Tweet
LOSING THE PRINCIPAL ALLY IN THE SOUTHERN PART OF THE CAUCASUS
by Yuri Simonjan
Translated by A. Ignatkin
Source: Nezavisimaya Gazeta, December 5, 2006, p. 9
Agency WPS
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
December 8, 2006 Friday
SLIPPING AWAY OUTPOST;
ADVANCEMENT OF ARMENIAN-NATO COOPERATION IN THE SPHERE OF CRISIS
MANAGEMENT AS ANOTHER STEP LEADING TO THE LOSS OF RUSSIA'S PRINCIPAL
ALLY IN THE CAUCASUS; Russia's indifference and arrogance may cost
it its last ally in the Caucasus.
Two-day crisis management seminar that opened in Yerevan this Monday
was organized within the framework of Armenia-NATO IPAP of Individual
Partnership Action Plan. Speaking at the seminar, NATO expert Avert
Sommer expressed satisfaction with the level of cooperation within
the framework of Partnership for Peace, NATO's Program. "Armenia is
an active participant. That is why specialists from Holland and the
United States are in Armenia now, at a meeting with their Armenian
counterparts for the purpose of establishment of a crisis management
system," Sommer said. Rescue Service Director Major General Eduard
Barsegjan announced in his turn that Yerevan was determined to deepen
cooperation with the Alliance in the crisis management sphere.
A routine function as it is, the seminar is actually anything but. It
was with "innocent" functions like it that cooperation with Georgia
once began to blossom into the near membership of this country in
the Alliance. And with Azerbaijan, the country that does not openly
proclaim its determination to join the foremost global military
structure but that is clearly drifting in this direction. All of that
attaches unprecedented importance to the question that seemed out
of place only recently - that of reliability of Armenia as Russia's
outpost in the southern part of the Caucasus.
Stepan Safarjan of the Center for National and Strategic Studies
dismisses all assumptions on the possibility of changes in Armenia's
foreign policy as idle speculation. "There are no indications that
any such turn is about to be executed. Armenian-Russian economic
treaties, the threat of another round of hostilities with Azerbaijan,
and tension in the relations with Turkey solidify Russia's positions in
Armenia," the political scientist pointed out. He admitted, however,
appearance of certain suspicions in Armenian society with regard to
Moscow. Safarjan referred to murders of Armenians in Russia and the
fears that the Kremlin might decide to support the current Armenian
regime in the forthcoming parliamentary and presidential elections. "As
a matter of fact, the regime is already trying to secure the West's
support too, but there is no point in talking of any dramatic changes,"
Safarjan said.
Stepan Grigorjan, Director of the Center for Globalization and National
Cooperation, believes at the same time there must be something about
all these talks on changes in Armenia's foreign policy. Moreover,
he assumes that some metamorphosis is inevitable.
"We do not want to lose Russia," Grigorjan said. "It is Russia itself
that is pushing Armenia away."
As far as Grigorjan is concerned, changes in the foreign policy are
made inevitable by the following factors: Moscow's partnership with
the Armenian authorities alone which comes down to cooperation with
corrupt state officials; non-transparency of Russian programs in
Armenia so that practically all industrial objects in the republic
are owned by Russia now and remain idling; and finally, attitude
towards the Armenians in Russia itself.
"Add intensification of the Russian-Azerbaijani military cooperation as
the fourth factor," Grigorjan said. "A member of the CIS Collective
Security Treaty Organization, Armenia is entitled to something
better in terms of military contacts with Russia. Yerevan cannot help
being dismayed over the fact that the level of Russian-Azerbaijani
cooperation in this sphere is rapidly approaching the Russian-Armenian
one."
The political scientist claims that these views are shared by the
population too; they are not restricted to the establishment alone.
