Tweet
U.S. STARTS IMPLEMENTATION OF BIG PLAN
Igor Muradyan, Political Analyst
Comments - 12 July 2014, 23:39
Paradoxical decisions in international politics indicate a u-turn and
ambiguous prospects. Such situations are not visualized in political
resolutions and occur unnoticed and sometimes pass unheeded.
No matter how diverse people's characters and styles are, in political
terms there are two types of thinking: political and non-political.
Even well-educated people with immense erudition may not be capable
of political thinking. In general terms and characteristics Maidan in
Kiev is an ordinary event in the world but even such local developments
result in global processes when one of the actors of the processes
trespasses the political, in this case geopolitical line.
In this world everyone gets what they deserve, and one has to be aware
of one's capacity. Obama administration was embarrassed and ready for
radical decisions, and revision of geopolitical priorities in Eastern
Europe can be defined only by the word radical. The American analytical
community also faced unexpected decisions and still cannot believe
that Obama had to accept a "Republican project" on global security.
Now there are no doubts that the United States has set to implement a
large-scale geopolitical action aimed at design of a Eurasian axis of
defense and security determined by challenges to global security. This
active foreign policy is not popular with the public at large and
political circles of the United States but the Republicans continue
to push Obama to expand military-political presence in Eastern Europe.
The Turkish topic remains delicate among the American political and
analytical circles but this old ally of the United States in NATO
has long been considered a big international political problem, and
though Washington tries to pay minimum attention to Turkey, a lot of
interesting things are happening in the American-Turkish relations.
In the Near East the United States has erected a powerful barrier
on the way of Turkish expansion but it turns out that additional
reinforcement is needed. The Americans have thwarted the Turkish
foreign policy, and even the most complementary actions towards Turkey
in reality have the character of a discussion. The Americans are not
worried much about the possibility of rapprochement of Turkey and
Russia but it is implied by their policy. Apparently, the efforts
of European partners are not enough for the implementation of the
dual containment policy, i.e. containment of expansion of Turkey
and Russia because the Europeans would not be able to pursue the
interests of NATO and the Western community, and the East needs a big
and reliable partner. Furthermore, the policy of this partner must
not be determined by a set of values but by geopolitical factors
and conditions of national and regional security. Of the Black
Sea-Caucasus region only Iran can be such a country, and this will
definitely accelerate the rapprochement of the United States and Iran.
The Eastern dimension of the dual containment policy is being formed
intensively, and soon new tasks will arise relating to the arrangement
of forces and location of military resources, in several regions
simultaneously and with consideration of interests and possibilities
of Iran.
The U.S. goals of ensuring balance of forces between the Sunni and
Shiite blocs were fundamental and perhaps in the course of time the
United States will return to this idea but now the United States is
interested in strengthening the Shiite bloc which may offset Sunni
radicalism which has obtained unprecedented scales and purposes. Iran
will try to conduct a more balanced policy but Tehran understands that
partnership with the United States could be a factor of strengthening
Iran in a vast geopolitical space.
Iran will need to demonstrate readiness and interest in curbing the
expansion of Turkey and Russia whose policy is aimed at leaving Iran in
misery, which harms not only the political but also economic plans of
Tehran. Iran is becoming an important factor of the dual containment
policy and there are no alternatives to it.
Not a long time ago the Armenian-Iranian relations were scrutinized
by the United States though the Americans never insisted on limiting
development of relations between Armenia and Iran, they were interested
in matters of nuclear security only. Now the views and positions of
Americans on this matter have changed, which has a systemic character
and is related to the geopolitical interests of the United States.
American policy makers think in the following way: Iran is an important
partner to Armenia; Americans must not oppose to this whether there
will be progress in the U.S.-Iran relations or not; the United States
and Iran have shared interests (such as Taliban); railway, road and
gas may come from Iran; when gas was cut in Georgia, Iran supplied
gas to Armenia; so the regional approach must include Iran.
Under such conditions Armenia needs to refrain from actions that
will hinder Iran in expanding its positions in the South Caucasus,
including in terms of "settlement" of conflicts. It is time to set
up a hub for negotiations and coordination of efforts of Armenia
with the United States and Iran on a unified political and diplomatic
arena. An important dimension is defense and security. The seminar on
NATO-Armenia relations held in Washington by the U.S. Atlantic Council
and Policy Forum Armenia on 2 July 2014 reflected the new realities.
