Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules (Everyone Must Read!!!)

1] What you CAN NOT post.

You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this forum to post any material which is:
- abusive
- vulgar
- hateful
- harassing
- personal attacks
- obscene

You also may not:
- post images that are too large (max is 500*500px)
- post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or cited properly.
- post in UPPER CASE, which is considered yelling
- post messages which insult the Armenians, Armenian culture, traditions, etc
- post racist or other intentionally insensitive material that insults or attacks another culture (including Turks)

The Ankap thread is excluded from the strict rules because that place is more relaxed and you can vent and engage in light insults and humor. Notice it's not a blank ticket, but just a place to vent. If you go into the Ankap thread, you enter at your own risk of being clowned on.
What you PROBABLY SHOULD NOT post...
Do not post information that you will regret putting out in public. This site comes up on Google, is cached, and all of that, so be aware of that as you post. Do not ask the staff to go through and delete things that you regret making available on the web for all to see because we will not do it. Think before you post!


2] Use descriptive subject lines & research your post. This means use the SEARCH.

This reduces the chances of double-posting and it also makes it easier for people to see what they do/don't want to read. Using the search function will identify existing threads on the topic so we do not have multiple threads on the same topic.

3] Keep the focus.

Each forum has a focus on a certain topic. Questions outside the scope of a certain forum will either be moved to the appropriate forum, closed, or simply be deleted. Please post your topic in the most appropriate forum. Users that keep doing this will be warned, then banned.

4] Behave as you would in a public location.

This forum is no different than a public place. Behave yourself and act like a decent human being (i.e. be respectful). If you're unable to do so, you're not welcome here and will be made to leave.

5] Respect the authority of moderators/admins.

Public discussions of moderator/admin actions are not allowed on the forum. It is also prohibited to protest moderator actions in titles, avatars, and signatures. If you don't like something that a moderator did, PM or email the moderator and try your best to resolve the problem or difference in private.

6] Promotion of sites or products is not permitted.

Advertisements are not allowed in this venue. No blatant advertising or solicitations of or for business is prohibited.
This includes, but not limited to, personal resumes and links to products or
services with which the poster is affiliated, whether or not a fee is charged
for the product or service. Spamming, in which a user posts the same message repeatedly, is also prohibited.

7] We retain the right to remove any posts and/or Members for any reason, without prior notice.


- PLEASE READ -

Members are welcome to read posts and though we encourage your active participation in the forum, it is not required. If you do participate by posting, however, we expect that on the whole you contribute something to the forum. This means that the bulk of your posts should not be in "fun" threads (e.g. Ankap, Keep & Kill, This or That, etc.). Further, while occasionally it is appropriate to simply voice your agreement or approval, not all of your posts should be of this variety: "LOL Member213!" "I agree."
If it is evident that a member is simply posting for the sake of posting, they will be removed.


8] These Rules & Guidelines may be amended at any time. (last update September 17, 2009)

If you believe an individual is repeatedly breaking the rules, please report to admin/moderator.
See more
See less

Regional geopolitics

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

  • Re: Regional geopolitics

    Originally posted by Haykakan View Post
    Not sure what you are disagreeing with Hakob. I also believe much of our issues lie within our own faults but denying the huge role the geopolitical situation plays is incorrect. We have been between empires for thousands of years and have learned that fighting them leads to death and this is where our aversion to fight lies. The problem now is that this aversion is leading to an abandoned homeland because simply it is much easier to leave and go someplace else now then ever before. Armenians demonstrated that some of us can and are willing to fight by beating a superior azeri force. We have demonstrated that we are smart enough to see corruption and we will not back down and shut up about it. There are people being beaten up and killed by the corrupt government yet you still see protesters out there. I am proud to say that some of us are not afraid but sure many of us are afraid. Yes many of our citizens lack the moral compass to lead effectively but there are many who still have strong morals , intelligence and everything else. I think decades of braindrain have caused much of the societal problems and the braindrain occurred because as I said earlier it is easy to go now then ever before. Many consider our diaspora an asset and indeed it has been but it is a big liability also. Our huge diaspora makes it that much easier for us to leave our homeland. Hakob this whole situation is no accident and it is not as much our fault as you think. This scenario was planned long ago by western powers who wished to depopulate all of Armenia. You well know what I speak of. If we are going to blame our fellow Armenians for something then lets blame them for the right things like allowing traitors like the Raffi Hovhanessians and vrej1915 to effect our thoughts, for allowing garbage propaganda like Lragir to continue spewing garbage and brainwashing some of our people. Yes it is true we Armenians do not like leaders and will even hurt each other f one does "too well" but despite all of this I will bet you anything that a good smart leader will get strong support. We in Armenia badly need a Putin type of leader who will take the county by the reigns and do what must be done to secure a better future for its people. If such a person comes to power he will get strong public support just like the Russians support their leader. The problems you speak of do exist but you see they are not our undoing but guess what is. Yes that is right it is indeed our geopolitical situation. You remember a guy named Vazgen? The guy was brave and fought in the war, he was smart and was actually well versed and prepared before every meeting about anything. He was in every way a good leader yet you do remember what happened to him right? You do understand that our geopolitical situation had everything to do with what happened to him right? You see it is our Goestrategic location that screws us in the arse each and every time and makes all other issues trivial. We Armenians have and can again overcome all obstacles except this one which bites us in the vor each and every time. Yes our internal doings matter but as you can clearly see we have bigger issues.
    Haykakan jan, most of that clip was absolutely correct and informative. But like anything else, those people touch important issues as observers and then move on.
    As allways, people are hopelessly complacent and indifferent to what's happening around.
    If 50% of our population would resolve to not accept current corrupt and hastaviz leaders, then things will change. But...
    Where is our "intelligentsia"? where is our opposition?
    They seem to have immersed themselves into big stage poltiicks and are just parroting antirussian or antiwest slogans.
    Neither russia nore west does have much to do about social conditions at home, even the speakers in clip mention that. That is, the geopolitics does not dictate for our population to endure Liskas, shmaises, pzos tzos and who the hell nows how many ugly xxxxs like that.
    Those, that have attached themselfs like leaches and are sucking the juices out of country. Their actions make any geopolitical condition 10 times worse.
    And our opposition and everybody is still deciding to be or not to be, LOL, with russia or west? stupidity...
    Nobody, calling themselfs opposition, have the guts to go after some oligarkh case by case and highlight their daily grab and plunder. It's so easy if one wants to do. It's very open.
    Where is the unity and comaraderie that was in soviet times, that made it imposible for autorities to go after any individual?
    Everibody has their heads down.
    Because this time, you cannot blame moscow. You cannot organise against a threat from outside. Those oligarkhs are we, they are US...
    Thay are neigbours or relatives. Those beurocrats are very much needed and appreciated to have as friends or relatives right?
    They help in dodging the law, get out of any legal issue easily. Help do business, buld, sell, steal illegally right? Just like before...
    Whoever has any relation to those, walks like the country is his. Defends and cherishes that relation and showers that person with gifts, praises and devotion.
    Whoever does not have anybody, Is shot out from life. Time to pack up and move.
    Only, when people realise that conducting life as has been accepted from old soviet times must go, then there will be changes.
    Our opposition or inteligentsia(or whatever has been left) has to highligt theese societal problems and the need to change at all force.
    Te che inch rusastan, amerika, bullxxxx (shan qaq, hayerenov)...
    Talking as if there were monsters that sit in government and somebody from outside will kick them out is pointless.
    Monsters, allright, but only people can make any change.
    We have looked and seen the world for a thousand years, but been blind for inside our home.
    Instead of looking out as if we were staring at stars, we have to look hard inside. That is where our next battles have to be fought. Next defences to be built.
    One thing is clear from that clip, and which is becoming more and more pressing issue.
    If no change within, then we endanger our Artsakh and whole country.
    Last edited by Hakob; 02-03-2015, 07:26 PM.

