azerbaijan and Armenia, Putin is most likely capable of unraveling the Nagorno-Karabakh conundrum. But if the Kremlin really wants to reach greater regional stability, the Armenia-Azerbaijan knot needs to be cut once and for all, not merely untied.


Russia Direct: What needs to happen for a peaceful settlement in Nagorno-Karabakh

https://cdn3.img.sputniknews.com/images/104831/43/1048314339.jpg

The OSCE reenergized peace process in Nagorno-Karabakh is still underway, but faces obstacles to a negotiated settlement. What must be done to open the way for OSCE incident investigation mechanism and build trust for a comprehensive resolution?

The Russian mediator in the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Minsk Group triumvirate, Ambassador Igor Popov, in a rare media appearance on June 7, speculated that the “framework agreement” on Nagorno-Karabakh is not a remote possibility at all. Adding even more complexity to the reenergized peace process, Popov also hinted at “individual Russian efforts” to achieve resolution, whereas OSCE experts are working on finalizing the implementation mechanisms of agreements reached in Vienna on May 16. The Russian Foreign Ministry came up with a short statement on the website on June 9 announcing a “trilateral summit” on Nagorno Karabakh resolution is being scheduled to be held in St. Petersburg “at the end of June”. So what does all this mean for attempts to find a negotiated settlement for Nagorno-Karabakh?
Difficulties in finding a solution
To refresh, a pre-negotiation round convened by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, French Secretary of State for European Affairs Harlem Desir and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in Vienna on May 16 ended with agreement (inked in a Joint Statement) on four basic points: to respect the open-ended 1994 and 1995 ceasefire agreements; finalize “in the shortest possible time” an OSCE investigative mechanism; expand the existing Office of the Personal Representative of the OSCE Chairperson in Office; and exchange data on missing persons under the auspices of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

Two of these points (honoring the ceasefire and exchanging data on prisoners of war and missing persons) are international obligations of any state engaged in an international dispute, so both Armenia and Azerbaijan did a favor only to themselves by agreeing to adhere to international norms of the civilized world. Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan, talking to a pool of journalists en route from Vienna, said Armenia was satisfied with the agreements reached and was ready to embark on their implementation. After a few days of silence and a brief demarche by the Azerbaijani presidential aide, Baku committed to all the above-mentioned bullet points within a span of 24 hours.

Azerbaijan, which has never been very much willing to adhere to the peace process (it views it as something Armenia and other peacemakers were using to prolong the status quo), admitted that a new meeting between presidents “was necessary” in order to use the momentum reached in Vienna. Since then, only single incidents of ceasefire violations have been reported. In Brussels and Paris, respectively, on May 31 and June 2, Minsk Group mediators equipped the Azerbaijani and Armenian Foreign Ministers with “expert-level elaborated ideas,” or drafts, on the OSCE investigative mechanism and expansion of the existing pool of monitors within the mandate of OSCE Chairperson-in-Office Personal Representative (CiO PR) Andrzej Kasprzyk to chart the path for a high-level meeting during June.

he common narrative after the so-called “Four Day War” suggests that, without these two preconditions satisfied, the peace process would remain in deadlock. It would only be a matter of time before the next round of armed hostilities. How to prevent a new round of devastating war in a region bordering Iran, Russia and Turkey (not to mention Iraq and Syria) – is the primary challenge before the mediators and parties involved. Speaking at the OSCE Permanent Council meeting in Vienna on June 9, Russian Permanent Representative Alexander Lukashevich urged “to finalise at an earliest date” preparations for establishment of incident investigation mechanism and expansion of office of CiO PR Kasprzyk.

A few things are clear. Turkish-Azerbaijani military exercises at the border with Armenia, conducted in Kars, are certainly not the recipe for a peaceful resolution. Neither is Ilham Aliyev’s claim that Armenia is “a historically Azerbaijani land,” or blaming German Chancellor Angela Merkel for sins before Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan just 48 hours before his own landing in Berlin. To brainstorm for the interlinked elements of the OSCE investigation mechanism and expanded monitoring mission in Nagorno-Karabakh (especially if Kasprzyk’s mandate is staying the same), one will need to look into the recent OSCE experience in Ukraine following the Minsk Agreements.
OSCE: A marginal role in Ukraine
The OSCE Special Monitoring Mission (SMM) in Ukraine is vested with the mandate “to gather information on the situation in Ukraine in an impartial and transparent manner,” as well as “to document incidents… on a daily basis.” The SMM is also monitoring the implementation of the Minsk Agreements in general terms, including the withdrawal of heavy weapons and foreign military equipment and mercenaries from Ukraine, but “on a limited basis” due to personnel security concerns. The SMM also developed an online library of interesting reports on various issues – including gender and the justice system in Donetsk and Luhansk.

Frustrated with the limited utility of the SMM, Ukraine, Russia and other stakeholders are now mulling over introducing a lightly armed policing mission in Eastern Ukraine. The Kremlin is against the whole idea in principle, while Kiev argues that there should be “no Russian boots on the ground.” As long as neither party has demonstrated willingness to abide by agreements reached, the SMM will continue playing a marginal role in the open-ended peace process.

The financial cost of sustaining observation or monitoring missions, especially in the case of Nagorno-Karabakh, is another problem. Back in 2012, Azerbaijan disabled the consensus in OSCE budget discussions for the allocation of funds for establishing incident investigation mechanisms. For those familiar with the history of peacekeeping operations and international observation missions in the past few decades, the SMM in Ukraine has a sample mandate for a Cold War-era, state sovereignty-conscious mission that will only do reporting and filing with no effect on the conflict resolution, allowing the sides to exercise their political rhetoric.  

The age-old case that comes to mind is the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), established in Spring 1978, which played virtually no role in deterring (it didn’t have mandate to use force and stop) Israeli interventions in either 1982 or 2006. UNIFIL, too, as the SMM in Ukraine, developed a robust library of their activity reports. Of course, proper and expert-level discussion of peacekeeping or observation mission mandates and specifics would require larger space and depth to elaborate, yet the recipe for Nagorno-Karabakh, in a nutshell, requires a more tailored approach.
Recommendations
The OSCE investigation mechanism in Nagorno-Karabakh will either fall within the mandate of the CiO PR Kasprzyk (likely) or a special mandate established by the Permanent Council (unlikely). However, if Kasprzyk’s office expands within the existing mandate, what added value are they going to bring apart from producing a lot of paperwork?

On the positive side, for the purposes of advancing the peace process in Nagorno-Karabakh, the deterrence effect of the investigation mechanism as such will overshadow the practical utility of the mechanism, if parties agree to this in principle instead of pro forma box ticking. And if the goodwill is out there to view this as a beginning of a longer journey, the six-hour blackout for leaking the incident to the media, as enshrined in the February 1995 document drafted by former Russian special envoy Vladimir Kazimirov and signed by all parties (Armenia, Nagorno Karabakh and Azerbaijan), will show not only consistency in mediation efforts in the past 20 years, but also allow for real work instead of abusing the whole arrangement by spinning narratives in the media.

And, last but not least, those who fought back in the Four Day War, shall have their say to this measure, as they are the real players on the ground, able to upset or veto any arrangement that negotiators will otherwise ink.

Without searching for nuances in the wording of the latest OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs’ press statement of June 3 or Popov’s interview of June 7, it is nonetheless clear that the thought-provoking documents delivered to Yerevan and Baku shall be, among other things, consented to by the “elected representatives” of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, too. This is because the main effect of these papers is well beyond the physical borders of Armenia and, in fact, of Azerbaijan – neither side has bodies of governance functioning in the yet unrecognized state, nor they ever had since the demise of Soviet Union.


The National Interest: America Must Stop Ignoring the South Caucasus

http://nationalinterest.org/files/styles/main_image_on_posts/public/main_images/Picture_1.png?itok=ay_Q1hnK

Russian President Vladimir Putin is due to meet his Azerbaijani counterpart, Ilham Aliyev, on June 13 in Baku. On the agenda: resolving the quarter-century-old dispute over the breakaway Nagorno Karabakh, a majority-Armenian territory which split from Azerbaijan in a brutal war with Armenia during the early 1990s. A ceasefire concluded the active phase of the conflict in 1994, but the feud remains unresolved, and violent incidents persist along the line of contact.

There is little reason to believe the meeting will yield any progress. An official peace process, the OSCE Minsk Group, has been underway since 1992 with joint Russian-French-American leadership. The Minsk Group is plagued by Western inattention and Kremlin intrigue. Russia deliberately plays both sides in Nagorno Karabakh and Washington and its allies seem not to care. Putin’s meeting comes only three days after American Minsk Group representative James Warlick discussed the conflict with Armenian President Serzh Sarkisian. That Russia provides presidential-level attention to Nagorno Karabakh while the United States offers only its liaison to a paralyzed negotiation forum is illustrative of U.S. indifference towards the conflict.

American disinterest could prove costly for both the United States and Europe. For the United States, settling the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict would carry two key benefits: improving energy security for European allies and reducing the risk of a conflict involving NATO member Turkey.

Putin previously met Aliyev and Sarkisian in August 2014 to discuss the conflict. Before that, Russia organized several presidential-level negotiations in 2011, 2008, and 2004. This stands in stark contrast with Western efforts, marked by abortive talks held in the United States in 2001 and in France in 2006.

In 2010, Aliyev and Sarkisian verbally agreed to some elements of the Madrid Principles [3], a basic outline for the peaceful resolution of the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict. This plan includes a phased withdrawal of Armenian forces from Nagorno Karabakh and a final referendum on the territory’s political status. While Baku and Yerevan still dispute many issues, the Madrid Principles provide a strong foundation for compromise and a mediated settlement. On the surface, this makes the lack of progress in recent years surprising. Closer examination of Russia’s role in the South Caucasus indicates otherwise. Moscow, ostensibly pursuing a negotiated peace, benefits from an indefinite dispute.

Azerbaijan imports 85 percent [4] of its weaponry from Russia. Baku’s energy wealth allows it to dramatically boost defense spending, even amidst falling oil prices. Azerbaijan’s military budget in 2003 was $163 million. By 2014, the country was spending $4.8 billion on defense, far outmatching rival Armenia’s $3.2 billion budget.

Armenia simply cannot afford the same degree of military prowess as Azerbaijan. As Baku grows stronger, Armenia becomes more dependent on Russia for security. Yerevan occasionally registers a complaint with its powerful patron over arms sales to Azerbaijan, but Armenia can do little more than that. At the same time, Baku risks war with Russia if it attacks its western neighbor, as Moscow is bound to Armenia by the Collective Security Treaty Organization’s mutual defense agreement. The commander of the Russian military base in Gyumri, Armenia, reported in 2013 that his troops would intervene on Yerevan’s behalf if Azerbaijan attempted to retake Karabakh by force. However, these statements are of questionable value to Armenia, as they have never been confirmed by Russia’s top officials.

Despite the dangers associated with renewed conflict, Baku and Yerevan are demonstrating a growing willingness to test one another’s patience. Over the past month, Armenian [5] and Azerbaijani [6] media have frequently reported ceasefire violations by the other side. These incidents come after months of intermittent fighting on the line of contact.

Eventually, Azerbaijan may determine that retaking Nagorno Karabakh is worth the risk. If Russia entered the fray, it would undoubtedly result in a catastrophic defeat for Baku. However, Moscow could remain on the sidelines, on the basis that Nagorno Karabakh is not part of Armenia’s internationally recognized territory and is therefore not protected by the CSTO. In this case, the conflict’s outcome might be less decisive. A protracted struggle could develop with or without Russian intervention, endangering prospective energy projects in the Caspian Sea basin and damage existing infrastructure. This would benefit Russia, which perceives Western energy enterprises in the area as threatening its dominant position in the European oil and gas market.

Would Russia really abandon its Armenian ally in a war with Azerbaijan? It is certainly possible. If Russia did fail to intervene on Armenia’s behalf, Yerevan would have little room to rebuke the Kremlin for its duplicity. Years of Russian protection have steadily eroded Armenian sovereignty. The Russian border guards who patrol Armenia’s frontiers and the 5,000 soldiers stationed in Gyumri are only the tip of the iceberg: Moscow’s influence now extends far beyond military affairs. As of 2008, Russia controlled 80 percent [7] of Armenian energy infrastructure. In June 2015, Yerevan announced plans to sell an Armenia-Iran natural gas pipeline [8] to Gazprom, further entrenching Russia’s position in the small South Caucasus republic. Armenia is a member of the Kremlin-led Eurasian Economic Union and Russia is the country’s single largest import and export partner. All of these factors grant Russia a wider range of policy options in the South Caucasus at Armenia’s expense.

What is clear is that Russia is unlikely to mediate in good faith as long as it can control the initiative in the Nagorno Karabakh dispute and profit from the conflict’s perpetuation. For Moscow, revenue from arms sales to Armenia and Azerbaijan, political leverage in the South Caucasus, and protection of Russian energy interests all come before a peaceful settlement. This does not bode well for the United States or its European allies.

Escalating hostilities might endanger emerging energy projects such as the Trans-Anatolian Natural Gas Pipeline (TANAP). This system is the first to bring Caspian natural gas to Europe, drawing supplies from Azerbaijan via Turkey and Georgia. The project would help diversify Europe’s energy supplies, making Russian influence vis-à-vis Gazprom less potent. This should be especially important for the United States, as current energy politics [9] make it difficult for Washington and its European allies to respond in concert to the Ukraine crisis.

Although TANAP’s planned terminus is in Azerbaijan, in the future, the route could link up with sources in Iraqi Kurdistan, Central Asia, and even Iran. Even without these additional outlets, the system promises to reach a capacity of 31 billion cubic meters [10] of gas by 2026. Renewed conflict in the South Caucasus could delay all of these prospects. With TANAP construction underway as of March 2015, workers and equipment are also placed at risk.

In addition to threatening European energy security, another South Caucasus war could draw in other regional powers like Turkey. Ankara previously played a significant role in the active phase of the Nagorno Karabakh War (as did Russia). To demonstrate solidarity with Baku, Turkey sealed the border with Armenia and instituted a blockade in 1993, measures that remain in place today. Turkish officers also trained the Azerbaijani military.

Turkey and Armenia lack diplomatic ties. If Ankara became involved again, it might find pretext to invoke Article V of the North Atlantic Treaty, the charter’s mutual defense clause (Turkey already threatened [11] such a move over Syrian Civil War spillover). In this eventuality, the United States and other NATO members would be drawn into a conflict directly on Russia’s doorstep, something that would undoubtedly poison already strained relations between Moscow and the West. If the United States can induce Turkish cooperation, Ankara’s position would be a valuable asset in conflict mediation rather than a liability in regional security.

Armenia is strategically insecure, but it also maintains control over Nagorno Karabakh two decades after the active phase of the conflict ended. Because of this, Armenia may perceive little need to make concessions.

That being said, diplomatic normalization with Turkey and an end to the land blockade on Armenia’s western border are objectives Yerevan cannot achieve under the status quo. Washington can help facilitate normalization between its Turkish ally and Armenia in exchange for settlement of Karabakh. In this scenario, Armenia can yield on certain issues relating to Azerbaijan while still getting an economic and political return. Terminating the blockade and normalizing relations would improve Armenia’s economy and help alleviate its isolation.

Turkey would reap several benefits as well. The country wishes to enter into a free trade agreement [12] with the Eurasian Union, in which Armenia is a member. Open borders and stable diplomatic ties could make such a move less complicated for Ankara. Turkey also has a 30 percent [13] share in the TANAP project, meaning it would benefit from a stable environment in the South Caucasus.

A framework for peace already exists. While challenges will arise, the United States can and should commit itself to a consistent negotiation process on Nagorno Karabakh. Renewed warfare would carry negative ramifications well beyond the South Caucasus. Armenia and Azerbaijan need a mediating partner that benefits from peace in the region, not perpetual conflict.

Source: http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/
Bloomberg: Kamikaze Drones, Russian Missiles Jolt Oldest Ex-Soviet Conflict
https://www.usnews.com/cmsmedia/ed/6ebb99913c85345a07d185d702a525/media:630c63c0e156423b9418b6497b817ff8ArmeniaAzerbaijan.JPEG

Old grievances are being aired with new force in the former Soviet Union’s longest-running conflict. Armenia and Azerbaijan, technically at war over the Nagorno-Karabakh region despite a cease-fire brokered by Russia 22 years ago, are beefing up their arsenals just seven months after the worst fighting in two decades. Armenia has acquired Russian-made Iskander ballistic missiles, while Azerbaijan says it’s tested combat drones produced with Israel and is in talks with Pakistan to buy high-tech weapons.

“We have a much more serious arms race,” said Zaur Shiriyev, an academy associate at Chatham House in London. “It will significantly increase the chance of future outbreaks.”

The rearmament is raising the stakes should tensions flare again between Russian ally Armenia and Azerbaijan, close to NATO member Turkey, after the two neighbors spent almost $27 billion on defense in 2005-2015. The conflict, within striking distance of a BP Plc-led oil pipeline, is once more showing signs of boiling over as talks mediated by Russia and the U.S. run aground and uncertainty mounts after Donald Trump’s election as American president.

Armenians took over Nagorno-Karabakh and seven adjacent districts from Azerbaijan after the 1991 Soviet breakup. The conflict killed 30,000 people and displaced more than a million. No peace accord was signed despite talks involving Russia, the U.S. and France halting major hostilities in 1994. Rhe enclave’s mainly Armenian population declared independence in 1991, which hasn’t been recognized internationally, and insists on its right to self-determination. Azerbaijan says it’s ready to grant more autonomy than the region enjoyed during the Soviet period, but demands respect for its territorial integrity.

Military Might

Azerbaijan, the third-largest crude producer in the former Soviet Union, has converted its oil wealth into battlefield might, becoming Europe’s largest importer of major weapons in the decade through 2015 by spending $22.7 billion on the military in the period, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Its annual defense spending eclipses Armenia’s entire state budget. The largess has been a boon for companies like Uralvagonzavod, the state-run maker of battle tanks in central Russia since World War II, and Elbit Systems Ltd., Israel’s biggest publicly traded defense contractor.

Violence surged in April, when more than 200 troops were killed on both sides in four days of fighting that involved hundreds of tanks and aircraft. Azerbaijan regained control of several hills lost to Armenians 23 years ago, before another Russian-engineered truce. New cease-fire violations were reported last week, which the belligerents blamed on each other.
 
‘Kamikaze Drones’

April’s clashes featured the first known use of “kamikaze drones” by Azerbaijan, with the explosive-tipped aircraft slamming into a bus carrying Armenian volunteers. Media including Radio Free Europe claimed to have identified the weapons as Israeli-made Harop drones. The Azeri and Israeli defense ministries both declined to confirm or deny that Harops were used.

Azerbaijan said in September that it would build “hundreds” of kamikaze and other combat drones using Israeli technology. Armenia has also bolstered its capabilities, getting a $200 million loan from Russia to buy and modernize weapons and other military equipment. It showcased its Iskander missiles at an Independence Day parade in September in Yerevan, the capital. Stationing the short-range missiles in Nagorno-Karabakh, Azerbaijan’s BP-operated Sangachal oil-and-gas-processing terminal south of Baku would fall within firing range. Azerbaijan has attracted more than $60 billion of investments in energy projects by BP and its partners in the past 20 years.

A spokesman for Russia’s state-run arms trader Rosoboronexport, Vyacheslav Davidenko, declined to comment on any weapons provided to Armenia. Russia has stressed that is also sells military hardware to Azerbaijan. It supplied the missiles through the Collective Security Treaty Organization, a post-Soviet military alliance, according to the Vedomosti business newspaper.

Shifting Balance?

“Armenia sought to use this display to deter Azerbaijan from a further attack and to demonstrate a solid position in the recently shifting military balance of power,” said Richard Giragosian, director of the Regional Studies Center in Yerevan. “This missile system is capable of reaching significant infrastructure and vulnerable targets in around Baku and throughout Azerbaijan. This is why the balance of power is now more equal.”

Azerbaijan rejects any shift in the military balance, and Armenia’s missile display certainly hasn’t eased tensions. The Azeri Defense Ministry responded by holding drills involving Russian-made S-300 air-defense systems and threatened to retaliate with “thousands of rockets” should Armenia try to use “a few” of its missiles. Deadly clashes around the conflict zone resumed last month, while Azerbaijan began some of its biggest-ever military drills on Nov. 12.

In Deadlock

The military one-upmanship has complicated mediation. Talks over a settlement in Nagorno-Karabakh are deadlocked, according to Russia, which helped arrange a June meeting between the Azeri and Armenian presidents, Ilham Aliyev and Serzh Sargsyan. U.S., Russian and French diplomats failed to persuade them to meet again soon. Meanwhile, the possible cost of any renewed violence is rising. “Russia’s delivery of Iskander missiles and other heavy weapons systems to Armenia” has the potential to “raise the costs to both sides of a potential future armed conflict,” said Matthew Bryza, an ex-U.S. deputy assistant secretary of state who also served as an ambassador to Azerbaijan and brokered talks over Karabakh.


Why Armenia’s Military Alliance With Russia Is Not At Risk

http://gdb.rferl.org/7E014B70-1137-41C9-8BBF-BBCCB96701BD_mw1024_s_n.jpg

For many decades, the dominant discourse of Armenian political and intellectual leaders was summed up by an emblematic quote from Khachatur Abovian, a 19th-century Armenian writer. "Blessed be the hour when the blessed Russian foot stepped upon our holy Armenian land," Abovian wrote in his most famous novel, set during the Russian-Persian war in the South Caucasus. For the Christian Armenians remaining in what at that time was just the central and eastern parts of an ancient Armenian kingdom, the Russian victory in the 1826-1828 war ended centuries of oppressive Muslim rule and their status as second-class subjects of the Persian Empire. It also laid the groundwork for the eventual establishment of the modern-day Republic of Armenia, a successor to one of the 15 Soviet republics.

The Armenian nationalist groups which emerged in tsarist Russia in the late 19th century generally professed loyalty to the Russian state. The 1915 mass killing of Armenians in Ottoman Turkey, which many historians and about two dozen countries have recognized as genocide, only reinforced this geopolitical orientation. Both the communist rulers of Soviet Armenia and anti-Soviet nationalist leaders in the worldwide Armenian diaspora portrayed Russia as the sole guarantor of Armenia's survival in a hostile Muslim neighborhood. Things started changing with the onset in 1988 of a popular movement for Armenia's unification with Nagorno-Karabakh. The anticommunist leaders of that movement, who eventually formed independent Armenia's first government, took a more critical view of the Russian-Armenian relationship, saying that it also had negative consequences for the Armenian people.

Yet even they chose to keep Armenia anchored to Russia politically and military after the breakup of the Soviet Union. This strategic choice facilitated the result of the 1991-1994 war with Azerbaijan, which left Armenians in control of Nagorno-Karabakh and surrounding areas. It was rarely questioned by major Armenian opposition groups, pundits and independent media until the early 2000s.

Pro-Western Sentiment

The past decade has seen a rapid spread of pro-Western sentiment among local journalists, civil society members, and youth activists who rely heavily on social media. This process only accelerated after Armenian President Serzh Sarkisian unexpectedly decided in 2013 to forego a far-reaching Association Agreement with the European Union and make Armenia part of the Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) instead. For this expanding circle of politically active people, Russia is a threat to Armenia's sovereignty, security, and democratization which must be neutralized by a reorientation of Armenian foreign policy towards the West. Some of them demand not only Armenia's exit from the EEU, but also an end to the Russian military presence in the country.

Although Russian policies are indeed a cause for legitimate concerns, such rhetoric glosses over the grave security challenges facing Armenia. Like virtually all other Armenians, the vocal pro-Western elements want Nagorno-Karabakh to remain under Armenian control -- something which hinges, in large measure, on the military alliance with Russia. But they do not present the country's political elite with alternatives security options, resorting instead to emotional oversimplifications of foreign policy issues.

Even so, these changing attitudes have fueled suggestions by some Armenia watchers in the West that Russia may be on the brink of losing one of its staunchest ex-Soviet allies. Such speculation was stoked by last February's furious street protests outside the Russian consulate in Armenia's second largest city of Gyumri over the gruesome killing of a local family, which a Russian soldier is accused of having carried out. It intensified further during this summer's demonstrations in Yerevan against an electricity price hike engineered by the country's Russian-owned power distribution network. The so-called "Electric Yerevan" campaign was so dramatic that it raised Russian fears of another "color revolution" against a Moscow-friendly government in the ex-USSR, leading the Kremlin to hastily make a number of major concessions to the Armenian government.

All the same, a closer look at Russian-Armenian ties should be enough to demonstrate why Armenia will continue to heavily rely on Russia for defense and security in the foreseeable future. The conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh is the most important driving force of that alliance, and it is unlikely to be resolved anytime soon.

Military Aid

Thanks to its massive oil revenues, Azerbaijan has increased its annual military spending by almost 30 times during President Ilham Aliyev's more than decade-long rule. It is projected to total $3.6 billion this year, more than Armenia's entire state budget. Consequently, the Azerbaijani army has been beefed up with large quantities of offensive weapons, including $4 billion worth of tanks, combat helicopters, air-defense systems, and other military hardware purchased from Russia since 2010. This military buildup has emboldened Aliyev to repeatedly pledge not only to win back Nagorno-Karabakh and surrounding Armenian-controlled territories, but to take what he has called "historical Azerbaijani lands" in Armenia itself, including Yerevan.

By comparison, Armenia's 2015 defense budget is equivalent to only about $500 million. Despite this huge spending disparity, the country has so far been able to largely maintain the military balance with its oil-rich foe. Through bilateral defense agreements with Russia and membership in the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), it has long been receiving Russia weapons at knock-down prices or free of charge. This mostly unpublicized military aid appears to have intensified in recent years.

In particular, Nagorno-Karabakh's Armenian-backed army is known to have formed a new tank brigade (which typically consists of around 100 tanks) and received more heavy artillery in 2012. In late 2013, it announced the provision of another 33 Russian-made tanks to its forces. Russia also reportedly delivered 110 armored vehicles and 50 rocket systems to the Armenian military during that period.

Armenia will soon buy more advanced weaponry at domestic Russian prices with a $200 million low-interest loan that was disbursed by Moscow during the "Electric Yerevan" protests. Around the same time, the Russian government revealed that it is negotiating with the Armenian side on supplying the latter with state-of-the-art Iskander-M missiles that would significantly boost Armenia's ability to strike Azerbaijan's vital oil and gas installations.

The Armenian missile arsenal currently includes Soviet-era Scud-B and Tochka-U systems with firing ranges of 300 and 120 kilometers respectively. The Azerbaijani military has implied that it can neutralize them with S-300 surface-to-air missiles supplied by Russia in 2009-2010 as well as other missile-defense systems reportedly purchased from Israel in 2012. But these systems would most probably be unable to intercept Iskander-M missiles, one of the most potent weapons of their kind in the world.

Iskander-Ms would thus give Armenia an additional major deterrent against possible Azerbaijani attempts to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict by force. Armenian leaders have repeatedly hinted at their impending acquisition in recent years. Russia has also been a key provider of free education and training for Armenian military personnel. As of last year, as many as 250 Armenians reportedly studied full-time or took shorter courses at Russian military academies. This figure is comparable to the total number of cadets graduating from Armenia's two military academies annually.

The Russian military base in Armenia's second largest city of Gyumri is another essential component of close military cooperation between the two states. Debate in Armenia on the wisdom of hosting it usually focuses on the question of whether or not the Russian troops would openly fight on the Armenian side should Azerbaijan act on its threats of military action. That misses the point.

The Turkey Factor

What Yerevan needs first and foremost is not Russian ground forces in Nagorno-Karabakh but a safeguard against Turkey's direct military intervention in the conflict, in light of its close ties with, and treaty obligations to, Azerbaijan. (Under the 2011 Agreement on Strategic Partnership and Mutual Support, the two sides undertake to support each other using "all possible means" in the event of an attack or aggression against one of them.) Bombing raids by Turkey's sizable Air Force alone could seriously affect the outcome of another Nagorno-Karabakh war by overwhelming Armenia's air defenses and destroying other Armenian military targets. The Russian base precludes such intervention, enabling the Armenians to concentrate the bulk of their military might on Azerbaijan.

For all its efforts to woo Baku, including with arms deals, Moscow is simply not interested in Armenia's defeat in the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute because that would eliminate the key rationale for the Armenian reliance on Russia. A military withdrawal from Armenia would in turn minimize Russian presence in a region which Moscow continues to regard as its backyard.

Pro-Western circles in Armenia rarely discuss these specific security issues in their critique of Russian-Armenian dealings. Nor do they question the underlying motive behind successive Armenian governments' pursuit of close ties with Moscow: continued Armenian control over Nagorno-Karabakh. So far the pro-Western camp has been unable or unwilling to disprove the notion that, as long as the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict remains unresolved, Armenia's ability to resist Russian pressure and seek deep integration with the West will be seriously limited.

As much as Sarkisian's dramatic 2013 volte-face was a manifestation of poor foreign policy making, it reflected this reality. A more legitimate, democratic and, therefore, pro-Western regime in Yerevan might have succeeded in wriggling out of the EEU. But even such a government could have hardly afforded a far-reaching accord with the EU in the existing geopolitical environment aggravated by Russia and the West's standoff over Ukraine.

Little wonder, then, that only one of the six parties represented in the Armenian parliament has openly opposed membership in the EEU. Most ordinary Armenians, too, continue to support the alliance with Russia, even if their pro-Russian sentiment is now far less intense than in the past. With a Nagorno-Karabakh peace remaining elusive, they are still more likely to agree with Khachatur Abovian than with the cohort of pro-Western pundits and activists increasingly setting the tone of political debate in their country.

Source: http://www.rferl.org/content/caucasus-report-armenian-russia-military-alliance/27351046.html

Russia Direct: Weighing the pros and cons of NATO policy in the Caucasus

https://foreignpolicymag.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/gettyimages-485369638-crop.jpg

NATO policy in the South Caucasus primarily serves U.S. interests to contain Russia’s influence in the region. But will it be able to provide real security once it is needed?

The upcoming NATO Summit in Warsaw has the potential to become one of the most important international events of the year. The July event will occur against the backdrop of the most serious confrontation with Russia since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War. As a result, NATO Summit participants will make important decisions that will determine the European security agenda for years to come.

News reports on the upcoming Warsaw Summit often mention the South Caucasus region. In their comments, politicians and experts focus on two major issues: Georgia and the prospects of its NATO membership and Moscow’s “stubborn” reluctance on the Alliance’s eastward expansion that involves the incorporation of former Soviet countries. To what extent is Brussels interested in the South Caucasus? What are the risks of converting the region into a point of contention between Russia and the West, especially in the light of currently unresolved ethno-political conflicts? 

How NATO views the Caucasus

After the collapse of the U.S.S.R. and the emergence of new post-Soviet sovereign states, NATO did not exhibit particular interest in the Caucasus for quite some time. Until the mid-1990s, it concentrated on the Balkans. Then the list of problems with “Europe’s powder keg” grew even longer due to the discussion of prospects for NATO enlargement (the fourth addition of new members since the formation of the Alliance occurred on March 12, 1999, and the fifth came on March 29, 2004).

Since Bulgaria and Romania joined NATO in March 2004, the Trans-Caucasian region has been perceived as the new Black Sea frontier of the entire European security system. Moreover, Turkey, an influential member of the Alliance with the second largest army of all NATO countries, showed its interest in the region. Ankara partnered with Azerbaijan, its strategic ally and Armenia’s adversary, and Turkey’s relations with Russia that had their ups and downs since the 1990s years have deteriorated dramatically over the past two years.

Currently, NATO is interested in the Caucasus as a strategically important energy market, a lucrative traffic artery with access to the Caspian Sea and Central Asia, and a region bordering with Iran. Moreover, Brussels takes notice of Russia’s high activity in the area, but tends to overlook Moscow’s actions on deescalating ongoing regional conflicts and, instead, focuses on the threat of Russia establishing its hegemony over the post-Soviet space.

In this context, the famous American diplomat and expert Ronald Asmus’ assessment of the 5-Day War of 2008 [The Russian-Georgian war that lasted from August 7-12, 2008 – Editor’s note] is very telling. He believes that the conflict “was not fought over territory, minority rights or the future status of the separatist provinces Abkhazia and South Ossetia… But the root cause of this war was geopolitical. Georgia was determined to go to the West and Russia was determined to stop it from doing so.” (Source: Ronald Asmus, “A Little War That Shook the World: Georgia, Russia and the Future of the West”)

Indeed, it would be incorrect to use Asmus’ final statement to interpret all NATO activity in the Caucasus exclusively as the manifestation of the interests harbored by the U.S. and its military allies. Every country of the region had its reasons for building a relationship with the Alliance. It would be naïve to presume that the choice came down to democracy and the system of values.

Reaction to NATO within the post-Soviet space

After their defeat in the ethno-political conflicts of the early 1990s and the loss of control over contested territories, Georgia and Azerbaijan saw NATO as a way to counter Russian influence. At the same time, both Tbilisi and Baku sought Moscow’s support. For example, in 1993-94, Georgian leadership decided to join the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) and agreed to Russia’s military presence on its territory (outside of Abkhazia and South Ossetia). In 1996, both Russia and Georgia introduced sanctions against Sukhumi through the CIS Council.

As for Armenia, when facing the land blockade from Turkey and Azerbaijan during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, Yerevan started to view the Western direction of its policy as a compensating factor. Armenia did have other reasons as well. Yerevan wanted to block Baku from being the only Caucasian state considered for the NATO membership, especially since Azerbaijan got actively involved in efficient energy cooperation with the West in 1994. Armenia’s partnership with the Alliance was meant to prevent Brussels from making the ultimate choice between the two warring nations.

In 2007-08, NATO’s response to the request for the “internationalization” of the region created extremely high (and topically unfounded) expectations among Trans-Caucasian elites, especially in Georgia. These expectations were based on misjudged calculations and undervaluation of the relations between Russia and the West, as well as problems with Iran, Afghanistan and the fight against terrorism.

This lapse in judgment led to the overstated perception of NATO’s potential ability to keep the peace. Consequently, these expectations were let down by the Alliance’s actual conduct towards Russia during the war of 2008, when Georgia suffered its major military and political defeat since the collapse of the U.S.S.R. NATO showed the Caucasus that it was not going to war with Russia over Georgia’s territorial integrity. The message rang clear to Azerbaijan, which then diversified its foreign policy and joined the Non-Aligned Movement in May 2011, and Armenia, which opted for Eurasian integration.

At the 2008 Bucharest Summit, NATO provided Georgia and Ukraine with the opportunity to join the Alliance, but it did not result in the acceleration of integration processes. NATO was all talk promising Georgia the sun and the moon, announcing new phases and stages of its integration, and even coming up with the creative label of an “aspirant country” just for Georgia.

During his 2012 visit to Tbilisi, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, NATO General Secretary at the time, declared that the Trans-Caucasian country was as close to the Alliance as ever. In April 2014, at the session of the Georgia-NATO commission, the “aspirant” was referred to as the “example for the entire region” and the “exporter of security.” Still, so far Georgia has not even obtained the Membership Action Plan (MAP) status, which is the penultimate step on the path to becoming a NATO member.

According to experienced Georgian diplomat Tedo Japaridze, former minister of foreign affairs and secretary of the Security Council of Georgia, who is currently serving as the chairman of the Parliamentary Committee on International Affairs, “We have a long-standing relationship with NATO. Everyone knows that Georgia will not become an MAP at the Warsaw Summit. This decision has already been made. But it is necessary to point out that MAP is an instrument that ties us to NATO.”

Under these circumstances, naturally there are politicians who are skeptical about Georgia’s prospects for cooperation with the West. For example, Gogi Topadze, the leader of the Industrial Party, states that, “It is abundantly clear that we can kiss NATO goodbye. Did NATO interfere in the conflicts in Abkhazia and South Ossetia? Or the war in Ukraine?”

The importance of American influence

Inside the Alliance itself, in spite of America’s dominance, there is no agreement on accepting new members. That is especially true of the so-called “old Europe,” which includes Germany, France, Italy and the Netherlands. However, Washington’s foreign policy (as opposed to the integration project) could not care less for the opinion of its resilient German or French allies.

Of course, the U.S. establishment in the White House, Department of State and Congress must consider the consequences of risking confrontation with Russia by converting its neighboring former Soviet republics into instruments for containing “re-Sovietization” or curbing the Kremlin’s “imperial ambitions.” In any case, Washington is reluctant to cede the post-Soviet space and acknowledge it as Moscow’s geopolitical domain, so attempts at cooperating with the former Soviet republics come not just from NATO, but also from the White House.

It is also important to remember that over the years of its NATO membership, the U.S. has accumulated extensive experience in bilateral cooperation with countries that for some reason (political, geographic, etc.) could not join the Alliance, as was the case with Franco's Spain, Israel, Japan, and some Latin American countries. Following suit, after the Ukrainian crisis, Washington prepared a series of laws aimed at “including” several post-Soviet states, such as Georgia, in the push for the defense of territorial integrity and sovereignty. The most vivid example of such legal action is the Russian Aggression Prevention Act of 2014, which extended the offer of U.S. assistance not only to Kiev, but also Tbilisi.

However, the efficiency of the above-mentioned steps meant to ensure Georgia’s integrity and tackle such security issues as defense against radical jihadist groups (which Tbilisi unfortunately already encountered in the Pankisi Gorge) remains to be seen. It is one thing to act as an aide to a global superpower in the desire to “contain” Russia and a completely different matter to get actual support in fighting against emerging risks.



Washington Post: Spurned by the West, Georgians look to Russia despite past quarrels


In this fiercely pro-Western nation that fought a brief war with Russia in 2008, few thought the Kremlin could ever regain a toehold. But with the West backing away from Georgia’s path to E.U. and NATO membership after a year of conflict in Ukraine, pro-Russian sentiments are on the rise.

The former Soviet nation’s leaders are warning that Russia may yet prevail if Georgia is shut out from Western clubs. Wary of further provoking Russia, Western politicians have quashed talk of NATO and the European Union expanding eastward anytime soon. Russia has stepped into the vacuum, increasing its presence by opening Georgian-language outlets of its state-owned news network and deepening investments in the energy industry and other key sectors. Similar movements are happening in other former Eastern bloc nations trapped between Russia and the West, in a tug of war that has deep Cold War resonance.