Until recently, affection for Moscow was mostly ascribed to the
unsolved Karabakh problem. The Kremlin in the meantime became markedly
neutral on the matter over the years. The West, on the contrary,
boosted its involvement. The United States even insisted on having
the latest so far conflict resolution plan include a provision on a
referendum in Karabakh. Moreover, it is helping Karabakh directly. All
of that is fomenting somewhat different moods and views in Armenian
society.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
by Yuri Simonjan
Translated by A. Ignatkin
Source: Nezavisimaya Gazeta, December 5, 2006, p. 9
Agency WPS
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
December 8, 2006 Friday
SLIPPING AWAY OUTPOST;
ADVANCEMENT OF ARMENIAN-NATO COOPERATION IN THE SPHERE OF CRISIS
MANAGEMENT AS ANOTHER STEP LEADING TO THE LOSS OF RUSSIA'S PRINCIPAL
ALLY IN THE CAUCASUS; Russia's indifference and arrogance may cost
it its last ally in the Caucasus.
Two-day crisis management seminar that opened in Yerevan this Monday
was organized within the framework of Armenia-NATO IPAP of Individual
Partnership Action Plan. Speaking at the seminar, NATO expert Avert
Sommer expressed satisfaction with the level of cooperation within
the framework of Partnership for Peace, NATO's Program. "Armenia is
an active participant. That is why specialists from Holland and the
United States are in Armenia now, at a meeting with their Armenian
counterparts for the purpose of establishment of a crisis management
system," Sommer said. Rescue Service Director Major General Eduard
Barsegjan announced in his turn that Yerevan was determined to deepen
cooperation with the Alliance in the crisis management sphere.
A routine function as it is, the seminar is actually anything but. It
was with "innocent" functions like it that cooperation with Georgia
once began to blossom into the near membership of this country in
the Alliance. And with Azerbaijan, the country that does not openly
proclaim its determination to join the foremost global military
structure but that is clearly drifting in this direction. All of that
attaches unprecedented importance to the question that seemed out
of place only recently - that of reliability of Armenia as Russia's
outpost in the southern part of the Caucasus.
Stepan Safarjan of the Center for National and Strategic Studies
dismisses all assumptions on the possibility of changes in Armenia's
foreign policy as idle speculation. "There are no indications that
any such turn is about to be executed. Armenian-Russian economic
treaties, the threat of another round of hostilities with Azerbaijan,
and tension in the relations with Turkey solidify Russia's positions in
Armenia," the political scientist pointed out. He admitted, however,
appearance of certain suspicions in Armenian society with regard to
Moscow. Safarjan referred to murders of Armenians in Russia and the
fears that the Kremlin might decide to support the current Armenian
regime in the forthcoming parliamentary and presidential elections. "As
a matter of fact, the regime is already trying to secure the West's
support too, but there is no point in talking of any dramatic changes,"
Safarjan said.
Stepan Grigorjan, Director of the Center for Globalization and National
Cooperation, believes at the same time there must be something about
all these talks on changes in Armenia's foreign policy. Moreover,
he assumes that some metamorphosis is inevitable.
"We do not want to lose Russia," Grigorjan said. "It is Russia itself
that is pushing Armenia away."
As far as Grigorjan is concerned, changes in the foreign policy are
made inevitable by the following factors: Moscow's partnership with
the Armenian authorities alone which comes down to cooperation with
corrupt state officials; non-transparency of Russian programs in
Armenia so that practically all industrial objects in the republic
are owned by Russia now and remain idling; and finally, attitude
towards the Armenians in Russia itself.
"Add intensification of the Russian-Azerbaijani military cooperation as
the fourth factor," Grigorjan said. "A member of the CIS Collective
Security Treaty Organization, Armenia is entitled to something
better in terms of military contacts with Russia. Yerevan cannot help
being dismayed over the fact that the level of Russian-Azerbaijani
cooperation in this sphere is rapidly approaching the Russian-Armenian
one."
The political scientist claims that these views are shared by the
population too; they are not restricted to the establishment alone.
Until recently, affection for Moscow was mostly ascribed to the
unsolved Karabakh problem. The Kremlin in the meantime became markedly
neutral on the matter over the years. The West, on the contrary,
boosted its involvement. The United States even insisted on having
the latest so far conflict resolution plan include a provision on a
referendum in Karabakh. Moreover, it is helping Karabakh directly. All
of that is fomenting somewhat different moods and views in Armenian
society.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress