Serge the traitor

[Armanen]

Re: serje the traitor

All Armenians would love to interpret it that way. Unfortunately, the ambiguity of the protocols lets it open for Turks to interpret "non intervention in internal affairs of other states" as do not try to interfere in the affairs of Azerbaijan, i.e. Artsakh. In the best case scenario though, us proceeding to interfere in Azeri affairs would bring to the annulment of the protocols .

If that is how they read it, Armenia can use the same tactic with regards to northern Cyprus and the islands in the Aegean which Greece and turkey bicker over.

[Federate]

Re: serje the traitor

What i think the protocols mean is Armenia will not get involved in turkeys affairs with other countries and turkey will not get involved in Armenia's affairs. thats the way i interpreted that section.

All Armenians would love to interpret it that way. Unfortunately, the ambiguity of the protocols lets it open for Turks to interpret "non intervention in internal affairs of other states" as do not try to interfere in the affairs of Azerbaijan, i.e. Artsakh. In the best case scenario though, us proceeding to interfere in Azeri affairs would bring to the annulment of the protocols .

[ninetoyadome]

Re: serje the traitor

I do not think it's a matter of Serge giving up Artsakh to the Azeris. The fictitious NKAO portion of Artsakh is certainly ours. The liberated territories is what worries me. Anyway, outside of this there is this paragraph that can be interpreted in many ways which is really the problem with these protocols: they are too ambiguous.

What i think the protocols mean is Armenia will not get involved in turkeys affairs with other countries and turkey will not get involved in Armenia's affairs. thats the way i interpreted that section.

[Federate]

Re: Serge the traitor

So the Russians not only own all the infrastructure in Armenia but now want to dip into our electricity exporting sector? And does Mr. Lavrov and this "other Russian company" not know that a railway line already exists between Turkey and Armenia?
----------------------------------------------------------
Russia ready to establish railway between Armenia, Turkey: Russian FM

12 October 2009 [10:36] - Today.Az
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov of Russia who also attended the signing ceremony of Turkey-Armenia protocols in Zurich said his country was ready to support the normalization process between Turkey and Armenia.

Russia can support this process with cooperation projects with Turkey and Armenia in the sectors of electricity, energy, transportation and communications, Anadolu news agency quoted him as saying.

Lavrov added that Russian United Energy Systems (UES) company was interested in transportation of electricity energy from Armenia to Turkey while another Russian company was ready to build a railway line between the two countries.

Meanwhile, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that the United States would do everything it could to build on the "milestone" that Turkey and Armenia achieved by signing protocols establishing diplomatic relations.

URL: http://www.today.az/news/politics/56432.html

[Haykakan]

Re: serje the traitor

During the later years of Robert Kocharian's presidency, I remember that Erdogan proposed something similar to the Armenians through a letter. He proposed opening the borders if Armenia accepts to create a commission discussing the genocide. However, Kocharian refused. Why do you think he refuse back then, while Sargsyan accepted today?

For Armenia and for foreign powers, opening up the border would have been as beneficial as it would have been today. And don't tell me that Sargsyan has no choice today because of the pressure.

Much has changed since then. The georgia situation is forcing the powers to look for alternative routes, it is making open borders more important of an issue for everyone involved. Georgia is no longer a trusted rout thus Armenia comes into the spotlight now. The Georgia situation is the biggest reason for all of this and it is the thing that is different from the Kocharian days. Back then Kocharian had no chance of getting what Serj can get now. Russia is on board because it gets to control and profit from this deal while punishing further the stupid shakasville.

[Federate]

Re: serje the traitor

here is to everyone who claims Serzh is going to give Artsakh back:

I do not think it's a matter of Serge giving up Artsakh to the Azeris. The fictitious NKAO portion of Artsakh is certainly ours. The liberated territories is what worries me. Anyway, outside of this there is this paragraph that can be interpreted in many ways which is really the problem with these protocols: they are too ambiguous.

Reconfirming their commitment, in their bilateral and international relations, to respect and ensure respect for the principles equality, sovereignty, non intervention in internal affairs of other states, territorial integrity and inviolability of frontiers.

[Davo88]

Re: Serge the traitor

Yes I got it from his video interview on youtube eheh

[Gavur]

Re: serje the traitor

During the later years of Robert Kocharian's presidency, I remember that Erdogan proposed something similar to the Armenians through a letter. He proposed opening the borders if Armenia accepts to create a commission discussing the genocide. However, Kocharian refused. Why do you think he refuse back then, while Sargsyan accepted today?

For Armenia and for foreign powers, opening up the border would have been as beneficial as it would have been today. And don't tell me that Sargsyan has no choice today because of the pressure.

Good point Davo.
Exactly touches on what Honorable Mr. Oskanyan was saying.

[Gavur]

Re: serje the traitor

At least General Aoun is an ethnic Arab. This is not the right thread but Aoun is certainly a better choice than that Geagea character.

any relations to Lady Gaga ?

[Davo88]

Re: serje the traitor

During the later years of Robert Kocharian's presidency, I remember that Erdogan proposed something similar to the Armenians through a letter. He proposed opening the borders if Armenia accepts to create a commission discussing the genocide. However, Kocharian refused. Why do you think he refuse back then, while Sargsyan accepted today?

For Armenia and for foreign powers, opening up the border would have been as beneficial as it would have been today. And don't tell me that Sargsyan has no choice today because of the pressure.