Is Russia an ally or foe, nowadays?

[hagopn]

Re: Is Russia an ally or foe, nowadays?

Today in most English speaking forums the term moderate is only applicable, at least according to the apparent majority, to someone who veers to the left. If you ever so slightly nudge to the so-called "right", you are automatically labeled an extremist of some form or another. I have been categorized as both in every forum in various contexts. The anti-nationalist is a valid category, the ultra-left who advocate the abolishment of the nation-state, so valid that its proponents actually and proudly label themselves as such.

There is no true moderate thought in the English language forums in general that gets categorized as such: Only leftist thought, which then automatically converts to or evolves toward anti-nationalism.

South American forums are by far the most Armenian nationalist friendly. American or Anglo based forums are downright hostile to nationalists. There, Argentinian forums for example, I have noticed the you can more easily express nationalist feelings without the usual automatic reflex of leftist "moderates" kicking in.

Having said that, Lampron would not be so passionate in his pessimism were he not a nationalist at heart, but in the English language world, we are taught to avoid that category via quite Pavlovian methodology.

[hagopn]

Re: Is Russia an ally or foe, nowadays?

As far as the scottish feline is concerned, his mission appears to be that of an obsessive compulsive "right thought exterminator" whose specialty of the day (decade or 2, who knows?) just happens to be Armenians. Armenians are easy feeding ground for raving mad leftists, particularly in the English language world. Even the Armenian elite have been amply denationalized, or at least only the denationalized sort are given positions of influence. Therefore his sort know they have nothing to worry about consequences of such actions.

For the time being, it has yet to re-occur to the largely denationalized English speaking public that Armenian nationality without Armenian nationalism is truly a silly thought, and that those who are given free reign to ridicule, debase, intimidate, label, isolate nationalist Armenians are not friends. At best, they are muses, sort of like mental vaccines.

[londontsi]

Re: Is Russia an ally or foe, nowadays?

......It is a fact that for the last 200 years most Armenian leaders, churchmen and 'intellectuals' have made shish kebab-eating their priority, not working on a collective vision, self sacrifice and struggle......

You are referring to the last 200 years.

Could you please explain what should have been the vision of our “leaders” of the time.
You can also be specific which “leader” lies the blame with .

What opportunities were missed,
What decisions were avoided,
What objectives should they have perused

Granted you have an advantage, the benefit of hindsight.

“They should avoided eating shish kebab” does not qualify as an intelligent answer.

[Vrej1915]

Re: Is Russia an ally or foe, nowadays?

Հարցազրույց «խորհրդավոր անծանոթուհու» հետ
Իգոր Մուրադյան
Շաբաթ, 21 Սեպտեմբերի 2013,

