Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Door Is Ajar For Karabakh War II

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Door Is Ajar For Karabakh War II

    DOOR IS AJAR FOR KARABAKH WAR II

    Igor Muradyan, Political Analyst
    Comments - Friday, 30 May 2014, 15:11

    NATO has realized that its charter is outdated and does not reflect
    the reality, and it is time to revise the present stiff framework of
    development of the alliance. At present, NATO is not making any effort
    to avoid the current conditions of cooperation with different states
    and combine "Point 5" and the resolution of defense and security
    issues. Most probably, either "Point 5" will be reviewed or a new
    format of cooperation with non-NATO members will be established.

    Otherwise it is impossible to ensure the security of the countries
    of Eastern Europe, Maghreb and the Near East without which European
    security cannot be imagined. A more global system of security cannot
    be limited to regional, European objectives, and even the toughest
    of supporters of isolation, primarily Germany, have recognized this.

    Of course, it would be far more effective to stop "praying" to the
    NATO charter and rules and accept the countries of Eastern Europe
    which do not differ from Western Europe much in terms of politics,
    history, religion and culture.

    NATO is having an intensive discussion not only on the upcoming summit
    in the UK but on a much broader range of issues because many people
    do not understand how they can resolve security issues when Eastern
    Europe has been demagogically farmed to Moscow which would not hide its
    contempt for the Western community and is undermining its positions.

    Russia is an aggressive state, and this factor will be definitive in
    the development of the alliance over the next two decades, especially
    that NATO has understand that in order to curb Russian expansion it
    must boost its military presence along the length of borders rather
    than develop relations with Russia.

    NATO is close to the decision on fulfillment of the objectives of
    boosting its military presence in Georgia, Ukraine, the Black and
    Baltic seas. The agreements with Russia in place on NATO military
    presence in East Europe are obsolete. These agreements were an
    important condition for the Russian expansion in its toughest form.

    In addition, NATO understands that fulfillment of objectives of
    military and political isolation of Russia is the most acceptable
    and cheapest means of resolution of issues of European security. In a
    long-term perspective, it would have been more costly to continue the
    policy of concessions to Russia and alignment of security interests
    to interests of some commercial banks and companies. These decisions
    are already in place and have been agreed with all the NATO members,
    and in this case Germany was one of the key initiators because it
    fears the prospect of being an outsider in Atlantic policy despite
    its economic capacity.

    What is awaiting the "zone" in this situation and in a long-term
    perspective? Though, in fact, deliberations on the destiny of the
    "zone" do not have a political meaning, there is still a meaning in
    the existence of the "zone" and its population.

    One should first of all be aware that reanimation of Turkey's role
    in the strategies of NATO and Russia will at least lead to oblivion
    of the "zone's" interests which marks the end of the period of any
    responsibility and interest of NATO and the United States for the
    destiny and security of the "zone". NATO and the United States
    have already identified their goals and priorities in the Black
    Sea-Caucasian region, and there is no place for the "zone" in this
    strategy, which is the best scenario.

    In reality, the "zone" is hindering the policy of NATO and the United
    States, and its interests will be constantly ignored, especially in the
    context of the increasing role of Turkey and Azerbaijan in blockade and
    isolation of Russia. This situation automatically leads to Russia's
    readiness to give up on the "zone's" interests in a trade-off with
    Turkey and Azerbaijan.

    The international isolation into which the leaders of the zone have
    led their country consciously and unconsciously allows all the foreign
    sides to sacrifice its interests. Isolation is a universal situation of
    the country in terms of its international helplessness and suppression
    of its rights. The door is ajar for Karabakh War II. The minister of
    defense Seiran Ohanyan has stated that he has no right to discuss
    Russia's behavior, thereby conveying that the Armenian military
    circles hate Russia but there is hardly anything to do. The "zone"
    has irrecoverably lost its sovereignty.

    At the same time, there are possible alternative that inspire little
    hope for survival, if not a successful and secure existence. Modern
    politics is moving on along a bumpy road rather than a railway, and
    the deeper the confrontation in Eastern Europe, the more complicated
    NATO's policy will be.

    The most important issue in this regard is whether a "third force"
    will emerge in the Black Sea-Caucasian region, and if yes, how long
    it will function in this region. Only the intensification of the
    military-political presence of NATO in this region will help prevent
    rapprochement and plot between Russia and Turkey.

    NATO and the United States have twice been close to this solution
    but illusions in some political circles in the United States and
    the UK have twice thwarted these plans. One way or another, the new
    geopolitical situation in the Black Sea-Caucasian region must take
    place or, otherwise, the policy of the United States and NATO in
    Eurasia will be futile. Dislocation of American military bases in,
    say, Georgia will be objectively aimed at supporting the ambitions
    of Russia and Turkey.

    It was mentioned in the publications in Lragir six years ago when
    the United States and NATO were close to this solution. It make one
    aware that this time too these plans may not come true. However,
    even if more favorable conditions for the "zone" occur, one has to
    remember that renegade and vassal states will have no "honorary"
    place on the political map in the future geopolitical arrangement of
    forces of the region. These countries which preferred loss of their
    sovereignty will hardly be able to expect preferences.

    Nevertheless, one has to understand that the expectations are
    better, and the Americans and Europeans understand who is who in the
    "establishment" of the "zone". Primarily, the military circles may
    be bidden which only formally remain loyal to the political leadership.

    The West understands that with the total capitulation of the "zone"
    and its society to the Russian dictate any future government will need
    a credit not only to fix the economy and administration but also to
    dissect the society which has signed off its sentence.

    In any case, the "zone" will have to pay for and always be reminded
    of its degenerative mentality and hope that the sentence will not be
    too severe.

    - See more at:
    http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/32513#sthash.3rRht6Hi.dpuf

Working...
X