“Stability and security cannot be maintained with this paradigm, with Russia’s paradigm of having special rights towards other countries,” said Georgian President Giorgi Margvelashvili, in an interview in the presidential palace on a bluff overlooking the old city of Tbilisi. The blue-and-gold E.U. flag flies outside of the building, as it does at most Georgian governmental buildings, as an emblem of the nation’s aspirations.

“Russia is working pretty actively, not only in Georgia, but all around the world” to expand its influence, he said. Despite the growing Russian presence, Georgia remains unshakably committed to eventual membership in NATO and the E.U., he said. As a token of its devotion, Georgia has sent more soldiers to Afghanistan to fight alongside U.S. troops in recent years than many nations already in NATO. The germ of the present conflict between Russia and the West lies in an E.U. offer of closer ties to Ukraine and Russian President Vladimir Putin’s infuriated reaction. E.U. membership for Ukraine was always a long shot — but it has become even less likely after fighting that has killed more than 6,400 people, according to U.N. estimates.

E.U. leaders squabbled at a summit in May about whether to offer even the faintest prospects for membership to Georgia, Ukraine and Moldova, which have said they want to join. The E.U. leaders decided against it, and they also delayed plans to ease visa rules for Georgian travelers, a bitter disappointment for Georgia’s leaders. The E.U. caution stemmed from a desire not to inspire backlash from Russia, diplomats involved in the discussions say. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who has taken the role of the lead European interlocutor with Putin, has played down expansion prospects. So has President Obama.

“Neither Ukraine or Georgia are currently on a path to NATO membership. And there has not been any immediate plans for expansion of NATO’s membership,” Obama said last year.

Now support for pro-Russian politicians in Moldova and Georgia is growing, while Ukraine is so consumed by conflict that it has made little progress in instituting overhauls necessary for westward integration. Armenia, a fourth post-Soviet country that had been in talks with E.U. leaders about a trade deal, last year abandoned the discussions altogether, allying itself with the Russian camp. Many here say that Russia has skillfully outmaneuvered the West.

“The Russians are working to dominate this part of the world. They calculate, they plan and they know this region much better than the Europeans and Americans,” said Tedo Japaridze, the chairman of the Georgian Parliament’s foreign relations committee. The United States has tried to offer consolation measures. U.S. troops did training exercises with Georgian soldiers in May, and Georgia’s leaders present an upbeat face about their westward efforts.

“We don’t have time to be disappointed,” said David Bakradze, the state minister on European and Euro-Atlantic Integration. “Our aspirations are irreversible.”

But some Georgians feel they have little to show for their long westward push. Some of those sacrifices have been made in blood in grueling deployments to Afghanistan, where they have been one of the top contributors of soldiers to the battle efforts per capita, even though they are not NATO members.

“More and more Georgians are feeling they haven’t gotten anything tangible from the West,” said Shorena Shaverdashvili, a prominent Georgian journalist. “There isn’t more love for Putin and Russia. It’s just a realization that we’re left face-to-face with Russia, and we have to deal with it.”

Spurned by the West, Georgians are starting to look elsewhere. Support for signing the E.U. trade agreement was at 68 percent in April polls from the National Democratic Institute, down from 80 percent immediately before the Ukraine crisis started. Support for Georgia’s joining the Russian-dominated Eurasian Economic Union, meanwhile, is up to 31 percent.

Part of the shift inside Georgia came with the ousting of President Mikheil Saakashvili, the Western-trained lawyer who ruled the country for a decade starting in 2003. Passionately anti-Russian and close to U.S. leaders, Saakashvili rarely missed a chance to jab at the Kremlin. The biggest eruption came in August 2008, when Georgian soldiers attacked Russian soldiers who were amassing in greater numbers on breakaway territories of Georgia.

The ensuing five-day war decimated Georgia’s military and led to Russia’s recognizing the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. By 2012, many Georgians were ready to embrace the leadership of their nation’s wealthiest man, Bidzina Ivanishvili, who promised to improve relations with Russia while maintaining ties to the West. The payoff for Georgia was swift. Russia lifted a ban on imports of Georgian wine in 2013, and trade spiked.

“Those people who are trying to help us, we just want to tell them, ‘Stop meddling with Russia,’ ” said Jemal Veliashvili, who works in a seed and fertilizer shop in Georgia’s Kakheti wine-growing region, in the green shadow of the Caucasus Mountains that form the border with Russia. He said his business had tripled since the ban was lifted. Even though diplomatic relations with the Kremlin remain tense, Russia’s presence inside Georgia is strengthening. Just last month, Russia’s Sputnik news agency opened new offices here and started a Georgian- and Russian-language Georgian news service.

“Georgia should be neutral, and it should be militarily free,” said Archil Chkoidze, the leader of Georgia’s Eurasian Choice, a coalition of pro-Russian groups that says it has nearly 16,000 members.

For now, even some of Georgia’s most committed pro-Western politicians say that their best hope is to hold tight to their goals but to expect little from their partners. “No one told us it was going to be easy,” said Irakli Alasania, the leader of the opposition Free Democrats. Alasania was defense minister until November, when he was ousted for being too pro-West, he says. The possibility of joining NATO “will only open up after Putin,” he said. Putin is widely expected to remain Russia’s leader until at least 2024.

 Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/despite-past-quarrels-with-russia-georgians-are-returning-to-its-orbit
Armenpress: Georgia has no plans to join anti-Russian sanctions: Garibashvili

 http://armenpress.am/static/news/b/2015/08/814493.jpg
Georgia has no plans to join anti-Russian sanctions set by the EU. Armenpress reports, referring to TASS news agency, that Prime Minister of Georgia Irakli Garibashvili, told the journalists the aforementioned. The Prime Minister said: “As head of the government I have always thought and keep thinking that Georgia must not join the sanctions against Russia set by the EU. We had such an approach last year and we stick to that. We are not going to change that.” “More than a year ago we joined only one of 15 anti-Russian sanctions (July 23, 2014) set by the EU.” clarifies the PM, referring to the imports of goods from Crimea and Sevastopol. Garibashvili stressed that Georgia highly appreciates that in recent years they could reestablish and develop trade and economic relations with Russia. The Prime Minster added that they want to continue developing trade and economic cooperation with the Russian Federation.

Source: http://armenpress.am/eng/news/814493/georgia-has-no-plans-to-join-anti-russian-sanctions-garibashvili.html
Eurasianet: Azerbaijan Increasingly Airing Grievances with Russia

http://static.kremlin.ru/media/events/photos/big/znYgdt6wVaIAnWs0T7RAp44rBCiA9hA7.jpeg

Azerbaijan is increasingly dissatisfied with Russia’s role as a mediator in the conflict with Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh. And Baku’s frustration is starting to seep out in public.
 
The trigger, according to government officials and analysts in Baku, was Russia’s response to the flare-up in fighting between Armenia and Azerbaijan in April 2016. Azerbaijani leaders expected that the fighting – the worst bout of violence in and around Karabakh in over two decades – would prompt Russia to use its influence over Armenia, a treaty ally of Moscow’s that is dependent on Russian arms supplies, to become more pliable in Karabakh peace negotiations.

But Russia has instead taken a more passive approach, officials in Baku complain. The growing rift between Moscow and Baku could complicate efforts to reach a resolution to the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict, for which Russia remains an indispensable mediator. In one of the more noteworthy incidents, an Azerbaijani journalist asked Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov at a January press conference in Moscow what Russia would do if Azerbaijan initiated a “counter-terrorist operation in the occupied territories” of Nagorno-Karabakh. “Will Moscow close its eyes to it, or interfere in the internal affairs of Azerbaijan?” asked Anar Hasanov, the Moscow correspondent for Azerbaijan’s Lider TV.

“This is not exclusively about the internal affairs of Azerbaijan,” Lavrov responded. This seemed to be a challenge to Azerbaijan’s sovereignty: Karabakh is recognized by all countries other than Armenia – including Russia – to be de jure part of Azerbaijan. Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov responded quickly, albeit obliquely: “I am fully confident that if Russia deals with this issue seriously, the status quo will be changed, regional stability will prevail and Armenian armed forces will withdraw from the occupied territories of Azerbaijan.”

And in February, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev seemed to address the issue, without directly mentioning Lavrov’s comments. “Armenia tried every possible way to globalize this issue after the April battles,” Aliyev said, referring to the deadly outbreak of fighting between the two sides in April 2016. “We’re in our own land... Hence the April battles and whatever happens on the contact line of troops is an internal affair of ours.”

In a measure of how delicate the issue is for Azerbaijan, however, Hasanov – the journalist who asked the offending question – was fired from his job just days afterward. In March, Lavrov again offended Baku when he indicated support for the stalled Armenia-Turkey rapprochement negotiations. “When Yerevan and Ankara sit at the negotiating table, Russia will be ready to provide them with most vigorous assistance,” Lavrov said.

Azerbaijan hopes to use the prospect of re-opening the border between Armenia and Turkey as a carrot in its negotiations with Yerevan, perhaps in exchange for Armenia handing over two or more of the Azerbaijani territories around Karabakh that it occupies, and which Yerevan has, in principle, agreed to give up. Lavrov’s statement was viewed by many in Baku as a diplomatic shift by Russia, in which Moscow was now looking to separate the issue of Armenia-Turkey normalization from the resolution of the Karabakh conflict.
 
Azerbaijan also has been frustrated by Russia’s backing of efforts by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe to increase monitoring along the Karabakh line of contact. “Before resuming practical talks on the settlement of outstanding issues, we need to defuse tensions, which have increased on the ground, at the contact line, and in the public space. I am convinced that confidence-building measures could be useful,” Lavrov said March 6 at a joint news conference with Mammadyarov.

Baku, though, wants such monitoring measures adopted only as part of a larger deal. “They offer to conduct a monitoring on investigation of incidents on the contact line of troops, and we agree to this. However, it should be an integral part of a big plan. It should be done after the withdrawal of Armenian troops from the occupied lands,” Mammadyarov said the following day, speaking in Moscow.

Analysts in Baku believe factional infighting in Moscow is hampering Azerbaijani-Russian relations: one camp in Moscow, they say, is content with Azerbaijan’s current geopolitical stance – with Baku not firmly in Moscow’s orbit, yet also keeping its distance from Euro-Atlantic structures, specifically the European Union and NATO. The other camp in Moscow, led by Lavrov, is suspicious of Azerbaijan, and wants to see guarantees from Baku that Azerbaijan is committed to the Russian sphere.

Some Azerbaijani officials believe that Lavrov is inclined to aid Yerevan because his father was Armenian. “The Azerbaijani public perceives the mediation activities of Lavrov as biased, one-sided, ethnically motivated and pro-Armenian,” said former foreign minister Tofig Zulfugarov in a March interview with local media. Azerbaijani diplomats also accuse Lavrov of unfair dealings with them. One senior Azerbaijani diplomat told EurasiaNet that during negotiations with Armenia in Sochi in 2011, Azerbaijan had reached a deal it was happy with, but then Lavrov asked for time to consult with the Armenian side.

“At that point, the Armenian side did not fully agree to the terms of the agreement. Lavrov promised that the same document would be discussed at Kazan” at a summit a few months later “and in the worst case, the text would bear some cosmetic changes,” the diplomat said. But the document presented in Kazan had been subject to more than just ‘cosmetic’ changes,” the diplomat said, while declining to provide details on the specifics of the disagreement.

There also is the perception that Russian President Vladimir Putin is less sympathetic to Azerbaijan than was his predecessor, Dmitry Medvedev. It was under Medvedev that the two countries signed a $4-billion arms deal, although the deliveries themselves have mostly come under Putin, who returned to the presidency in 2013. Putin has not agreed to any more arms sales, though, and the deliveries have been taking place more slowly than Russia had initially promised. Those deals have nevertheless raised alarm in Armenia, and rising public anger over those deals has forced Armenian politicians into their own increasing outspoken criticisms of Moscow.

Azerbaijan continues to pursue arms deals with Moscow, not only to build up its military, but because it also believes that such deals help build relations with the Russian security elite. “Good relations with Russia’s military industry elite helped Azerbaijan, and led Moscow to have a neutral position during the April war,” one pro-government Azerbaijani analyst said, on condition of anonymity. In January, Aliyev said that Azerbaijan was in talks with Russia on weapons purchases. “Yes, we’re negotiating on new purchases,” he said. “We’re interested especially in the most advanced defense equipment, new products: helicopter technology, defense systems, the whole complex. This is an ongoing process.”

Source: http://www.eurasianet.org/node/83191

The Jamestown Foundation: Moscow Pressing the Azeri Diaspora is a Shot Across Azerbaijan’s Bow

https://gdb.rferl.org/F8084871-1CD8-4AEB-946E-093E4606BBC4_w1023_r1_s.jpg

The Russian Supreme Court ruled, on May 15, to revoke the registration of the All-Russia Azerbaijanis Congress (ARAC), the largest and most influential Azerbaijani Diaspora organization in Russia. The initial decision came on March 9, at the request of the Russian Ministry of Justice, which alleged the ARAC was not in compliance with legal requirements (APA; TASS, May 15; Abc.az, May 16). Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Alexy II sent welcoming messages to the Congress when it was founded back in 2001. President Putin also attended the II Convention of the ARAC in 2004 (Kremlin.ru [1], [2], [3] January 19, 2004; October 19, 2004; Vakrf.ru, accessed May 22, 2017).

The liquidation of the ARAC’s registration foreshadows the possibility of further acts to follow concerning Azerbaijanis living in Russia, particularly the hundreds of thousands of labor migrants who send remittances back to Azerbaijan. This scenario must be viewed in light of Moscow’s push to expand the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU)—Russia’s political project to institutionalize its grip on post-Soviet countries under an economic guise (see EDM, October 4, 2013; May 9, 2014; March 2, 2015; March 2, 2016; Kennan-russiafile.org, April 13, 2017).

Moscow has a long track record of using labor migrants as leverage against its post-Soviet neighbors, including Azerbaijan. Remittance flows provide Moscow with political influence over these countries, which the Kremlin routinely uses as a bargaining chip on various issues (see EDM, November 10, 2011; July 6, 2015; September 15, 2015; EurasiaNet, March 27, 2017). National governments are forced to take this factor into account for fear of a mass return of labor migrants from Russia, which could heighten the unemployment rate and social tensions at home. And now, Azerbaijani labor migrants may become useful to Moscow as it seeks to draw Baku into the EEU.

Indeed, back in 2013–2014 Russia specifically used the threat of expelling guest workers as an instrument of leverage against Azerbaijan (APA, November 22, 2013; Interfax, October 22, 2013; Unikal.org, January 16, 2014). Then, Azerbaijan was preparing to hold presidential elections and simultaneously negotiating an association agreement with the European Union. Ultimately, Baku refused to sign the association agreement with the EU in 2015. Now again, the Kremlin is apparently boosting its efforts to expand the EEU ahead of the 2018 presidential elections in Azerbaijan and just as Baku has started negotiations to upgrade its relations with the EU. However, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev has made it clear that Baku is not interested in joining any union, at least for now (see EDM, March 24).

The sudden mass return of labor migrants from abroad would be a serious burden and social inconvenience for Azerbaijan, particularly at this time of economic constraints and low oil prices. No exact statistics exist as to the actual number of Azerbaijanis living and working in Russia (Caucasus Analytical Digest, December 3, 2013; BBC—Azerbaijani service, November 1, 2013). Various sources put the figure at between 600,000 and one million, while a few estimates even point to two million Azerbaijanis working in Russia. Many of those are not Russian citizens and work there temporarily as guest workers. Remittances from Russia to Azerbaijan totaled $739 million in 2016, which actually represents a drop from previous years (Azadinform, April 7, 2017). Sources of Russian pressure on the Azerbaijani expatriate community comes in a variety of forms. On February 13, for example, hundreds of Azerbaijani migrants were detained by the police in the Russian city of Derbend (Mia.az, February 13). This incident was followed by dozens of trucks carrying agricultural produce from Azerbaijan being held up at the Russian border in March (Xezer TV, Medianews.az, March 24).

Moscow’s toolbox for coercing Baku includes not only instruments for controlling labor migrants and blockades of food imports (see above) but also the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict over Karabakh. Of those, the Karabakh conflict is the most serious since another large-scale breakout of armed violence could have significant consequences for Russia itself, particularly in the North Caucasus. Hence, at this stage, the other options are still more convenient and safer to employ for Moscow as it seeks to push Baku into the Russia-centric Eurasian Economic Union.

Russian political analyst Evgeny Mikhailov attributed this month’s decision to de-register the ARAC to efforts of the Armenian lobby in Russia (Trend May 15, 2017). However, according to many Azerbaijani experts, the decision was also driven by the Russian government’s discontent over Azerbaijan’s independent policies—including its large, multinational infrastructure and transportation projects such as the Trans-Anatolian Natural Gas Pipeline (TANAP) the Trans-Adriatic Pipeline (TAP) and the Baku–Tbilisi–Kars (BTK) railroad, all of which bypass Russia (Strateq.az, May 15; Azpolitika.info, Musavat, May 16; A24.az, April 4; Amerikanin Sesi, April 13).

The tensions along the Moscow-Baku axis are developing while Azerbaijan’s relations with Europe are far from perfect. And it is difficult to predict whether the Donald Trump White House will pursue a more active policy toward the South Caucasus than his predecessor. All these factors make Baku more vulnerable in the face of Moscow’s assertive pressure. Despite its constraints and internal weaknesses, however, Azerbaijan continues to sound quite defiant; it will, therefore, likely not be an easy task for Russia to pull Azerbaijan into a much closer orbit despite the mounting pressure on the Azerbaijani diaspora.

The spokesperson for the Azerbaijani foreign ministry, Hikmet Hajiyev, declared that the de-registration of the ARAC will negatively impact Azerbaijani-Russian relations (Azertag, May 16). But that said, Moscow also will have to consider that, over the past few years, the Azerbaijani government has become more mature in dealing with external pressure and threats that have a domestic dimension. The recent detection and arrest of a group of Azerbaijani servicemen and civilians collaborating with and passing classified information to Armenian intelligence is a case in point (Azernews, May 7).

The All-Russia Azerbaijanis Congress is now appealing the decision of its de-registration, and the appellate court may overrule the Supreme Court’s decision. But even in that case, the incident nevertheless represents a Russian shot across Azerbaijan’s bow.

Source:https://jamestown.org/program/moscow-pressing-azerbaijani-diaspora-send-loud-signal-baku/

Stratfor: The Nagorno-Karabakh Dispute Revisited

Nagorno Karabakh_Occupation_Map

With all eyes focused on Ukraine's border with Russia, it is hardly surprising that the "other" dispute has fallen off the front pages. However, as Stratfor notes, there has been a burst of diplomatic activity in recent months over the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, which Armenia and Azerbaijan have disputed for decades. Russia, the strongest power in the Caucasus, has become more engaged in the issue as Azerbaijan's leverage in the region grows. Russia's involvement could herald a change in this longstanding conflict.

In 1994, after mediation by numerous external players including Russia, Turkey, and Iran, a cease-fire was reached to end the conflict. But by that time Armenian forces had decisively defeated Azerbaijan, leading to the de facto independence of Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenian control of several provinces bordering the region.

Now, as Russia and the West confront each other over Ukraine, the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute represents a subtler yet similarly significant issue for the Caucasus. As Georgia attempts to move closer to the West and Armenia strengthens ties with Russia, Azerbaijan is maintaining a careful balance between the two sides. Azerbaijan thus serves as the pivot of the Caucasus, and the dispute over Nagorno-Karabakh is a crucial aspect in shaping Baku's role.

Russia has historically supported the Armenians, but in light of Azerbaijan's rising influence, Russia has become more engaged on the Nagorno-Karabakh issue than it has been in years. Russian officials have held numerous meetings with officials from Azerbaijan and Armenia on the issue in recent months, indicating a possible shift in Moscow's position. But for Moscow to truly change its stance on Nagorno-Karabakh, it would need to weaken considerably, or Azerbaijan would need to become so vital to Russian interests that Moscow would change allegiances and confront Armenia, an unlikely prospect at this point.  

Source: https://worldview.stratfor.com/image/nagorno-karabakh-dispute-revisited

Atlantic Council: There He Goes Again. Putin Meddles in the South Caucasus

Russia President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump likely agreed to restrict intervention in the affairs of third countries at the G-20 summit. This agreement, however, contradicts Russian foreign policy. In Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia, Russia seeks to curtail the ability of these governments to pursue independent foreign policies. A series of recent probes in the region demonstrate that Trump’s agreement with Putin is worthless and that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of these states is meaningless from Moscow’s standpoint. Russia feels free to intervene in their affairs at any time, threaten their compatriots in Russia, and regularly brandish military and other forms of power to intimidate them. Unless Washington, Brussels, and NATO step up their game, this region will either explode or be compelled to shelter under Russian power. The West cannot simply look away because European security is linked to the security of the South Caucasus.

In Georgia, Russia continues to press Tbilisi to accept the abridgement of its territorial integrity, stonewalls Georgian efforts to negotiate, and insists that the country renounce its NATO and EU aspirations. In early July, Russian forces unilaterally moved 700 meters deeper into Georgia in a process called “borderization.” Russian troops are now less than a kilometer from the Baku-Tbilisi-Poti highway, one of the main regional highways. In Armenia, Russia curtailed Yerevan’s ability to conduct an independent foreign and economic policy years ago. It has forced Armenia into Moscow’s Eurasian Economic Union, reserves the right to veto any Armenian agreement with the EU, and obtained army and air bases in virtual perpetuity at Gyumri and Erebuni. Ostensibly these bases defend Armenia against Turkey or Azerbaijan, but they also ensure Moscow’s de facto protectorate over Armenia and are vital to the projection of Russian power into the Black Sea and Middle East.

Russia has recently stepped up its pressure on Azerbaijan. In Nagorno-Karabakh, Russian border troops have abandoned any pretense of neutrality and have reportedly held drills with Armenian troops in July 2017. At the same time, Russia and Iran jointly launched drills in the Caspian Sea, which threaten Azeri energy installations there. These drills take place in the context of other signs of Moscow’s efforts to pressure Azerbaijan into joining the Eurasian Economic Union, refrain from becoming a major pro-Western outpost, and block it from becoming an energy competitor to Russia in the Balkans. As is typical in such campaigns, Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has fabricated charges of discrimination by Azerbaijan against Russians. Russia’s courts also closed the main lobby organization of Azeris in Russia, the All-Russian Azerbaijan Congress, while Russian officials appear to be paying heed to Armenian diaspora organizations in Russia, and Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova publicly humiliated journalists from Azerbaijan.

The recent tragic killing of an Azerbaijani woman and her infant granddaughter by Armenian troops firing upon supposed Azeri targets in Nagorno-Karabakh underscores the fact that this conflict is a simmering one that may catch fire at any time. The broader point is this: what happens in Nagorno-Karabakh will not stay in Nagorno-Karabakh. As we saw from the 2008 Russo-Georgian war and as scholars such as Robert Legvold and I have written, the security of the Caucasus is inextricably linked to European security. Another conflagration in the region will have serious repercussions across Europe, the Middle East, and on the international order.

The good news is that things are changing in Washington. The Obama administration essentially ignored the Caucasus and trouble spots like Nagorno-Karabakh, while US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson recently met with Azerbaijan President Ilham Aliyev in Istanbul. The new administration has an opportunity to display a stronger presence in helping Baku and Yerevan negotiate a peace settlement that meets both countries needs and reduces the likelihood of future military intervention. It’s critically important for Tillerson, Vice President Mike Pence, Trump, and their European counterparts to make clear to Russia through regular visits to Baku, Tbilisi, and Yerevan that the West will defend these states’ sovereignty and integrity and actively play a role in the peace process.

Of course none of these countries has suffered the depredations loosed upon them by Moscow to the extent that Ukraine has, but the same principles are at work. For the Russian president, these are not real states and he alone decides to what degree they may “pretend” to act as such. But here’s the rub: the continuation of Russian foreign policy in the South Caucasus may entail war, since these states will not indefinitely renounce their statehood. Moreover Moscow, by fanning the flames of conflict in South Ossetia and Abkhazia against Georgia and in Nagorno-Karabakh by selling high-performance weapons to both sides, encourages the very outcome it professes to abhor. Russia’s policies all but ensure that ancient grudges will lead to new wars—an outcome that neither Washington nor Europe can passively accept. As Tillerson’s visit suggests, the time for neglect is over and the time for engagement is now. 

Source:http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/there-he-goes-again-putin-meddles-in-the-south-caucasus

Armenpress: Military expert Vladimir Evseev proposes to form Iran-Russia-Armenia triangle

Horizon Weekly Newspaper

Military expert Vladimir Evseev, deputy director of the CIS Countries Institute, positively assesses the May 19 presidential election results in the Islamic Republic of Iran. According to him, Hassan Rouhani’s re-election as President of Iran is beneficial both for Armenia and Russia.

“It was under Hassan Rouhani’s presidency that the Russian-Iranian strategic dialogue launched which is very important, in other words, currently we speak about strategic dialogue which leads to strategic partnership. I think that dialogue will strengthen more easily under Rouhani’s presidency. In late March Rouhani visited Russia, and a number of joint decisions were made which will be easier to implement again during his tenure”, Evseev told Armenpress.

The expert said in line with strengthening of the Russian-Iranian relations, he expects also deterioration of Iran-US ties. “Why, because Trump will probably support Israel and Saudi Arabia which has money. In fact, Saudi Arabia’s range of interests, that weakened a little under Obama’s presidency, will return to its place, and Saudi Arabia is Iran’s regional rival. And if Iran’s relations deteriorate, it will be more open for partnership with neighbors, and in this sense Armenia is that friendly state with which Iran can cooperate”, Vladimir Evseev said.

He also proposed to take respective steps to form Armenia-Iran-Russia triangle. Moreover, this must be directed not only towards political cooperation, but also a military one, the grounds of which we already have. In this sense I would like to highlight the visit of Armenia’s Defense Minister to Iran during which a number of issues, including defense issues were discussed”, the military expert stated. Rouhani won Iran’s Presidential election with 57% of votes. Four candidates were running for the post. Over 70% of eligible voters participated in the election. 


Moscow maintains parity in arms trade with Yerevan, Baku

http://www.president.am/files/pics/2013/08/14/3592_b.jpg
Russia is making efforts to maintain parity in arms trade with Armenia and Azerbaijan, Izvestia cited Director of the Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation Aleksandr Fomin as saying. “Everything must be solved via political and diplomatic channels,” Fomin said as he commented on Russia’s weapons sale to both Armenia and Azerbaijan. “I wouldn’t focus on whether our military-technical cooperation with them influenced the relationship among various countries. The main task of such a cooperation is not about helping one of the sides or creating superiority of forces. The main task, as paradoxical as it may sound, is the preservation of peace and stability in a particular country, a region and the world in general.” “Even if parity exists theoretically or one of the sides has an advantage, it is not determinative," Fomin said in a blurred message. "Conflicts start irrespective of whether one of the sides is armed better or worse. Nevertheless, we need to strive for parity. And Russia is making efforts to maintain parity both in absolute terms as well as in the quantity and quality of basic weapons systems.”

Source: http://www.panarmenian.net/eng/news/217213/

Moscow’s arming Azeris beneficial to Armenia: Russian news agency chief

https://02varvara.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/00-dmitri-kiselyov-06-04-14.jpg

Azerbaijan is arming Armenia through its own purchase of weapons from Russia, head of Russia’s state-run news agency Rossiya Segodnya Dmitry Kiselyov said.  “Azerbaijan can buy armaments from Israel, the U.S. and Russia. The world's second largest exporter of weapons, Russia supplies arms to the international markets and shows, where Azerbaijan, like many other countries, buys weapons,” he said.  Kiselyov urged against searching for political implication behind the sale of arms to Azerbaijan. According to him, Moscow thus maintains relations with Baku.  Kiselyov expressed the belief that Armenia benefits from relations between Russia and Azerbaijan, since Russia, according to him, uses the money received from Azerbaijan to develop its military-industrial complex, thus gaining an opportunity to arm Armenia.  “Azerbaijan thus buys weapons for Armenia through Russia,” he said. 
Armenian authorities and people were not happy with Russia’s sale of ammunition to Azerbaijan during the four-day war in early April, 2016. Russian officials, however, defended the deals, claiming that Moscow “thus maintains the balance in the South Caucasus.”  Azerbaijan on April 2 unleashed a large-scale military offensive against Artsakh (Nagorno Karabakh), which claimed the lives of hundreds on both sides. Chief Armenian and Azerbaijani defense officials reached an agreement on the cessation of hostilities on April 5 in Moscow.
Also, Kiselyov said fluency in Russian language is vital for Armenia.  “Once I happened upon a young Armenian taxi driver who didn't know how to say something in Russian, which really surprised me. My words drew a stormy response, with people reacting not to the fact that the driver could not count in Russian, but to my saying that ‘Russian language is a security factor for Armenia,’” Kiselyov explained, according to Radio Sputnik Armenia.  He stressed that he never recanted and still believes that fluency in Russian is vitally important for Armenia. According to Kiselyov, "without this (knowledge of Russian - editor’s note), it is impossible to imagine the future of Armenia."
Azerbaijan is arming Armenia through its own purchase of weapons from Russia, head of Russia’s state-run news agency Rossiya Segodnya Dmitry Kiselyov said.
“Azerbaijan can buy armaments from Israel, the U.S. and Russia. The world's second largest exporter of weapons, Russia supplies arms to the international markets and shows, where Azerbaijan, like many other countries, buys weapons,” he said.
Kiselyov urged against searching for political implication behind the sale of arms to Azerbaijan. According to him, Moscow thus maintains relations with Baku.
Kiselyov expressed the belief that Armenia benefits from relations between Russia and Azerbaijan, since Russia, according to him, uses the money received from Azerbaijan to develop its military-industrial complex, thus gaining an opportunity to arm Armenia.
“Azerbaijan thus buys weapons for Armenia through Russia,” he said.
Armenian authorities and people were not happy with Russia’s sale of ammunition to Azerbaijan during the four-day war in early April, 2016. Russian officials, however, defended the deals, claiming that Moscow “thus maintains the balance in the South Caucasus.”
Azerbaijan on April 2 unleashed a large-scale military offensive against Artsakh (Nagorno Karabakh), which claimed the lives of hundreds on both sides. Chief Armenian and Azerbaijani defense officials reached an agreement on the cessation of hostilities on April 5 in Moscow.
Also, Kiselyov said fluency in Russian language is vital for Armenia.
“Once I happened upon a young Armenian taxi driver who didn't know how to say something in Russian, which really surprised me. My words drew a stormy response, with people reacting not to the fact that the driver could not count in Russian, but to my saying that ‘Russian language is a security factor for Armenia,’” Kiselyov explained, according to Radio Sputnik Armenia.
He stressed that he never recanted and still believes that fluency in Russian is vitally important for Armenia. According to Kiselyov, "without this (knowledge of Russian - editor’s note), it is impossible to imagine the future of Armenia."

 Source: http://www.panarmenian.net/eng/news/234333/Moscows_arming_Azeris_beneficial_to_Armenia_Russian_news_agency_chief

Russian expert: Armenia should be interested in Russian-Azeri arms deals

http://vestnikkavkaza.net/upload2/files/og.jpg

Russia's only goal is to avoid a new war in Nagorno-Karabakh, Head of the Caucasus Department of the CIS Institute Sergey Mikheyev said during a Yerevan-Moscow TV link-up on Monday. He said that both Armenia and Azerbaijan urge Russia to sever contacts with the opposite side and to develop ties with them only. "We cannot do this as this may cause instability in the region. The point here is that in order to guarantee peace in the region, Russia has to keep balance between the parties," Mikheyev said. Director of the Public Political Studies Center Vladimir Yevseyev said that if Russia stops selling arms to Azerbaijan, Israel, the US or somebody else will start doing it. "So, Armenia should be interested in Azerbaijan's buying arms from Russia as the Russians know their arms and will be able to help the Armenians with 'antidotes' if need be. There is no evil design in these supplies. Russia is not going to abandon Armenia. All it wants is just peace in the region," Yevseyev said. It was reported on 26 May that Russia planned to supply another ordered lot of 6 TOS-1A heavy flamethrower systems. According to Uralvagonzavod plant, under a contract with Azerbaijan, that country will receive 18 items of TOS-1A "Solntsegorsk." Last year, Russian supplied the first lot of 6 systems. In addition, on 23 May, Konstantin Byrulin, Deputy Head of the Federal Services for Military-Technical Cooperation of Russia, said Azerbaijan has already received 100 tanks T-90C and another 100 tanks may be delivered to Baku later, along with helicopters Mi-171 and Mi-35, armored vehicles, light weapons, and mortar howitzers.

Source: http://www.arminfo.am/index.cfm?objectid=DC40C210-47E2-11E4-980E0EB7C0D21663

President Aliyev: No allergy in Azerbaijan for Russia's selling arms to Armenia

https://cdn.trend.az/media/pictures/2016/06/08/prezident_metbuat_konfransi_080616_06.jpg

The fact that Russia is selling weapons to Armenia doesn't create any allergy in Azerbaijan, said the country's president, Ilham Aliyev answering a question at the joint press conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Berlin, Trend's correspondent reported from the event. "We consider Russia as our strategic partner," he said. "We understand that Russia is a big producer of arms, and can sell weapons to any country. The allergy is in Armenia, for the fact that Russia sells weapons to Azerbaijan." The president went on to add that unlike Armenia, Azerbaijan paid the full price for the weapons, and Russia is not the only country where Azerbaijan purchases weapons. "It is not a secret that we purchase weapons from Turkey, Israel, Belarus, Iran and many other countries, because we are modernizing our armed forces," the president said. Ilham Aliyev further said that Russia is also one of the members of the OSCE Minsk Group, which deals with the Nagorno Karabakh settlement, adding that Azerbaijan considers Russia's role to be very positive. "We hope that Russia, along with the US and France will use all their potential to convince Armenia that it is time to leave the occupied territories."

Source: http://en.trend.az/azerbaijan/politics/2543191.html

Posted by
Labels: , ,

195 comments:

  1. Mardig BidanianJune 13, 2017 at 8:14 AM

    Hi Arevordi ,
    great article . Just a few comments regarding some topics brought up.
    On Trump's agenda :
    - The recent blockade of Qatar is a manifestation of trying to de-facto bring Israel and the Gulf countries on the same side vis-à-vis Iran . This has been simmering for a while . Obviously the reason that KSA gave for severing relations was absurd as Saudis do the same thing across the World . They finance extremist mosques (Salafist) around the World just like Qatar does. Its a wider plot of isolating Iran.
    Regarding Artsakh and the South Caucasus:
    - The direction Georgia has been on since 2004 means their grand strategic goal is Westernization and European integration. Even with the fall of Saakashvilli's government they seem to still have a pro-Western direction. Its going to take something very drastic like a regime change to change the direction that country is going in.
    - Azerbaijan's strategy in NK conflict right now is to keep the fighting limited to small skirmishes , trying to capture strategic sites in order to inflict more causalities on us and force Armenians to make concessions. However I can see a strategy like this potentially backfiring because Azerbaijan and Armenia would be forced to spend an increased amount on defence , suffer heavy losses and potentially triggering a full-scale war and a Russian intervention.
    - One thing I noticed is that April 2016 changed everything at least in a psychological way . It showed that as you said Armenian society is averse to territorial concessions. This is a double edged sword which is what is concerning. In a way if a war starts it would be extremely difficult to stop it . But I don't blame the people in Armenia of having this attitude at the end of the day this conflict is very personal in both countries , everyone knows someone involved.
    - As for peace , yes I agree . Armenia is a country of very limited resources . Our Turkic neighbours aren't the friendliest or kindest people but if coming to some sort of peace would be better for Armenia and Armenian society that should be the option. However I doubt Azerbaijan might see incentive to come to the negotiating table if their army succeeds militarily. I think the way forward should be deterring incursions that their special forces do in the LOC. I remember there was an incident back in February I think where the army managed to foil an attack and kill 8 Azeri soldiers without a single casualty .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ArevordiJune 13, 2017 at 4:26 PM

      I agree with everything you said about the dispute over Artsakh. As I said, the following is the secret to our success: A capable/efficient military to defend territory and fight off Azeri incursions that will be coming periodically; a diplomatic corps that is farsighted, patriotic and pragmatic; lobbying Russian officials and establishing a deep alliance with the Russian bear. Moreover, we as a people need patience.

      Disregard all the Russophobic fear-mongering coming from our Western-funded smut peddlers. Moscow is not going to sell Armenia or Artsakh to anybody and time is on our side. If we do what I suggested above, there is a good chance that in a matter of few years Azerbaijan will descend into serious internal unrest. If we do what I suggested above, Armenia will clearly come on top in any final peace settlement. That said, we as a people must also understand that the south Caucasus desperately need peace and stability. We also need to understand that peace and stability will come at a price. We also need to understand that peace and stability can only be brought by Russia.

      In my opinion, the above are the fundamentals of our success in the Artsakh dispute.

      Regarding Georgia: Tbilisi is not as West-leaning as thought. Georgians will sooner or later come back into Russia's orbit with or without Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Russian officials know that the agenda to bring Georgia back under it fold will become much easier once the dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan is settled. In a sense, the key to establishing Pax Russica in the region is Artsakh.

      Regarding Qatar: I believe the country may have become the weak link in the budding anti-Iranian alliance. Sooner or later we'll have a better idea of the problem they suddenly have with Doha. I suspect Doha leaders have been in touch with Iranians.

      Delete
    2. HerminianJune 14, 2017 at 2:52 AM

      On the Artsakh issue there will never be an agreement on a settlement with or under the current regime ruling Azerbaijan. It is a vacuous and futile exercise in intellectual paroxysm to engage and continue with the dialogue which is a dead end in itself. The solution to the Artsakh issue , from an Azeri perspective , can only be realized by force of arms. From an Armenian perspective a peaceful settlement periodically shuffles the imagination, a settlement of the status quo, recognition or acceptance by Azerbaijan , nominally Turkey, of the existing territorial delimitations which is anathema to the Turks. Armenia hopes of a peaceful settlement of her territorial integrity, Azerbaijan or the Turks work and dream of a conquest of Artsakh and the crushing of Armenian statehood. Two incompatible and irreconcilable political concepts . Armenia must internalize the conceptual essence and substance that surrounded by hostile enemies which seek her destruction leaves no room for stale platitudes and hair brained schemes of "peaceful settlement". Armenia's destiny is to the eternal struggle for her homeland survival in the most difficult and perilous conditions ,and this struggle will be no different than our thousands year bloody history attests.. Like Friedrich Nietzsche said "love your fate".

      Delete
    3. Mardig BidanianJune 14, 2017 at 7:55 PM

      Herminian,
      I agree it's difficult at the present to make peace with the Azeris. They have maximalist aims . However I honestly don't think much is going to be different in the coming years . Partly because negotiations are a pure waste of time and Azerbaijan hasn't started a fully scale war yet . On the other hand I don't think leaving this conflict unresloved is not sustainable for either country . The war which isn't over has been going on for nearly two generations and the cost to both societies is very high . For Armenia we are putting a lot of scarce resources to the military and as a result Armenia is the 3rd most militarzed country in the world and plus every family knows someone involved . For the Azeri its a massive financial cost surely using their formerly lucrative oil wealth on their society is less costly than two generations of war . That being said I understand your point of view there would be no peace in NK for the foreesable future . Aliyev doesn't want peace because that would be too costly for him

      Delete
    4. ArevordiJune 14, 2017 at 8:39 PM

      Mardig,

      Aliyev can be overthrown in a coup or assassinated. This can happen tomorrow. A major war may also happen at any time. Anything can happen in politics at anytime. The problem with us Armenians is that we are too emotional and too proud/arrogant. This always gets in the way of truly/deeply understanding politics and the world we live in. Also, there is no middle with us Armenians. We are either self-hating traitors or extremist chobans. Also, we seriously lack foresight. We only see what right in front of us. This is why we are bad at nation-building. This is why throughout history Armenia has remained a small nation constantly fighting for survival. In any case, the longer the Artsakh dispute remains unresolved, the higher the chances that Aliyev will be either overthrown or assassinated or we will have a major war on our hands.

      There will be a time for war and there will be a time for peace. We must be as ready for peace just as much as we are ready for war.

      Delete
    5. Ռազմիկ ԱրտաշեսJune 15, 2017 at 2:56 AM

      Mardig,

      Adding to Arevordi's comment on lacking foresight, we Armenians are unfortunately reactive and passive. We wait that events take place and we react to them, defensively mostly. When was the last time in the last couple of thousand years that Armenia's leadership actually got proactive and challenged the regional powers? Barely, if ever. The reasons are various, which I want get into now. The bottom line because of this passive/reactive approach, we had to constantly fight merely for our survival, not for securing our borders and prospering the country.

      Let's only hope that some officials in Yerevan have understood history's past mistakes and are at least considering proactiveness.

      Delete
    6. HerminianJune 17, 2017 at 12:12 AM

      Hayastan has no options . There can never be a peace settlement by ceding territories in exchange for a piece of paper from Turks.. There is no middle way, any middle way implies grave and imponderable threats not only to our territorial integrity but to our continued existence as a nation, a nation state. What is more we need to be looking to the next generations, and realize that it is our historical imperative to grow out of our 28000sq. Km. There are large swathes of historical Armenian lands under occupation by Turks . Hayastan ideally needs a common border with Russia, how is that common border going to be realized it's a geopolitical challenge. To entertain solutions on an agreement on the basis of ceding land it is a subject to occupy the minds and time of professional political analysts. We may not see solutions implemented in our generation , but the Artsakh issue and its adjoining lands which were gained by the investment of precious blood and young manhood are not going to be compromised in exchange for some spurious scrap of paper called agreement. We know very well what happens to treaties, if there is the lack of armed responses and resistance, they end up in history's dustbins; a glaring example like the treaty of Sevres.

      Delete
  2. Ռազմիկ ԱրտաշեսJune 14, 2017 at 6:36 AM

    I am glad that the notion of "position of strength" was brought up multiple times in the commentary. This is one thing that Armenians rarely talk about. Being the maximalists that they are, some Armenians talk about extreme solution scenarios, such as handing out all seven "occupied" territories to Azerbaijan and be done with it, hoping that that will resolve the issue.

    The Armenian side was the victor in 1994. Therefore, the conditions of a solution should come from a position of strength, where the victor has to ensure that its victory came at a worthy cost. To hand out Berdzor and Karvachar, for example, can and should not be discussed of handing back. Armenians took it for security reasons, and handing them back will damage the entire security of Armenia/Artsakh. Also the question of the Shahumyan region has to be put in place. If Azeris are willing to get some land, they have to be willing to give some land as well (Shahumyan lies within the de jure borders of Nagorno Karabakh). The strategic significance of Artsakh acting as a natural barrier between Azeris and Turks cannot be questioned.

    The position of strength guarantees more favorable conditions. If Armenia is considering to willingly secede from all seven territories, then it is coming from a position of weakness. Armenians should understand that Azeris, who lost the war, are doing everything they can to at least project that they are coming from a position of strength.

    Speaking of realpolitik and lobbying, unfortunately Armenians are losing the time and opportunity to establish some sort of relations with the Lezgins and the Talysh, ethnic persecuted minorities within Azerbaijan. They themselves have been vocal and pro-Armenian at certain points, yet I have yet to see any form of collaboration with these people.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ArevordiJune 14, 2017 at 4:45 PM

      Ռազմիկ Արտաշես,

      Please read my commentary carefully. My intent is to shape mindset and lay foundations of a discourse that is rooted in patriotism, pragmatism, foresight and strength. Details are a secondary matter. As I mentioned in my commentary, our extremists chobans in Armenia and our armchair generals in the Diaspora (who not only say Armenia must not under any circumstances pull back from any territory but also envision Armenian troops marching all the way to Baku) are just as much a problem as our self-hating liberal garbage that envision capitulating to Azeris/Turks in hopes of "living well" again. Between these two diametrically opposed mindsets, I would of course support our chobans. But, for Armenia's long term health and well being, I think we need to find a middle road. For me, Armenia's and Artsakh's red line (i.e. what we as a people should be ready to go to war over) is Bardzor and Karvachar. That said, the region where our homeland is unfortunately located needs peace and stability, and peace and stability in the south Caucasus can only be brought by Russia. As I noted several times in my commentary, the secret to our final victory lies in a powerful military, capable diplomatic corps and close ties to Russia.

      Delete
  3. AnonymousJune 15, 2017 at 10:23 PM

    Even though we are living though an era of rapid and sometimes unpredictable political changes, it is still very, very difficult picturing a scenario where Azerbaijan actually negotiates anything with Armenia anytime soon. I agree with Arevordi that there will most likely be another major military flareup, just based on historical trends. And I agree that this time Azerbaijan will be dealt a decisive defeat at the hands of Armenia and Artsakh.

    Armenian readiness to concede Aghdam and some other areas outside of Artsakh proper will not be accepted by Azeri society as the basis of negotiations, these people are more maximalist and irrational than Armenians or Jews. Azeris as a society are not only extremely primed to wage a genocidal war against Armenians, but they are now also overconfident that they are militarily invincible. The "massive victory" they think they accomplished in 2016 -which consisted of taking two hills and total land equaling a standard US city block in territory- has them amped up for a conquest of Artsakh, maybe even Syunik and Yerevan. I occasionally lurk around Azeri forums, mostly the Azerbaijan subreddit, and these people have totally bought into the notion that they are a superpower and that "starving Armenians" are on the verge of capitulation. So it appears to me that, even if some sort of prearranged war played out, there is no way Azeri authorities could sell a peace plan to their own population that did not include most if not all of Artsakh under their control. Azeri authorities themselves are fully responsible for painting themselves into a corner. Obviously Armenia will never agree to give up Artsakh proper. It will take a German-style TOTAL DEFEAT followed by the Azeri equivalent of a denazification program to prepare Azeris for peace.

    I may be biased here, but if Russia truly wants to bring the South Caucasus under its control, it needs to be ready to "occupy" Baku, either an actual occupation through its own (or Armenia's) military, or a constructive occupation by installing a Soviet-style regime in Baku which is wholly prepared to mercilessly crush protesters and rioters.

    Just to be clear, I would rather avoid a war if possible. I don't think Armenian troops marching to Baku and Istanbul is a good idea to focus on at this point in time, although I am totally open to the idea of Mestamor-tipped Armenian Iskanders. But peace with a society as extreme and irrational as Azerbaijan today seems pretty much impossible.

    Also, the Azeri economy is in deep trouble. When it gets bad enough, I fully expect Baku to launch a (disastrous) distraction campaign against Artsakh.

    And if I was a western official trying desperately to trip Russia up, I'd fully support an Azeri military campaign against Armenia. Russia is strategically allied with one, and trying to win over the other. Set the whole place on fire and let Moscow deal with the cleanup.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ArevordiJune 16, 2017 at 12:09 AM

      History teaches us that anything can happen in politics. History also teaches us that anything can happen after a nation goes down because of economic problems and/or a disasterous war. History also teaches us that sheeple in any given nation can be reprogrammed. The likelihood that Baku will face serious economic problems in the coming years is high. The likelihood that Baku will try to solve the Artsakh conundrum through a major war is also very high. Moreover, as I write this, some in Moscow are trying to figure out how the settle the dispute. The status quo over Artsakh will therefore sooner or later change. Although I want peace, I too think there will be another war before things perhaps begin to look promising. This is why I keep saying the most important thing for us today to is have a powerful military, a capable diplomatic corps and very close ties to the Kremlin. In any case, I think Baku will eventually be dragged to the peace table kicking and screaming. That said, knowing how politics work, even in the event of an Azeri defeat, the Armenian side will still be expected or forced to make some concessions so as not to make a settlement process very painful for Baku. The degree of concessions we make is dependent on the aforementioned three important elements: Military, diplomacy, Russia.

      Delete
    2. JerrikoJune 17, 2017 at 8:41 AM

      I could see the need for a common border between Russia and Armenia as something that would be beneficial in the long run, with the whole "granitsa se Rusiya" being ultimately positive for the Eurasian Union. However, I must ask if Iran would also be okay with the idea of Azerbaijan being completely partitioned, because an attempt at creating a common border between Russia and Armenia is something that will be of major concern for Tehran. I suppose the potential Russian portion of future occupied Azerbaijan would simply be lumped into Dagestan.

      In addition, how would a potential conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan have an effect on Iran's own Azeri population? That might be something that would be potentially dangerous. If President Trump was crazy enough (or more likely, General Mattis was crazy enough), he'd sponsor an Azeri rebellion in northern Iran with the goal of uniting with their fellow Azeris should the US go to war with Iran. Israel would also be delighted at the prospect of an enlarged Azerbaijan because it would mean more airfields for Israel planes to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities.

      Delete
    3. Longtime readerJune 20, 2017 at 4:46 AM

      Arevordi, no ones against peace but we dealing with barbarians. Afraid only another war can settle the case but I agree with you that we have to always strive for peace because without it Armenia will remain backward. Regarding the 7 territories just like you my biggest concern is lands between Armenia and NKR but the other territories give Armenia defensive depth. You even made the point about how important defensive depth is for Russia it also appies to Armenia.

      Delete
  4. AnonymousJune 16, 2017 at 1:59 AM

    With all due respects Arevordi but how is your approach to Karabagh any different than traitor Levon Ter Petrosyan's?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ArevordiJune 19, 2017 at 9:32 PM

      Anonymous, next time you make a comment or ask a question please use a moniker. Also, please refrain from calling the territory by its Turkish name. There is an ancient Armenian name for the territory and it's called Artsakh. If you want to liberate the land from Turks, first liberate your mind from Turkish. Please.

      Now, regarding Levon Petrosyan. He has wanted to settle the conflict from the earliest days of the war. The formula he has always peddled is similar to the US sponsored Camp David accord between Egypt and Israel: Land for peace. In principle, there is nothing wrong with land for peace. Moreover, Levon has not been alone in wanting to trade land for peace. Every Armenian administration after Levon's resignation in 1998 has also announced Armenia's willingness to trade land for peace. The problem has always been Baku. Azeri officials have always categorically rejected every single Armenian proposal. Azeri officials have always been maximalistic in their demands.

      Despite the fact that I agree with some of Levon's ideas, I nonetheless continue to believe that he serves foreign interests. He's most probably funded and protected by globalist interests. The man is very intelligent. He knows history well. But he is a traitor at heart. Like I said, in concept, Levon's land for peace is something I do not have much problem with. My problem with him is that I don't trust his intentions. I see him giving too much for too little. He has always come across as being a bit too enthusiastic in trying to appease "international interests". I must also add here that the hate some Armenians in Yerevan express towards Artsakh Armenians was started by him and his cronies during the Robert Kocharyan years.

      To recap: I agree with Levon when he says the conflict over Artsakh has to end for Armenia's sake. In my opinion, Armenia's most urgent problem today is the unresolved dispute and the double blockade the country been subjected to for over 25 years now. I also agree with Levon that land for peace may eventually be a way out of the mess. In my opinion, Armenia is too small, too poor, too landlocked and too remote. Armenia cannot perpetually be at war with its neighbors. Therefore, if (I emphasize if) Baku one day is willing (or forced by Moscow) to recognize Artsakh's unification with Armenia (including all territories between Armenia and Artsakh), I, personally, would be willing to pull back from some of the territories we have been controlling east of Artsakh's officially recognized boundaries. I would also want to see Russian peacekeepers stationed between us and the Azeris. A comprehensive peace, where both sides will feel they have gotten something, may finally pacify the south Caucasus and reign in much needed Pax Russica.

      Delete
    2. ArevordiJune 19, 2017 at 9:34 PM

      Until peace and stability is brought to the region, Armenia will continue remaining impoverished and politically vulnerable. My thoughts regarding the conflict is not too far from Levon's - with one fundamental difference: I believe we can only talk about land for peace if Baku officially states it is ready to recognize Artsakh's unification with Armenia. Thus far, it has not. Levon is ready to give up all of the territories around Artsakh with the exception of the "Lachin corridor" and only then beg the international community to force Baku to reciprocate in kind. That is foolish. That is dangerous. That is treasonous. That is why Levon was ousted in 1998. When you announce to everyone that you are eagerly waiting to compromise and are enthusiastically waiting to make the first move, you will end up giving up a lot more than you were initially planning to in the end. What I'm saying is that when you enter a negotiations process with such a position, you will most likely come our the loser. In other words, Levon's bar is set too damn low, whereas Baku always places its bar at the highest possible level. This is what makes Levon dangerous.

      Finally, I primarily dislike Levon for one fundamental reason: Everything we dislike about Armenia today has its genesis in the 1990s, when Levon was king.

      Delete
  5. SonofamalekJune 17, 2017 at 12:15 AM

    The Putin interviews

    Оливер Стоун Интервью с Путиным Part 1 Oliver Stone's Interview with Putin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQ-0385u4mg

    Интервью с Путиным часть Part 2 The Putin Interviews: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLWgPUMRCwg

    Интервью с Путиным часть 3 The Putin Interviews Part 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2G95BoG1vo

    Оливер Стоун Интервью с Путиным Part 4 Oliver Stone's Interview with Putin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rH5BSwlx2G8

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ArevordiJune 17, 2017 at 12:49 AM

      Although he looked a bit disheveled and some of his questions were just silly, Oliver Stone did an excellent job with this historic and timely interview. In my opinion, this was his career's most seminal work. Finally, the Anglo-American world has an in depth look at the man in the Kremlin. Vladimir Putin is without doubt the greatest leader of our times. Leaders like him come about only every few hundred years.

      PS: For those who don't know, in 2012 Oliver Stone released a monumental ten episode documentary titled "The Untold History of the United States": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6TGkpi_vVE

      Delete
    2. մարJune 21, 2017 at 10:53 AM

      Oliver Stone Tells Colbert Israel Had More Influence than Russia on 2016 Election
      ^ http://www.jewishpress.com/news/israel/oliver-stone-tells-colbert-israel-had-more-influence-than-russia-on-2016-election/2017/06/14/
      &
      http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/oliver-stone-israel-meddled-far-more-us-election-russia/ri20110

      Delete
  6. AnonymousJune 17, 2017 at 1:28 AM

    Armenia Minister: Foreign diplomats should not interfere with our election processes
    https://news.am/eng/news/395455.html

    It is no secret that European officials look down on us Armenians as a bunch of whinny beggars, looking for financial handouts, the same kind of acknowledgment for our Genocide as the holohoax gets, and recognition that the people of Artsakh have the the same right to democratically determine their future as the terrorist scum in Kosovo. The smug Eurofags hand out financial aid mainly as geopolitical bribes, constantly spit on the memory of Armenian Genocide victims while fellating the Turks (sometimes figuratively and sometimes literally,) and actively work to ensure a second Armenian genocide by supporting energy-backed Azeri claims to Artsakh. While they're at it, Europeans fund Georgia to relocate Meshketian Turks from Central Asia and settle them in Armenian Javakhk, and berate the Armenian nation for not brainwashing our sons to be faggots and our daughters to be whores who are passed around by Africans and Afghanis... I'm ranting here, I just want to point out how low my opinion of Europeans is.

    Anyway it is a well-known fact that the EU sees itself as natural master in Armenia, and constantly tries to undermine our sovereignty and relations with Russia. Swedecuck Carl Bildt is the best example I can think of, who went on a Twitter tirade like a scorned teenaged bitch when Armenia announced it had chosen the Eurasian Union over becoming an EU vassal. I am glad to see Armenian officials politely telling Polecuck EU ambassador to Armenia Piotr Świtalski to basically "know your role and shut your mouth." I have reiterated before that I would like to see the Armenian government reiterate its national sovereignty, and pull out of any international organizations that give the EU power over internal Armenian affairs - most notably I want the Armenian government to declare that the Armenian court system is the highest legal authority in the land, and that no Armenian legal decision can be appealed to in a silly whorehouses like the "European Court of Justice" and "European Court of Human Rights." I think telling EU officials to mind their own business is a good start.

    ps the EU is suing the psuedo-nationalistic governments of its eastern vassal states for not taking in enough brown muslim people. I think this is great, I hate cuckservative fake-nationalists more than I hate open ultraliberals - call me old-fashioned but I at least respect honesty:

    EU Sues Eastern Europe for Refugee Refusal
    https://www.dailystormer.com/eu-sues-eastern-europe-for-refugee-refusal/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JerrikoJune 17, 2017 at 8:33 AM

      Well the rest of Europe is cucked anyways, and even poor Ireland is also cucked too. Even a handful of alt-right figures won't be much of a help in delivering Western and Northern Europe to the grave. Also, I'm wondering as to why the EU isn't suing those Baltic underlings for refusing to take in those very same migrants, and they're the ones with a serious demographic crisis:

      http://www.france24.com/en/20120522-latvia-emigration-population-brain-drain-economy

      (I don't normally cite Stratfor for crucial info, but I will have to make an exception to this one):
      https://www.stratfor.com/article/baltics-emigration-and-demographic-decline

      If Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians continue to immigrate to other countries, their countries would be so depopulated that Russia could simply take it over without a single shot being fired. In Latgale, ethnic Russians are the majority there, and they could simply expand their demographics into the rest of Latvia and Estonia. What's left of depopulated Lithuania could go to Belarus. God knows that Belarus would love to have an access to the Baltic Sea.

      Delete
  7. AnonymousJune 17, 2017 at 2:42 AM

    US Cubans Cheer as Trump Cancels Obama Cuba Deal
    https://www.rt.com/usa/392608-miami-trump-cuba-policy/

    Cuba is a fake nation anyway, their language is imported (and corrupted) from Spain, their genetics are atrocious and unnatural (Mediterranean mixed with Amerindian mixed with African,) same for their culture. Thus they really have no foundation for a national identity, apart from "weird science experiment gone horribly wrong." At least that is the only conclusion I can draw when I look at the disgusting animals in the Cuban-"American" community who cheer the idea of the US harming their homeland.

    As a general rule I don't fight other peoples battles unless it directly or strongly pertains to Armenia. And I can control my emotions to the point that appeals to "human rights and democracy" motivate me to support western-backed regime change. Neither do appeals to "but they are communists/socialists, bro" or "but they are atheists, bro" or "but that's anti-Christian, bro" or "what about The Black Book, bro" or "they didn't bow their heads in reverence to some western-based ethnic Armenian capitalists who were trying to profit from their country, bro" or whatever excuse neo-cohens and their supporters (witting or unwitting) trot out to denigrate the few remaining smaller countries that are successfully resisting Anglo-American-Jewish domination and exploitation by utilizing a specialized form of leftist resistance ideology - namely Cuba, Venezuela, and North Korea.

    I just want to highlight that expatriate communities that live in the US are as a rule a fucking cancer to their nations. Dumb as shit and twice as repulsive, as the saying goes. I've known Iranian sluts who do cocaine protest in favor of the "Green Revolution" in Iran here in Los Angeles. I've known obese Arab Christians from Syria eagerly demonstrate for ISIS (oddly referred to as "democracy") at the early stages of the Invasion of Syria here in Los Angeles. I've had random Chinese women come up to me and in broken English complain about "lack of human rights in China." I've seen footage of Venezuelans and Cubans in the US cheering news of the deaths of Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro. And needless to say, the Armenian-American community can be whipped into a "DEATH TO ARMENIA" frenzy over things like March 2008, the Protocols, the Sasna Tsrer terrorists, etc. I'm not even going to mention Ukrainian Jewish-Nazis...

    I don't know how to explain it, except that Americans are raised to be unthinking idiots who obey whatever the talking heads tell them to obey. Like when Arevordi described Armenian-Americans applauding documentary Jew Goldberg's calls for Armenians to just be cool with the Turks even after the Genocide. Or how "rebels" like Antifa use violence to make sure that the agenda promoted by every mainstream organization, public and private, faces no opposition.

    Anyway I think it is time we Armenians had a serious talk, and agreed that Soviet-era restrictions on Diasporan influence in Armenia were a blessing in disguise.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JerrikoJune 17, 2017 at 8:25 AM

      Most of the nations in the Americas are pretty much considered fake nations, as representations of a flawed Spanish colonial legacy. Even before identity politics became a phenomenon, let alone a thing, interracial mixing was widely practiced in the Spanish and Portuguese Empires because the colonial authorities there are concerned that white skinned Spaniards and Portuguese can't cope with the tropical environment that often comes with tropical diseases like malaria and dengue (you could get sick with dengue from infected mosquitoes in tropical nations like the Philippines). In fact, their racial hierarchy is much more complicated than that of the ones you see in French or British colonies where they only managed to import very few slaves. So it is quite common for Latin Americans to have a mixture of Amerindian and African, with barely any white European in them. Even the rest of South America had this kind of phenomenon occur to them.

      A lot of expatriates that live in the United States often come there to flee from communist dictatorships during the Cold War. You'd be surprised to see a lot of expatriate Vietnamese, Cambodian and Laotian political refugees who settled there after their countries fell to communists. I kinda get the feeling that the US is technically a cancerous cell that is waiting to explode if it has too much cancer cells growing.

      And if you think Cuban-Americans are crazy enough to cheer for Trump, how about the Puerto Rican referendum for statehood? Puerto Ricans voted in favor of statehood in order to get out of the economic bankruptcy that they dug themselves into.

      Delete
  8. JerrikoJune 17, 2017 at 9:02 AM

    I'm not sure how much longer will the West actually paint North Korea as a chronically starving, poverty stricken state, now that there is news of untapped natural resources:

    https://qz.com/1004330/north-korea-is-sitting-on-trillions-of-dollars-on-untapped-wealth-and-its-neighbors-want-a-piece-of-it/

    Right now, China is buying up most of North Korea's mineral resources needed to build up their economy, and assuming that Trump wants to attack North Korea as well, he'd want US corporations to take charge of North Korea's mineral resource mines.

    Adding on Sarkis's comments about expatriate communities in the US, it's mainly the mega metropolis areas that are hugely populated by those expatriates. Canadian cities are also not an exception to this rule either, with Toronto hosting a crap ton of expatriates from all over the world in Canada. Even the Armenian community in Vancouver is rather small, with only 2,705 Armenians living there alone.

    ReplyDelete
  9. AnonymousJune 17, 2017 at 1:42 PM

    Azerbaijani Spy Scandal Leaves Trail Of Dead Suspects
    https://www.rferl.org/a/azerbaijani-spy-scandal-dead-suspects/28558844.html

    Interesting, and funny in its own way. These animals don't even try to pretend they are anything more than a cartoonish backwater. Pay attention though to how ready as a society they are to summarily execute people they think are traitors - these people are not ready for peace.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Arto2June 18, 2017 at 6:46 PM

      I agree Sarkis, the deep level of hatred that has been "engineered" in that primitive society over the last 25 years will not go away anytime soon. The solution would be to take all that anger and hatred and re-direct it internally. The longer the status quo lasts, the more ripe and volatile that hatred will become and will need only a spark to set it off. Who knows what really happened with those arrests and tortures/murders. Possibly some in-fighting or coup was put down. The show is just beginning and hence the real danger of war.

      Delete
    2. AnonymousJune 19, 2017 at 9:57 AM

      Yeah. I actually agree with what Arevordi wrote, but talking about peace and negotiations between Armenia and Azerbaijan is almost like talking about setting up human colonies outside our Solar System: theoretically possible but still a long way off, and there will definitely be some painful hurdles before the program is underway successfully. Again, I don't want to come off as the stereotypical asshole sitting comfortably in Los Angeles casually calling for young Armenian men to fight and risk injury / death in a war against Turks / Azeris, I'm just pointing out that all available facts suggest that another war is far more likely than any peace talks. Remember even after the major Russian victory and reassertion of dominance in the South Caucuses in August 2008, Armenia and Azerbaijan signed the Meindorf Declaration in Russia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nagorno-Karabakh_Declaration.) Azeris predictably continued to behave like 14th century Seljuks thereafter.

      Arevordi touched upon how unpredictable things can get whenever a country collapses due to economic problems or societal tension. It would be good if Azeris take out their anger on other Azeris - if they factionalize and start killing each other, it will be the best possible outcome. In fact it can be argued that a main factor behind the Armenian victory in 1994 was the fact that Azeris were not united, disorganized, there were nonstop power struggles in Baku (from 1991 to 1993 the presidency passed between Mutallibov to Mammadov, Mutallibov, Gambar, Elchibey, and finally to Aliyev,) and there were additional attempted coups, most famously from Surat Huseynov. But that was then, the power structure in Baku today is a little bit more stable and competent (relatively) and if there was a danger of a violent overthrow, they would have nothing to lose and everything to gain by starting another large-scale skirmish along the Line of Contact. To paraphrase Hermann Göring, people behave the same way everywhere: an unthinking herd which can easily be manipulated to focusing their rage/fear at an easy-to-hate foreign enemy.

      Plus the Azeris have acquired a number of weapons, those have got to be put to use somewhere. I believe their government is so corrupt that they blew the vast majority of their oil wealth; for example their air force inventory is a joke relative to the funding they have, and their 200 export-variant T-90 tanks won't really help them in mountainous warfare - but maybe it can be useful if leaders in Baku need to confront another Huseynov marching on them from the plains of Ganja. Still, there's enough weaponry to become problematic if/when Baku feels tempted to use it. They've already proven that they are primitive barbarians, they don't even give a shit about their own soldiers.

      In a sense Azerbaijan is an unstable powder keg. Unless they start killing each other, the second-best course of action I think would probably be the status quo continue, the current authorities in Baku steal/squander every remaining cent in their reserve funds, and Armenia acquires even more advanced weaponry that would convince even the most primitive savages that they are better off not fucking with us, while Russia zeros out the remaining Turkish, Israeli, Iranian, Islamist, and western corporate influence in the South Caucasus.

      Delete
  10. ArevordiJune 19, 2017 at 9:16 PM

    The shooting down of the Syrian warplane by the US military yesterday and Russia's response to it may have shed some light into the evolution of the conflict's demarcation lines. Russia's defense ministry announced: "In areas where Russian aviation is conducting combat missions in the Syrian skies, any flying ojects, including jets and unmanned aerial vehicles of the international coalition discovered west of the Euphrates River will be followed by Russian air and ground defenses as air targets" -

    Russian Missile Defense to Track US-Led Coalition Aircraft in Syria - MoD: https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201706191054760684-russia-us-syria-deconfliction-channel/

    In my opinion, this essentially means that Moscow is willing to concede territories east of the Euphrates River to Anglo-American-Jews and their Sunni/Wahhabist allies. And, as the following article shows, the situation is southern Syria suggests territories bordering Israel and Jordan may also be conceded by Moscow -

    Israel Gives Secret Aid to Syrian Rebels: https://www.wsj.com/articles/israel-gives-secret-aid-to-syrian-rebels-1497813430

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ArevordiJune 21, 2017 at 6:38 AM

      I am not convinced President Trump was involved in the decision to shoot down the Syrian warplane and the Iranian attack drone. These acts could be provocations by anti-Trump elements inside the US military hierarchy. Lavrov made some stern comments -

      US coalition still owes explanation over downing of Syrian warplane: https://www.rt.com/news/393284-demand-explanation-syria-lavrov/

      Delete
    2. AnonymousJune 22, 2017 at 12:01 AM

      It's becoming very hard to figure out what is actually happening. The indisputable, open facts generally support the theories that:




      -Trump and co. are fully intent on bring down Iran, the latest development being the more "moderate" Tillerson's call for a so-called peaceful transfer of power (which is kind of an odd thing to demand of one of the Middle East's few functioning democracies)

      https://www.rt.com/news/393293-iran-tillerson-interventionist-plan/




      -Somebody is getting really desperate and provoking Saudi Arabia to push for a war against Iran

      https://www.rt.com/news/393306-saudi-salman-named-crown-prince/



      -I don't even know what to say about relations with Russia. It almost hurts my head to try to understand how stupid and self-destructive these anti-Russian eastern European states are - are they just provoking Russia because they are just low-quality retards, or is someone high up in the western establishment giving them the green light in order to sabotage the apparent wish of the Trump regime to lessen tensions with Russia.

      https://www.rt.com/news/393327-russia-defence-ministry-plane-nato/

      https://www.rt.com/news/393051-nato-suwalki-gap-drills-baltic/



      -Also it will be interesting to see if Trump vetoes the latest anti-Russian sanctions the criminals in the US congress passed.

      Let's be honest here: compared to the US Congress, Armenian officials and oligarchs are altruistic angels. And compared to eastern Europeans (and the remotest Arab desert dwellers or African jungle tribes,) Armenian society is politically mature.

      Delete
    3. JerrikoJune 22, 2017 at 6:32 AM

      Those Eastern European nations are Russophobic even before the Romanov dynasty even rose to prominence. It is more of a culture clash, but with religion mixed into it. The Poles were the only nation to occupy Moscow for two years, during the Times of Troubles, and there has been bad blood ever since. I wouldn't be surprised if it was the Vatican that is pushing Russophobia in addition to Jewish neoconservatives.

      Delete
  11. AnonymousJune 20, 2017 at 3:37 AM

    There's a lot going on that I'm not going to bother commenting on. I'll just leave this here instead...

    Karen Karapetyan: "The tourists should not start getting to know Armenia with unshaved taxi drivers wearing slippers, who demand a fare, which is thrice expensive."

    Minister: Competition for Yerevan-Zvartnots airport bus route to be announced in fall
    https://news.am/eng/news/395891.html

    BTW the taxi industry everywhere is a cancer. It's a cross between a medieval guild and a 1900s mafia. Taxi drivers tend to be the most unethical, greedy, gypsy-like people. Your average cheap Jew, Armenian, Indian, or you average cut-throat corporate scumbag has nothing on the greediness and lust for profit that the average taxi driver has. I'm glad the Internet has given rise to ride-sharing apps that are breaking these extortionist, monopolistic entities. No one apart from Azeris, Turks, and Jews badmouths the Armenian state as badly as your average Yerevan taxi driver.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. aaaJune 20, 2017 at 4:57 PM

      I ought to drop my 5 cents worth of comments, on taxi drivers, and it is out of alignment with the general impression .It is unusually different. This is a perception nurtured on personal experience. I have been unctuously lucky with taxi drivers in Yerevan, save for one suspicious individual . Upon arrival at Zvarnotz I have always encountered clean cut , well attired drivers, off their marks to offer you a drive; I found out at Zvarnotz that the taxi fare depended on the type of machine they were driving. A mercedes 4x4 will ask 20Euros to take you to the hotel, a more modest level vehicle 10 Euros. The average fare , with an average model 5 Euros. At the Metropol Hotel where our party stayed we had to hail taxis on average 5 times a day. As I said, except for one individual who grumbled that he had no change, all of the other taxi drivers gave us zero problems, and I can only be complimentary of them. We can not recall a poorly dressed driver, or an unsavory one, a dirty taxi, etc. . Maybe we were egregiously lucky.

      Delete
  12. մարJune 21, 2017 at 8:19 AM

    Former US marine Ken O'Keefe was recently back on PressTv. Notice how he does not beat around the bush and immediately goes to source of the problem in both these interviews. Short and simple. RT, take notes! This is how it's done, not giving in to every single (((terrorist))) incident in Europe and headlining them as they are, what the West intends them to be, and only blaming 'Muhrica' for the crisis in the ME.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7q4UY1HTqGo
    ^ US shoots down Syrian fighter jet over Raqqah
    &
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNJzc-Fy7Ew
    ^ Analysis: Iran’s missile strikes on Daesh Takfiri terrorists

    @ Arevordi
    'Moscow is willing to concede territories east of the Euphrates River to Anglo-American-Jews and their Sunni/Wahhabist allies'

    IF Russia is prepared for this before going public via RT or whatever, specifically doing segments on the Yinon Plan, PNAC's Clean Break Strategy, also reminding the dumb American cattle of the 1967 Liberty, operation susannah/the lavon affair, operation Ajax, King David Hotel bombing, 911 (dancing israelis, George Washington bridge van full of explosives, israeli art students) followed by Sharon's Infamous Comment "We Control America" in October 2001, Bibi's "9/11 Was Good For Israel" and finally operation talpiot.. then I'm sorry to say but Russia's brilliance on the geopolitical chessboard will begin to seem staged to some. There is so much ammunition available on Israel's hand in all of this, it's beyond delusional at this point to keep avoiding. The blame is not entirely on Russia, I also find it dubious how Iraqi, Syrian, Lebanese, and Iranian English speaking media is not day and night beating these events and facts into the public's brains. Besides Russia, the Arabs and Persians should be also day and night reciting Talmud passages and racist quotes from recent famous Orthodox Rabbis. What do they have to lose at this point? Clearly US, Saudi, Turkish, and ISRAELI aggression is not going to die down.. Have they not figured it out by now? How is Russia prepared to settle for a Salafist state in the Levant before at least making it public that this was preplanned all along by the House of Saud, Israelis, and CIA immediately after the IDF's defeat in the summer of 2006.

    On a side note, this is a decent English speaking channel from Australia for Syrian war and map updates:

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7Ul2ZW9Vagv1b9l8goUwrw
    ^
    OZ Analysis

    Finally, great piece as usual.. Took me some days to finish
    http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2017/06/17/525594/Karabakh-clashes-Armenia-Azerbaijan
    ^ 3 Armenian soldiers killed in fresh clashes in Karabakh, last week

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ParmenionJune 26, 2017 at 9:56 PM

      On the Syrian conflict scenario I find it highly dubitable if Russia has agreed to keep looking the other way ( It might , why not ?) while the Jewish Amerika carves a slice of territory east of the Euphrates. First and foremost Russia can not decide on Syrias behalf in so far territorial what the "new geographycal demarcations are concerned. I also find it highly dubitable if Syria and Iran and their proxies would or would have agreed to such a treasonous and outrageous political skulduggery of a plan, which is nothing less than recognizing the hegemony of Jewish America in the region. Assad and Syria are committed to unifying the lost territories, temporarily held under Jewish Americas sway. Whether Assad can achieve the grand objective remains to be seen. However sight should not be lost to the wider stretch of this conflict. Is Syria the ultimate goal, or is Syria just a stepping stone toward the onslaught agains Iran and further toward the Caucasus thus hitting Russia's underbelly in that region . At the moment in spite of seemingly sweeping SAA advances and driving Jewish America proxies into a strait situation on the ground, these advances have not prevented the Jewish state and America for striking at the Syrian on the ground from the air. To speak of an impending end to this conflict is more than premature. it is clear the Russia is not strong enough to deter the Jewish state badgering and bombing of Syria at will, and also the biggest Jewish states proxy : America. The political package is riddled with enigmas. It only serves to as severance Dr Assads claim that the war can end if Jewish America proxy forces fighting the SAA are dealt with mortal blows and obliterated from the landscape. The current status of open ended fighting , with open ended end, suits and supports the Jewish Americans geopolitical goal to the hilt. Nothing more fits the strategy of Jewish America tha custom made "wars" In the entire entire region for as long as there is life on earth.

      Delete
    2. մարJune 28, 2017 at 2:27 AM

      The longer Russia keeps quite about the tribes decades long intentions, preplanning, and open source documenting.. then the more it begins to seem as though they were 'in on' slowly bleeding Syria and just there to preserve their ports & test their new equipment/toys. Just as you stated, (((the problem & it's proxies))) is NEVER going to go away. If they don't directly attack/invade, then they will continue to keep dumping countless amounts of savages from all corners of the world into the region.. they have endless supply of notes they print out of thin air. One way or another "death by a thousand cuts - Arevordi" they will continue emptying out Syria.

      We live in the Age of Aquarius, age of information.. This is an information warfare to a degree, and the West is beyond shameless presenting outright lies as facts. When the hell are RT (and PressTv) going to quit jumping on board with nonsense false flag scripted shooting stories, and begin presenting hard evidence and setting the bar (narrative) themselves. How much longer ignore the elephant in the room September 11th attacks? That's a GOLD MINE, rt! Notice whenever they have a Ken O'keefe on crosstalk or other segments, the views skyrocket.