Հայաստանում կոնկրետ նպատակներով գտնվող Կոմսոմոլսկայա պրավդա թերթի թղթակից Դարյա Ասլամովան հարցազրույց է վերցրել ինձնից «Ինչու չեք սիրում Մաքսային միությունը» թեմայով: Ես չէի տիրաժավորի նրա մտքերը, եթե դա չարտահայտեր մոսկովյան քարոզչության խնդիրներն ու նպատակները:
Զարմանալի կերպով դա ինձ հիշեցնում էր մոսկովյան թղթակիցների պահվածքը 1988 թվականին. Զտված փորձարկված թեզեր, չփաստարկված եզրահանգումներ, բերված ոչ թե պարզապես հարցազրույցում, այլ ավելի շուտ առաջարկված բանավեճով:
Փոխարենը բերվեցին Ռուսաստանի քաղաքական ղեկավարության բոլոր փաստարկները: Սկսվեց, ինչպես միշտ, գազի անջատումից, վիզային ռեժիմ մտցնելուց, հայերին Ռուսաստանից վտարելուց, ռուսական բազայի դուրսբերումից, զենքի մատակարարման դադարեցումից: Ընդ որում, լիովին հստակ խոսվում էր այն մասին, որ հայերին պետք չէ անկախ պետություն, ընդհանրապես պետություն: Գործնականում թղթակցուհին պնդում էր, որ եթե Պուտինը սեպտեմբերի 3-ին բերել էր հենց այդպիսի փաստարկներ, ապա դա շատ լավ է եւ քաղաքականապես արդյունավետ:
Սակայն, առավել հետաքրքիրը հետեւյալն է: Պարզվում է, Մոսկվայում չափազանց մտահոգ են Արեւմուտքում թափ առնող հակառուսական քարոզչությամբ, որն օգտագործում է Հայաստանի դեմ Ռուսաստանի կոպիտ ճնշումների փաստը: Մոսկվան անտարբեր չէ դրա հանդեպ, եւ ռուսական զլմ-ներից պահանջվում է արձագանք այդ իրադարձություններին:
Ընդ որում, կարելի է հասկանալ, որ այդ քարոզչությունը հետ մղելու համար լավագույն միջոցը համապատասխան փաստեր եւ հայկական նյութ բերելն է: Այսինքն, Հայաստանը պետք է դառնա արեւմտյան քարոզչության դեմ պայքարի ասպարեզ:
Հայտնվեց նաեւ, որ Մոսկվայում Հայաստանի իրադարձություններին արձագանքում են ելնելով Լրագիր կայքի եւ Ժամանակ թերթի նյութերից, ինչը ամբողջական չի թվում, նրա խոսքով:
Հարցին՝ արդյոք Եվրամիության հետ Ասոցացման համաձայնագրի ստորագրումն անհրաժեշտ ուշադրության չէր արժանանա Մոսկվայում, ասվեց, որ դա շատ է մտահոգում Մոսկվային: Թվում է հարցը միամիտ է, սակայն ավելի վաղ ռուս քարոզիչները պնդում էին հենց դա:
Թղթակիցը գտնում է, որ Մոսկվան մեծ նշանակություն է տալիս տեղեկատվական քաղաքականությանը, եւ Ուկրաինայի հարցով անհաջողությունը բացատրում է տեղեկատվական վատ քաղաքականությամբ:
Կարելի է ենթադրել, թե ինչ է պատրաստվել Հայաստանի համար: Իհարկե, հնարավոր է ես ճիշտ չեմ հասկացել երիտասարդ, հետաքրքիր կնոջը, սակայն, իմ կարծիքով, նա անկեղծ էր, ավելի անկեղծ չի լինում:
- See more at: http://www.lragir.am/index/arm/0/pol....BKkwVGAW.dpuf

[bell-the-cat]

Re: Is Russia an ally or foe, nowadays?

You are referring to the last 200 years.

Could you please explain what should have been the vision of our “leaders” of the time.
You can also be specific which “leader” lies the blame with .

What opportunities were missed,
What decisions were avoided,
What objectives should they have perused

Granted you have an advantage, the benefit of hindsight.

“They should avoided eating shish kebab” does not qualify as an intelligent answer.

If you are disagreeing with lampron's assertion, and have access to sources detailing historical hindsight, why don't you tell us, for example:

What opportunities were seized?
what correct decisions were made?
what objectives were set and attained?

Of course Lampron is being deliberately overly dismissive and painting with an overly broad stroke - and I'm sure you can give numerous examples of successful leaders - but that doesn't mean there is not a core truth behind Lampron's feeling that the quantity of the failure in leadership is significant. And I bet Lampron's comment was prompted more by the behaviour of current leaders than past ones. These days it's honorary medals and honorary dinner banquets rather than shish-kebabs. And at least when that cartoon dog Muttley demanded yet another meaningless medal for doing next to nothing, he didn't demand a celebratory meal with it as well!

[londontsi]

Re: Is Russia an ally or foe, nowadays?

If you are disagreeing with lampron's assertion, and have access to sources detailing historical hindsight, why don't you tell us, for example:

Actually I was trying to prove through his own words his ignorance of the Armenian history,
of course if he knows the history then his logic and judgement.

I thought you were smarter than him !!

.

[bell-the-cat]

Re: Is Russia an ally or foe, nowadays?

Actually I was trying to prove through his own words his ignorance of the Armenian history,
of course if he knows the history then his logic and judgement.

I thought you were smarter than him !!

.

But his (alleged) ignorance of Armenian history does not actually disprove his point, it only makes it difficult for him to argue for it!

He may not know about Hovhannes Katchaznouni's damning post-war essay of the wartime Dashnak leadership and the failure of the organisation's political aims - but that just means he cannot use it as an argument to support his point, not that the point itself is fundamentally wrong.

I'm not saying that the point is right, but that it has some foundationin truth. And I think it does need to be extended downwards into the lower eschelons of leadership and be more to do with today's Armenia.

Would you trust doing business with the business leaders of todays Armenia? Would you trust the leaders of the legal profession in todays Armenia to hand down correct and impartial judgements. Would you trust the lawyers and accountants of todays Armenia to represent you and not rip you off or set you up? Would you trust the politicians of today's Armenia to represent the people and the rule of law rather than their own personal interests? Would you trust the minor officials of Armenia to do what they are paid to do without the need for bribery to get them to do it? And would you trust that they had the actual training and competence to do the task at all? Every country has those problems too, but would the concerns have the same degree of importance to you if you were in, say, France or Germany? In Armenia, you need to assume the worst, in France of Germany you would tend to assume the best. That shows there is a serious failing at all leadership levels in Armenia.

[hagopn]

Re: Is Russia an ally or foe, nowadays?

Every country has those problems too, but would the concerns have the same degree of importance to you if you were in, say, France or Germany? In Armenia, you need to assume the worst, in France of Germany you would tend to assume the best. That shows there is a serious failing at all leadership levels in Armenia.

It depends on who you ask. In the US, for example, you have racism galore at every step, within the justice system, the corporate employment realm, etc. Impartiality is selectively applied.

In Armenia, the toxins are visible. The "western countries" have learned to hide their toxic hatred of others in wonderfully crafted cammouflage.

Ah, needed to add also that it is a well known fact that the US and other western states are increasingly devolving into police states where, particularly in the US, police brutality outstrips the civilian sector in the number of violent crimes. It is also a problem that most such cases never get prosecuted, or, if prosecuted, the law enforcement officer or agent usually faces little punitive action.

Armenians are just not good at being dictators, olligrarchs, criminals, and so on. They get caught. As the British "ethic" says, "it is only against the law if you get caught." Certainly the ethic of a "morally dependable" paradigm.

Now, if the Bentley Bishop was in, say, the US or UK (and there are a great many, I assure you), I would imagine he would keep his concubines and real-estate assets in much stricter confidence, perhaps sharing them with civilian leadership (of course, those "paragons of vritue") and so on. "You scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours" goes the saying.

[Vrej1915]

Re: Is Russia an ally or foe, nowadays?

YEREVAN IN THE CLUTCH OF GEOPOLITICAL POLES (SECOND ROUND)

Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
Sept 20 2013

20 September 2013 - 10:44am

Susanna Petrosyan, Yerevan. Exclusively for Vestnik Kavkaza

President Serzh Sargsyan's declaration about joining the Customs Union
did not put an end to geopolitical processes around Armenia. Moscow
won the first round of the struggle. The second round has already
started. It is peculiar with topicality of the favourite issue of
the West - the violation of human rights. Concerns about the problem
were expressed by the US Embassy in Armenia and Human Rights Watch,
urging the Armenian authorities to punish people responsible for
attacking civil activists.

The reaction of the Europeans was very harsh, in general. But the
violence targeted Russia, a country that, according to the EU, put
pressure on Armenia, threatening to escalate the situation in the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict zone. The European Parliament considers
pressure on any member of the Eastern Partnership program (Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Georgia, Ukraine, Moldova and Belarus) unacceptable. The
countries are close to signing bilateral agreements on EU association.

Such evaluations and threats to alter the status quo of
Nagorno-Karabakh if Armenia takes the European path were taken
by Yerevan as a sign of intolerance between the West and Russia, a
recurrence of the Cold War. Armenia is an object in the clutch of two
poles. Using the awkward and hasty attempts by Yerevan to go for the
West, the Kremlin expanded its unmeasured influence on the little ally.

Stepan Grigoryan, head of the Analytical Center for Globalization and
Regional Cooperation, believes that, by deciding to join the Customs
Union, the Armenian authorities handed over the security of their
country to Russia: "The authorities hint that there are security
problems. I agree with them. Security is in danger after this step.

The most essential problems of Armenia will be resolved in Moscow from
now on. Secondly, we lose the chance of becoming a law-governed state."