- See more at:
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/32721#sthash.sLwmjSOl.dpuf
Igor Muradyan, Political Analyst
Comments - 12 July 2014, 23:39
Paradoxical decisions in international politics indicate a u-turn and
ambiguous prospects. Such situations are not visualized in political
resolutions and occur unnoticed and sometimes pass unheeded.
No matter how diverse people's characters and styles are, in political
terms there are two types of thinking: political and non-political.
Even well-educated people with immense erudition may not be capable
of political thinking. In general terms and characteristics Maidan in
Kiev is an ordinary event in the world but even such local developments
result in global processes when one of the actors of the processes
trespasses the political, in this case geopolitical line.
In this world everyone gets what they deserve, and one has to be aware
of one's capacity. Obama administration was embarrassed and ready for
radical decisions, and revision of geopolitical priorities in Eastern
Europe can be defined only by the word radical. The American analytical
community also faced unexpected decisions and still cannot believe
that Obama had to accept a "Republican project" on global security.
Now there are no doubts that the United States has set to implement a
large-scale geopolitical action aimed at design of a Eurasian axis of
defense and security determined by challenges to global security. This
active foreign policy is not popular with the public at large and
political circles of the United States but the Republicans continue
to push Obama to expand military-political presence in Eastern Europe.
The Turkish topic remains delicate among the American political and
analytical circles but this old ally of the United States in NATO
has long been considered a big international political problem, and
though Washington tries to pay minimum attention to Turkey, a lot of
interesting things are happening in the American-Turkish relations.
In the Near East the United States has erected a powerful barrier
on the way of Turkish expansion but it turns out that additional
reinforcement is needed. The Americans have thwarted the Turkish
foreign policy, and even the most complementary actions towards Turkey
in reality have the character of a discussion. The Americans are not
worried much about the possibility of rapprochement of Turkey and
Russia but it is implied by their policy. Apparently, the efforts
of European partners are not enough for the implementation of the
dual containment policy, i.e. containment of expansion of Turkey
and Russia because the Europeans would not be able to pursue the
interests of NATO and the Western community, and the East needs a big
and reliable partner. Furthermore, the policy of this partner must
not be determined by a set of values but by geopolitical factors
and conditions of national and regional security. Of the Black
Sea-Caucasus region only Iran can be such a country, and this will
definitely accelerate the rapprochement of the United States and Iran.
The Eastern dimension of the dual containment policy is being formed
intensively, and soon new tasks will arise relating to the arrangement
of forces and location of military resources, in several regions
simultaneously and with consideration of interests and possibilities
of Iran.
The U.S. goals of ensuring balance of forces between the Sunni and
Shiite blocs were fundamental and perhaps in the course of time the
United States will return to this idea but now the United States is
interested in strengthening the Shiite bloc which may offset Sunni
radicalism which has obtained unprecedented scales and purposes. Iran
will try to conduct a more balanced policy but Tehran understands that
partnership with the United States could be a factor of strengthening
Iran in a vast geopolitical space.
Iran will need to demonstrate readiness and interest in curbing the
expansion of Turkey and Russia whose policy is aimed at leaving Iran in
misery, which harms not only the political but also economic plans of
Tehran. Iran is becoming an important factor of the dual containment
policy and there are no alternatives to it.
Not a long time ago the Armenian-Iranian relations were scrutinized
by the United States though the Americans never insisted on limiting
development of relations between Armenia and Iran, they were interested
in matters of nuclear security only. Now the views and positions of
Americans on this matter have changed, which has a systemic character
and is related to the geopolitical interests of the United States.
American policy makers think in the following way: Iran is an important
partner to Armenia; Americans must not oppose to this whether there
will be progress in the U.S.-Iran relations or not; the United States
and Iran have shared interests (such as Taliban); railway, road and
gas may come from Iran; when gas was cut in Georgia, Iran supplied
gas to Armenia; so the regional approach must include Iran.
Under such conditions Armenia needs to refrain from actions that
will hinder Iran in expanding its positions in the South Caucasus,
including in terms of "settlement" of conflicts. It is time to set
up a hub for negotiations and coordination of efforts of Armenia
with the United States and Iran on a unified political and diplomatic
arena. An important dimension is defense and security. The seminar on
NATO-Armenia relations held in Washington by the U.S. Atlantic Council
and Policy Forum Armenia on 2 July 2014 reflected the new realities.
- See more at:
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/32721#sthash.sLwmjSOl.dpuf