      How To Market Knowledge Of Jewish Power To Ordinary People, Brendon O'Connell
      ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1cbQU6xd5k

      Delete
  13. JerrikoJune 21, 2017 at 9:06 AM

    Speaking of America, I have mixed reactions about this moron who had the tenacity to travel into a country that openly hates their guts:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2017/06/19/otto-warmbier-dies-days-after-release-from-north-korean-detainment/?utm_term=.68fb7d137ba6

    Isn't it ironic that the neo-Trotskyite social justice warriors in this case are defending an openly batshit Songun-dominated Stalinist Nork regime only because of the poor bastard's white skin? Another interesting tidbit is that the guy who died had a connection to various Jewish communities in Israel.

    http://www.news965.com/news/local/watch-whiteness-work-teen-magazine-defends-north-korea-after-warmbier-death/DEUd1HQovSrxUd9VHMCgtN/

    https://www.thejc.com/news/world/comatose-student-released-by-north-korea-was-beloved-member-of-hillel-1.440190

    Perhaps Trump should trade the special snowflakes in the US for the Nork political prisoners held by Kim Jong Un's regime. I'm sure the starving deplorable skeletons would be more productive than the snowflakes who LARP everytime the police or Trump supporters give them a real beatdown.

    ReplyDelete
  14. AnonymousJune 24, 2017 at 2:51 AM

    Boris Johnson might replace Theresa May as UK Prime Minister. I don't really care, but an article mentioned Johnson has some Turkish background and so I looked into it. I was not aware of Ali Kemal, his story was interesting. He was a liberal Turk, opposed the Armenian Genocide, and after the war he was abducted to be taken to court on treason charges. From the "Death" section of the Wikipedia entry:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Kemal

    On 4 November 1922, Kemal was kidnapped from a barber shop at Tokatliyan Hotel in Istanbul, and was carried to the Asiatic side of the city by a motor boat en route to Ankara for a trial on charges of treason. On 6 November 1922, the party was intercepted at İzmit by General Nureddin Pasha, then the Commander of the First Army which was aligned with Mustafa Kemal Pasha. Kemal was attacked and lynched by a mob set up by the General with sticks, stones and knives, and hanged from a tree. His head was smashed by cudgels and he was stoned to death. As described by Nureddin personally to Dr. Riza Nur, who with Ismet Inönü was on his way to Lausanne to negotiate peace with the Allies, "his blood-covered body was subsequently hanged with an epitaph across his chest which read, "Artun Kemal"". This bestowal of a fictitious Armenian name administered a final indignity to the victim.



    There are lots of lessons to be drawn from this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JerrikoJune 25, 2017 at 7:50 AM

      The only one who benefited from the snap election which ended in disaster was Corbyn and the Labour Party, which had recently acquired some significant communist influences. What was supposed to be a win for the Conservative Party with a clear goal of forming a majority government ended with the Conservatives having a Minority government instead (they opted to make a coalition with the other minor party from Northern Ireland, the DUP).

      European politics is fucked beyond repair, I don't know if I want to follow it or not, except for Balkan politics.

      About Ali Kemal, I guess he's one of those few dissidents who opposed the massacre of Armenians and paid for it with his life.

      Delete
  15. Ռազմիկ ԱրտաշեսJune 26, 2017 at 1:55 AM

    Սարդարապատից Կարս․ հայկական բանակը 1918-1920 թվականներին
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjGksmPI1V4

    Here are my comments (I suggest you read them after watching):

    1) Artsrun's military analysis of the situation in 1918-1920 was eye opening. We rarely get to hear such critical approaches to the situation in Armenia during those years, most of the comments out there are subjective and filled with emotions. His analysis of the 1918 situation shows the potential Armenians can hold if they are properly disciplined and determined (which was the case mostly during May-June 1918).

    2) The part of the British military aid to Armenia was quite a surprise to me, especially the numbers he gave. I for one had never heard of such a thing, perhaps Arevordi or Zoravar have. Yet here too, despite the good-willingness of the British, I find that due to the distance between Armenia and Britain, that aid came very late, as he noted (August 1920 when Armenia was already fighting on all fronts). In the end, the Armenian government did not even think of maybe considering aid with the Bolsheviks (as much I hate them, but I'm trying to be realistic)

    3) Note how the head reporter (T. Hakobyan) is always trying to push forward his pro-western agenda, especially at the end.

    4) Georgians yet again acted hostile towards us in 1918-1920. Throughout their last two thousand year history Georgians and Armenians have cooperated against foreign invaders, yet it was always ARMENIANS sending aid/reinforcements to Georgians and rarely the reverse.

    In conclusion, I reiterate was Artsrun says at the end. The reason we lost the First Republic was due to our disorganized state and mismanagement of our forces. I add that our political illiteracy contributed to its downfall (relying solely on faraway Britain, despite its supposed good-willingness) instead of our closer neighbors.

    ReplyDelete
  16. AnonymousJune 26, 2017 at 12:36 PM

    Speaking of "azeris aren't ready for peace" and the pressing need for Armenia to come to the negotiating table from a position of strength provided by a strong military...

    Պատասխան Հարված
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgifDOrd_F8

    Video summary and translation from https://www.reddit.com/r/armenia/comments/6jfvk9/translated_video_shows_a_mortar_action_between/

    The video you're seeing shows the Azeri soldiers firing towards Artsakh positions, then the Armenian retaliatory response.

    0:15 - Two Azeri soldiers firing mortar towards Artsakh.

    0:52 - zoomed in

    1:04 - they leave the position to observe the Armenian lines.

    The author criticizes international observes for not directly calling out Azerbaijan for peace violations.

    1:23 - Armenians respond with a mortar fire. They are targeting the shelters where the Azeri soldiers hide.

    2:23 - mortars hit the right side too

    3:01 - Another direct hit inside the Azeri trenches. When you see a persistent smoke that stretches with a straight line, that means the mortar hit inside the corridors.

    The author acknowledges that very recently there was one call by the international community that was directed specifically towards Azeribaijan, who bragged about using Spike system. There was another video few weeks ago showing how Armenians responded to that attack and destroyed an Azeri OCA unit.

    Armenian units have recently begun to respond more harshly to ceasefire violations if they believe Azeris are planning attacks.

    4:55 - the same Azeri positions recorded from behind, from another angle. A truck approaches [presumably] to evacuate the soldiers.

    5:13 - Multiple Armenian mortars hit the truck. (how do they hit so precisely with mortar?)

    5:48 - zoomed in. Armenian mortar hits the spot that Azeris were using to launch mortar attacks.

    6:23 - From another angle.

    6:46 - another direct hit inside the positions.

    7:31 - different incident. Azeri soldiers (lower right) firing towards Armenian positions (left)

    7:43 to 8:20 - Multiple different angles. The area where the fire came from was hit by Armenian mortars.

    8:29 - Footage shows how an Armenian sniper shoots and destroys an Azeri camera that monitored the borders. (no-scoped bro?)

    ReplyDelete
  17. LGJune 27, 2017 at 5:31 PM

    Little by little the deep state is conditioning the foreign policy crowd to accept and endorse the partitioning of Syria.

    http://nationalinterest.org/feature/its-time-break-syria-21308

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. մարJune 28, 2017 at 2:43 AM

      ATTACKING SYRIA - How Does Israel Get Away With it? - OPERATION TALPIOT
      ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uqIXBtQJnU

      Russia can throw the entire northwest into disarray by releasing a professional documentary about Mossad, the lobby, & 911. Iranians can quit marching and yelling deaths to big and little satan, and actually work on documenting and releasing projects such as the Liberty attack, obviously 911, and Yinon Plan/A clean break for Syria & Iraq. it's beyond mind boggling that they don't.

      I bet they'll sit around on RT's crosstalk again soon on the subject of Partitioning Syria, baffle about Muhrica's uninvited presence in Syria, distinguishing rebels, 'evil empire', and if we're lucky then one of the guests might utter "Israel" and get ignored by the rest of the crew.

      I don't know, I hope I'm wrong. In the end, we are not there behind closed doors.

      Delete
  18. AnonymousJune 28, 2017 at 2:29 AM

    Armenian activist sentenced to 3.5 years over charges of participation in mass riot
    https://news.am/eng/news/397375.html

    Look at this disgusting animal. What are the chances that he doesnt have a massive amount of Jewish and/or Turkish genes in him. Democracy, human rights, and the coddling of criminals and subversives is a sickening spectacle, labor camps and the KGB -perhaps even psycho surgery- needed to exist because of "people" like this.

    Seriously, behold the "quality" of our western-backed ultranationalist warriors. Can anyone imagine any scenario where these people take over the country and succeed against the Turks?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Ռազմիկ ԱրտաշեսJune 29, 2017 at 10:10 AM

    I finally had the time to write on the following subject. It is an attempt at critically looking at the events in Armenia during the 5th century. Any comments or criticisms are welcome:

    Differentiating Military Victory
    from Immoral Defeat: A critical analysis of the events of the Vardanantz war


    http://haiknahapet.blogspot.com/2017/06/differentiating-military-victory-from.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ArevordiJuly 4, 2017 at 5:57 AM

      I totally agree with the general spirit of your work. Yes, ideally, I would like to see a warrior spirit among Armenians. But, there is another aspect to this discussion that I want to address:

      The defeatist Armenian mindset some of us always complain about actually has a constructive purpose. In my opinion, the attitude in question is a survival strategy, and it is a natural by-product of political circumstances prevalent in the Armenian Highlands during much of the previous two thousand years.

      When a group of people collectively (often subconsciously) realize that they are vulnerable to their larger and more powerful neighbors, they tend to act less aggressive and more resourceful intellectually and culturally. Such a group of people will instead seek ways to somehow present their weaknesses and defeats as strengths and victories. This is a collective psychological process (occurring mostly in a subconscious or spiritual level) and it is fundamentally a survival strategy. And this is what I call "bio-politics" - the biological/genetic underpinnings of politics.

      Nevertheless, sometimes the strategy in question does not work, in which case a nation goes extinct. Sometimes it works, which is why we are here today.

      Let me put it another way: Had we Armenians been a warlike society in a fucked-up place like Anatolia, essentially an intersection that saw wave-after-wave of powerful empires come through, we would have been eradicated a long time ago. Instead of dying by the sword, our mindsets/attitudes readjusted to the reality of our situation and we collectively/subconsciously figured out a way to turn defeat into a moral or spiritual victory.

      Jews used this survival strategy for hundreds of years as well, until they finally got their "promise land" in the aftermath of the Second World War.

      You clearly see this survival strategy in today's Armenian society: Some of us instinctually want Armenia to have better relations with Russia to survive. Some of us instinctually want Armenia to have better relations with the West to survive. Those who think Armenia does not need Russia or the West to survive in the south Caucasus are the crazy ones; and it's true.

      Also, societies that are aggressive and warlike (like Russians and Americans in particular) tend to have large numbers of laborers, blue collar workers and people who work the land. These kinds of people provide their governments a steady supply of soldiers who are aggressive yet incapable of critical thinking. Societies that have concluded for one reason or another that aggressive/warlike behavior is not for them tend to have large numbers of people who seek work in higher professions and speak about the importance of justice and international law. Armenians tend to belong to the ladder group.

      In short: I don't think we Armenians are yet ready nor can we afford to have the kind of warrior mentality you speak about, at least not for the foreseeable future. We instead need to devise a better/clever strategy for our homeland's survival in a hostile environment.

      PS: Vasak Syuni was a true Armenian patriot and a great leader. The Mamikonians were pushing a Roman (Western) agenda inside Armenia. They even resided in Roman territory. Vasak Syuni knew the importance of maintaining good relations with Persia (today's Russia). Had I been alive in 451 AD I would have wholeheartedly supported Vasak Syuni's politics. But fate would have it that in 650 AD (when Persia converted to Islam without a fight) the Mamikonian effort two hundred years earlier finally bore fruit. No body could have predicted the events of 650 AD in 451 AD. I wrote about this topic in a previous blog commentary titled Armenia stuck between Rome and Persia.

      Delete
  20. ArevordiJuly 2, 2017 at 6:55 AM

    Regarding Russia, Syria and Jews:

    I strongly disagree with the opinions some of you have expressed here. Whether you guys want to admit it to yourselves or not, they (Anglo-American-Jews and their Sunni/Wahhabi allies) managed to break Syria from within. With all of Syria at the risk of falling to Western-backed Wahhabists by 2015, Russia jumped into the bloody mess essentially to stop an even worst geopolitical disaster from developing, one that was virtually on its doorstep. Now, Russians have a thoroughly broken country on their hands and they have to figure out what best to do with it.

    So, what to do? Fight an all out war, spill more blood and risk a world war simply to keep the former borders of Syria whole? Or, accept losses, face reality, be pragmatic, think forward, and try to reach some kind of a settlement?

    The Russian nation has already paid dearly for its geostrategic foresight and courage in Syria; I would even say more so than Iran.

    War is not a zero sum game. You guys need to stop being maximalistic, hateful and emotional. Such irrational approaches in politics can be very destructive. Just accept the fact that Bashar Assad's enemies, both internal and external, were able to thoroughly break the country - essentially because Bashar Assad's family (just like the Husseins and Qaddafies) were notoriously bad leaders. Consequently, Syria today is so badly damaged that it simply cannot be kept together despite yours or anyone else's wishes. After what has happened in Syria, if any one of you here still think Syria can still be kept together, you must be delusional.

    Bashar Assad's government is incapable of securing all of Syria's borders and rebuilding the historic damage Syria has suffered. If, as some of you have suggested, Iran wants Syria's borders to remain unchanged, they should do more of the ground fighting. But, Iran won't do that. Other than doing its best to preserve what Damascus is capable of holding on to, Tehran will not sacrifice too much for any ambitious projects in Syria. Tehran knows that a new front can be opened directly against it at any moment. Tehran will therefore concentrate it resources on protecting the Iranian mainland.

    If Bashar Assad is incapable of keeping Syria whole and Tehran is unwilling, it is therefore absurd to expect Russians to wage a major war for Syria's territorial integrity.

    Therefore, Russia and Iran will not risk a major war in Syria (which could ignite a world war) merely to keep the country together. Instead, both Moscow and Tehran will do their best to salvage what they can in the country. This is what we are in fact seeing Bashar Assad and his Russian and Iranian allies doing recently. Therefore, I suggest you guys disregard some of the tough rhetoric coming out of Damascus. The best thing to do with Syria at this point is to stop the bloodshed and federalize or partition the country. The best thing to do at this point is to establish a powerful Russian-Iranian backed Alawite region. Yes, the budding Iranian Arc will suffer a setback. However, Iran, Syria's Alawites, Iraq's PMF and Lebanon's Hezbollah will continue yielding a lot of power throughout the region.

    In other words, accept your loses and put an effort in enforcing and expanding as much as you can what you have managed to preserve.

    The suggestion by some that Russia might have colluded with Anglo-Ameican-Jews to break-up Syria is just stupid. I suggest you think of it this way instead: Had Russia not gotten militarily involved in late 2015, all of Syria would have been turned into another Libya, Bashar Assad would most probably have been killed and Syria's Alawites and Christians would most probably have been subjected to a genocide.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ArevordiJuly 2, 2017 at 7:09 AM

      The obsessive forms of antisemitism some of you express here is essentially making you wish for a world war - merely because you don't like the idea of Russians and Anglo-American-Jews partitioning a country that has already been thoroughly destroyed from within?

      I suggest we face reality, accept the losses and hope that Syria's allies in Moscow and Tehran are able to salvage what remains of the country.

      I don't like it when people formulate political opinions based purely on personal biases, wishful thinking, anger, racism, emotions or a narrow understanding of the world. War is not a street fight or a family dispute. Faulty decisions and aggressive mentalities can cause historic calamities like World War One and World War Two. In fact, the risks for mankind are worst today due to advanced military technology and nuclear weapons. Being that Russia, the largest country in the world, does not have natural barriers, it will go out of its way to prevent major wars from igniting on or near its borders. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of the West. This is why Russians tend to be overly cautious in geopolitics, whereas Westerners are often risk takers. This is why I say Russians play chess, Americans play poker.

      Allow me to also say this: Every major power on earth - and Israel is no exception - has its "Yinon" plan. It's not like some of you guys here have discovered the Holy Grail of geopolitics, with which you think you will finally slay the evil dragon.

      It would be utterly stupid of RT (or PressTV) to concentrate on such geostragetic agendas ultimately because, if it's simply a matter of using the news media to "awaken" the sheeple, the Anglo-American-Jewish news media has the most powerful tools to awaken the sheeple with. They can be more effective in promoting their narrative to the stupid masses around the world. Besides, a vast majority of people around the world would not understand serious geostrategic matters anyway.

      Western powers, Russia, China, Iran, Turkey, etc., have geopolitical agendas of their own, agendas that are no less ambitious or audacious as Israel's. Moreover, we don't know if the plan in question is actually being pursued by Tel Aviv to its full extent. That said, we must realize that it's totally logical for Tel Aviv to do all it can to weaken/undermine neighboring states that are opposed to it. Such an approach to solving regional problems is actually commendable. Would we not want Armenia to do the same, that is if it could?

      In the big picture, the main problem in the Middle East is the inability of Arabs to present a viable front against Jews. The Arab plight is essentially due to Arab incompetence.

      I think some of you guys are really getting carried away with your hate of Jews. Hate is a poison that only harms the hater. Hate also stops you from looking at the world around you rationally. When it comes to Turks and Jews, instead of hating, simply see them as your enemies/opponents. I would actually want you to look at Turks and Jews as opponents that you can learn from.

      Delete
    2. ArevordiJuly 2, 2017 at 7:16 AM

      I don't like it when criticism of Jews (while justifiable and necessary) morphs into racism, hate and hysteria.

      The reality is that Jews are a global power today - I would say on par with Anglo-Americans, Russians, Germans, Chinese, Japanese, etc. Why do we Armenians therefore insist on treating them merely as an ethnic/religious minority with supernatural abilities, or a group that for some reason is not allowed to look after its interests?

      Jews are major geopolitical players in the world today and they have interests that they cleverly pursue. Jews are also a divided people, just as much as any other nationality.

      For example: There are Jews that are genuinely friendly towards Russia and there are Jews that are vehemently hostile towards Russia. Being that Jews wield a lot of power, and being that they are not politically monolithic, the Kremlin will do its best to strive for normal relations with Jews and Israel. Why would Kremlin officials want to unnecessarily turn all Jews (who as we know yield so much power in this world) against Russia by adopting a narrow/rigid antisemitic path?

      Ask yourselves: How well did the Russian Czar's persecutions of Jews work out? How well did Nazi Germany's persecution of Jews work out? Why do you guys want Russia today to repeat such mistakes?

      It should also be said that in recent decades Kremlin officials have been able to establish close ties with Israel because hundreds-of-thousands of Russian-Jews (mostly with high levels of Soviet education) moved there after the Soviet Union's collapse. Anyone that knows anything about Russian-Jews know that they are much more Russian than Jewish. There are of course exceptions to this rule but generally speaking Russian-Jews in Israel can be assets for the Kremlin.

      Kremlin officials realize the real problem they have with Jews is the Anglo-American variant.

      Taking all of the above into consideration, the Kremlin will carefully maintain and nurture its relationship with Jews/Israel. While Russians will not engage in traditional antisemitic rhetoric, they will engage in close relations with anti-Israel entities like Iran and Hezbollah. In other words, Kremlin officials will carefully engage in multi-vectored diplomacy and statecraft.

      Finally, let's accept the fact that Jews are not going to disappear from the face of the earth. Resisting them or fighting them has to therefore take on different, more unconventional forms. I have said this before and I'll say it again, the best way to defeat Jewish parasite is to defeat its Anglo-American host.

      Delete
    3. SenegaJuly 2, 2017 at 8:47 AM

      The power of international Jewry over extends any stretch of imagination. To combat forces inimical to one's interests, the forces have to be identified and tagged. One can not engage in combat or challenges against an abstraction mode. The only force that was capable to put a stop, albeit temporarily, to international Jewry in time and space were the NS. Hatred is not invoked in combatting this international pestilence. It is awareness of who the enemy is and the degree of power and control it carries with it. International Jewry runs this planet, controlling every facet and level of human endeavor in every corner of the planet where there is a center of gravity. The whole of the so called west thinks and is a Jewish clone. Jews are loved in every western nation and have armies of apologists , from intellectuals ( academia is 100 % Jewish inseminated in thoughts , ideologyand processes) Antisemitism is a myth, a toxic anthrax to befuddle the brain and render the opponent in total impotence. If it were not the chosenites in control, some other force would be. The only force that has a chance of combatting international Jewry is nationalism, racial nationalism. That is exactly why Nationalism is excoriated and in the process of being dissolved through the method of racial panmixia. Genocide is an international tool to do away with nationalism . We are witnessing the early beginnings of the application of this demonic tool with the contemporary so called migrant crisis, or refugee crisis, the initial storm blows to eradicate nations and dissolve national genetic pools.

      Delete
    4. AnonymousJuly 2, 2017 at 2:40 PM

      Interesting point about Russian Jews in Israel, Arevordi. Back in UCLA I took a Jewish history course, and my professor was an Israeli. He was as decent a person you could expect in modern academia. He mentioned a few interesting points about Israel. On the very first day of class he asked "what does it take to establish a new nation" and I responded, thinking of Mustafa Kemal in Turkey, an invented language and an invented history. At some point down the semester he brought up the large scale immigration of Jews from the Soviet Union. Many people, myself included, tended to look at Jews as one solid block, but he pointed out a lot of tension existed between Jews from Russia and Jews from western Europe. A lot of the Russian Jews saw themselves as coming from the high culture of the Soviet Union (the great musical kompositors, the world-leading scientific achievements in areas like space, the generally modernized way of thinking, the relatively highly educated population, etc.) These Jews tended to look down on Israelis, particularly the Haredi fanatics, as primitive lowlifes. Some Russian Jews went back to Russia. Russian Jews in Israel in many ways are slow to assimilate, for example Russian is pretty much the only European language that the immigrants to Israel did not give up in favor of Hebrew (and English because of America and its general international prominence.)

      So yes, it's true that Russian Jews can be dangerous, such as the old Bolsheviks, the recent oligarchs like Berezovsky and Guzinsky, would-be czars like Khodorkovsky, and disgusting freakshows like homosexual Masha Gessen or "journalist" Julia Ioffe. But there are several layers, like you said Russia can exploit the Russian Jews in Israel. A lot of this seems more metaphysical than can easily be described, that community in Israel is a tool or opportunity that can be utilized by Russia if Russia is spiritually strong enough and leaders in the Kremlin can maintain sanity, integrity, inner strength and resist being entrapped or corrupted in closely dealing with a historically dangerous and parasitic entity. It can be thought of as a new chapter in epic dealings between the what we would call Orthodox Christian world and Jewry. The western world, namely Catholics and Protestants, Germanics, Anglos, etc. have either always been corrupt, or have become corrupted over the centuries and are now at the mercy of the Jews - an important case study in the dangers this community can pose to weak / unfit nations attempting to deal with it.

      The Israeli professor said one other interesting thing, though. The historic trend for diaspora Jews is that first generation immigrants tend to form their own sub-communities. The second-generation and beyond tend to assimilate into the larger group.

      Delete
    5. AnonymousJuly 2, 2017 at 3:03 PM

      I agree that RT should be beyond criticism. Despite the overwhelming power of the western media establishment, RT is still doing an amazing job of presenting some forbidden facts to whatever segment of the English-speaking audience that is willing to listen. It's not for nothing that the worst elements within the western establishment always target RT - that alone is proof that RT is doing many things right. Again, I'm proud Margarita Simonyan is at the top of this, and that Amenians like Gayane Chichakyan play an important role. RT even managed to find Murad Gazdiyev, and Azeri whose work I enjoy very much. Their headline news is pretty much the best. There is absolutely nothing that comes close in the west, not in the mainstream and not in the alternatives (including inforwars and breitbart and the many racist websites that are popular right now.) Several news stories about important hotspots, mainly Syria and Israel, are basically only reported in English by RT, PressTV, a handful of translations from Arab channels, and English-language content from Israeli and Jewish media.

      This may or may not actually be relevant, but between the "right-wing" and "left-wing" news audience in the west, RT is probably correct in trying to gain shares in the left-wing. People who get their worldview from fox news, breitbart, and inforwars are in all honesty the stupidest and most cowardly segment of westerners. They are also largely geriatrics who will be dead sooner than later, the average fox news viewer is a 68 year old bloodthirsty white evangelical piece of shit. If RT can reach demographics like young Corbyn voters or non-racist BDS supporters, it will probably make the biggest impact.

      It would accomplish nothing, and destroy everything, for RT to destroy its own credibility by transforming itself to a racist hotbed, to attack Jews on racist grounds instead of attacking Israel on legitimate violations of international law, and/or to give a extreme fringe lunatics an outlet to spew nonsense. There are plenty of fringe sites, youtube channels, and racist websites for these people. Some people seem incapable of grasping that becoming a transparent propaganda outlet is not a viable strategy for gaining a respectable audience while competing with the western mainstream media - look at the quality of the audience that openly racist websites attract, RT and Russia frankly are better off without the support of these trailer park nazi trash; those types are better off getting their information from Ukrainian media anyway.

      Also, its good to see someone as intelligent as Chris Hedges get a show on RT. Peter Lavelle remains my favorite.

      Delete
    6. AnonymousJuly 2, 2017 at 5:52 PM

      Another factor to consider when thinking about Russia and the Jews. For most of modern history, the existential threat to Russia has come from western, white, European / American, (purportedly) Christian powers. Turkic and other Muslim peoples like Chechens occasionally revolt, but Russia has shown that it can easily deal with them even under the worst circumstances. And none of the western-wannabe Christian nations traditionally dominated by Russia, including the Baltics, Poland, the former Czeckoslovakia, Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria, or pathetic little Georgia are even remotely competent to pose a military threat to Russia. Instead Russia has since the 1700s been targeted for exterminationist invasions by Sweden, then France, and then Germany twice. Anglo-American forces were forced to settle with merely trying to subvert Russia from afar, due to the need to keep Russia afloat as a check against their continental rivals in France and Germany, and later due to fear of the Red Army and Russia's nuclear power. These western powers were in a sense trying to repeat the accomplishments of their bandit ancestors and sack Byzantium once again.

      Now if we accept the premise that the Jews are the main reason why ethnic westerners are becoming a minority in their own countries, if we accept that the reason that westerners have such low birthrates, such high instances of interracialism, and now are having millions of migrants brought in to outright replace them is mainly because of the Jews, then I would argue that Jews controlling the west is the best possible scenario for Russia. Think about it this way: if the US is majority Mexican, Germany and various other European nations are majority a mix of various types of Muslims, these nations will never again be able to pose the kind of threat to Russia that they posed when they were relatively healthy, monoethnic societies. The more feminized, homosexualized, drugged out, GMO-ed, obese, unhealthy, racially mixed,and drowning in pornography western nations are, the less risk they will pose to Russia. Is the Europe of today, or the Europe of thirty years from now really going to be able to put together a new Grand Armee or new Wehrmacht? Why should Russia interrupt its western enemy as it makes the greatest of all historical mistakes? Or to put it another why, is not the enemy (the Jews) of my enemy (the west) my friend (Russia's?)

      Lots of westerners look at Russia with a childish "they need to save the west because that's what would happen if geopolitics was like a Disney movie" view. It is probably the best course that Russian officials smartly criticize Israeli terrorism and the subversive activities of select anti-Russia Jews like Soros or Khodorkovsky wherever these things conflict with Russian national interests, but at the same time there is no need to support "nationalists" in the west who would sooner tattoo swastikas on themselves while trying to sweep the killing of twenty million Soviets during the Nazi invasion under the rug.


      If the EU before it collapses can successfully settle large numbers of incompatible Islamic migrants into the most anti-Russian countries eastern Europe, then its brief existence might well prove to be the best thing to ever happen in terms of securing the Russian state by weakening its main rivals. So in that sense: good luck Jews!

      Delete
    7. ArevordiJuly 2, 2017 at 11:48 PM

      Very, very well said on all accounts, Sarkis. Let me just add here that I have mingled and worked with Jews (all kinds) for most of my life. The divisions (political and cultural) and inter-ethnic hate they have inside their communities (religious Jew vs. secular Jew, conservative Jew vs. liberal Jew, Russian Jew vs. American Jew, Ashkenazi Jew vs. Sephardic Jew, etc.) are deeper and more virulent that anything seen inside the Armenian community. Moreover, intellectually Jews are not any better than us Armenians. I would even say pound-for-pound Armenians are smarter and more talented than Jews. However, the distinct advantage they have over us is refinement. They are culturally refined, whereas Armenians, regardless of wealth or education, tend to be like either backward chobans or shrewd merchants. Also, unlike us Armenians, Jews tend to be politically aware and active.

      But the single greatest advantage Jews have over non-Jews is their elite - the very large numbers of highly educated, immensely wealthy and very influential individuals/families based in the Western world.

      Their elite is ethnocentric, cultured, farsighted and they keep things orderly inside the Jewish world. The same elite is also the one that is constantly seeking ways to penetrate economic systems and governments around the world. It's a survival method meant to preserve their wealth and power, as well as their existence as a national/religious group. Historic events in Europe during the past two hundred years have basically fine-tuned the abilities of the Jewish elite. Moreover, the late 19th and early 20th century persecution of Jews, first by Russian Czars then by German Nazis, while understandable, only made the situation worst. Now, their elite controls more in the western world than ever before. The rise of Anglo-American power around the world after Napoleon's defeat in 1815 has made the situation worst because organized Jewry (which is by nature parasitical) has found Anglo-Americans to be the ultimate host.

      In any case, like us Armenians, Jews wont be going anywhere. They are in fact at the pinnacle of their power.

      Yes, organized Jewry does pose a danger to us Armenians as well as to our allies in Russia and in Iran. Yes, organized Jewry will eventually go into decline. Their decline will come about faster once the Anglo-American world goes into decline. It's happening. Some intelligent Jews are seeing the writing on the wall -

      Israel's worst existential threat - and it is not a nuclear Iran: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/18516

      However, traditional forms of antisemitism will not remedy the problem. History teaches as that the more you push them, they more resurgent they become. A better way needs to be devised to defeat them. Their history (biblical texts) suggests that the best way to defeat Jews is to simply leave them alone. But how can you leave them alone when they are everywhere and they are politically active. It's an age long dilemma.

      PS: I have very mixed feelings about the current demographic/cultural situation in Europe and North America. I have great admiration for classical western/European civilization and Germanic peoples. I would therefore like to see Europe revived, at least culturally. But, as you pointed out, Western nations have posed a serious danger to nations and cultures around the world for a long time now and they have to be stopped at some point. So, how do you defeat Western powers without further damaging western/European civilization? Yet another dilemma, in my opinion. But there may be hope as Russia has within its national body the potential to be the bearer classical western/European civilization.

      Delete
    8. AnonymousJuly 3, 2017 at 11:45 AM

      Thanks Arevordi. I could tell from your posts above that you are getting frustrated with the emotional and shallow arguments being posted here. To be honest I starting skipping some of the comments because reading "Russia isn't doing enough to battle the Jews and/or destroy all rivals in Syria" over and over is a waste of time.

      You know the industry I am trying to start a career in, so you can imagine the number of Jews I have come across. I agree with your assessments, common Jews find grounds to despise each other that other races would never bother with. And I actually have the same opinion that Armenians are pound for pound smarter and more talented than Jews - the way I used to state it was "one Armenian will outperform one Jew, but if there are two Armenians than the one Jew will outperform the two Armenians," some of the reasons go back to Armenians being very individualistic and nowhere near as refined, organized, ideological, politically savvy as Jews. For example international Jewish organizations tend to be very cohesive, goal-oriented, and focused on tribal interests in one form or another (even if on the surface there is a divide between factions like globalist v. zionists.) Armenian organizations by contrast tend to be aimless and have self-interested and incompetent leadership (see every Armenian lobbying organization,) and politically active Armenians -especially in the western diaspora- are as likely to attack the main Armenian institutions (the Armenian state and the Armenian national church) as they are to try to do anything constructive... To put it another way, the Jewish national soul is best expressed in their ultra extreme ethnocentric religious documents from thousands of years ago like the Talmud proclaiming that they are God's chosen people - it may be unethical and parasitic but you have to admire its resilience and powerful results. The old line "I admire its purity" pretty much sums it up. Armenians don't have this intrinsic worldview or behavior patterns, for better or worse. Just different breeding.

      Regarding emotional antisemitism, I can't speak for others but I personally would not spend any time at all on the Jews if they weren't so actively and so centrally engaged in anti-Armenian activities. I don't like fighting other people's battles, if I am going to spend time and energy fighting anyone's battles, it will be my own nations battles. So if Jews weren't involved in supporting Turkey and Azerbaijan, I'd just look at Jews like I do Japanese and Koreans: an interesting and capable foreign race. Good point about the dilemma of trying to avoid Jews when they are so large and powerful that they have made themselves unavoidable. The analysis you gave a while back about the human ecosystem and the parasitic role played by Jews really stuck with me, I suppose ignoring parasites might be a good strategy. Perhaps when you have time you can expand on the statement "their history (biblical texts) suggests that the best way to defeat Jews is to leave them alone" because it sounds interesting.

      I think a part of the problem is that Jews have thoroughly wiped out any mainstream criticism of Jewry, therefore people who are in the early stages of "waking up" to the world's problems tend to get sucked into the large amount of neo-nazi antisemitism available online, which to the less politically astute becomes a path to the "let's just gas them all" nonsense. That cartoonish worldview has been around since the end of WW2, and has failed to attract any supporters beyond hateful, non-constructive, and totally self-destructive trailer park trash and Ukrainians. To be fair, I think we've all been through this stage at one point of our self-education process.

      Delete
    9. AnonymousJuly 3, 2017 at 11:46 AM

      Regarding the west, I admire classical civilization too, particularly French philosophers and art, and German music and scientific achievements up to the late 1800s. But I consider those civilizations to be dead and buried already even if the nations exist in name, not unlike how the civilization that built the pyramids is dead and buried even though "Egypt" is still around. You're right, Russia is the last European civilization; recall the powerful symbolism in the Russian Army liberating the classical Roman ruins in Palmyra and celebrating by having their choir stage a concert of classical music in front of the amphitheater (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIJPHHvwN0A) - this is a level of glory unseen for quite some time (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ob28S3AvyDE). The west made its decision, it can live with the consequences - Armenia can't save them and what we have here is a reverse "our ships can't climb your mountains" situation. C'est la vie. I'm happy with my identity as an Armenian nationalist and part of the larger Orthodox Christian world, I have no need to try to fit incompatible and frankly hostile western Europeans into this identity while making excuses for their treachery.

      Here's another interesting fact from the Israeli professor. He pointed out that Israel has a thriving hi-tech industry largely because of the Russian immigrants. To quote him: "The Soviet Union paid for their education, Israel got to keep all of the benefits." We see something very similar in Armenia: the legacy of the Soviet educational system produced the current generation of Armenians who are now making great strides in Information Technology and creating a nice IT sector in Armenia's economy. A week ago Armenia started manufacturing solar panels, for example: https://www.azatutyun.am/a/28586570.html

      Regarding Syria, Arab states are more or less all "fake" anyway, as in the current boundaries were drawn by western European colonial powers drawing lines (sometimes actual straight lines that are illogical in practice) on a map. It is silly to expect these artificial constructs to hold forever. In fact, the partitioning of any major Arab state sets a precedent that shakes Turkey to its very core. Particularly if the partitions produce Russia-secured, strategically vital states that happen to border Turkey. Ankara can take a look around and see the Russian military in Russian Crimea, in Russian-backed Abkhazia, in Russia-protected Armenia, in a Russian-protected Alawite state in the northeastern Mediterranean, and hundreds of millions of Kurds, Persians, and Shiites right in the middle... And the bulk of Turkey's NATO allies are well passed their days as respectable military powers (see the Dutch) and are probably on the way to total bastardization and collapse. The competent NATO military powers all support partitioning Syria and Iraq and the establishment of a Kurdistan. There are many risks, true, but the developing situation makes Turkish aggression against Armenia even less likely because Turks have their hands full, and down the road makes it more likely to produce a potential partitioning of Turkey itself. After all, it was the western decision to recognize the bandit regime in Serbian Kosovo as a real country that almost directly led to Russia mutilating the western regime in Georgia and recognizing Abkhazia and South Ossetia. This is a real chance for Armenians to stop admiring Jews and start acting like Jews.

      Delete
    10. Jerriko MagpantayJuly 5, 2017 at 2:03 AM

      The whole modern interaction between the Anglo-Americans and the Jews had its origins in the English Civil War with the Roundhead victory and Oliver Cromwell's decision to reverse the ban on Jewish immigration and residence in England (the ban was placed during the time of King Edward I in 1290 in what is now known as the Edict of Expulsion because of severe persecution of Jews). During the Edict's validity between 1290 and 1657, there were very few Jews living in England, so I suspect that the English economy there had thrived without Jewish interference or more or less declined.

      Even during the time when most of Western and Central Europe weren't comfortable with the entry of Muscovite Russia into the political arena (the 1500s to the 1600s when Muscovy was still a minor player), England and Russia had an informal relationship. The forerunner of the modern Hudson's Bay Company had its roots in the economic relationship that Richard Chancellor had with the Muscovite court. There was even a close game changer where Ivan the Terrible could have married Elizabeth I, but failed in the end.

      So in a way the victory of the Roundheads during the English Civil War is what started the whole Jewish re-integration into the English and later British and American society.

      Delete
    11. մարJuly 5, 2017 at 3:27 PM

      I assume this thread was made as a reply to couple of comments I had made previously.
      I will reiterate: I never suggested RT to cover the Protocols or even scratch the surface of Jewish racial supremacism, especially being the fundamental structure of the apartheid state. Also, to imply that over-focusing on the issue suggests some sort of jealousy, hatred, and racism is nonsense. I, for one, have always remained suspect of David Duke for never insisting some sort of unification between whites and blacks in America, and instead obsessing over a 'white "European" America' and remaining in the 'divide and conquered' sphere. What I do 'obsess' over is how RT can continuously check 'America' and her crimes without ever doing an in depth coverage of the neocon deep state. Why continue the 'East vs West' illusion? They don't need to say the J or Z word, just substitute it with 'dual citizens' & 'Israelis'. And why should Russia, or anyone else for that matter, settle for redrawing the ME map, when it's been an obvious ploy of these zionist scumbags for decades? The least they can do is present the Yinon Plan, A Clean Break, and the Seymour Hersh research. But RT continues to go along with the post 9/11 War on Terror script, and pretends the chaos in Iraq and Syria are just due to American "failures" in Iraq and "mishandling" the so called opposition groups and laughable "moderates" in Syria. Sarkis mentioned how the current ME outlines are Western drawn, anyways. I suggest you check out this presentation by Syrian Girl on the Sykes and Picot issue -
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZtoDS9bh6E
      ^ The Link Between The Wars on Iraq and Syria - Syrian girl Talk at Sydney University

      Yes, God bless Russia for their aid and involvement, no one is arguing that and we are grateful. But this came only after the Western salafist proxies had already created buffer zones and safe spots for future 'allied' landings.

      I somewhat agree with the statement that Western Europe is a degenerate sewer and why bother wasting energy to preserve it, especially since they have been so hostile over the centuries towards Armenians and our neighborly allies. My friend once pointed this out: Just look how easily the Germans turned towards degeneracy after WW1. meaning how prone they are to perversion to begin with. In reality, the only nation and people I feel terrible for in Western Europe are the Irish. They've suffered famine/genocide, split up nation, have a fighting spirit, strongly support Palestine, and have been eternal enemies of the British Crown.

      I do believe every Armenian must be raised aware of the hrya. That does not translate towards 'racist'. It means they will be cautious and more susceptible to nationalism, racial awareness, Orthodoxy, morale, and even take notes on how to be less egoist, selfish, materialistic, and instead work as a unit for a greater goal.. and eventually, spiritual growth. What I mean is hryas are doing everything possible to prevent the Christ Consciousness awakening in every gentile individual, via vaccines, promoting masturbation and porn, chem-trails, fluoride, and GMO poisoning.. And I do not necessarily blame them, to a certain degree, I believe this is just their part/role they play on this planet.

      "We Jews, we are the destroyers and will remain the destroyers. Nothing you can do will meet our demands and needs. We will forever destroy because we want a world of our own." (You Gentiles, by Jewish Author Maurice Samuels, p. 155).

      Sorry for this comment being kind of all over the place, it's just I read all the above a little late and was not sure what to respond to first, lol.

      Delete
    12. LGJuly 6, 2017 at 12:47 AM

      A few points:

      Russia is unlikely to accept muslim majority countries bordering its western sphere of influence. If the muslims take over w. europe and then kill off all the degenerates, what is to stop them from turning on Russia at some point? This is a highly speculative question but it needs to be considered.

      There are more goys waking up to the power the jews wield in the world generally and western world specifically. There is no putting the genie back into the bottle. The overton window on this issue, and many other formerly taboo issues, has shifted to the right. The victim card the jews play is losing its luster very quickly.
      I agree that hate or any other emotion is harmful when analyzing these issues and ethnic or religious groups. The problem Armenians and others have with jews is the fact that they tend to come into your space, hijack your operation, and then belittle you or even persecute you for mentioning the crime committed. No, they are not a monolithic entity, to suggest so is idiotic, but they do tend to support one another against goys even when they know they are in the wrong. Hive mentality is how Kevin MacDonald has described it. I think it is accurate.

      'Gas them all' is a meme, nothing more. What people who seriously would like to kill off all jews advocate is the creation of ethno-racial specific biological weapons. The Soviets, Americans, Chinese and Israelis have all at some point done research on these bio weapons. I would not be surprised to find out such weapons do in fact exist already.

      "their history (biblical texts) suggests that the best way to defeat Jews is to leave them alone"
      I mostly agree, the Biblical hebrews were their own worst enemy. However each time they were faced with a final calamity they were saved by God due to the Father taking mercy on the few spiritually noble among the lot. Having rejected God, jews no longer can claim to be the chosen people. That title belongs to all apostolic Christians, particularly Orthodox churches.

      Russia is the last major bastion of Western Civilization, which itself is an offshoot of Aryan Civilization. If western europeans are intent on committing mass suicide there is not much that any outsider can do. We are witness to a dark age - kali yuga - we will see the dawn of a new and better age.

      Delete
    13. ArevordiJuly 7, 2017 at 2:22 AM

      I agree. A growing number of people around the world - on the right as well as the left - are becoming aware of their power, influence and machinations. It cant be avoid in this age of information. This is essentially what the Jewish author in this article was warning about -

      Israel's worst existential threat - and it is not a nuclear Iran: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/18516

      The cat is out of the bag so to speak. I think Jews will suffer a serve backlash once again. I just don't know when. That said, we have to approach this awakening intelligently. The best thing we can do to help international Jewry resist this awareness is to allow it to get hijacked by extremist groups.

      I think the Russian approach is good: Russian society, from bottom to top, is very aware of organized Jewry. A growing number of people in Russia are even blaming Jews for Bolshevism. A growing number of people in Russia are also beginning to see Stalin as one that helped Russify the Soviet Union. Russian officials have good working relations with Jews that want to work with Russia, but they also have good working relations with entities that are opposed to the Jewish state. Their news agencies regulatory showcase report that cast a dark shadow on Israel, but they don't get into classical "antisemitic" stuff. Even the government in Tehran is open to working with Jews that are not hostile to it.

      When combating an opponent as powerful, as influential and as resilient as Jews, you must be very careful, very nuanced and very intelligent.

      Delete
  21. ZoravarJuly 2, 2017 at 7:38 AM

    Not directly related to the topic but very much at the heart and soul of this blog.
    The "Awara" report about how the Russian economy fared under the last 3 years of sanctions has just been published:

    https://www.awaragroup.com/blog/russian-economy-2014-2016-the-years-of-sanctions-warfare/

    I strongly recommend everybody to read it. It makes crystal clear why the Political West is freaking out and panicking about Russia.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousJuly 3, 2017 at 1:44 PM

      Fascinating read, and I'm not much of an economics person. Basically the summary is what Arevordi pointed out at the beginning of the sanctions: Russia is basically the most self-sufficient nation on the planet, Russians have the knowledge and ability to produce domestically whatever they need or at least acquire necessary imports from the east instead of relying on the west, Russians as a people do not bend at the first sign of hardship, and that the sanctions would have the unintended benefit of forcefully weening Russia from its current dependence on western imports. Or to put it another way, Russians are a truly nationalistic people and will not complain about being denied fancy French cheese and having to eat lower quality Russian cheese if their Motherland is attacked.

      The key points are that Russian economic indicators are all stable, Russia appears to have low imports-exports to GDP simply because Russia produces and consumes its goods and services domestically, and that the main effects of sanctions have been a rough 10% decrease in real disposable incomes, real salaries, and retail sales - hardly catastrophic prices for Russian citizens to pay for liberating Crimea and reasserting the prominence of Russian interests on the global stage in the face of extreme western hostility. The article also mentions Russian state support for large businesses in order to protect them from western predation.

      The west must be viewing Russia like a monster from a horror movie that just keeps coming back stronger. The weak and decadent American financial pirates watching their most lethal attacks being brushed off by the Russian Bear must be getting the same feeling that German military leaders got 75 years ago as Operation Barbarossa sputtered to a halt and turned into the worst disaster in their history. This historic successful repelling of the west's best attacks on Russia is amazing to watch in real time.

      I especially enjoyed the tone of loathing that the article had towards economists, because it is the only correct and proper attitude to take to these over-educated, under-intelligent terrorists. Modern economists have pretty much no attachment to reality, it's all theoretical and abstract nonsense one short step removed from fairies. These people would call total outsourcing and deindustrialization "progress" even as millions of citizens go unemployed and society (marriage, birthday, substance abuse, crime) is torn apart. Economists would with a straight face claim that bankrupting your entire working and middle class just to line the pockets of executives with saved labor costs and allegedly "lower-priced" goods through outsourcing is a legitimate and sustainable system. That importing millions of low IQ, unskilled foreigners who are genetically and culturally incompatible and in fact openly hostile as cheap labor (subsidized by untold amounts of government welfare) in order to drive wages towards zero is the only way to remain competitive, in a consumption-based economy of all things... This may sound extreme, but the only group equally deserving to modern economists of mass round-ups and forced labor camps is modern journalists.

      Delete
  22. մարJuly 5, 2017 at 8:43 AM

    Under the Cover of "Diplomatic Flights", Azerbaijani Regime has been Shipping Weapons to Terrorists Worldwide, Leaked Documents Claim [Video]
    ^ http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/07/shocking-under-cover-of-diplomatic.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. մարJuly 6, 2017 at 11:29 AM

      Devastated by its Losses, Azerbaijan Resorts to False Propaganda and Using Civilians as Human Shields [Video]
      ^ http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/07/devastated-by-its-losses-azerbaijan.html

      Delete
    2. մարJuly 9, 2017 at 9:29 PM

      Germany starts pulling out troops from Turkish base
      ^ http://presstv.com/Detail/2017/07/09/527934/Germany-Turkey-troops-withdrawal

      Turkey: German troops pulled out of Incirlik Air Base amid diplomatic spat
      ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rD1xOMdUJ-M (Ruptly TV)

      Delete
  23. AnonymousJuly 6, 2017 at 6:16 AM

    Russia Complains To Azerbaijan About Discrimination Against Armenians
    http://www.eurasianet.org/node/84226

    Diasporan Akhpar: "Bro, Russian wants Armenia without Arme... hold on bro my sister and her husband Da'vante are here..."

    Note: I don't actually read anything published by eurasianet, just the headline caught my eye.

    ReplyDelete
  24. մարJuly 7, 2017 at 6:57 PM

    Paul Craig Roberts "Putin Is All That Stands In The Way Of Israel Destroying Syria & Iran." on The Richie Allen Show
    ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmtXzq8_WCY

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. մարJuly 8, 2017 at 5:40 PM

      Important Update - Court Case, Putin Trump Predictable Cease Fire
      ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pmLykKNcBM

      Delete
    2. մարJuly 10, 2017 at 7:31 AM

      Understanding Russia: The Continuum of History
      ^ http://thesaker.is/understanding-russia-the-continuum-of-history/

      'To understand how Russians usually respond to Western power a little time travel, starting 1219 AD, is more than useful.

      This was a time when a cataclysmic event left deep scars on the Russian character; an abiding fear of encirclement, whether by nomadic hordes then or by nuclear missile bases today.

      Russia then was not a single state but consisted of a dozen principalities frequently at war with each other. Between 1219 and 1240 all these fell to the Genghis Khan hurricane, whose lightning-speed cavalry with his horse-borne archers, employing brilliant tactics unfamiliar to Europeans, caught army after army off guard and forced them into submission.

      For more than 200 years Russians suffered under the Golden Horde of the Mongol – named after their great tent with golden poles. They left the Russian economy in ruins, brought commerce and industry to a halt, and reduced Russians to serfdom. Asiatic ways of administration and customs were superimposed on the existing Byzantine system.

      Taking full advantage of its military weakness and of its reduced circumstances, Russia’s European neighbors started to help themselves to its territory, starting with German principalities, Lithuania, Poland, and Sweden. The Mongols couldn’t care less so long as they received their tribute. They were more concerned with their Asiatic dominions.

      Still, European cities did not match the riches of Samarkand and Bukhara, Herat and Baghdad, whose incomparable wealth and splendor outshone wooden-built Russian cities.

      Russia’s greatest fear begins here – crushed between their European foes to the West and the Mongols to the East...'

      Delete
    3. ArevordiJuly 11, 2017 at 9:17 AM

      It's a pretty good representation of Russian history and it underscores what I touched upon in the body of my commentary: The Russian political mindset today, with all its good and bad aspects, is a direct by-product of Russian history - one thousand years of struggling against powerful enemies from all sides. Due to cultural and genetic reasons (perhaps supernatural reasons as well) Russians have been mostly successful in their struggle, which is why Russia has been for centuries one of the most powerful nations in the world, as well as the largest country in the world. This is the reason why Russian leaders have for centuries desperately sought to create satellite states or buffer zones around the Russian heartland. To Russians it's simply a matter of life and death. As such, history has had a significant impact on the Russian character. In other words, this is the reason behind Russian patriotism, arrogance, racism, suspicion towards non-Russians and propensity to be warlike. The better we Armenians understand the Russian mindset (and the political culture in the Kremlin) the better will we be able to promote Armenian interests inside the halls of the Kremlin. If we don't want Armenia to be turned into another Ukraine or Serbia (who have been turned into buffer zones between Russia and Europe), we better make Armenia one of Russia's satellites. The more confidence Kremlin officials will have in the Armenian people, the better will Armenia be off.

      Delete
    4. aaaJuly 13, 2017 at 11:00 PM

      Armenia needs to make herself important to Russia. Russian foothold on the Caucasus hinges on and around Armenia. Armenia is the pivot for the Russians in the area. There are two important Russian army bases; which are there for a reason. The centuries old symbiotic relationship with Russia has to be preserved and expanded. It is impossible to countenance or understand any political direction which runs counter to this premise.

      Delete
  25. Ռազմիկ ԱրտաշեսJuly 7, 2017 at 11:00 PM

    A new documentary just came out on the first Kingdom of Armenia, Ararat - Urartu. All in all it holds valuable information, while some areas/arguments can be debatable. In general though it is a great documentary, the English version will be available in a few months. For now, here is the Armenian version:

    «ԱՐԱՐԱՏ-ՈՒՐԱՐՏՈՒ ԹԱԳԱՎՈՐՈՒԹՅՈՒՆԸ» (Մաս I)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5oqTwoUfWM

    «ԱՐԱՐԱՏ-ՈՒՐԱՐՏՈՒ ԹԱԳԱՎՈՐՈՒԹՅՈՒՆԸ» (Մաս II)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAlcLmX2LdU&spfreload=5

    «ԱՐԱՐԱՏ-ՈՒՐԱՐՏՈՒ ԹԱԳԱՎՈՐՈՒԹՅՈՒՆԸ» (Մաս III)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jZ-pdbPcTo

    «ԱՐԱՐԱՏ-ՈՒՐԱՐՏՈՒ ԹԱԳԱՎՈՐՈՒԹՅՈՒՆԸ» (Մաս IV)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxvRDyQ6s8w

    «ԱՐԱՐԱՏ-ՈՒՐԱՐՏՈՒ ԹԱԳԱՎՈՐՈՒԹՅՈՒՆԸ» (Մաս V)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xB12WY2Roc

    ReplyDelete
  26. AnonymousJuly 12, 2017 at 4:45 PM

    Armenia ex-FM appointed ambassador to Denmark
    https://news.am/eng/news/399904.html

    What a weird development. I thought Alexander Arzoumanian was a diehard "Death to the Putin-controlled Armenian regime" traitor. There's intercepted cell phone recordings of him from March 2008 laughing at the dumbass rioters who get themselves injured and killed while trying to destroy Yerevan.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Longtime readerJuly 15, 2017 at 7:30 AM

    Why do kurds remind me of armenians LOL

    https://southfront.org/russia-asked-kurds-allow-syrian-army-enter-afrin-ypg/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ArevordiJuly 16, 2017 at 3:45 PM

      Armenians and Kurds have lived as next door neighbors for thousands of years. Cultural and genetic similarities between Armenians and Kurds are therefore inevitable. Such similarities naturally translates into similar mindset and behavior. There are also some similarities in the political situation our two peoples face. But, there are also significant differences between our two peoples. I think these differences stem from the fact that we Armenians are Christians, we have had long periods of statehood in the past and we have been under Russian/Soviet influence during the past two hundred years. The nature of our above noted differences with Kurds have placed us way ahead of them. Moreover, perhaps it is due to the vivid memory of the genocide, we Armenians are not nearly as fragmented as Kurds. Kurds today remain of the world's most backward and fragmented peoples.

      Delete
  28. մարJuly 15, 2017 at 2:50 PM

    this was a pleasant surprise -

    CrossTalk: Remembering USS Liberty, with Ken O’Keefe, Daniel McAdams, and Phillip F. Nelson
    ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uL_ulVuxloc

    ..they must have read my recent comments on this blog, che?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. SonofAmalekJuly 15, 2017 at 11:16 PM

      Yeah it was a treat. I have great respect for Ken.

      Delete
    2. ArevordiJuly 16, 2017 at 3:41 PM

      I don't know why you guys are so surprised. Maybe not as much as we would like them to, but the people at RT have periodically done his sort of reporting, especially in the past. RT (as well as Voice of Russia) has also given the 9/11 truth movement a lot of positive coverage. I remember a lot of these types of reports being aired around the time of the ten year anniversary of the 9/11 attacks in 2011. But, as I suggested previously, the Russian government will not go out of their way to concentrate on these types of reports because all governments, including Russia, have dirty secrets they don't want others to talk about.

      Delete
    3. մարJuly 17, 2017 at 12:08 PM

      Exposing The Iranian Pornography Industry & Other Issues - Brendon O'Connell
      ^ www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYi8-WXNp2I

      Delete
    4. մարJuly 18, 2017 at 4:14 AM

      Updates - Confirming the massive links between Putin, Tillerson, Flynn, Russian Jewish Oligarchs, Netanyahu....extracting oil from the Middle East.
      ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tgk7AVYsAeo

      Delete
  29. ArevordiJuly 16, 2017 at 3:25 PM

    Yet another death connected with Hillary Clinton's email hacking -

    Peter W. Smith, GOP operative who sought Clinton's emails from Russian hackers, committed suicide, records show: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/ct-peter-smith-death-met-0713-20170713-story.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousJuly 17, 2017 at 5:39 AM

      Maybe she hired some Ukrainian mercenaries

      Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire
      Kiev officials are scrambling to make amends with the president-elect after quietly working to boost Clinton.
      http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446


      http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/10/everybody-is-forgetting-that-clinton-allies-did-the-same-thing-as-don-jr/

      A veteran DNC operative who previously worked in the Clinton White House, Alexandra Chalupa, worked with Ukrainian government officials and journalists from both Ukraine and America to dig up Russia-related opposition research on Trump and Manafort. She also shared her anti-Trump research with both the DNC and the Clinton campaign, according to the Politico report.
      Chalupa met with Ukrainian ambassador Valeriy Chaly and one of his aides, Oksara Shulyar, at the Ukrainian Embassy in March 2016 to talk about unearthing Paul Manafort’s Russian connections, Chalupa admitted to Politico. Four days later, Trump officially hired Manafort.
      “The day after Manafort’s hiring was revealed, she briefed the DNC’s communications staff on Manafort, Trump and their ties to Russia, according to an operative familiar with the situation,” Politico reported.
      The Politico report also notes that the DNC encouraged Chalupa to try to arrange an interview with Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to talk about Manafort’s ties to the former pro-Russia president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, whom Manafort previously advised.
      The embassy declined to arrange the meeting but was nevertheless “helpful,” Chalupa told Politico. “If I asked a question, they would provide guidance, or if there was someone I needed to follow up with,” she said, but added that “There were no documents given, nothing like that.”
      Chalupa also told Politico that the Ukrainian embassy worked directly with reporters in uncovering dirt on Manafort and Trump.
      The Open World Leadership Center, which funded Chalupa’s briefing of journalists about Manafort, is a taxpayer-funded congressional agency. A spokeswoman for the center, Maura Shelden, emphasized to Politico that the center is non-partisan and that “our delegations hear from both sides of the aisle, receiving bipartisan information.”
      After Trump’s shocking electoral victory, the Ukrainian government told Politico, “We have never worked to research and disseminate damaging information about Donald Trump and Paul Manafort.” But Andrii Telizhenko, a former Ukrainian embassy officer, told Politico that he was assigned to work with Chalupa.
      “Oksana said that if I had any information, or knew other people who did, then I should contact Chalupa,” said Telizhenko “They were coordinating an investigation with the Hillary team on Paul Manafort with Alexandra Chalupa.”
      “Oksana was keeping it all quiet,” Telizhenko said, but added that “the embassy worked very closely with” Chalupa, the DNC operative.
      Like the Ukrainian embassy, the DNC distanced itself from Chalupa’s actions when asked by Politico, insisting that she was acting on her own.

      Delete
  30. AnonymousJuly 17, 2017 at 5:31 AM

    I've been saying for a while now that as Europe becomes a majority Islamic region, the states which are by tradition allegedly friendly to Armenia will become virulently anti-Armenian. Here are just a few examples. I know that I'm citing trend.az which is about is reliable as the NYT, but its good enough for this argument:

    Khalid Chaouki, Italian MP from the Democratic Party
    Italian politician condemns Armenia's aggression against Azerbaijani citizens
    https://en.trend.az/azerbaijan/karabakh/2774170.html

    German MP Patrick Sensburg
    German MP condemns Armenian shelling of Azerbaijani civilians
    https://en.trend.az/azerbaijan/karabakh/2775742.html

    Senator Andre Reichardt, Chairman of the France-Caucasus Friendship Group in the French Senate
    French senator: Armenia should fulfill UNSC resolutions demanding withdrawal from Azerbaijan’s occupied lands
    https://en.trend.az/azerbaijan/karabakh/2774991.html

    Of course people may respond with "gee Sarkis, Europeans have always been sellout faggots" and that is of course correct. But from this point forward in time it is undeniable that the average man or woman living in Europe will be more likely than not to support Turks and Azeris against Armenians. Things are only going to get worse. Therefore, pro-Europe Armenians ought to be attacked mercilessly whenever they open their filthy lying mouths - don't bother wasting your time arguing with the diaspora because the diaspora is a nonentity in terms of Armenian geopolitics, but anyone in Armenia promoting western interests should be DESTROYED by facts pointing out their dangerous stupidity... And if/when another war with Azerbaijan breaks out, pro-Europe Armenians should be rounded up as a national security threat and be put in labor camps to do something useful. I'm not kidding here, promoting European involvement in the settlement of the Artsakh issue is only barely above promoting Turkish or Saudi or Pakistani involvement - would anyone argue against punishing such people??

    Europeans, as is the case with all bitches, do have one good use. Since they are hellbent on taking in whatever "refugees" they can get -the closer to Islamo-Turkic the better- I suggest Armenia use the next opportunity to lob some missiles at mainland Azerbaijan, and then facilitate a migration of a significant part of Azerbaijan's young male population to western Europe - it would actually be a merciful way to move the enemy far from Armenia's borders and even compensate them with European welfare and easy/desperate white sluts.

    Apart from Europe, here are our friends the Jews giving us more reasons to hate them by defending Azeris and painting Armenians as the new regional Nazis:

    Tension in Azerbaijan-Armenian conflict : Azerbaijani girl and her grandmother became the targets and victims of Armenian atrocity
    http://www.jpost.com/Blogs/News-from-Arye-Gut/Old-and-very-young-Azerbaijani-civilians-are-target-of-latest-Armenias-atrocity-498883

    Two Azerbaijani Civilians Killed by Armenia, the Neighborhood Nemesis
    http://www.jpost.com/Blogs/Think-With-Me/Two-Azerbaijani-Civilians-Killed-by-Armenia-the-Neighborhood-Nemesis-499050

    Armenia’s attack on Azerbaijani civilians
    Killing noncombatants resembles a strategy for triggering a larger conflagration
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/6/azerbaijani-civilians-attacked-by-armenia/

    BONUS: ILLUSTRATION OF ARMENIAN MISSILES TARGETING POOR OLD AZERI BITCH - aka jews projecting israeli treatment of palestineans on Armenia
    https://twt-thumbs.washtimes.com/media/image/2017/07/06/7_6_2017_b1murinasonlgarmeni8201_s878x1207.jpg?9c2af93d39825115e94bbab0e644c01c2dc32cbf

    As with pro-western Armenians, in case of war pro-Jewish and partially Jewish Armenians need to be rounded up and put in labor camps. And we are currently in war.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ArevordiJuly 17, 2017 at 12:52 PM

      I do not think the ultimate intent of those who are intentionally flooding Muslims into Europe is to thoroughly "Islamize" the continent. I think there is a far deeper and a far more sinister agenda at play. Their ultimate intent may be to gradually/systematically foment a serious "clash of civilizations" between the Western/Liberal/Christian/Jewish world and the Middle Eastern/Conservative/Islamic world. This clash of civilizations is a theory that has been spoken about since the 1990s. If this theory holds true, sooner or later, perhaps in another generation or two, there will be persecutions of European Muslims, and Europeans, along with Anglo-Americans, will find themselves in full scale wars with Islamic countries. They have already managed to turn various Islamic groups violently against Europeans and Christians. They have already managed to draw some Western forces into the Middle East. This all may very well grow in volume and intensity in the coming decades. Ultimately, the above noted agenda will serve the long term interests of Globalists and Jews. For Globalists, it will help stamp-out the world's last remaining highly-religious, ultra-conservative and multiple-child bearing regions, thereby reducing the region's "carbon footprint". For Jews, it will help weaken/destroy nations in the Middle East thereby allowing the Zionist state to exist unopposed for another era. The destruction of Iraq, Libya and Syria are in various degrees part of this long-term agenda. Iran will most probably be their next target. Saudi Arabia and Egypt may follow soon thereafter. Turkey may also be somewhat down-sized. Nevertheless, we can all expect the rising of sociopolitical tensions throughout Europe in the coming years.

      Delete
    2. AnonymousJuly 17, 2017 at 10:56 PM

      Arevordi, I get the point you are trying to make but I have to disagree. I think the main goal is to mess up western Europe so that they (namely Germany and France) never again pose a threat to the ruling, mainly American power base. If population control was the issue, they would be focused on bringing the Africans under control, instead they are flooding the continent with food and medicine resulting in a population explosion which in ~80 years is predicted to lead to 4 billion Africans.

      I don't think anyone intends to see Islamic states in Europe, the ruling elite prefer atheism which is why they promote whorishness as trendy to Muslim bitches and faggotry as trendy to Muslim men. But it won't work because Muslims are generally primitive to fall for that retardation - advanced European minds can be seen like advanced/complicated electronics in that there is just so much more that could go wrong. Whenever a region reaches a critical mass of Muslims, they take over - look what they did to Asia Minor and the Middle East. It could very well be that western elites indented to just have a mixed race area that is always in crisis, but it would be foolish to think that such a status could be controllable or sustainable. Islam will dominate, the native sluts will give in to the religion of the (relatively) alpha Muslim males and the feminized native men will be unable to do anything about it - except take comfort in drugs and porn.

      In any case, whatever is happening in the west is only interesting from an academic perspective. I fully expect in a generation or two Muslims and full-blooded Turks will be a powerful political force in the governments of every European nation - this is a fact that needs to be shoved in the faces of Armenia's naive Europe-supporters.

      I agree though that Iran is the next target, and that Turkey itself has a pretty bleak future.

      Delete
    3. JerrikoJuly 18, 2017 at 10:14 AM

      I'm not sure if it's true that there has been a chronic problem with genetics surrounding Muslims due to the tradition of marriages between cousins, primarily first cousin marriages.

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1394119/Its-time-confront-taboo-First-cousin-marriages-Muslim-communities-putting-hundreds-children-risk.html

      Whoever came up with such a ghastly idea of flooding Europe with Muslims had the intention of reversing centuries of genetic defects that have plagued most Muslim families. Fresh blood from conquered Western and Central European women would have made those regions of Europe genetically colorful like Turks. While Eastern Europe has somehow avoided this problem, the Baltic States has its own demographic crisis, and I wouldn't be surprised if Baltic women living in Western Europe end up becoming conquered booty for those Muslim migrants seeking to bed them.

      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/children/11723308/First-cousin-marriages-in-Pakistani-communities-leading-to-appalling-disabilities-among-children.html

      If Muslim migrants wanted to screw European women badly, why is it that they passed over Bosniak and Albanian women? Bosniaks and Albanians are European Muslim, so they would have loved to marry their fellow Muslims from the MidEast, but I guess those migrants are too picky.

      Delete
    4. AnonymousJuly 18, 2017 at 8:43 PM

      I don't want this thread to lose focus. I don't blame the Muslims at all, they sense that their centuries-long foe is now weak and decedent and therefore ripe for conquest. Western Europe, the heir of old Rome that once launched Crusades against Islam, is no longer interested in self-preservation. Naturally Muslims will move in -they are being welcomed with hugs and kisses- and they will take the resources of their enemies, including welfare, property and women. Muslims, in their primitive simplicity, never lost sight of the fact that they as a community are the continuation of the once-great Islamic/Arab empire, whereas Europeans have become rootless individualists with no connection to the past and consequently no possibility of a future. Europeans have thrown away their self-respect, and their national and Christian heritage and instead adopted atheism, materialism, nihilism, and a foolish pride in the fact that they celebrate everything that their ancestors would have considered vulgar and obscene... In this type of environment, whether the architects of the great immigration project intended it or not, the Muslims will come to dominate - and they deserve it.

      Armenian patriots need to shove explicit, graphic details of Europe's destruction into every discussion about Armenian politics. A small portion of society will naturally be composed of defective people like Paruyr Hayrikyan (incidentally most of these defectives will have either direct Jewish or Turkish blood or at least a Jewish spouse) but I think the majority of Armenians can get the message. Even millennials and younger in Armenia who did not grow up with the Soviet Union can largely understand that the society which produced and honors things like Conchita Wurst is sick.

      Anyway I could be totally wrong about the Europe situation, we're all just making educated guesses here.

      BTW if anyone had told me a few years ago that I'd feel closer to Chechens than Germans, I would have thought they were crazy. Kadyrov recently told a Canadian journalist "We don’t have those kinds of people here, we don’t have any gays. If there are any, take them to Canada. Praise god. Take them far away from us so we don’t have them at home. To purify our blood, if there are any here, take them." Kadyrov then gave his opinion on the US threat to Russia "We have a strong government and are a nuclear state. Even if our government was completely destroyed, our nuclear missiles would be automatically deployed. We will put the whole world on its knees and screw it from behind." The guy has 12 children (2 adopted.) Muslim or not, this is a winning attitude, especially compared to the childless trash that rule European governments... The stabilization of Russian-Chechen relations during the past 17 years is remarkable, it should be studied and possible lessons for Armenia-Azerbaijan taken into consideration.

      Chechen President Ramzan Kadyrov Confirms: There are No Faggots in Chechnya
      https://www.dailystormer.com/chechen-president-ramzan-kadyrov-confirms-there-are-no-faggots-in-chechnya/

      Delete
    5. մարJuly 19, 2017 at 4:55 AM

      LoL, now the West is attacking Chechnya since they quit being Salafist traitors towards Russia

      Ramzan Kadyrov-Gay Purge: Real Sports Trailer (HBO)
      ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUvsG2TC-Uc
      "if there are any, take them to Canada"

      Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel: Episode #244 Topical Promo (HBO Sports)
      ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6t5PwzMkn4

      Ramzan Kadyrov-MMA Fight Club: Real Sports Trailer (HBO)
      ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fi3sKVrvuOs

      Ramzan Kadyrov-Geo Politics: Real Sports Trailer (HBO)
      ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFLTTI0Jl88

      Obviously, Young Cucks were quick to jump on it: Dictator Thinks His Gay Concentration Camps Are Hilarious - Cenk
      ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0_Z0NfKZTE

      Meanwhile, in the tolerant democratic Western Jewrope -
      Sheffield-based boxing champ Billy Joe Saunders "reported to police" over "bullying" tweet row
      ^ http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/sheffield-based-boxing-champ-billy-joe-saunders-reported-to-police-over-bullying-tweet-row-1-8631395
      The Sheffield-based WBO middleweight champion has apparently been reported to police for hate crime following the incident in which he tweeted a picture of city shop assistant Jonny Marsh saying he was "confused" and that: "I don't think its right for kids to see."
      LOL - Dozens of Twitter users blasted him, describing the tweet as "bullying" and "homophobic."

      Brandon Martinez - Neocon Globalism & Kalergi's Plan to Genocide Europeans - Hour 1
      ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1VkIiJ6k1g

      Has the time finally arrived where it's safe to say that I'd rather see Armenia embrace Islam before the EU? Man, what's happened with this world

      Delete
    6. AnonymousJuly 20, 2017 at 2:32 AM

      The story in the image link below is an example of what I was referring to when I said that the EU and the "western values" that all of Russia's eastern European enemies are currently dying to embrace and show off, will actually end up weakening eastern European Russophobe nations. This sort of perversion would never have happened behind the Iron Curtain. The meme itself is nearly perfect: the first frame is from two years ago of a Polish woman posting a video announcing she is 21 weeks pregnant featuring the New European who knocked her up, the second frame is is a recent video about being a single mother, and the third frame is an actual photo of this lovely New Pole who I am sure will crush the Russian Army in future combat. The only thing the meme is missing is a quote like "Stupid Russians hate all of the freedom and democracy we have here in EU":

      https://bbs.dailystormer.com/uploads/default/original/4X/c/9/0/c90c39f61610a08182c452c55b4979dbff03eaae.JPG


      Poland and the others cannot expect to enjoy the economic and (perceived) security benefits of being vassals of the west without suffering the consequences of having modern western "values" imposed on their population - especially their young people. This is actually the only possible end result from the hardcore Russophobic ultranationalism that drives nations like Poles and Ukrainians to turning themselves into western whorehouses in a short-sighted attempt to spite Russia.

      Delete
    7. LGJuly 21, 2017 at 1:18 AM

      Speaking of Poland.

      http://www.unz.com/tsaker/how-russia-should-deal-with-the-pilban-syndrome-pbs/

      Delete
    8. AnonymousJuly 21, 2017 at 1:08 PM

      Great link LG, right on topic and a very interesting look at a very interesting situation. I suggest everyone take the time to read it. I completely agree with the symptoms and explanation the author listed. The suggested solution that Russia just disengage from Poland, Ukraine and the Baltics fits in with what I suggested, which is that within a generation or two those countries would be utterly and permanently destroyed by the EU. Sadly Russia can't disengage because those countries are going to be key staging grounds in the next attempt at Operation Barbarossa.

      Again, if we Armenians want to be successful we need to be studying these nations and learning from their mistakes. Armenia is clear not an "oblast" of Russia, in fact Russia objectively caves in to many of Armenia's demands, from Iskander missiles to exceptions in Eurasian Union trade rules exclusively for Armenia, and probably even waiving the requirement that Russian be made an official language for driver's license recognition for Armenia. Armenia is not a vassal, it is a sovereign nation and it is scoring some relatively major benefits at the moment by playing the major world powers off each other at the moment. By stark contrast, eastern EU members are powerless non-sovereign vassals, ranging from Russophobes in Poland and the Baltics, corrupt and short-sighted nations Hungary and Romania and Bulgaria, to nations like Greece that have had their spirits broken.

      On the topic of Poland, isn't it funny how Poles and Romanians (actual Romanians as well as Gypsys from Romania) became the only acceptable targets for attacks and insults during the Brexit debate? UK law criminalizes criticism of Muslims and nonwhite immigrants, so the nativists and anti-immigration groups focused their energy on attacking eastern Europeans on grounds of undermining native workers, not assimilating, abusing welfare, organized crime, etc... There was barely a peep out of the "proud" Polish nationalists that their NATO overlords in the UK openly despise them. I wonder what it feels like to be a Pole in London and see Pakistani rape gangs totally ignored, and people instead attacking you on cheap labor grounds.

      Anyway here is a Muslim guy in a dress yelling at a Polish guy he got in a car accident with in Britain. The Pole came off as a real pussy in my opinion, but whatever. Considering what was discussed above and in the unz article you posted, I really can't wait to see the EU settle large numbers of these people in Poland:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEoSML6swcs

      Delete
    9. AnonymousJuly 21, 2017 at 1:53 PM

      Note I don't hate Poles or Baltics, and I feel closer to Romanians and Bulgarians than I do to other nations. It's just that I find stupidity and suicidal behavior to be particularly loathsome national characteristics, chalk it up to trauma associated with involvement in Armenian politics. The non-Orthodox Russophobes in eastern Europe indirectly pose a threat to Armenia because they are facilitating Anglo-American-Zionist plans to undermine Russia; while the Orthodox EU and NATO states -apart from Serbia which is under military occupation- are simply major disappointments selling themselves out. On paper at least all of these nations would be obligated to defend Turkey if for some hypothetical reason a Russian-backed Armenian campaign to finally liberate Western Armenia was undertaken.

      It's an interesting thought experiment, at least from an academic perspective, considering that a (significantly?) weakened Turkish in the not-too-distant future is an inevitability. None of the states I mentioned value Armenians attaining justice from Turkey more than they value protecting themselves from an imaginary Russian threat via strengthening Turkey to serve as an anti-Russian pawn. The whole thing has a meta vibe to it because a century ago our French, British, and American partners also proved more interesting in maintaining a strong Turkish state as an anti-Russian pawn than they did in supporting justice for Armenia at the expenses of the Turkish Empire.

      Delete
  31. ArevordiJuly 17, 2017 at 12:13 PM

    I watched the following television interview with President Sargsyan last night on Armenia TV. The interview concentrated mainly on the dispute over Artsakh, including Russian-Armenian relations. It was in my opinion a very impressive performance by the president -

    Ռ-Էվոլյուցիա, Թողարկում 203 / R-Evolution: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ea24VhcCHc

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ArevordiJuly 18, 2017 at 2:17 PM

      I want to revisit some fundamental points regarding Russian arms sales to Azerbaijan:

      Russian arms sales to Azerbaijan IS NOT a threat to Armenia. Moscow is executing a very complex geostrategic agenda. Armenians are incapable of fully understanding this agenda because Armenians are too emotional and politically illiterate. In a nutshell, the agenda is meant to create military parity between Yerevan and Baku and keep both parties dependent on Russia. Russian arms sales to Azerbaijan is not designed to help Azeris defeat Armenians of Artsakh. Moscow gives Armenia the countermeasures (often for free) for every weapons system Baku purchases from Moscow. Moscow knows that Armenia transfers these weapons to Artsakh but does nothing to stop it. We must also understand that Baku has the money to purchases whatever it wants from whoever it wants and Yerevan does not. Baku however pays market prices for everything it acquires from Russia, while Yerevan pays domestic (Russian) prices, and as noted above, sometimes Armenia is given weapons for free. If Russia did not sell weapons to Azerbaijan, there are nations like Turkey, Israel, Ukraine, China and Pakistan, to name only a few, that would. And in the process, Russia would lose all leverage over Baku, making the situation between Yerevan and Baku even more dangerous. Moreover, Moscow is actively seeking ways to place peacekeeping troops between Armenians and Azeris. Moscow will therefore use its leverage over Yerevan and Baku to eventually realize this agenda. Moscow’s ultimate intention here is to bring peace to the region and reincorporate it back into its political and economic orbit. Being that our small, impoverished, landlocked and blockaded homeland is located is a very dangerous region of the world, this is something that should be wished for by all Armenians.

      President Sargsyan understands all this. But, being that he is the president of the Armenian republic, and being that he is also under constant pressure from the West, he cannot openly talk about it, let alone support Moscow's position. President Sargsyan is also trying to put some pressure on Moscow, which is good. However, if you read between the lines, that is if you listen carefully to what he has to say, you will see President Sargsyan subtly acknowledging all that I have written.

      Those who do not understand any of what I wrote are either Western funded cyber activists out to drive a wedge between Armenia and Russia or simple minded, emotional people who simply do not understand the world they live in.

      Sadly, in this regard, I see Baku acting much more rationally -

      President Aliyev: No allergy in Azerbaijan for Russia's selling arms to Armenia: http://en.trend.az/azerbaijan/politics/2543191.html

      Delete
  32. AnonymousJuly 17, 2017 at 10:43 PM

    I can't really support Tucker Carlson for reasons similar to why Arevordi said he couldn't bring himself to vote for Trump... but he did a pretty good job gassing this Russophobe jew neocohen live on air. This was a serious Auschwitz-tier massacre of the holy tenets of mainstream western cuckservatism; a few years ago it would have been hard to imagine a hardcore neocon jew being mocked, derided, and summarily dismissed with such contempt and sarcasm like this. He even gave a few rare honest statements on Iran. The jew looked real weak and his arguments were all appeals to emotion. I wonder what affect watching something like this has on the typical American audience.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peqzjAqqVqI

    BONUS: Congressman demands attacks against Russia because of RT, Tucker questions whether this includes punishing RT's Larry King as a traitor:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja5eO3KHaWo

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. մարJuly 21, 2017 at 10:30 PM

      CrossTalk: Neocons Return
      ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gq13-QnhnTw

      they mention the Tucker Carlson recent debate with Max, too

      Delete
    2. AnonymousJuly 23, 2017 at 1:45 AM

      Mar I actually caught that episode of CrossTalk when it originally aired on RT. I try to give credit where credit is due, Tucker did a very good job there and deserves recognition. Needless to say, when someone the caliber of Peter Lavelle notes your work, it is a good sign.

      I wonder what, if any, connections Tucker and Sean Hannity have with the Trump campaign. They are both part of the system, but they are also the most powerful journalists in the country right now. If Trump wants to push his policy of normalizing relations with Russia through in spite of opposition from Democrats and Republicans, perhaps his trusted agents can advise Tucker, Hannity, and Super Male Vitality Jones to begin attacking the Russophobes as anti-American. Soviet-style propaganda is unnecessary here, just keep saying exactly what Tucker has been saying lately like "just like WW2 Russia and the US are facing the same enemy and should work together" and "there is no legitimate argument for why my children should sacrifice their lives in a war against Russia over Lithuania" and "the sane intelligence agencies which lied about WMDs in Iraq are now claiming without a scintilla of evidence that Russia 'hacked the election' whatever that means, and furthermore we are being told that if we ask questions it makes us unpatriotic, traitors, and puppets of Vladimir Putin."

      I'm not losing sight of the fact that the Russophobe establishment remains large and in charge in the west and controls most of the news and entertainment media, but like I've been saying the Internet and the Trump phenomenon have pretty much wrecked the credibility of traditionally dominant media like CNN and the NYT.

      Here is Alex Jones doing what he does best (just jump to 3:42 and enjoy this genius performance art):
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mOtYUvrkyw#t=3m42s

      I'd like to see Trump appoint Alex Jones as press secretary, it would be the death blow to the media.

      Delete
  33. ArtoJuly 19, 2017 at 7:15 AM

    Breaking news! Russian separatists in Ukraine declared new state.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/18/separatists-ukraine-declare-creation-new-state-malorossiya/

    http://www.newsweek.com/big-russia-quashes-hopes-little-russia-ukraine-638440

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ArevordiJuly 20, 2017 at 11:41 AM

      A few things to note -

      The separatists have declared independence (most likely at the urging of Russian officials) but Moscow has not officially recognized the new republic. As I noted a few years ago, this is the Karabakhization of the conflict. This conflict will last indefinitely. Moscow may one day in the future move into the territory to incorporate it into the Russian Federation, or it may all together abandon its plans over the territory if it reaches a meaningful accord with a future government in Kiev.

      To help us Armenians better understand the situation in the region, we should think of Crimea as Artsakh proper; as soon as the opportunity arose Moscow spared no effort to liberate it and will now defend every square inch of it. And we should think of "Novorossiya" or "Malorossiya" as the regions outside of Artsakh. In other words, the regions east of Artsakh proper.

      We see Moscow giving priority to Crimea. Similarly, we see Yerevan giving priority to Artsakh proper. If Yerevan has not yet officially recognized Artsakh and Moscow has recognized Crimea, it's only because Armenia is not a major power.

      Armenians who complain about Russians selling arms to Baku or not openly supporting to Artsakh need to be asked these fundamental questions: Is Moscow openly supporting Russian separatists in Ukraine? Is Moscow directly intervening in the conflict there every time a separatist is killed on the line of contact? Is Moscow cutting off vital energy supplies to Ukraine? In other words, is Moscow cutting off all relations with their Western-backed enemies in Kiev? The answer for all these questions is, no.

      So, why should official Moscow recognize Artsakh; why should official Moscow rush to defend Armenians in Artsakh; why should official Moscow cut of relations with Baku?

      Moscow waited decades to liberate Crimea, and did so only when Kiev had descended into chaos. Now it will use the territories its separatists are controlling in south-eastern Ukraine as pawns - to maintain pressure on Kiev in order to get concessions from it.

      If we emotional and politically illiterate Armenians want to learn statecraft, we need to closely observe how Moscow conducts politics.

      Delete
    2. JerrikoJuly 21, 2017 at 8:26 AM

      What happened to the Novorossiya project? And why are they declaring another one when they haven't finished their previous project? As far as I'm concerned, isn't Malorossiya technically consisted of the lands that constituted central Ukraine?

      Delete
    3. մարJuly 21, 2017 at 10:51 PM

      @ Jerriko M.

      I was wondering that same thing
      +
      http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/07/duterte-calls-us-lousy-country-and-says.html

      "I will never go to the US either during my presidency, or after," Duterte told journalists on July 21. "I saw America, and it's a lousy country. Why won't the US Congress investigate human rights violations during the killing of civilians in the wars in the Middle East - looks like I'll have to investigate it myself. "

      Delete
    4. JerrikoJuly 23, 2017 at 10:05 PM

      I won't be surprised if the Dickhead President ends up ruffling the feathers of the Rothschild untermenschen when asking about dead Palestinians or dead Syrians, though his main focus is the ISIS insurgency in Mindanao.

      In other news:
      http://news.abs-cbn.com/news/07/18/17/reds-offer-to-co-found-federal-govt-joma

      My response to this will naturally be "over my dead, rotting body". Any reforms that involve allowing Reds to play a role is something I would oppose.

      Delete
  34. ArevordiJuly 20, 2017 at 11:48 PM

    Duma Speaker suggests making Russian official language in Armenia: http://www.mediamax.am/en/news/foreignpolicy/24345/

    Moscow Suggests Armenia Adopt Russian As Official Language: http://www.eurasianet.org/node/84396

    Eurasian Union Executive Tells Russia to Scrap Ban On Armenian Driving Licenses: http://asbarez.com/165009/eurasian-union-executive-tells-russia-to-scrap-ban-on-armenian-driving-licenses/

    Recent comments by the Speaker of the Russian Duma has caused quite a stir among Armenians. Needless to say, Western financed media outlets are jumping on it, as it gives them another opportunity to further disseminate Russophobia in Armenian society. What's amusing here is that those who are acting hysterical over this matter are for the most past the same garbage that would have loved to see Armenia join the European Union - where the adoption of English as an official language would have been mandatory. Moscow is at least giving Yerevan an option, as membership in the CSTO and the Eurasian Economic Union does not come with such conditions.

    Most likely, given the sensitivity of the issue, Moscow will compromise on this issue. Had Russians been as subversive or as conniving as Westerners, they would have long ago forced Armenia to adopt Russian as an official language as a condition for all the military, energy, economic and financial support Armenia has been receiving for the past 25 years. In fact, there would be many, many conditions placed on Armenia (both cultural and political) had Yerevan joined the European Union.

    In my humble opinion, if official Yerevan wants the hundreds-of-thousands of Armenian citizens who periodically work in the Russian Federation to have the same rights as Russian citizens, it should expect some conditions from Moscow. It's natural. You cannot enter the home of another family and be expected to be treated as a family member there if you do not take measures to be fully accepted by the said family.

    In any case, I personally would fully support any measure to give Russian an official status in Armenia. I find it troubling that many Armenians are worried about Russian, while the state of the Armenian language (and culture in general) in Armenia today is worst than it was during Soviet times. I find it troubling that Armenians are worried about Russian, even though English has been slowly been replacing Russian throughout Armenia -

    Foreign Language Yerevan: Capitalism Speaks English: http://hetq.am/eng/news/73087/foreign-language-yerevan-capitalism-speaks-english.html/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ArevordiJuly 20, 2017 at 11:54 PM

      The following is a quote taken from my commentary -

      English today is the catalyst upon which Globalization (where everybody speaks English and trades in Western currency and where there are no genders, religions, borders or nationalities) travels on. English is also the vehicle upon which Westernization (the spread of materialism and the worship of Anglo-American-Jewish-African pop culture) is disseminated around the world. It would be wise for us to recognize that language imparts outlook and mentality on its speaker. Every language has a value system of its own. Every language is a world of its own. English today may be the language of international trade, but it is also the language of idiots, perverts and Western-financed activists. For a poor, remote and isolated nation like Armenia, learning English is also the first steppingstone for either leaving the country permanently or working for some Western-financed NGO that is trying to undermine Armenia's statehood.

      The most powerful weapon Western powers have in their military arsenal is by-far the cultural influence they have over humanity. And it is we the sheeple, and the choices we make, that give them their power over us. By far, the most important language in Armenia today (after Armenian of course) has to be Russian. Again, I say this as an Anglophone. I look at this matter logically: Russian is the language of Armenia's largest and most affluent diaspora, largest investor, largest trade partner, largest energy provider, the largest proportion of tourists visiting Armenia, largest arms supplier and ONLY military ally.

      As it has been for the past two hundred years, Armenia today lives because of its close ties to Russia. Yet, young people in Armenia are striving to learn English instead?! And they say Armenians are smart?!

      Delete
    2. LGJuly 21, 2017 at 1:14 AM

      Arevordi,

      All the young Armenians I meet in Armenia or recent arrivals know both Russian and English. The truly studious know French or Spanish as well.

      I am not worried about Russian losing its status in Armenia. But it also shouldn't be pressed upon us to make it a de jure official language. There are less than 9000 ethnic Russians in Armenia. If the government of Russia wants to fund the creation of more Russophile organizations that teach the locals about Russian history, culture, language, etc so be it, that is totally fine. And the Armenian government ought to be open to that as well.

      But Armenia should work on cultivating its own culture so that we can truly deserve the state motto of 'One nation, on culture'

      Delete
    3. ArevordiJuly 21, 2017 at 12:34 PM

      LG,

      What was it in what I wrote that suggested I don't want Armenia "to cultivating its own culture so that we can truly deserve the state motto of 'One nation, on culture'"? You are reading too much into what I said.

      Armenia has nothing to lose and a lot to gain from giving Russian official status. However, I agree with you that Russia needs to do more to promote its civilization in Armenia. Every year I spend a significant amount of time in Armenia, and I have extensive dealings with all kinds of locals here. From what I see, especially here in Yerevan, the Russian language is fast losing ground to English. All Armenian banks make US citizens declare their Armenian bank accounts to the IRS. Financial transactions are conducted in English. Most private businesses conduct their business in Armenian and English, and there are some that do so primarily in English. Most shops advertise only in English, even though a majority of their customers are locals and tourists from Russia.

      Couple of years ago I walked into a cafe near Republic Square and asked to see their menu. The waiter brought me an English language menu. I said, I would like to see an Armenian language menu. He said to me they don't have any. I said to him I am leaving. I later found out that the owner of the cafe was American or British. Yes, this cafe was an exception, but more and more of these types of businesses are springing up in Yerevan. Had there not been laws demanding businesses to conduct their business in Armenian, there would be much more of these types of places opening up.

      Lastly, don't kid yourself: The typical young Armenian today speaks better English than Russian. Most of them prefer English. An increasing number of them cant even hold a simple conversation in Russian, even though they learn it in school. The situation is gradually getting worst as more and more of the younger generation want to be "cool". They therefore yearn to learn English.

      Needless to say, low grade Western pop-culture, one that primarily appeals to the primitive/animal instincts of humans, plays a massive role in this equation.

      Russian is the language of boring stuff like Dostoevsky and Tolstoy and bad times like Communism and World War 2, where as English is the language of cool stuff like "freedom", blockbuster films, rap, jazz, Kardashians, porno, internet, etc.

      Delete
    4. AnonymousJuly 21, 2017 at 1:11 PM

      You want to see Armenian maturity on this issue:

      https://www.reddit.com/r/armenia/comments/6o193h/moscow_suggests_armenia_adopt_russian_as_official/

      Of course that forum is only visited by diasporan akhpars who may or may not be wearing panties at any given moment so it doesn't really matter...

      The statement "if its about 'brotherly relations' then Russia should make Armenian an official language" is the level of maturity here, like a 7 year old brat whose parents failed to discipline it.

      Delete
    5. AnonymousJuly 21, 2017 at 4:39 PM

      On this topic, am I the only one here who hates the ArmComedy group? WTF is the point of making shitty attempts at satire in broken English (pro tip: English with a heavy Armenian accent is among the ugliest varieties of English.) Who is the intended audience? The show is clearly political in nature, is it just supposed to get a bunch of keyboard gay rights badasses in Glendale worked up? Same with Armenia's Eurovision entries; I know Eurovision is absolute garbage but if you are going to make an entry why not go ahead and create something someone unique and national in form, rather than an imitation of a standard American pop song featuring a vocalist who isn't fluent in English - the most mediocre Harut Pamboukjian hit from the 1980s would be more interesting than Armenia's entries... These are relatively minor things but useful indicators in larger cultural trends. Also jazz is degenerate and gay, I don't know a single person under 60 who listens to jazz, apart from rumors that hipster fags do it ironically.

      Regarding Russian culture in Armenia, I agree that Russia's best move would be to promote their civilization more actively in Armenia. I think the main fascination Armenians have with the west is the thought of getting rich quick and acquiring luxury goods and high end lifestyles. Armenians are attracted to Armani and "Mercedes Brabus, bro" way, way more (by a wide margin) than they are interested in gender fluidity theory or the concept of sharing your wife with Syrian refugees from Ethiopia as a expression of resistance to the toxic repressiveness of Christianity-based patriarchy, or German canine brothels and such.

      Russia's best move would be to appeal to what they already know Armenians actually crave: continuously promote the idea that the Eurasian Union is a Russian-speaking cash cow waiting to be exploited.

      Delete
    6. AmirianJuly 22, 2017 at 10:00 AM

      In my opinion Russian should be made into, as it was not long ago, the second official language. English can be picked up one way or another. The jewified American subculture is undermining the national cultural and its degenerate influence is spreading fast. The authorities would do well to adopt countermeasures to battle against its subvertive and seditious nature. I also experienced a weird incident in a cafe 5 years ago. I went in to have a shot of vodka and a cup of coffee, once inside I was assaulted by the cacophonous jungle sounds of negro howling, as background "sound". I asked the waiter why are they playing this filthy sound, instead of Armenian music; where are we , in NY or in Armenia? He could not respond, I got up and left the premise.

      The new generation assumes airs of excessive self importance if they can doodle a few words in English. I have also noticed billboards and advertising hoards using photos of negros with English captions, propaganda for some shaving cream, or something else. They should use photos of Armenian, not aliens.

      The comment that "Armenians are smart", drew a chuckle and reminded me of my dear old grandmother with her often repeated Turkish proverb. My grandmother was Turkish speaking, although she knew Armenian very well. They had escaped from the Smyrna catastrophe in 1922, minus 5 members of her family that were killed/burnt alive in that inferno. When she wanted to admonish us kids, for some indiscredition, she would repeat the proverb in Turkish, which translated figuratively means "the Armenian brain wakes up late".

      Delete
    7. ArtoJuly 22, 2017 at 3:00 PM

      Arevordi, trust me my friend your words have more value than a Armenian Russian speaker saying the same things as you. Wanting Armenians to learn Russian even tough you are a English speaker is a powerful testimony to the decline of Western civilization. Who could predict this 25 years ago?

      Delete
    8. Ռազմիկ ԱրտաշեսAugust 10, 2017 at 7:08 PM

      @Arevordi and others

      I recall having a similar experience, and may have possibly been the same restaurant (or cafe) close to Republic Square. English keeps on gaining more ground in Yerevan.

      A few years back I was meeting a friend in Yerevan. She all of a sudden starting talking in English to me with her bad grammar and accent. After a few sentences I called her out, she excused herself claiming that she wanted to "practice more"

      A few months ago I met an PhD student who just moved here (Canada) from Armenia. Despite her high intellect in her field, when I brought up the importance of the Russian language for Armenia, she dismissed it, deeming it "unnecessary and pointless" and that her generation (she's in her early 20s) barely speaks Russian (just as you mentioned) and they just don't care, because Russian is "old", "uncool", whereas English is "hip" and the "language of business" (except that more and more businessmen are learning foreign languages such as Russian, Spanish, German and Mandarin to conduct business in those countries).

      The millenial Armenians (especially those raised in Armenia post 1991) are going to cause a lot of headache with their otaramolutyun.

      Delete
  35. AnonymousJuly 23, 2017 at 8:17 AM

    http://thediplomat.com/2017/07/can-japan-and-india-counter-china-in-the-caucasus/

    This author probably has good interests but his analysis here is wrong. The problem is that he is applying his Reagan-worshiping cuckservative mindset to Armenian issues - I'm sure he cannot break his American bias against the Chinese and favoritism towards the Japanese and to a lesser extent India. In order words, racism is evil except when applied to America's rivals. As a general rule, no one based in the United States should ever give an opinion on Armenian issues, except for a few rare exceptions like Arevordi. And as the author in the article proves, people holding PhDs generally ought to be looked down upon as overly theoretical and disconnected from reality.

    I appreciate Japanese aid to Armenia, but China is just too important and cannot be replaced. First off Chinese wealth is enormous; China if it wanted could quadruple the Armenian governments national budget through grants and China would not feel a dent. But as important as economic cooperation is, it is actually military aid and support against pan-Turkism are the most important facets of Sino-Armenian relations. China has tens of millions of Turkic peoples, Mongoloid peoples, and Sunni Muslims concentrated in its territory and China has no interest seeing NATO-member Turkey gain influence in the Caucasus or Central Asia - this is one of the reasons China has such close relations with Iran and Armenia. Japan by contrast cannot even fully assert its interests in the pacific, how the hell can anyone argue that Japan is ready to make a presence in the South Caucasus in any form other than (much appreciated) economic and technological aid?

    Chinese relations with the pathetic shitskins in Pakistan has no bearing on Armenia, it is solely directed at India. What happens between China and India is as inconsequential to tiny Armenia as what China does in its Tibert region - it's none of our business, and these mostly diasporan "activists" out to familiarize themselves with the following legal concept (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Officious_intermeddler). While I greatly respect Japan, it is a culture facing serious decline thanks to the poisonous effect of being an American vassal. Here are a few articles showing the poisonous effect of American values in South Korea and Japan:

    http://www.dailystormer.com/negro-ap-beauty-demands-nation-be-flooded-with-third-world-hordes/


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/afp/article-4684162/S-Koreas-black-model-faces-widespread-racism.html

    Armenia needs to focus on Russia, and to a lesser extent Iran and China as its closest allies. I think most people around the world are now beginning to understand that Europe is in serious decline, so "pro-Armenian" countries like France and Greece should be placed on a lower tier of diplomatic focus while rising powers like China gain focus. And I'm all for Armenia developing relations with prosperous, advanced, and admittedly friendly Asian nations like Japan, Korea, Singapore, as well as India and others. But what the guy with the PhD is suggesting in his article, that China play Japan and India off of China, is senseless.

    On a side note, I'd like to see a policy of agitating Best Korea against Turks and Azeris take shape.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JerrikoJuly 24, 2017 at 10:45 AM

      Sunni Muslims living within China's borders that aren't Turkic Uyghurs are called Hui Muslims, basically Han Chinese who converted to Islam.

      It may come as surprise to most people here, but North Koreans have also displayed racist rhetoric, as followed by this article here:

      http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/michael-day/north-korea_b_15896118.html

      Another article explaining North Korea's surprising hostility towards Africans:

      http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/fighting_words/2010/02/a_nation_of_racist_dwarfs.html

      In the second article explained above, it is not surprising that the mixed race offspring that South Koreans prefer are white, but it is amusing that SJWs are not whining about how white skinned South Koreans should be checking their privilege and all the other institutional racist BS they're espousing.

      Regarding Japan, their declining demographics are a serious problem as a result of young Japanese people's desire not to get into relationships at all. It seems that the expectations that were long ingrained in Japanese society (such as the patriarch of the family being the breadwinner while the wife should stay home) has made young Japanese people more eager to avoid relationships altogether. It doesn't help that more Japanese women are choosing their careers over their children (a trait often shared with Western countries) while Japanese men find relationships too hard.

      https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/20/young-people-japan-stopped-having-sex

      Drastically speaking, the only realistic way that the Japanese would solve their demographic problems would be to bring in Korean immigrants who would intermarry with the Japanese, although this might also trigger bitter animosity between two nations as a result of the Japanese colonial period in Korea. Technically speaking, the Japanese royal family does have some Korean blood, with one of the concubines of a Japanese emperor who reigned in the 6th century belonging to the same dynasty that ruled the Korean kingdom of Baekje.

      Another example of a declining Japanese interest in human relationships:

      http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/823088/Sex-dolls-Japan-Dutch-Wives-Senji-Nakajima

      http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/07/05/world/science-health-world/need-talk-sex-robot-experts-say/#.WXWh8YjyuUk

      I can't believe how disturbing this is. Not even the most cucked Western European nations would resort to sex dolls to satisfy their declining sex drive. This is one shocking trend that might end up destroying Japan's civilization altogether.

      "Best" Korea doesn't have any relations with Turkey to speak of. In fact, Turkey actually sent its troops in the Korean War to fight alongside the south, so if anything, South Korea's relationship with Turkey is a lot warmer. Azerbaijan virtually has no quarrel with the Norks, so I'm not sure what kind of benefit the Norks would have in picking a fight with Azerbaijan.

      Delete
    2. LGAugust 10, 2017 at 1:21 AM

      Areg is based in Russia. He came across like a level headed Armenian patriot when I interacted with him.

      I did not read the article because the title alone implies an event that is highly unlikely to occur. It is a non starter.
      Experts in foreign policy/IR are a dime a dozen.

      Delete
    3. AnonymousAugust 11, 2017 at 1:40 PM

      LG, I agree with everything you posted.

      Like I said at the very beginning, he seems like he has good intentions. It just struck me that someone could think up such a pointless position. And on top of that he has a PhD, which as a rule makes him the kind of person I like to attack - I always point out that it was assholes with PhDs that fucked up the Aral Sea and significantly lowered the water level in Lake Sevan. They probably also had good intentions too, sadly not enough people at the time beat them into silence.

      I favor using Pol Pot levels of scrutiny when dealing with the intelligentsia, otherwise before you know it global warming becomes a religion, GMO foods and processes sugars become totally safe, race and sex become a "social construct," monogamy and marriage and family become oppressive, and there is no God. Shortly thereafter, your society becomes sterile and your people are standing at train stations holding "refugees welcome" signs for their own intelligentsia-resistant replacements.

      Anyway here are some positive Armenia-China developments:


      China begins construction of new embassy building in Armenia
      http://arka.am/en/news/politics/china_begins_construction_of_new_embassy_building_in_armenia/

      Li Huilai: The high-level relations and friendship between China and Armenia are based on sincerity and mutual respect
      https://www.armradio.am/en/2017/08/10/li-huilai-the-high-level-relations-and-friendship-between-china-and-armenia-are-based-on-sincerity-and-mutual-respect/

      Armenia, China look to launch direct flights
      http://www.panorama.am/en/news/2017/08/10/Armenia-China-look-to-launch-direct-air-flights/1818660

      Delete
  36. SonOfAmalekJuly 24, 2017 at 6:29 AM

    This interview caught my eye:

    Complex of Superiority?
    https://www.rt.com/shows/worlds-apart-oksana-boyko/397227-us-election-hacking-scandal/

    ReplyDelete
  37. մարJuly 26, 2017 at 2:21 PM

    Quranic view on Russia and The Eastern Orthodox Christianity - The coming alliance
    ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezFPjZ10pj0

    I won't lie, this was beautifully made. Enjoy everyone

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. մարJuly 28, 2017 at 9:43 AM

      A Street in Honor of the Armenian General has been Named in Belgorod, Russia
      ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oaz_lQgpUU

      On May 23, by the decision of the municipal authorities of the city of Belgorod, Russia; a street was named in honor of the Armenian general and Hero of the Soviet Union Mr. Sargis Martirosyan. The author of this initiative is Mr. Stepan Stepanyan, Doctor of Historical Sciences.

      Delete
    2. մարAugust 2, 2017 at 2:10 PM

      The Saker: The Syrian Powderkeg, Published on Jul 11, 2017
      ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQmQuEbk3Ng

      'Following up on our recent warning about the situation in Syria, Chris sits down this week for a conversation with The Saker, who writes extensively on geo-political and military matters. The Saker (a nom-de-plume), is a former intelligence expert with professional and personal insights into Russia and the Middle East.

      He shares our deep concern for the dangerously misdirected current state of US foreign and military policy, as well as the potentially lethal repercussions these threaten to have in the powderkeg that is Syria.

      In this week's podcast, The Saker provides an excellent distillation of the complex forces in play in Syria -- as well as in the brewing friction between the US and Russia -- and why the risk of nuclear war has now grown higher than it has been in decades.'

      Delete
    3. մարAugust 4, 2017 at 2:32 PM

      Prof. Azadgan - Is There Divergence Between Iran & Russia Over Syria? - (Part 1/3)
      ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4IepmF-B7E

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zj--vbIQsOI Part 2/3

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXiFn8OW3r8 Part 3/3

      Delete
  38. Longtime readerJuly 29, 2017 at 10:41 AM

    Russia has disabled U.S. Tomahawks in Syria!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iC0t7gP3m2g&feature=youtu.be

    ReplyDelete
  39. մարAugust 1, 2017 at 10:32 AM

    Georgia: Opening ceremony for NATO-led military drills launches in Vaziani
    ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbFygVEylQw

    Armenia participated in this? Clearly see our flag at 0:03 & 1:19, grouped along with Turkey's. Then Armenians have the audacity to have the highest on demand expectations from Russia.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ArevordiAugust 1, 2017 at 7:16 PM

      It's simply part of the 25-plus years of "complimentary politics" bullshit employed by official Yerevan. It's all meant to make garbage like this feel good -

      Ուրվագիծ 19.07.2017 : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S85DTYeF4FA

      Armenians around the world are proud of the fact that Armenians troops can stand next to Turks, Anglo-Americans, Ukrainians and Georgians and practice how to repel a Russian invasion... but then cry like bitches that Moscow does not give Armenia white glove treatment. I have always said that for Armenia's benefit, Moscow needs to keep Armenians on a short leash.

      PS: But there is another angle to this. Russian agents are well represented throughout the Armenian military. These military exercises are a good way to see first hand what's going on in NATO circles.

      Delete
    2. AyrudziAugust 2, 2017 at 2:00 AM

      the PS: statement you made is the more plausible. I think most Armenians of Armenia are beginning to understand that "complimentary politics" isn't the right thing to do

      Delete
    3. ArevordiAugust 2, 2017 at 9:22 AM

      Ayrudzi,

      Unfortunately, both are very real. There are Russian agents throughout Armenia and Armenia's military is to a certain degree controlled by Russia. And Armenian society is indeed very proud of Yerevan's complimentary politics and a vast majority of Armenians today (consciously or subconsciously) relish Western culture (democracy, music, movies, languages, etc) and products (cars, clothing, foods, etc). This is exactly how it was 2000 years ago when Armenia was stuck between Persia (today's Russia) and Rome (today's West), when Armenia was trying its best to have a foot in both the Persian and Roman camps.

      Delete
    4. ArevordiAugust 2, 2017 at 12:56 PM

      Speaking of the increasing corrosive influences of the Western world inside Armenian society, the following is a television discussion about the Masonic lodge that opened in Armenia recently -

      Ուրվագիծ 31.05.2017: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raSODjpf_uE

      Delete
    5. BorodinoAugust 2, 2017 at 3:01 PM

      Speaking about Masonic lodges in Armenia, it is an ambivalent conundrum to realize that a good number of high government representatives of 1918-21 were Mason's. Simon Vratzian, one of the many others. Another notable Masonic personality was AH miracle economic/finance wizard Hjalmar, who was not pursued by the Allies at the end of the war. Opus Dei, the religious order which stood behind Franco's administration had Masonic origins, which in turn had Talmudic origins. In the end they brought down Franco's reign following his death and contributed to Spain's abject surrender to Marxist/liberal ideology. We can recall The Generalismo's last speech before the assembled throng of supporters in October 75 from the balcony , Spain was facing a serious political crisis then- terrorism, sabotage,assassinations- declaring Spain is under a Masonic assault. As for Armenian soldiers parading next to Turks in NATO led exercises it's another hair raising interrogation. Russia has an inside look and overall influence over the Armenian armed forces. It would stand to reason to gauge the extent of Russian acquiescence to his type of complementary politics. On the one hand it grants the illusion that Armenia is demonstrating its sovereign status to pursue independent politics, on the other hand it might be servicing higher state interests. If a critical point is breached we may not harbor any doubts as to where and with whom Armenia would be standing next.

      Delete
    6. AnonymousAugust 3, 2017 at 2:38 AM

      That is so fucking disappointing. I sincerely hope someone at the NSS, or if not then someone at the FSB and GRU, is compiling a list of every piece of shit who decides to associate himself with that masonic lodge, and at some point in the near future the situation is dealt with the way Stalin would have dealt with it. The west is in decline, we really have no excuse to tolerate what we know are subversive and toxic western-rooted secret societies operating in our country.

      As for military drills with Georgia, I guess they can teach us their amazing retreating tactics. I remember thinking way back in August 2008 as I watched reports on tv "damn, look at those Georgians running back to Tbilisi." Although it would probably have been smarter to send Armenia's Olympic athletes competing in running sports than our soldiers, because to their credit during the past quarter century of independence and constant war with Azerbaijan, no Armenian soldiers to my knowledge have run away from the battlefield.

      Delete
    7. AnonymousAugust 3, 2017 at 11:23 PM

      If you didn’t notice, there’s not Azeri troops participating in the Georgia drills. From an Azeri perspective, how do you think they would view Turkish troops next to Armenian ones? Possibly offensive, to put it mild?

      Delete
    8. ArevordiAugust 3, 2017 at 11:45 PM

      The military exercise in question is organized by the political West and it is meant to send a message to Russia. So, Armenia, as well as all the other participants, are there to more or less impress Western powers and partake in a Western show of force designed against Russia. Armenian and Turkish military units have been coming into contact with each other in NATO circles for many years now and Azeris are not stupid enough to believe that Armenia and Turkey will become friends as a result. In any case, Baku was going to participate in the event but it pulled out shortly before it began. If I had to guess, I would say Baku did it to impress Moscow. Baku has doing its best to convince Moscow to take a step back from Armenia and give it a green light in Artsakh.

      Delete
    9. RaffiAugust 4, 2017 at 10:28 AM

      See this azerbaijani propaganda in line with what you are saying
      https://en.trend.az/scaucasus/armenia/2783518.html

      Delete
    10. AnonymousAugust 4, 2017 at 10:31 PM

      "Azeris are not stupid enough to believe that Armenia and Turkey will become friends as a result"

      Stupidity is the mere suggestion of something like that happening. Perhaps stupider than that is your suggestion of Azeris getting Russian concessions on Karabakh by holding back from participation. (I wonder how much Armenia's UN vote was worth to Russia when it ended up with a handful of rouge states in going against the rest of the world). In other words, pleasing Russia doesn't decide anything. As a matter of fact, Azeris view Turks and Armenians beside eachother in military drills is extremely insulting from an Azeri perspective, from the grassroots level to the filthy, sadistic head. It is helpful is driving some wedge between them.

      Delete
    11. մարAugust 5, 2017 at 1:56 AM

      We seriously need our own platform before English Speaking videos like this go viral. Thankfully, the speaker in the video is not some young 'hip' and 'sheek' modernized Westerner without an accent producing cutting edge clips.

      Russia fueling Armenia's Enemy Turkey, Time to abandon Russia
      ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vvJNIPHFGY

      Why are these people so illiterate when concerning geopolitics? How can you possibly suggest 'look towards America & Europe', the parties directly responsible for arming those who murder Armenians, Assyrians, Yazidis, etc in Syria & Iraq. Those responsible for introducing 'gay culture' into our society. Notice how these types never once suggest perhaps ACTUAL LOBBYING EFFORTS IN MOSCOW. How about creating positive images through parades and social media celebrating and strengthening ties with Russia and co? Instead, wasting energy and focus on participating in Eurovision smut and making stomach cringing hip hop/rap music videos

      Delete
    12. ErnestoAugust 7, 2017 at 8:50 AM

      The elderly gentleman who produced the video about "abandoning Russia", makes some factual valid points against a background canvas of questionable premises. Georgia-Armenia becoming one nation? He does not reveal the extent of in depth Turkish domination over Georgia's economy and the fact that Georgia is a crypto Turkish colony- in a manner of speaking. "Armenia knows how to deal with terrorism, Turks are cowards when venturing out", these are unsubstantiated claims, figments of his febrile imagination. "Armenia should turn to America, Europe, look at Israel, bla bla Balls". Israel is in total control of America and Europe, so how can he describe Israel as an example to follow. Like arevordi says there are many chobans in Armenia, but there does not seem to be a shortage of even bigger choban mentality in the diaspora fragments. Although that is understandable, having been borne, grown and indoctrinated or mal educated in that decaying environment they would not be thinking any differently. The situation with turkey getting the lion share of Russian business contracts is of course not a healthy development from even the Russian perspective. Having Turks building highways and autobahns for Russia challenges one's pride and honor. Where did the Turks gather the intelligence and technology to build autobahns? The sale of S400 to the Turks is another business deal, which apparently angers the Americans, but who knows what secret deals lie behind these Russian-Turkish deals. It seems that turkey is, like Armenia, playing complementary politics too. The Turks can do that efficaciously, bigger country, bigger resources, and courted lovingly by both the West and Russia. In a holiday resort in Dilijan, at the dilijan resort and spa hotel, in the long and pretty open veranda there are TV sets deployed under the ceiling every set of three tables. These TV sets are turned on from 10 am to 23 pm. The program running are from a Russian station and in Russian, filthy , degenerate negro rap sounds are aired, with images of negroes fondling beautiful blondes purporting to be monkey dancing, but more of a coitus simulacra. The irony of it is that although the Muzak is omnipresent, no one drinking in the veranda is watching it. The question raises, why are Russians producing this kind of putrescence and parading it as "culture ", why are these disgustingly rotten programs being aired and shown publicly for the visual catch of toddlers, young and old relaxing In their leisurely hours. Is Russia also "turning west" ??. Why are these type of subculture, negro fornication tv shows are produced and played openly, instead of being banned. It is a formula to addle and dumb the brain. The Jews know how to mesmerize and zombify the masses, this kind of mono degenerate subculture is of American-Jewish import, and has or its becoming like the standard international ID of subculture and subversion.

      Delete
    13. LGAugust 10, 2017 at 1:08 AM

      "PS: But there is another angle to this. Russian agents are well represented throughout the Armenian military. These military exercises are a good way to see first hand what's going on in NATO circles."

      Precisely. Armenia participating in various nato exercises is condoned by Moscow. Otherwise it would not happen.


      Delete
    14. մարAugust 11, 2017 at 1:59 AM

      Serbia to hold military exercises with NATO
      ^ http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/08/something-doesnt-stack-up-serbia-to.html

      Delete
    15. JerrikoAugust 20, 2017 at 9:50 PM

      I'm not surprised, given the brutalized cuckholdry that was imposed on the Serbian government after NATO obliterated them in a bombing blitz in 1999. I wouldn't be surprised if in a few years the cucks in the Serbian government opted for NATO membership, despite widespread opposition to that very idea. Although that didn't stop Montenegro from actually joining NATO despite its supposed close ties to Russia. At this point the Russians might as well court several SE Asian nations and ask if they want to join CSTO.

      On a rather personal note, I was experimenting with the idea of going alt-right, but after going to a rally that was supposed to discuss the problems of uncontrolled immigration but instead turned into a communist rally and the speaker didn't even show up, I'm done with experimenting with the alt-right. Perhaps I could go for being alt-lite or paleoconservative, but at this point the alt-right movement in the West is fast becoming weak.

      Delete
    16. LGAugust 30, 2017 at 1:53 AM

      @Jerriko,

      Where was this so called alt right rally? Did you see what took place in Charlottesville, VA a few weeks ago?
      Since then multiple right wing websites have been unconstitutionally taken down by tech companies like google and godaddy. Leading to calls for the government to step in and regulate tech companies the same way they do with utility firms nationwide.