Maybe Armenia should not have started the process of moving towards
the West to avoid the situation of being forced into the Customs
Union. Armenia was "asked" to join the Customs Union after numerous
declarations by high-ranking functionaries of the Republican Party
of Armenia. They said that Yerevan had taken the European path of
development. People, including Shavarsh Kocharyan (Vice Chairman of
the Republican Party, Deputy Foreign Minister of Armenia), praising
the association agreement, suddenly changed their attitude and became
devoted supporters of the Customs Union on September 3.

Political analyst Yervand xxxoyan, explaining the choice between the
EU and the Eurasian Union, noted that it was more of a geopolitical
choice than a system of values: "Our society has no problems with
choosing a system of values, because we are part of the European
system. De facto, Armenia was forced to make the choice of the Customs
Union." The political analyst assumes that Armenia, a state that has
no common borders with the Customs Union, will have serious problems,
including some in Nagorno-Karabakh: "It would be in the national,
state interests of Armenia to bring its legal acts closer to the
standards of members of the Customs Union, doing the same process
for the EU at the same time. This way we can become a link between
the West and Russia. Armenia was not ready to join a big system."

Therefore, Yerevan forced itself into the Customs Union, depriving
itself of a chance for manoeuvre. Meanwhile, Armenia's history has
examples when some countries patiently waiting for the right moment
made well-executed, rather than hasty steps towards the West, without
creating threats to its national security or relations with Russia.

http://vestnikkavkaza.net/articles/politics/45332.html

[Hakob]

Re: Is Russia an ally or foe, nowadays?

If you are disagreeing with lampron's assertion, and have access to sources detailing historical hindsight, why don't you tell us, for example:

What opportunities were seized?
what correct decisions were made?
what objectives were set and attained?

Of course Lampron is being deliberately overly dismissive and painting with an overly broad stroke - and I'm sure you can give numerous examples of successful leaders - but that doesn't mean there is not a core truth behind Lampron's feeling that the quantity of the failure in leadership is significant. And I bet Lampron's comment was prompted more by the behaviour of current leaders than past ones. These days it's honorary medals and honorary dinner banquets rather than shish-kebabs. And at least when that cartoon dog Muttley demanded yet another meaningless medal for doing next to nothing, he didn't demand a celebratory meal with it as well!

Name one nation that had to deal with as many "empires" as Armenians and keep it's national identity. Assirian empire, Roman empire, Persian Empire, Arab counquerors, Monghol counquerors, Seljuk conquerors, Ottoman empire, Russian empire, Soviet empire...
The important point that mr lampron is missing is that all those times the survival politics were brought up and strengthened not by specific leaders but by national will and mentality. Armenian leaders have allways followed national movements and were just figures in our struggles in history. We never had Lui 14s, napoleons or elizabeths, Peters or hitlers, and we never needed such, because no individual could encompass and serve or use such a broad politcal/national identity as Armenians. And any such leader that mr Lampron is trying to see could present an easy target to our enemies and could be destroyed or used to weaken our national struggles. Most of our leaders have been either military or religios ones and as such have done excellent jobs. That is one of our national characters that has been established by our history. Even the leaders now, they have done perfect job in the battlefields against azeris and are doing such in the defence of our country. We are currently in an economic crisis that is brought upon by blockade and geopolitical situation. That is why when any one that brings up economic plans, cannot but weaken countrie's defenses, or vise versa. That is why there has allways been large opposition to any of our leaders in our history resulting in their weakness. That is a suvival policy. That is why when nation unites(produces) a viable survival movement, we produce leaders with whom we allways achieve the unachievable, from times of Vardan and Ashot Ergat till now.
Our nation is tired at this moment of blockade, economic crisis all around, left over soviet legacy like oligarkhs and such. That is why we have emigration( which is a survival instinkt by itself) or such cynical relations between government and people. But make no mistake. Armenia is going to stay where it is. It's not the first tme that after dispersing we come together for next buildup of our country, just like in 1920's. 1940's or any time before that.
One of the proofs is the fact that there is no empty living space in country, because majority of people who has left, still keps their apartmens or houses, because they know they will return.
One cannot judge by just opportunities or actions of single person about us, or what our future will be.
So mr Lampron is not asking any meaningfull questions. He is uninformed enough not to know to not expect any unswers to those.