      Delete
  40. մարAugust 12, 2017 at 4:31 AM

    'If Bitcoin is the model for a new Internet-based global currency, Israel is likely to be its guardian too, protecting that currency from hackers around the world.
    As chief of security for the world’s information and currency, and with energy independence, Israel stands to gain substantial wealth.'
    ^ http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Israel-and-the-unexpected-new-world-order-499310

    'At Putin's side, an army of Jewish billionaires'
    ^ http://www.jpost.com/Jewish-World/Jewish-Features/At-Putins-side-an-army-of-Jewish-billionaires

    The Jewish Role in the Refugee Crisis (well made new video)
    ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfCOO7Z39j0

    ReplyDelete
  41. Ռազմիկ ԱրտաշեսAugust 13, 2017 at 1:06 AM

    According to a new survey, 79% of Armenians do not want to leave Armenia:

    Հարցում. հայերի 79% չի պատրաստվում լքել հայրենիքը

    https://armeniasputnik.am/armenia/20170807/8203326/armenia-harcumner.html

    900 people took the survey, a quarter of whom were from the marzer-s (rural areas or other smaller cities)

    75% of them are youths ages 18 - 35
    72% of them are non-affiliated to any political party


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ErnestoAugust 13, 2017 at 11:11 PM

      Armenians do not want to leave Armenia. Many of them, are left with few options if they can not find employment. However even those who leave, a good many of them return to the homeland once their work life cycle abroad is over. I wonder if Armenians appreciate the treasure they have in having a homeland. I am certain they do. History is littered with nations and races that have come and exited from its pages. Those who leave ,out of necessity, for Russia are always closer to homeland in soul and body, than those who leave for e.g the USA racial stew pot. USA and EU are areas where identities can be lost in a few generations; through assimilation,intermarriages and oblivion.

      On the issue of the cryptocurrencies; it stands to reason that no matter what happens in the end the fatal talmudic embrace appears unavoidable. Since time immemorial the Sanhedrin and the talmudic tribalists always had a stranglehold in matters of fiance, moneys, currencies and everything else that had to do with making and breaking nations and economies. The crypto currencies will , (even now are- who invented these currencies? them, them of course), ultimately become one more string in their bow. The talmudic vice grip on these controlling power springs can be eased only if they are broken asunder. To break them one needs a countervailing force, which at present there is not one.

      Delete
    2. ArevordiAugust 23, 2017 at 1:54 AM

      Ռազմիկ Արտաշես,

      Sorry, I don't believe the results. Surveys/polls can be easily manipulated. Results can therefore mislead. The respondents could have essentially been saying, "ideally" we don't want to leave Armenia... but we may have to because of reasons x, y and z... When it comes to topics like this, you can get different results/answers depending on how you ask the question. Also, what people say in public and what they think in private can be very different.

      I have been visiting Armenia since the early 1990s. I have dealt with large numbers of Armenians from all backgrounds. From what I have personally seen, a clear majority of them would abandon Armenia if they had a chance. They often say they don't want to, but because of this or that reason they feel they may have to. This or that reason they give is merely an excuse to seek greener pastures. Armenians are by nature intelligent and proud and they crave the easy life. Armenia, with all its problems, is simply incapable of providing the typical Armenian today the kind of lifestyle he/she craves. It therefore becomes a problem. This is why I always say Armenia is too small for the Armenian. On a deep psychological level, this natural propensity of Armenians to seek greener pastures is one of the fundamental reasons why the country has had so many sociopolitical and socioeconomic problems. A significant number of Armenians today (perhaps a majority) don't take their statehood seriously. A significant number of Armenians today (perhaps a majority) would rather live in a nation that was already built for them by others, than do what it takes to build a nation of their own.

      Please revisit the following three blog commentaries -

      Why Armenians want out (2013): http://theriseofrussia.blogspot.am/2013/04/the-need-for-cyber-activism-and-why.html

      Collective destructionism of Armenians (2012): http://theriseofrussia.blogspot.am/2012/08/collective-destructionism-and-armenias.html

      The problem with Armenia is not its government, it's the people - Autumn, 2016: http://theriseofrussia.blogspot.com/2016/09/the-problem-with-armenia-is-not-its.html

      I would also like to add this: A proud Armenian can be proud anywhere on earth. A nationalist Armenian can only be proud in Armenia. There is a lot of pride among Armenians today but very little nationalism. I am talking about healthy, pragmatic nationalism and not its backward, choban verity. In any case, Western activists and propaganda outlets throughout the Armenian world have contributed greatly to the erosion of moral in Armenian society. They are therefore a fundamental part of the depopulation problem. Speaking of anti-Armenia activists and propaganda outlets preaching Western-financed doom and gloom, the following are two very recent examples -

      Why Did Armenia Not Feel Like Armenia?: http://armenianweekly.com/2017/08/11/why-did-armenia-not-feel-like-armenia/#comment-874702

      Armenia’s “Ari Tun” (Come Home) Program: Who’s Ari? Where's Home?: http://hetq.am/eng/news/81257/armenias-ari-tun-come-home-program-whos-ari-wheres-home.html

      Delete
    3. ArevordiAugust 23, 2017 at 2:25 AM

      Related topic:

      As we all know, Armenia is a nation with very high unemployment rates, especially among young adults. Yet, many would be surprised to know that one of the major complaints managers of hotels and resorts in Armenia have is the lack of workers in the country. Granted, the work in question is menial work (i.e. labor, cleaning, waiting tables, etc). What Armenian parent would want to see their precious boys carrying trash, washing dishes or cleaning toilets? What "self respecting" Armenian male would "lower himself" to do such types of work?

      Sadly, Armenian men are lazy. In my opinion, it's because of bad upbringing. But the problem is that lazy Armenian men also have a very strong desire for the good life. Therefore, Armenian men are in constant search for easy money. This often takes them down the path of illegal activities. And when they look for legitimate work, they primarily look for "managerial" positions, even if they have no experience in the field. Simply put: Armenians refuse to do work they consider demeaning. This is why there has been a noticeable increasing of Asian laborers in Armenia recently. I was therefore not surprised when I saw this recent report by Sputnik -

      Մաքուր Երևանը՝ ասիական բանգլադեշցիների ձեռքերում: https://armeniasputnik.am/video/20170727/8096198/armenia-bangladesh-maqur-erevan.html

      Granted, these are dirty jobs and they don't pay well. But aren't they better than being unemployed? Isn't it a healthy thing for young men to do hard work? In any case, the ironic part in all this, those who refuse "demeaning" work in their homeland are often times the same ones that are ready to do anything, including prostitute themselves, once they find themselves in foreign lands. Once they return to Armenia, they once more resort to thinking of themselves as nobility. Disregard all the bitching and complaining about there being no work in Armenia. For the mentally healthy in Armenia (i.e. those who have no problems with doing hard work or learning new skills) there are no job shortages in Armenia. People may not find the exact kind of work they are looking for, but jobs do exist, especially in Yerevan. Armenia is actually a great place for entrepreneurs.

      Ultimately, the unemployment problem in Armenia is primarily rooted in three things: The collapse of Soviet era industry; the economic blockade of the country; and bad parenting.

      Delete
  42. AnonymousAugust 17, 2017 at 5:21 AM

    @Ռազմիկ Արտաշես

    Thanks for posting the links to that Urartu documentary. I really enjoyed watching it, and I'm glad Armenia is producing these types of materials on our ancient past. I never realized it but for some reason -even though I know Armenia extends continuously from the modern era to the dawn of humanity- I still erroneously default to the Artashesian Dynasty whenever I think of the earliest period of Armenia history. Urartu, the Yervanduni Dynasty, and most likely ancient regional states like Mitanni are as Armenian as Artsakh, Javakhk, or Cilicia.

    I have disavowed mainstream western history and historiography for a long time now, at best it is based on worthless Greek historians, but more generally it is total fiction designed to serve present geopolitical interests. Armenian history as "presented" (read: distorted) by mainstream western historians is an outright malicious attempt at covering up the accomplishments of our ancient civilization, or if they can't cover it up then attempt to separate Armenians from our history. I am fully convinced "the Urartian language" was a dialect of Armenian, and that any difference between Urartian and better known dialects of Armenian were even less than the difference between German and Dutch, or between Danish, Norwegian, and Swedish. I am fully convinced that significant portions of civilization had its birth in Armenia, and the diffused outwards towards Greece, Mesopotamia, and Egypt.


    It is too bad that in the English-speaking world, particularly among the Armenian Diaspora, the jew-led revisionism and denial of Armenian history is prevalent. I don't think the west is salvageable, either its population or its culture, so its not worth wasting energy. But I hope Armenia starts pumping out educational materials like this.

    Anyway I reccommend everyone set aside 2.5 hours and watch this:

    «ԱՐԱՐԱՏ-ՈՒՐԱՐՏՈՒ ԹԱԳԱՎՈՐՈՒԹՅՈՒՆԸ» (Մաս I)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5oqTwoUfWM

    «ԱՐԱՐԱՏ-ՈՒՐԱՐՏՈՒ ԹԱԳԱՎՈՐՈՒԹՅՈՒՆԸ» (Մաս II)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAlcLmX2LdU&spfreload=5

    «ԱՐԱՐԱՏ-ՈՒՐԱՐՏՈՒ ԹԱԳԱՎՈՐՈՒԹՅՈՒՆԸ» (Մաս III)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jZ-pdbPcTo

    «ԱՐԱՐԱՏ-ՈՒՐԱՐՏՈՒ ԹԱԳԱՎՈՐՈՒԹՅՈՒՆԸ» (Մաս IV)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxvRDyQ6s8w

    «ԱՐԱՐԱՏ-ՈՒՐԱՐՏՈՒ ԹԱԳԱՎՈՐՈՒԹՅՈՒՆԸ» (Մաս V)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xB12WY2Roc

    ps I like how the last episode points out that Urartu was civilized while Assyrians were barbarians who celebrated brutally murdering large numbers of people and destroying cities. The amount of Assyrian-worship among Armenians is disgusting, at least in the diaspora. I have a theory that since diasporan Armenians have adopted their host cultures value system (minority-worship,) they have fetishized Assyrians and Kurds in the same way that white American liberals have fetishized Blacks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ռազմիկ ԱրտաշեսAugust 18, 2017 at 8:43 AM

      @ Sarkis (part 1 of 2)

      Thanks for the reply Sarkis,

      Let me tackle some of your points, while trying to remain as objective as I can:

      Unfortunately I can't agree with you on the point of completely disavowing western historiography for a number of reasons. 1) Like it or not, western historians, linguists and archaeologists (most notably Germans, Brits, Italians, French and Americans) hold an upper ground in the fields of ancient history and archaeology. Soviet academics rivaled the westerners till the collapse of the Soviet Union, but today the main centers of study of ancient history of the Greco-Roman world as well as the Near East are in the west. 2) "Worthless" Greek and Roman historians are our main sources for events in classical antiquity (from 500 BC down to Byzantine era). Keep in mind that the "historians" back then are not the historians of today (modern historiography was founded in the 19th century), and their recording of events are biased and in many cases outright misinformation or lies (e.g. Herodotus). Nevertheless western academics know this and re-interpret these texts in a more objective manner.

      Now having said that, let's come to the "Urartian" language. The earliest inscriptions of Urartian kings are in Assyrian. Then came Urartian, a simplified form of the Assyrian writing system but in a different language. That language according to linguists (even according to pro-Armenian linguists like Gamkrelidze and Ivanov) is an offshoot of Hurrian (a non-Indo-European language). But here is where it gets tricky: a big chunk of the vocabulary that has been deciphered, especially names of places, resemble a lot to Armenian (as you saw in the documentary). Also, the language has not been fully deciphered yet, and the main help has come through the Assyro-Babylonian pronounciations of the cuneiform inscriptions, meaning that possibly if an "Urartian" read those he'd pronounce differently than an Assyrian (e.g. "Biaina" can be read "Van", "Khaldi" can be read "Hayk" and so on).
      Now another. EVEN IF Urartian had nothing to do with the Armenian language, that doesn't mean anything. The Romans used Greek as their language in the East, that didn't make them less Roman. The Achaemenid Empire didn't use Persian in its early stage and used Babylonian, but we all know that Persia is not Babylonian.
      My guess for the Urartian language is that it is not studied well enough, both by Armenians and non-Armenians, and there is still a lot of work to be done.

      Delete
    2. Ռազմիկ ԱրտաշեսAugust 18, 2017 at 8:43 AM

      @Sarkis (part 2 of 2)

      Now, who were the Urartians? Urartu's mythology is Indo-European in design. Urartu's art contains symbols the Tree of Life, something that can be seen in Bronze Age Armenia up to Christian Armenian art, the sun/light, and other aspects that can be seen in modern Armenian culture. Genetic and DNA research papers also show a growing genetic continuity of people from the ancient Armenian Highlands with the modern Armenians. Therefore, I can confidently say that the Armenian element is definitely present in Urartu in a large way.
      Also, Urartu encompassed a possibly sensible Hurrian population. But genetically, Hurrians and ancient (and modern) Armenians are very similar. So you can say that this was a confederation of similar groups who spoke different languages with the intent of fighting off Assyria, and in the end it is the Armenian element in this group that culturally and politically starts to dominate (my theory). In the end let’s keep in mind however that there is still a lot of missing information regarding Urartu. Many sites need to be excavated throughout modern Armenia and Western Armenia, and linguists need to work harder on deciphering the “Urartian language”. Who knows, it may turn out one day that Hurrian and Armenian are actually interrelated in more ways than we thought.

      Now, having said all that, I completely dismiss the theory made by Western, Turkish and some Armenian historians that Armenians are newcomers to the Armenian Highlands in 1200 or 600 BC and annihilated the “Urartians”. This has been long debunked, yet some academics still cling onto it. Armenians (or-proto-Armenians) were natives since prehistoric times (but you can’t say it in those words in academia, there are ways of saying it). This brings me to the subjectivity of historiography. Western Historiography is still very Euro-Centric, and they try to tie Western Civilization to the Greco-Roman past, most notably Greek. But many of those same historians accept that ancient Greece borrowed almost everything (culture, art, technology) from “somewhere in the East”… Very few brave souls like Robert Drews dare to mention Armenia as one of the birthplaces of “western” civilization, and many others rightfully point to Mesopotamia and Egypt as sources of influence to ancient Greece. Also keep in mind that when Greeks were just coming out of their Dark Ages in the 9th c. BC where you had small city-states squabbling against each other, Ararat-Urartu was already a unified state and challenging Assyria in Anatolia…

      Yes, Assyrian culture was very violent and brutal, whereas Ararat-Urartian the polar opposite. But I do not get what you mean by Assyrian and Kurdish fetish amongst Armenians in the Diaspora. Maybe it’s my social circle. What I can say about modern Assyrians is that they have almost nothing to do with their ancient past, culturally wise. When the Assyrians lost their statehood in 612 BC, they lost their warlike, brutal and violent culture with them. They are harmless, especially against Armenians.

      Delete
    3. Romanian AnonymusAugust 21, 2017 at 4:30 PM

      The Tree of Life is an universal symbol, found in the most various religions. A good overview of the problem at:

      "The Assyrian Tree of Life: Tracing the Origins of Jewish Monotheism and Greek Philosophy", by Simo Parpola
      Journal of Near Eastern Studies
      Vol. 52, No. 3 (Jul., 1993), pp. 161-208

      It is most likely that the Urartian theme of the Tree of Life is closer to Assyrian prototypes (or at least Middle-Eastern) than Indo-European (although it does not exclude it, see the symbolism of the Tree in 'Shamanism', Slavs, Germans, Celts).

      Greeks always acknowledged their debt to "Eastern" wisdom and knowledge (even to Zoroaster!). It is wrong to project on the classical Greeks the animus of the anti-Chalcedonian "East" of hundred of years later.

      Delete
    4. Ռազմիկ ԱրտաշեսAugust 23, 2017 at 6:02 AM

      @ROmanian Anonymus

      Indeed. The Urartian Tree of Life is closest to Mesopotamian/Middle-Eastern prototypes. In post-Urartian Armenia,
      you can see Trees of Life resembling to that of Urartu, hence my argument of cultural continuity in Armenia and ties with Urartu-Ararat.


      Urartian:
      http://www.morning-earth.org/Graphic-E/BIOSPHERE/SPIRIT%20IMAGES/UrartuTree1200BC.jpg

      Armenian (7th c. AD) (the grape vines and pomegranate leaves in the center upper part):
      http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/87dbd2e43c2c4148bfa3e323d375416c/grapevine-and-pomegranate-ruins-of-the-zvartnots-cathedral-near-vagharshapat-cnhcay.jpg


      As for the Greeks, some authors did acknowledge their debt to the East, yet many didn't for political purposes (Strabo, Plutarch...) The problem also lied with Eurocentric western historians of the late 19th up to the mid 20th century, who tried to turn the Greco-Roman world the birthplace of civilization, hence their bias antagonism towards the historiography of eastern civilizations.
      Nevertheless I will take the time to read the source you've provided. Thanks.

      Delete
    5. AnonymousAugust 24, 2017 at 7:30 AM

      Razmik, your claim that western historian cannot be disavowed and the reasons you provided are flawed. You basically argued that the west is "too big to fail" or too influential to ignore. By this logic, one would be precluded from disavowing the mainstream western [or should I say (((western))] media of news and entertainment, pop music, and films and movies on the exact same grounds precluding the disavowal of mainstream western historians. Same with the other major tenets of modern mainstream western culture, including "gender-neutral" child rearing, the normalization of feminism, atheism, faggotry and other perversions, and everything else we complain about on this blog.

      "Holding an upper ground" is absolutely meaningless in ancient history and archaeology, and other other field for that matter, when those holding the upper ground are entirely lacking in integrity, and pursing an evil agenda rather than engaging in honest scientific inquiry. The pseudo-"historians" of the west are not just misinformed or biased in the normal sense, they are vile charlatans worthy of criminal prosecution. I know it makes some people uncomfortable to hear these "impolite" statements about these so-called "scientists" but I am well past the point where I give a damn about maintaining a cover of proper academic manners when dealing with the likes of Hovanissian et. al. Frankly that would be analogous to worrying about your suit and tie when you are in a life and death fight with a murderer who is trying to kill you.

      As for archaeology, I don't trust the findings in high regards. I suspect that linguists looking at fragments of a dead languag probably have the same level of accuracy in deciphering the text that I -an average English speaker- have whenever I look at text in the German or Danish languages: I might get a couple of the more familiar words right because they have cognates in modern English, but I wouldn't trust myself to accurately translate a novel or national epic or whatever. Archaeology and linguistics have a tendency to very quickly go from hard science to theoretic (read: bullshit "its real in my mind") "science."

      Therefore, I go with what makes sense: all of the evil anti-Armenian scum claim that Urartians were not Armenians, therefore Urartians are extremely likely to have been Armenians. Basically I apply the same common sense to archeological facts that I apply when some pseudo-respectable western faggot with a Ph.D. tries to teach me that "gender is a social construct" or whatever the hell they are preaching at the moment.

      Delete
    6. Ռազմիկ ԱրտաշեսAugust 24, 2017 at 8:02 PM

      Sarkis,

      If you apply the same common sense to archaeological facts that you do to modern psychological warfare then you can easily dismiss everything made by all historians and make your own version of world history.

      All linguists, especially the pro-Armenian Soviet linguists Gamkrelidze and Ivanov (who designated Armenia as the Indo-European homeland) agree unilaterally that Hurrian is a non-Indo-European language, and somehow the so-called Urartian language became a later branch of it. The following is where your missed the point. The "Urartian" language has a very rich vocabulary of Armenian words we use today and is a mix of hybrid of Hurrian and proto-Armenian. Now, even if Urartian had nothing to do with Armenian, that doesn't mean that the people living there were not Armenian. For example the Thracians or ancient Macedonians had their own language, but they weren't written down, and after a time they used Greek. Does that make them Greek? The Persian Empire used Mesopotamian languages in its early stages, did that make Persia Babylonian? Just because the Armenians used a Hurrian writing system and incorporated a big chunk of their own vocabulary in it does not make them less Armenian. Yet here is where your "beloved" western historians come in and do their dirty work.

      As for western historiography having an upper hand, this is a fact whether you like it or not. That's not my issue. My issue is that we (Armenians) are not countering the blatant falsifications the proper way. We are instead resorting to making ultra-nationalistic claims without providing ample evidence. This will only make us look ridiculous and no one will take us seriously.

      Delete
    7. VickenAugust 25, 2017 at 5:48 PM

      Let us set an operational basis for Armenians to intellectual counter the blatant falsifications of the media historians. Why is not being done ? . It is not being done because we have only been navigating around the tip of the iceberg. There is a massive amount of theoretical propositions, after a while without any meaningful refutation the theories begin to be accepted as facts. If there is blatant falsification, then it is high time to start debunking them. Again, I doubt whether this mammoth task of debunkification can be realized by the diaspora. The source has to be borne in the homeland. The diaspora can and will keep producing fakes like hovanessian. Hovanessian is not at fault, he was fertilized and grew up in the theoretical knowledge ( false) base where his education and grooming as historian took place. We have to have counter theories to arrest existing theories, we have to deploy counter facts to counter contemporary falsehood of theories = facts. It is a promethean effort worthy of erudite learning.

      Delete
    8. ArevordiAugust 26, 2017 at 3:38 AM

      Urartu is one of the names of ancient Armenia. Modern day Armenians are the direct descendants of ancient Urartians.

      Our Anglo-American-Jewish-Turkish enemies win every time we discuss - and therefore bring into question - Amenia's ties to Urartu. This is similar to how the same have gotten us constantly debating/analyzing the Armenian Genocide instead of treating it as a historic fact. It's simple: Urartu is Armenia. Armenians are the direct descendants of Urartu. Discussing, debating or analyzing this fact takes away from it.

      That said, a fundamental problem we Armenians face when looking at Armenian-Urartian ties is this: We Armenians have been made to think of ourselves as an Aryan (Indo-European) people. There are many idiots among us that even proudly claim "we Armenians were once blondes", as if being blonde is a standard of achievement, as if not being so is a sign of decline. So, in the minds of many Armenians today, how can non-Aryan Urartians (who's Hurrian language belongs to the Alarodian family of languages originating in northeastern Caucasus) be the ancestors of us "Aryan" Armenians?

      This flawed reasoning is the source of our dilemma. This flawed reasoning makes us "Aryan" speaking Armenians question our ties to "Hurrian" speaking Urartu. And this gives our enemies the excuse to insist that we Aryan Armenians are not descendants of Hurrian Urartu. In fact, Turks take it a step further. Because there are some general similarities between Turkic and Alarodian languages (essentially because the two language groups originated in close geographic proximity to each other) Turks claim Urartians are related to Turks.

      Here we again see Turks outsmarting Armenians. While we Armenians go around insisting that we are an Aryan people, in doing so causing problems for our Urartian heritage, Turks are cleverly embracing our Urartian heritage.

      So, get this through your heads: We Armenians are not fully an Aryan/Indo-European people.

      The non-Aryan (Hurrian/Caucasian) component in Armenians is very significant. It may in fact be a major component. Also, Armenian is not completely an Aryan language. Urartu was a federation of a number of powers located in the Armenian Highlands. From what we know, some of them were of Aryan origin and some were of them were of Caucasian origin. Historically, culturally and genetically, there is no doubt that we Armenians are the direct decedents of Urartu. We are therefore a mix of Aryans and Caucasians. This is something to be proud of.

      We Armenians got into the "Aryan" craze as a consequence of 19th/20th century European/German propaganda, and our people's burning desire to be a part of the western world. This in my opinion lies at the root of us being unable to fully appreciate our Hurrian speaking Urartian ancestors.

      I repeat: Genetically, we Armenians are a mix of various regional tribes, some of whom were Aryans, some of whom were not. And our language is a mix of Aryan and Caucasian languages.

      Final note: Northern Middle Easterners - Syrians, Lebanese, Persians, Kurds and Iraqis - also share Hurrian roots in varying degrees. Like the much vaunted Aryans of the region, Hurrians were also a powerful cultural and genetic locomotive of their time.

      Delete
    9. ArevordiAugust 26, 2017 at 3:43 AM

      Regarding western academia:

      The only thing western academia has over its counterparts around the world is better funding and better bullshiting abilities. Other than a lot of money and the gift of gab, there is nothing in western academia that is in any way better than what one finds in places like Russia, China, Iran and Armenia.

      However, from an Armenian perspective, there are 3 primary problems associated with western academia: 1) its overwhelming Jewish component; 2) its infiltration by the CIA; 3) its use by Western powers as a political weapon.

      As we have come to learn, everything in the Western world - be it gender, sexuality, human origins, language, finance, trade, humanitarian aid, entertainment, news media, food production, medicine, climate change, religion, politics, education, archeology, history - has been weaponized by the Anglo-American-Jewish community.

      I think it was sometime in the 1950s when the Western intelligence and the Turkish government agreed that the Armenian heritage of Anatolia (Armenian Highlands) was to be erased from Turkish and Western history books. The reason why Turks wanted this is quite obvious. The reason why Western powers would want to go along with this agenda may have been because Armenia then was part of the Soviet Union. The anti-Armenian stance of Western powers was therefore a way of propping up one of their most important regional allies. Obviously, the same was done with Israel vis-a-vis its Arab neighbors.

      Moreover, because western academia is saturated by Jews and because Jews and Turks share deep rooted historic ties, the problems we Armenians have faced within the Western world has always been unsurmountable. There is no reason to believe that this will change.

      As a general rule, anything produced by western academia cannot be taken seriously until further scrutiny.

      Delete
    10. HrayrAugust 27, 2017 at 5:00 AM

      The question is who is going to scrutinize it? Institutions of learning and higher learning, academia , print, press, cine, information, is thoroughly jewified. "Western thought" has been usurped and hijack by the house of Judah, intensely so after 1945. It carries on with corrupted education and crass masification of the slave population,or nations. The civilization we knew of until 1945 ( it lingered on for a few more decades, but it was on an inexorable road to perdition) no longer exists. The changes wrought by worl Jewry have been cataclysmic, a soft core cataclysmic morphosis. In our parents generation we learnt and grew up under the Greco Roman veneer of culture. It is no longer the case today, we have the sub cultural pod/rot of Judeo-holocaust-Christianity, Jewish globalism. How does one break free from this vice grip ?

      One man tried, and we all know how it ended. World Jewry ignited the whole world against the man. Esoteric religious fringes talk about the spiritual cycle of eras, kaliyuga, katriyuga and other Yugas. The spiritual sources of light against the demiurge in human form in the Jew. In the meantime while one waits for the next spiritual rebirth, what was known as the West is materially being crushed and its lands depopulated of it original genus and replaced by the exponential growth of Afro -Asia denizens. There are school of thoughts which predicate divine intervention to arrest the demiurgic wave .In all this welter of turmoil, it is a big question of how the nation and the homeland will fare. On the points of linguistics, an interesting observation after visiting the Basque Country. Whenever I heard basque spoken I invariable thought it was Armenian. Only after a minute or so of listening I realized that it was not. But the initial sound bite rang like some twist of Armenian accent. At the American university of Erevan, a professor in languages ( a learned American professor which was to complete his teaching cycle) remarked in a number of his lectures the close affinity of the basque and Armenian idioms.

      Delete
    11. Romanian AnonymusAugust 29, 2017 at 2:24 PM

      The confusion arose from the conflation of 'Indo-European' (a linguistic notion) with 'Aryan' (a religious and cultural notion), conflation made in principal by the Germanic academia for too obvious propagandistic reasons (Germans quietly equated Indo-European with Indo-Germanic). It become even more confusing when indue 'racial' considerations were introduced into that shaky equation. 'Aryan' vs 'Semite' is a false opposition.
      More recent research (linguistic and archaeological) made a convincing (at least IMHO)case that the origins of Indo-European languages are to be found in the European-Mediteranean-Balkanic areas where from they expanded northward and eastward (Hittites, Mittani, Phrygians, Celts, Scythians, Massagetes, later on Norman Crusaders), mixing in various degrees with the native non-Indo-European populations through wars, commerce, collaboration, alliances, inter-marriages, religious syncretisms (taking into consideration a universal common tradition cutting across all ethnic, cultural, linguistic diversities), acculturation). And also with invaders from the Eurasian steppes. Actually, a genetic cesspool.
      The original meaning of 'Arya' is 'noble', and even if it suggests situations of conquest, it is not necessarily the unique explanation. In the Vedic/Avestan context the 'Arya' were the 'twice-born' (dvija), the three 'varnas' who undertook an 'initiation' rite (upanayana), a 'second birth' (not dissimilar to Baptism) into a life in accordance to 'Dharma' (the order that makes life and universe possible, and includes duties, rights, laws, conduct, virtues and right way of living), life lost by the majority of mankind sunken into increasing disorderly materialism. It had no racial meaning, but was related to the conception of the four descending 'yugas' (cycles) of the Hindu (and not only) tradition. Non-dvija children may also be inducted into the Dvija category, if they wished to pursue the duties associated with these varnas.
      Genetical 'explanations' have then little relevance (if at all) for determining political options.

      Delete
    12. ArevordiAugust 29, 2017 at 3:27 PM

      Romanian Anonymus,

      There is ample archeological and linguistic evidence to suggest that the cradle of Indo-European languages was located in Asia Minor (i.e. Anatolia and Armenian Highlands). Hittites, who are known as the oldest known Indo-European speakers, were genetically natives of the aforementioned region, so were the Mittani. There is nothing to suggest that Hittites and the Mittani came to the region from other places. The others like the Phyrigians, Celts and Scythians came onto the scene much, much later. The general vicinity of Asia Minor seems to have been where Indo-European, Semitic and Caucasian languages evolved, at least their prototypes. This makes perfect sense as the region is thought to be the cradle of human civilization. That said, I agree that Indo-European and Aryan are two separate terms that modern Germans fused together. However, Aryan did have a national/racial meaning to it, at least in classical times as regions that are now in Afganistan were once called Ariana and Persians called themselves Aryans. The nation-state name of Iran is in fact a derivative of Aryan. In Armenian tradition, the word Aryan (which Armenians call Ari or Ariatsi) means brave/warlike. So, while the origin of the name itself may have had its genesis in Vedic mythology, it eventually did became associated with particular regions and nations. Europeans, Germans in particular, took all this to a whole new level in the late 19th, early 20th centuries.

      Delete
    13. ayrudziAugust 30, 2017 at 10:28 PM

      Im surprised Wikipedia notes Armenians are direct descendants of Urartu. Even stating that we are the coming to gather of Indo-european and Hurrian (Urartu) people of the region

      Delete
    14. Romanian AnonymusAugust 31, 2017 at 8:03 AM

      The theory of Colin Renfrew (the IE Neolithic Dispersal from Anatolia) is less solidly established than previously admitted (the previous Kurgan theory of Gimbutas-Mallory has collapsed altogether).
      Although mostly rejected by the IE 'establishment' (no less for the fact that it dismantles the 'eurocentric' heroising Indo-Germanic-'Aryan' mythology), the "Paleolithic Continuity Paradigm for the origins of the Indo-European languages" advanced by Mario Alinei [Professor emeritus (University of Utrecht, NL); honorary member (and former President) of the International Society for Dialectology and Geolinguistics; President of the Societas Linguistica Europaea (1989); founding member of the Società Linguistica Italiana; co-founder and President (from 1982) of the Atlas Linguarum Europae (UNESCO sponsored project); founder and Emeritus Editor of the international journal "Quaderni di Semantica"; senior member of the Royal Academy Gustaf Adolf, Uppsala (Sweden); member of the Accademia Peloritana, Messina], author of "Origini delle lingue d'Europa, 2 vols, Bologna 1996-2000", accounts better for the complexities of the process of formation of the IE languages.
      On-line: "The Paleolithic Continuity Paradigm for the Origins of Indo-European Languages International PCP Workgroup Website" @http://www.continuitas.org/index.html


      Delete
  43. մարAugust 25, 2017 at 12:50 PM

    Abby Martin Exposes Zionism & Israel on Joe Rogan Podcast
    ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBRxt5ufnGg

    I didn't know Abby Martin appeared on Joe Rogan's podcast recently & was talking about her experiences with the apartheid state. I was surprised she was allowed to speak so long & loudly on the issue, but then it occurred to me that she's coming off as a foulmouthed commie leftist, therefore further advancing the 'divide and conquer' strategy and giving more reason for cuckservatives to align with the chosen parasites.

    Calling Homeland Security To Report Jewish Zionist Terrorists - Brendon O'Connell
    ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r78ByAqo5UM

    ReplyDelete
  44. mugoSeptember 1, 2017 at 4:24 AM

    There are reports going around that Turkey, spurned by the decaying EU, is projecting to apply to the EUU for membership. Turkey can not by any stretch of the imagination join the EU. Such a move would be as cataclysmic as the fall of Constantinople or at the Gates of Vienna. It will create a questionable position for Armenia . If Turkey is accepted, Azeria will follow in its wake. After all we are speaking about 2 turkish states, Turkey and Azeria. Where does that leave the seemingly isolated Judeo americans if they drop Turkey from their grip . It is hard to conceive that the Jews will allow Turkey to decamp the Nato Occupation Mafia and move next to the Russians. They would first see Turkey demolished and carved up. Besides who is to say that jew-Israely geo politics are not in tandem or aligned with Russia's. The international jew is exemplary at playing both sides of the field. They are grand masters. The set up the scenarios and then throw in the nations to war. After masterminding 2 WWars,they are supreme scions at their craft. Netanjew travels to Moscow as frequently as a coal miner washes himself. They also refer to each other as " partners". The Russians seem to be in love with that word. Diplomatic language at its finest. Maybe Armenia's complementary politics, in the welter of flux and cross currents is not that insane after all ?. The situation is critical.The fires have to be kept away from our borders.

    ReplyDelete
  45. aaaSeptember 1, 2017 at 4:24 AM

    USA asks for Russian SF consulate to be shut down, and downsize NY and Washington consulates . If that is the case , maybe Russia needs to tell Armenia , as a tit for tat, to downsize the american embassy in Yerevan. The other day I was stolling in Yerevan and I stumbled across the monumental size of the American embassy. Endless hectares of occupied land. In contrast the Russian house is an unobtrusive dept. bldg, very small and compact. It would not cross anyone's mind that it could be a foreign consulate. There are marines inside the compound of the USA embassy; God knows what else is harbored inside its walls. Why such a humongous embassy in Yerevan ? The second largest American compound, after Bagdad's embassy, in the region. It is not a good sign at all. It is an insult. We understand the size of the embassy in Bagdad--occupied country by the ZOG--; but the Yerevan monstrosity ????. The taxi driver glibly dismissed it as a nest of international espionage in the transcaucasus.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ArevordiSeptember 1, 2017 at 4:40 AM

      The massive CIA front office in question was built at a time when Uncle Sam was very hopeful that his agenda for the country would succeed. The embassy also has a USAID compound (another CIA operation) attached to it. The complex was built on Yerevan Lake because the water's surface helps intelligence officers intercept radio communications throughout the region. Uncle Sam's plans however have suffered serious setbacks in recent years not only in Armenia but throughout the region. But, the embassy continues to operate as a subversive entity in the country giving aid and moral support to all kinds of anti-government and anti-Russian forces in the country. Speaking of Russia, did you noticed the gold domed Russian church near the embassy? It's not by chance that the church was built there...

      Delete
    2. aaaSeptember 1, 2017 at 5:19 PM

      Yes, I did noticed the beautiful golden dome, it gladdened my heart and lifted the spirit from the depths of gloom when confronted by that grotesque complex . I can't wait for the day when that large occupied space is reclaimed. About Marines being stationed inside I learnt it from an expat acquaintance who spends his leisure time playing some sport with these men.

      Delete
    3. ArevordiSeptember 1, 2017 at 5:22 PM

      The Russian church is not there only for spiritual reasons. Speaking of your expat friend, maybe you should ask him to befriend some of the personnel in question. I'm sure they have some good stories to tell, specially when they are drunk...

      Delete
  46. Ted BostonianSeptember 5, 2017 at 1:13 AM

    Good news. Armenia drops out of NATO's show of force against Russia and it's about time.

    At Last Minute, Armenia Drops Out of NATO Exercises in Georgia: http://www.eurasianet.org/node/84956

    PS: Arevordi, you picked a terrible time to go on your sabatical. There are so many things going on in the world.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ArevordiSeptember 5, 2017 at 8:04 PM

      Ted,

      This move by Armenia was most probably a result of Moscow finally putting some pressure on our chobans-in-Armani suits. Official Yerevan should have done this a very long time ago. Maintaining cordial relations with EU or even NATO is one thing, participating in what is tantamount to a show of force against Russia is just ludicrous. The closest analogy to this would be Russian troops officially participating in Azerbaijani war games that are specifically designed to put pressure on Armenia. Yerevan was playing a game, albeit with Russian approval. However, it was inevitable that at some point the game in question would have to come to an end. While having eyes and ears inside NATO circles did have its advantage, the outward appearance (political ramifications) of the game Yerevan was playing was gradually becoming a serious problem - especially in the context of heightened tensions between Russia and NATO. Moreover, who's to say Western intelligence services have not been able to recruit spies among our military men, most of whom are your typical backward choban types?

      Delete
    2. ArevordiSeptember 5, 2017 at 11:35 PM

      Regarding this blog:

      Unlike what some people think, I am not a KGB agent, nor do I have a Russian lover, nor do I get any kind of assistance from anyone. Recent years (the Putin era to be exact) has made me a Russophile. Ultimately, however, I'm pro-Russian because I'm pro-Armenian. Fundamentally, I'm an Armenian nationalist. But, my nationalism is rooted in political pragmatism, a deep understanding of the world we live in, a deep understanding of Armenians and strategic farsightedness. It's more than obvious to me that Armenia cannot survive in the south Caucasus without Russia. This is why I have always said Armenia's independence from Russia will only mean its dependence on Turkey. This is why I have always said Armenia's existence as a nation-state in a Turkic/Islamic region like the south Caucasus is only made possible by a strong Russian presence inside Armenia. Moreover, I have always promoted deeper, more effective Armenian lobbying efforts in Moscow. I remain convinced that Armenians can be in Russia what Jews are in the US. We have been unable to work towards this goal because we lack national unity, foresight and political sophistication - and our collective attention is always placed on the Western world. It is also very obvious to me that powerful interests embedded deep within our society are actively trying to drive a wedge between Armenia and Russia. This agenda, essentially a desire to strip Armenia of its Russian protection, has been in operation since the early Soviet period. Many Armenians continue serving this agenda today; some do so professionally, some do so idiotically. I see the agenda to drive a wedge between Yerevan and Moscow as an existential threat to Armenian statehood, and I see Armenians behind this agenda as traitors to Armenia. I'm therefore not your typical "nationalist" in this regard. In fact, I now see our so-called nationalists as a bigger threat to the health and well being of Armenia than our Western-funded agents of sociopolitical change.

      The last fifteen years or so has also helped me recognize Russia as the last front against Westernization, Globalism, American expansionism, Zionism, Islamic extremism and pan-Turkism. I believe Russia is the last hope we have for western civilization, apostolic Christianity, the traditinal family and the traditional nation-state.

      All of the above essentially compelled me to create this blog. This blog became the only voice in the vastness of cyberia that dared to preach about the strategic importance of Armenia remaining within the Russian orbit, as well as the importance of rejecting Western inroads inside Armenia. From about 2010 to 2015 I did monthly, at times weekly, commentaries about Russian-Armenian relations and Eurasian geopolitcs. It was very difficult for me because I am self-employed and I have a family. I don't know how I did it but I was somehow able to do it. The time I put into this blog came at the expense of work, family and personal life. But a powerful voice/feeling inside urged me to keep going, and I did. When Armenia joined the EEU a couple of years ago, I finally felt a deep sense of relaxation, as if a very heavy burden was lifted off my back. I felt as if my personal mission was accomplished. I also felt vindicated. I therefore felt I could take a step back. I needed the rest. Going forward, I plan on posting only seasonal commentaries but I will keep moderating the comments section on a daily basis. Thank you for reading.

      Delete
    3. aaaSeptember 7, 2017 at 7:41 PM

      The cordiality of diplomatic interchange with the EU, America, and their pack of mercenary allies may continue, and probably will continue ( complementary politics ?) however there is a limit at how deep this double politics can pan out. There is a point of non plus ultra, and high levels in government, the silent "architects" of such policies , are or should be fully aware of. Armenia can not - whether one likes it or not it's not of the essence- uncouple herself from Russia. That is the stark reality. The partnership,or strategic alliance with Russia must be further developed and taken from strength to strength. It is in both nation's interests to do so. Russia without Armenia will be hobbled in the transcaucasus, Armenia alone can not endure inside a turkish muslim ocean. There many turkophiles amidst the Armenian race; these turkophiles need to be marginalized and turfed out. They are nothing but traitors. Descendants of the ilk of those politicos who placed their faith in the young turks.

      Delete
    4. Ted BostonianSeptember 7, 2017 at 7:47 PM

      Arevordi,

      I never thought you were KGB LOL

      I understand family comes first. But I want to say you've had a disproportional impact on social media. I found your blog several years ago doing research on the political opposition in Armenia. Been reading you ever since. You've also helped me approach Russo-Armenian relations differently. I was never a Russophobe in the western sense but I was one that thought Armenia needed independence from Russia. I no longer think Armenia has that luxury. One of your best works is the one in which you claim Armenians themselves are Armenia's real problem.

      Thank you for all you do. Even if I don't comment often I read regularly.

      Delete
    5. AnonymousSeptember 7, 2017 at 10:53 PM

      Arevordi,

      How would you then describe Azerbaijan's decision to participate in the drills? You previously said they didn't participate in the previous drills, where Armenia did participate, in order to gain favor with Moscow. Are the Azeris now trying to antagonize Moscow? If we use your logic, that would explain it. Could it be your analyses are wrong at times? and that you are capable of being wrong? that everything is not as black and white? that perhaps Russia can serve an essential purpose, yet conflict with our national interests? that anything Russians do, is first and foremost out of self-interest, and that could change any time? that it's naïve for anyone, including nations, to place hope on anyone, and that they may be severely disappointed?

      Delete
    6. SenegaSeptember 8, 2017 at 7:10 PM

      Azerbaijan is Turkeys left arm, Azeries are Turks, there is 1 Turkish nation with two branches, who are breached in the middle by an inextricable thorn. Therefore it stands to reason they will consort, being inside the USA-Israely-Nato sway; with whatever dictates their policies impose. For Turkey, Armenia should not exist, since her existence is the reason for their geographical break up. Armenia has no place sitting at a table where Turks sit. Scenarios should be drawn where the impossible, improbable suppositions, or theories are aired. If there was no Russia's overt or covert backing (obviously there are common interests mandating this backing within a geopolitical context) how feasible is Armenia's continued survival as a sovereign nation state. There is one answer, and it is not very encouraging. Who will come and stand in between the 2 Turkish states, America, EU, Israel or the diaspora?

      Delete
    7. ArevordiSeptember 10, 2017 at 6:04 PM

      Anonymous,

      I have to ask: Besides looking at pictures posted in this blog to draw your conclusions, have you read any of what I have written in the past ten-plus years?

      I'll explain a few things for the sake of other readers here.

      When it comes to international relations none of us get to see what goes on behind closed doors. We only see the aftermath. We then draw conclusions from it. With the latest NATO show of force against Russia in which Armenia and Azerbaijan reversed roles, could Baku be sending Moscow signals? Could Baku be signalling to Moscow that Azerbaijan can be with or against Russia, to put pressure on Moscow over Artsakh? In the case of Armenia, was Yerevan finally told by Moscow to stop its stupid collaborations with NATO, especially when they are specifically directed against Russia? No one knows the answers to these questions. That is why concerned individuals like myself are left to observe, assess and speculate. So, yes, my analysis could indeed be wrong at time. And yes, nothing in politics is ever black and white. But it's also obvious that Baku is trying to gain Moscow's favor, and it's also obvious that Yerevan is playing an at times dangerous game of complimentary politics. That's all I have been saying.

      So, I don't see what I said that was so terribly wrong or offensive that you felt the need to come here and - correct me? In any case, thank you for your political wisdom. All these years I thought Russia supported Armenia because they love us. So thank you for your earth-shattering lesson in politics. Kidding aside, I know what your real problem is. Your problem is me. You just want to prove that "I am capable of being wrong".

      But have I ever said I'm incapable of being wrong? Have I ever said Russia's alliance with Armenian is rooted in anything but geostrategic interests?

      I have said that having an Armenia exist in the south Caucasus has been in the geostrategic interests of Russian officials for the past two hundred years. That is why the Russian Empire set the foundations of the Armenia we have today in the early 1800s; that's why the Soviet Union made sure to establish a Soviet Republic of Armenia in the early 1900s; and that is why the Russian Federation has been the single biggest factor in keeping Armenia - and Artsakh - alive in the post-Soviet years. I have also said that the Russian nation will need an Armenia in the south Caucasus for as long as Western, Islamic, Turkic and Iranian interests exists in the region. In other words, Russia will continue needing Armenia in the region for well into the foreseeable future. I have also said that since Russian-Armenian interests converge for the most part, this is a historic opportunity to deepen and strengthen Armenia's ties to a major superpower, one that also happens to be a virtual neighbor. I have also said that since Armenians of Russia are the most affluent in the world and because they are disproportionately represented in the highest layers of Russian society, this is a historic opportunity to organize pan-national lobbying effort inside the highest offices of the Kremlin.

      In other words, instead foolishly doing the work of Armenia's enemies by fearmongering about Russia (which is what like assholes like you tend to do) I have been using my soapbox here to preach pan-national pro-activism in Moscow, which is what real Armenian nationalists should be doing.

      Remember this: If Moscow ever wanted to "sell" Armenia/Artsakh to Turks/Azeris (something a lot of assholes like you always say) not even a million of your kind would be able to stop Armenia for disappearing from the map once again. All the political systems that ruled in Russia during the past two hundred years had many opportunities to "sell" Armenia but they did not. Not only that, Russian troops spilled blood to make sure Turks and Iranians did not overrun the region. Russia has protected Armenia from all predators, including Armenians in the service of the predators.

      Delete
    8. ArtoSeptember 10, 2017 at 9:07 PM

      Arevordi, I know your upset because every time someone new comes here to pick a bone with you you have to repeat yourself over and over. Give anonympous the benefit of doubt and assume he means well. I also want say Russian media is being tough on Armenia lately, I think the relationship has some problems.

      Delete
    9. ArevordiSeptember 12, 2017 at 4:56 AM

      Arto jan,

      If anonymous wanted me to give him/her the benefit of the doubt, he/she should have first familiarized him/herself with my work instead of coming here with an attitude and accusing me of things that only exists in his/her imagination. People like anonymous come here simply to try to give me "lessons" in politics and, in their simple minds, put me in my place...

      Regarding your observation: All relationships, including the one between the US and Israel, including the one between the US and England, have internal problems. It is therefore natural and expected to have problems in our relationship with Russia. It's quite obvious that Moscow and Yerevan do not see eye-to-eye at times. There certainly are flaws in the relationship. One of the reasons for the flaws is the unresolved dispute over Artsakh. Example: Moscow wants to station troops (peacekeepers) in the region, Yerevan does not want it to; Moscow wants Yerevan to negotiate a peace deal with Baku by pulling back from some territories, Yerevan does not want to; Moscow would rather Armenia enter fully into its orbit, Yerevan would rather not.

      Probably, there are also a number of other things we are not aware of.

      Yes, there are flaws in the relationship, and I have always said there are. But they are flaws that need to be approached rationally and worked on bilaterally. The flaws that exist between Moscow and Yerevan need to be corrected through increased contacts between our officials as well as better lobbying efforts in the Kremlin on our part. What we must not do is threaten Moscow with this or that every time there is something we don't like.

      The reality we face is this: Other than committing collective suicide, we Armenians are in no position to realistically threaten Russia with anything, and official Moscow knows this. Therefore, we need to accept reality and try to work out the best possible solution/outcome for our homeland through deeper contacts and increased lobbying efforts.

      Anyway, I cover a lot of this topic in the blog commentary.

      Delete
    10. PitukianSeptember 12, 2017 at 7:58 PM

      Even in a marriage one has numberless of quarrels and disagreements, it becomes much larger in scope and intensity when you extrapolate it to international relations, alliances of sorts, strategic or nit, however these are not sufficient reasons to be heading for a divorce or a break up. As long as the foundation is sound, disagreements and internal disputes can always find solutions. The lobbying efforts in the Kremlin is an element which needs energizing and solidifying. Perhaps it is being overlooked, perilously so, at the moment, but one can not wait too long. The enemy does not sleep.

      Delete
  47. մարSeptember 8, 2017 at 11:38 PM

    Azerbaijan’s Silk Way Airlines transports weapons with diplomatic clearance for Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Congo

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47748.htm
    ^Diplomatic Flights Carry Weapons For Terrorists

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. մարSeptember 13, 2017 at 2:20 AM

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfIKWxNiinM
      ^ The Greatest Betrayal Never Told
      In last week's clip, ReallyGraceful explained Baku's oil and their ties with the (((British)))

      Delete
    2. մարSeptember 17, 2017 at 11:42 AM

      This young woman just keeps giving, & yes, she covers the House of Saud being crypto hryas. It's a trip because I read the comment in the previous video or the one before where someone suggested she make a video specifically on that hidden Saudi subject, and she just did! Pretty awesome of her and this channel. Do check it out, even Brendon O'Connell has praised her work. I've also seen her leave comments on Nathanael's videos lol -_-

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9m8FW9s8Jsg
      ^ What the Media Won't Tell You About Saudi Arabia

      Delete
  48. մարSeptember 15, 2017 at 9:14 AM

    I usually try really hard to avoid seeing and knowing of activities such as this one taking place in our holy lands, but the timing of this one really made me blow a fuse

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fv0ZrOWsbz4
    ^ The 4th K-Pop Flashmob in Armenia by INCREDIBLE (2017)

    what is this nonsense?! Why are we partaking in this western degenerate hip hop sub culture aimed towards wrecking Korean culture, to begin with?.. and here we are embracing it. Mihat imagine the hours of wasted practice in learning these useless moves, and for what? To show off to otars? Show off to the lowest life forms of other indoctrinated species? The end result will be bunch of colored heads (men and women, in this perv society) to get off on our younger sisters behaving this way. Where are the tough talking brothers, cousins, and fathers in all this? Spineless television addict goyim. What happened to 'such a clever jogox azg' ?

    Does someone need to remind these retards of our neighbors to the east? or Azeri daily threats of invading and retaking Artsakh once and for all? Turkish backed militants have been attacking Armenians in Syria for over 5 years now and ongoing, and yet we make time to participate in this nonsense. Of course they'll be a ton of idiots to respond to this rant with a "ara they're just kids having some fun, relax dawg" but that's a pathetic excuse to be lazy and turn a blind eye. Or even worse, the coward men who get intimidated to step up in todays feminized generation. This reminded me of the waves of morons with open arms during Kim Kunts visit.

    On a side note, to keep it geopolitik related:
    Russia, Armenia and Kazakhstan to hold joint military exercises
    http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/09/russia-armenia-and-kazakhstan-to-hold.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ArevordiSeptember 15, 2017 at 6:58 PM

      The US and British embassies usually sponsor these types of events in the country. It part of their "soft power" approach to dealing with backward tribes around the world. Armenians in particular are very susceptible to soft power approaches because Armenians love to sing and dance and be told how wonderful they are. While many of us tend to praise the new generation we have in the country today, I tend to say: Let's wait and see how they turn out. The signs are not all that encouraging. In any case, these types of events basically showcase the cultural/civilization power the Anglo-American-Jewish world order has over humanity. When you get barbarians to willingly sing and dance to your music, you have already more-or-less defeated them -

      HAPPY YEREVAN: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbZZttoWJn0

      U.S.-Armenia FLASH MOB (Official Video): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdmyDhsuucU

      Delete
    2. մարSeptember 16, 2017 at 2:10 AM

      I had seen the Happy Yerevan vid some years ago and was mind boggled by the amounts of likes and praise it was receiving in the comments. US embassy = cultural subversion/ CIA spy nest. Again, how it's tolerated is just stunning.. but I remind myself that these are the same Armenians who hangeest allowed a Shabbos Goy Levon T.P. to run for presidency TWICE lmao

      At least our Azeri counterparts are not too far behind
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l05swfS51v8
      ^ LEAN ON the BEACH | FLASHMOB Azerbaijan

      I tried searching anything similar in Iran and found pretty much nothing of such sort. How sad that it takes extreme Islamic measures to keep their goys in check.

      Delete
    3. VascosSeptember 23, 2017 at 12:23 AM

      These subversive pseudo - corrupted monkey swings and dances should be outright banned. The degeneracy and debauchery of today's youth growing up outside our borders must not be allowed to to permeate our frontiers. Pornocracy , liberalism, feminism and all the other "ism" are anathema toArmenia's youth and future and should be proscribed. I was reading Lapshin story about his sojourn in a Baku jail. The blogger exhorts Armenia to stand strong against an enemy that does count the days when in can wipe us off the map. In a brief visit to artsakh and a medley of Azeri jail time made Lapshin realized how lopsided and stupid his ideas were about as to who the territories belong, and Armenia must not weaken her position with Compromises and negotiation over Artsakh and its adjacent territories because that would be her end as a nation. A sound beating in a dark cell was all lip shin or Lapshin needed to put some sense into him. A large congressional team is planning to visit Armenian . Their agenda is to " fight corruption" ( they would better serve their time fighting corruption in the USA, ) and to develop the functioning of democracy. Agains, soft points in an agenda with corrosive intents hiding ulterior political motives.

      Delete
  49. AmirianSeptember 20, 2017 at 10:07 PM

    Garo Palyan is in the diaspora conference. I like Garo,his work , dedication and struggle in most strait circumstances; but I don't like the manner in which he is labeled, a "Turk of armenian origin". If he is a "Turk", then he is a "Turk", who cares about the "origin". If he is not a Turk because of his origin, then the he is Armenian. It is the hypocrisy and falsehood of Democracy that allows such a deliberate distortion of identities. At last the government has sent the odious protocols to the dustbin of falsehoods and deception- according to Serge's speech at the UN. Another hurrah for the government in his plan to call the diaspora youth to serve in the Armenian army, albeit for a few months. They should go two rungs higher and mandate the diaspora youth , those who consider themselves armenianas and are conscious of it - , to serve the full 2 year term. There is a great deal of youths in the diaspora that are on border line of being assimilated and lost for ever. Things appear to be quiet on the world scene, just appear, underneath they are boiling like in a cauldron. The Syrian scenario is evolving further along imponderable avenues. The SAA has crossed the eastern bank of the Euphrates; heading toward Raqqa and the total reconquest of Assad's Syrian territories. Opposing the Syrian army are the so called "Syrian Free Army' aka Israel'-Saudi proxies degenerates, the USA bloc of advisers and other malcontents and misfits with a short span of life before them . These agglutination of mercenaries and dogs of war are hinged to the Kurdish chariot. A clash is unavoidable with SAA if these international subhuman dregs ( remember the international brigade in the Spanish civil war, a motley assortment of jews, trostkytes , anarquists, social renegades and red thugs- majority of "jewish origins") of the desert decide to make war, instead of accepting the inevitability of Assad's Syria unitary state. The North Korea circus is more of an entertaining burlesque show.Not a shred of truth is vomitted out of the foul mouths, from the whore chandala of Nick Haley to the inner sanctums of the white house. It evidences the stupidity and inanity of the homosapiens creatures. North Korea is defending herself. The comedian in the white house hurls invectives and insane threats to the NK ( we will obliterate you !!!) The South Koreans have also joined the chorus of the damned. One SK minister blustered that " nothing standing will remain in NK". It all seems these grey cells starved goofs are playing at war in their play stations; and implicitly believed in vaporizing countries at the push of a button while themselves remaining unscathed. It is all grand posturing for the mish mash masses of subhumaniy. The comedian in the White house has picked a bone with the Venezuelan leader, Maduro, whom he gilds with the flattering sobriquet of "Hitler". Trump calls Maduro a Hitler because he is " starving his population, he is violating democracy, jailing opponents, violating the rights of Venezuelans to vote and damning his his country into misery ---things which were contrary to what Hitler achieved or did. It is a time factor as to when this buffoon in the white house is either impeached, thrown out-deposed, or become a pixilated mannequin , made to lick the spittle of the USA deep state and military wall street complex.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Ռազմիկ ԱրտաշեսSeptember 22, 2017 at 4:10 PM

    Like it or not, the Armenian Apostolic Church has and continues to play an important role in the preservation of Armenian identity. Having had good and bad religious figures, the Armenian Church at the very least kept the Armenian identity intact. Whenever Armenians converted to another religion, they stopped being Armenian. Therefore, being Armenian in the modern sense still has to do with being Christian (The whole case of Muslim Armenians in Anatolia is a whole different story, and people should be careful whenmaking extreme claims about them (like placing a little too much hope on them. A lot depends on other factors, but anyways...).

    The following interview with Hayr Komitas Hovnanyan is worthy to listen. In my opinion, Hayr Komitas is the ideal role model to the Armenian spiritual leader:

    Ուրվագիծ 14.09.2017
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9S72a7W0hWs

    Also, while being a great staunch Armenian Christian, Hayr Komitas is also an intellectual and has researched our pre-Christian past well. But that's a whole different subject which I won't get into now. But feel free to research on YouTube and elsewhere.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ArevordiSeptember 23, 2017 at 8:03 PM

      In 451 AD I would have proudly stood right next to Vasak Syuni. However, in 650 AD I would have thanked God that Vardan Mamikonian won the struggle against Vasak Syuni. Although there was no way of knowing this in 301 AD or 451 AD, had we not accepted Christianity and stubbornly held on to it, we would have ended up being either like Kurds or Yezdis. No thank you. Christianity helped us preserve a unique identity in a very Turkic/Islamic region of the world. Moreover, I have always said a man without God, family and country is an instinct driven animal that is easily controlled. This is exactly why Christianity (apostolic Christianity in particular), nationalism and the traditional family has been under constant assault by Neo-Marxist/Globalists.

      I have the utmost love and respect for Hayr Komitas. He and no one but he deserves to be the Katoghikos. In any case, he still has a very powerful position in the church (thanks to the current katoghikos who appointed him) and he is doing great work. The following is a sampling -

      Շահե Աճեմեանը Komitas Hovnanyan-ի հետ է։ https://www.facebook.com/shahea.ajemian/videos/1243567799122654/

      ԶՐՈՒՅՑ ԿՈՄԻՏԱՍ ՎԱՐԴԱՊԵՏ ՀՈՎՆԱՆՅԱՆԻ ՀԵՏ ՄԱՍ-1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sDDBkleac8

      ԶՐՈՒՅՑ ԿՈՄԻՏԱՍ ՎԱՐԴԱՊԵՏ ՀՈՎՆԱՆՅԱՆԻ ՀԵՏ ՄԱՍ-2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5hoxGKA53s

      Komitas Vardapet Հայագիտություն 1-mas: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbHCljmdBHc

      Komitas Vardapet Հայագիտություն 2 mas: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNkb_d5Qwi8&feature=related

      Komitas Vardapet Հայագիտություն 3 rd mas: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIGrt_PkKNk&feature=related

      Komitas Vardapet Հայագիտություն 4 rd mas: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkVRcf4Tprc&feature=related

      Komitas Vardapet Հայագիտություն 5 rd verjin mas: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXCgO2I27Vg&feature=related

      Հայկական տառեր Բոլիվիայում: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yc9QsxO_qI8&feature=share

      Սկսենք Նորից Կոմիտաս վարդապետ հետ 1 մաս: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdJd9pp6Lx0

      Սկսենք Նորից Կոմիտաս վարդապետ հետ 2 մաս: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWJVHk3OWjI&feature=related

      Սկսենք Նորից Կոմիտաս վարդապետ հետ 3 մաս: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5ISbcdlZXU&feature=related

      Սկսենք Նորից Կոմիտաս վարդապետ հետ 4 վերջին մաս: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JW3rShtqZoI

      Erkri Harc Komitas Vartapet Hovnanyan: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzacWGfnxrg

      Urvagits - 29.05.2012:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_MxKQyJuL0&feature=youtube_gdata_player

      Երևանն է խոսում,ԱՆԵԾՔ: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkgP7gSGFcI

      Zham. am. «Ամբիոն». Կոմիտաս Վարդապետ Հովնանյան: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJLHAmfIjAM

      Կ. Վարդապետը՝ Հ. Բագրատյանի և Տյառնընդառաջի մասին: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQpIQMwtEfI

      Հարցազրույց - Տեր Կոմիտաս վարդապետ Հովնանյան:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTZVeyHKTUY

      «Դեմ առ դեմ»` Կոմիտաս վարդապետ Հովնանյան եւ Կարինե Հակոբյան: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBEC-b3-eeg

      Բարև Երկիր 17.08.2017 Հայր Կոմիտաս Վարդապետ և Հակոբ: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxZyVkgFmvg

      Այստեղի Պնդոն, այնտեղի Կնդոն չեն կարող երկրի ճակատագիրը որոշել. Կոմիտաս վարդապետ Հովնանյան: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cEtCumijt0

      Ուրվագիծ 10.04.2017: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Obvowqa3eR0

      Delete
  51. ArevordiSeptember 23, 2017 at 12:57 AM

    Այս մեկ հարցազրույցը ինձ բավական դուր եկավ:

    Ուրվագիծ 21.09.2017: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZTNBnyaqLE

    ReplyDelete
  52. BodijkianSeptember 26, 2017 at 8:51 PM

    The Kurds voted to secede from Iraq and establish an independent state. Naturally, the USA-Israely geopolitical stratagem demand this new state creation in the region. To live in peace and quiet you must have mayhem,arson,fire,and chaos visited upon your closest neighbors. Permanent instability, permanent chaos, permanent warfare in ME = peace , tranquility and aggrandizement of the chosen race. The Kurds will survive by being the obedient vassal of the chosenites, the sharp point of the Israeli lance against the disunited Arab world. Can the Kurdish secession spread to Turkey and Iran ? In Syria they are already semi-established; their foothold here is not as strong as in Iraq. The SAA could displaced them in due course. The Kurds are basing their state's renaissance legal claims on the treaty of Sevres. One would think that we may countenance another period of 20 years facing the "kurdish question" . The putative independence of the Kurds will not end with the limited northeast of Iraq. The Kurds are roughly 40m, spread over 4 states. Is the Iraqui state and army strong enough to maintain the integrity of its territory ?. Some Arabists are saying that a second Israel is being established amidst and among their lands. Rightly so; but they are too weak and lacking in ethnic cohesion to be capable to rise to the new challenge. The strength of the chosenites does not lie solely on themselves, their strength and power in the region is in inverse proportion to the weakness and despair of the Arabs.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ArevordiSeptember 26, 2017 at 10:14 PM

      Ordo Ab Chao is not merely an Israeli motto, it's a Anglo-American-Jewish motto. In any case, it's very interesting what's going on throughout the region. The entire post-war geostrategic formula with which the Middle East has been governed is in a flux. The wars in Syria and Iraq have not gone according to their plan. Russia and Iran have been the greatest beneficiaries of the war. And Erdogan's Turkey is drifting farther and farther away from the West.

      Under these circumstances, the Anglo-American-Jewish AND Franco AND Saudi interests may be seeing the formation of a Kurdistan as their only hope.

      With Kurdistan, they are trying to create a strategic buffer against Turks, Alawites, secular Arabs, Persians and Russians. Such a Kurdistan will keep Ankara contained. And similar to what was envisioned with ISIS, a Kuristan will also keep the Iranian/Shiite Arc in check. For us Armenians, a Kurdistan will add yet another layer of complexity/difficulty because Kurds are claiming Western Armenia as theirs. In the long run, however, this all may work in Armenia's favor.

      Kurds may be good guerrilla fighters but they are a hoplessly disunited not to mention a seriously backward people. Kurdistan will be just another deeply troubled third world country manipulated by a Anglo-American-Jewish-Franco-Saudi coalition. In any case, regardless of who or what is behind Kurdistan, its creation will most certainly cause serious long-term problems for Turkey and unfortunately Iran. I nevertheless would love to see a major war between Turkey and Kurdistan. Ankara has been very angry about all this. The following is Erdogan's recent comments -

      'Israeli flags won’t save you': Erdogan threatens Iraqi Kurds with famine over referendum: https://www.rt.com/news/404658-erdogan-threatens-kurdistan-hunger/

      Anglo-American-Jews began placing the foundations of a Kurdistan soon after their invasion of Iraq in 2003. This was done because Ankara back then had already began plotting a course away from the political West. In other words, a Western-backed Kurdistan region in northern Iraq was the West's reply to Ankara. A Kurdish state however took a long time in comming essentially because the time was not yet right and Anglo-American-Jews had not yet fully given up hope on Ankara.

      The war in Syria changed a lot of the calculus. With Ankara clearly drifting further away and with Russia and Iran gaining on the ground in Syria and Iraq, Anglo-American-Jews are making their move with Kurdistan.

      This has some good sides. The more Erdogan tries to be independent from the political West, the more will he be forced to deal with Russia (and to a lesser extent Iran). The more Erdogan opens up to Moscow (and to a leser extent Tehran), the more will Russians (and to a lesser extent Iranians) try to pull Turkey eastward. The more Turkey gets pulled eastward, the more will Anglo-American-Jews pull it westward. In the process, Turkey may very well fall apart. And now with a potential Kurdistan thrown in the mix, Turkey may at the very least suffer a major war. We are actually seeing this dynamic playout right now. This is why I have been cheering closer Russian-Turkish relations and this is why I don't mind some form of a Kurdistan in Iraq and/or Syria.

      Sidenote: The French intelligence-backed group known as "government of Western Armenia" and today's "ASALA" (which is also seems to be part of French intelligence) are part of the Anglo-American-Israeli-Franco agenda for the region. "Western Armenia" government representatives and "ASALA" operatives have been actively collaborating with Kurds since at least 2011.

      Delete
    2. Romanian AnonymusSeptember 27, 2017 at 8:26 AM

      One may wonder whether the creation of Kurdistan as a second Israel was not THE primary reason of the chaos created in the ME, thoroughly concealed behind the smokescreen of 'WMD','Arab Springs', 'Sunni-Shia' , 'Iran's nuclear ambitions', 'Sykes-Picot' ritual denunciations and what have you.
      The Oded Yinon Plan was candid about it.
      It might be that what delayed it was that the Kurds are "a hopelessly disunited not to mention a seriously backward people".

      Delete
    3. HayarpiSeptember 27, 2017 at 5:06 PM

      In the long run, Kurdish interests will clash with Armenia's. Kurdish claims to western Armenia need to be dispelled energetically. We do not know , if we ever get into such a situation where WA will be contested by the Kurds. Interestingly enough, as things are now , if for some quirk of historical fate WA was restaurated it would constitute fatal blow to the main Armenian body. WA is populated mainly by Kurds, under the democratic umbrella of corrupted principles (crypto democracy) Kurds can take over the government through elections. Armenia requires to put its repatriation program into high gear. We need to have at least 6m Armenians to have a credible chance of recovering the ancestral territories of WA.

      Delete
    4. Ռազմիկ ԱրտաշեսSeptember 27, 2017 at 8:53 PM

      Armenians should think of this situation in terms of 'divide and conquer'. The more Turks and Kurds fight each other, the weaker they become, the better for Armenia.

      Regarding Western Armenia, our people, organizations and government have to be seriously willing and prepared for it to happen, or else we may lose that opportunity. Currently, I don't see us getting ready for it. And realistically, we can't go on the offensive against Turkey in the current geopolitical situation, for we lack manpower and resources, and I don't think we will even be allowed to go in at this point. It all has to do with preparation, lobbying, strengthening of Armenia and many other factors. For the time being, let us try to exploit the whole Kurdistan situation to our benefit.

      PS: Next time you meet a diasporan, ask them this simple question: "If tomorrow Turkey magically gave back Western Armenia and allowed all Armenians to return to their homes, would you be willing to leave your current stable life in the West/Middle East etc. and resettle in your ancestral lands and contribute to the nation building process?" Many of them will be dumbfounded by that question, and Most of them will always answer no. Well then, what are you exactly demanding on April 24 each year?

      Delete
    5. AnonymousSeptember 28, 2017 at 4:57 AM

      I've been meaning to comment about the Kurds. I agree with what Arevordi wrote. I'll start by noting that I hate Kurds and that Armenians should have absolutely no sympathy towards Kurds, who did a lot of the "manual labor" for the Turks during the Armenian Genocide - The Jews ordered the project, contracted it out to their junior partners the Turks, and the Turks in turn subcontracted to the low-grade Kurds, Circassians, and other Muslim trash. Due to deep-seated psychological issues which exist primarily in the Armenian Diaspora, a portion of the self-destructive "activists" look at Kurds as a poor, oppressed people to be helped because the Turks are attacking the - Turks have assumed the role of a great destroyer-deity in the mindset of these activist diasporans, for whom the Armenian Genocide and all of the accompanying trauma now form a sort of creation myth... In other words I personally hate Kurds as much as Turks.

      Anyway, there is no room for "I hate them" in geopolitics, just interests. And here the creation of a Kurdistan is almost certainly going to be a long-term threat to Turkey. Even if some elements of the Turkish establishment think that for the time being they can control Kurdistan and use it as a pawn against Turkey's Arab and Iranian rivals, there is pretty much no scenario under which the Kurd-majority eastern regions of Turkey will not be radically effected by the existence of a Kurdish state. This is the only existential threat Turkey really faces as far as I can tell. They screwed up bad by turning their southeast region into a terrorist holding base against Assad, and shooting down a Russian jet.

      A direct move at Western Armenia is off the table for Armenians for the time being. However, it is clear that Western Armenia will either be taken by the Turks, or the Kurds, or by Armenia. Or Western Armenia will be partitioned and two or three sides will get various pieces. For Armenia, the best course of action would be to weaken the Turks and the Kurds until the time is right. The NATO-backed Turkish military presence in Western Armenia is one major problem, while the demographic domination of the tens of millions of Kurds which make the majority throughout most of Western Armenia is the other major problem. Luckily these two problems can be played off of each other, without requiring much Armenia n involvement.

      If Armenian "activists" were smart, they would be inciting Turks and Kurds to slaughter each other in Western Armenia and northern Iraq, and western extensions of the Middle East in the Germanic and Anglo worlds. The Jews, for example, expertly manipulate dumbass Evangelical Americans into fighting against Muslims (see anti-Islamic Crusading "jedeo-Christian" zionists like Pamela Gellar or any of the other faggots they regularly trot out on Fox News). Or how Israel gets the Druze and various Sunni sects to attack the Shiites. But of course Armenia has internal social and economic issues, while the diaspora is only interested in gay supremacy and normalizing Kardashian-style interracial gangbangs, so Armenians will not capitalize all that much on this opportunity. Please note that given what I just pointed out, I am actually thankful that the Diaspora is incompetent at following through on strategic political objectives.

      As long as Turkey has its hands full with Kurds, they will be more agreeable and less of a threat to Armenia. Should Turks get desperate and try to go all in on relations with Russia, it would be even better. There is also room to manipulate Azeris on the Kurdish issue, let them teat each other apart.

      Delete
    6. aaaSeptember 28, 2017 at 7:34 PM

      Unfortunately we are not strong enough, as a nation, to play in the league of international schemers and conflict stirrers, creating or inventing hostilities among nations (the way the master race does it). With the almighty grace, we have our hands full to protect the little blessing God has granted us by having a nation. As to the Diasporas; it all seems fine with them and they appear to be all "go Kurdistan". Even the govt. of NK has applauded the vision for the Kurds to separate. The kurds case bears no resemblance whatsoever with the NK situation. One has to be very careful. On the diplomatic front we don't need to antagonize neither Iraq-Syria, the Arab world (if such a thing exists) nor Iran by taking sides. As for Turkey they can go to hell. As someone else commented, we need more Armenians for Armenia to have the smallest chance of a " reconquista" of usurped and stolen territories. With our current demographic thermometer we are just coping to defend, protect and consolidate what we have. In all this welter and flux of cross currents and fraught imponderables, we must not forget the ace of spades in the pack,in a figure of speech, Russia. Whatever we do in the region we'll need the full backing of Russia. Kurdistan is a pet project of international jewry, the sanhedrin, the kabbalists,zionist and jewified anglo americans. This pet project is in the service of greater Israel. We have to watch for developments and await the reaction, there will be one, from Iran, Syria, Iraq. I am leaving Turkey out because their reaction is going to be predictable and beyond doubt in regards to the 20M kurds lodged in WA. WA is, today, part of Turkish occupied Armenian territory ,but the majority population is Kurdish. Turkey will not hesitate to purge WA of Kurds when the threat becomes critical. Whether they overreach themselves by encroaching into Iraq and Syria and tangle with the Kurds there, it remains to be seen. Turkey has the military muscle and the will to carry out such maneuvers. If Turkey starts a depopulation of Kurds from WA ( which will inexorably happen ), Armenia must seal its borders and not allow to be stampeded with kurdish refugees. Once inside Armenia, those refugees will never leave. To destabilize Mayr Hayastan, you only need 150000 kurds as refugees, a very ghastly picture to contemplate.

      Delete
    7. Arto2September 28, 2017 at 8:25 PM

      In regional and especially global affairs, I don't see Armenians as having the political farsightedness and will to plan and encourage neighboring groups to battle it out. For Turks and Kurds, I agree with Sarkis in their equal standing as nasty tribes but our leaders are far to small minded to be pitching larger enemies against each other. We're too busy being split and pitched against ourselves by others.

      Don't know if anyone else has heard of Stepan but he's raised some interesting historical issues over the years. Here's another example of how easy tools we have become at the hands of others

      Hamakargvatz Davadrutyun (Kartez) PART-14: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=12&v=49KP5VuZTfE

      To strengthen internally, psychologically, spiritually is the best we can do while we wait and see what global geopolitical opportunities or disasters await us.

      Delete
  53. Ռազմիկ ԱրտաշեսSeptember 27, 2017 at 8:56 PM

    There is a YouTube Series on Armenian historical issues. Here are two episodes that talk about the 1850s-1920s Armenian awakening movement. I ask the viewer to read between the lines and see how in many areas our traditional political parties made political mistakes that they shouldn't have had:

    Ձայն Արարատի-46 Հայաստանը 1890-ականներին, Համիդյան ջարդեր
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvpIPXiX2uE

    Ձայն Արարատի-51 Հայ ֆիդայական-ազատագրական պայքարը 1860-1910թթ.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDzc_LJcAZc

    ReplyDelete

Dear reader,

New blog commentaries will henceforth be posted on an irregular basis. The comment board however will continue to be moderated on a regular basis. You are therefore welcome to post your comments and ideas.

I have come to see the Russian nation as the last front on earth against the scourges of Westernization, Americanization, Globalism, Zionism, Islamic extremism and pan-Turkism. I have also come to see Russia as the last hope humanity has for the preservation of classical western/European civilization, ethnic cultures, Apostolic Christianity and the concept of traditional nation-state. Needless to say, an alliance with Russia is Armenia's only hope for survival in a dangerous place like the south Caucasus. These sobering realizations compelled me to create this blog in 2010. This blog quickly became one of the very few voices in the vastness of Cyberia that dared to preach about the dangers of Globalism and the Anglo-American-Jewish alliance, and the only voice emphasizing the crucial importance of Armenia's close ties to the Russian nation. Today, no man and no political party is capable of driving a wedge between Armenia and Russia. Anglo-American-Jewish and Turkish agenda in Armenia will not succeed. I feel satisfied knowing that at least on a subatomic level I have had a hand in this outcome.

To limit clutter in the comments section, I kindly ask all participants of this blog to please keep comments coherent and strictly relevant to the featured topic of discussion. Moreover, please realize that when there are several "anonymous" visitors posting comments simultaneously, it becomes very confusing (not to mention annoying) trying to figure out who is who and who said what. Therefore, if you are here to engage in conversation, make an observation, express an idea or simply insult me, I ask you to at least use a moniker to identify yourself. Moreover, please appreciate the fact that I have put an enormous amount of information into this blog. In my opinion, most of my blog commentaries and articles, some going back ten-plus years, are in varying degrees relevant to this day and will remain so for a long time to come. Commentaries and articles found in this blog can therefore be revisited by longtime readers and new comers alike. I therefore ask the reader to treat this blog as a historical record and a depository of important information relating to Eurasian geopolitics, Russian-Armenian relations and humanity's historic fight against the evils of Globalism and Westernization.

Thank you as always for reading.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)