    Comment


    • Re: Regional geopolitics

      Hakob these issues you speak of have nothing to do with soviet days. The problem is far deeper then that. We have been our own worst enemy for much longer then the soviet union existed. We exhibit the mentality of a conquered people who steal and take while the getting is good and do not contribute to anyone but themselves. We do not trust any government because all the governments we have known were our conquerors who robbed, murdered and pillaged us. The hrias have a similar mentality because they have a similar history of being a conquered people. Look at how they steal and plunder countries like USA with their usual schemes. They do not build they do not know how to, nor do they care about such things. They con and scheme their way in and out of things because that is what they had to do to survive thousands of years of being conquered. Not taking responsibility for the consequences of ones actions, not contributing to and not considering the overall good for society, running from trouble instead of facing it...these and many more such symptoms are the consequence of being conquered and are exhibited by many people from various cultures which have been on the losing end of wars and history too often. This behavior is the result of being where we are. Our geopolitical situation is what has shaped us into who we are over many millenniums. Empire after empire have subjugated us continuously throughout history all because of our geostrategic position and even now that we hold such a tiny bit of land we are still geostrategically screwed. You see how and why geostrat has everything to do with who we are and the situation we find ourselves in...
      Hayastan or Bust.

      Comment


      • Re: Regional geopolitics

        Եվրո-Ատլանտիզմի ծրագրերը Հայաստանի հանդեպ

        ԻԳՈՐ ՄՈՒՐԱԴՅԱՆ, Քաղաքագետ
        Մեկնաբանություն - 03 Փետրվարի 2015,


        Վերջին տարիների ընթացքում ՆԱՏՕ-ն ու Եվրամիությունը շատ հարցերում վերանայել են Ռուսաստանի նկատմամբ իրենց քաղաքականությունը եւ մինչեւ վերջերս Եվրոպայի առաջատար պետություններն առավել ճկուն քաղաքականություն էին վարում՝ չցանկանալով ավելացնել լարվածությունը, առավել եւս առճակատումը:

        Միեւնույն ժամանակ, հենց եվրոպական ասպարեզում է շատ բան որոշվում Ռուսաստանի միջազգային մեկուսացման ու շրջափակման մասով:

        ԱՄՆ-ի ու ՆԱՏՕ-ի աշխարհքաղաքական դադարի պայմաններում Ռուսաստանը վճռել է հարձակման անցնել, ընդ որում, մի քանի ուղղություններով:

        Դա ռուսների ուժերից վեր էր, եւ Արեւմուտքը ստիպված էր լուրջ ջանքեր գործադրել այդ էքսպանսիային դիմագրավելու համար:

        Անկախ հայկական քաղաքական ղեկավարությունից, Հայաստանը տարր էր այդ գլոբալ խաղում:

        Ռուսաստանը հակազդում է նախկին խորհրդային հանրապետությունների նկատմամբ ՆԱՏՕ-ի ու Եվրամիության մտադրություններին, որոնք ձգտում են ինքնիշխան ու ավելի անկախ քաղաքականություն վարել:

        ՆԱՏՕ-ում եւ Եվրամիությունում ուշադիր հետեւում են Ռուսաստանի ու Հայաստանի միջեւ հարաբերությունների զարգացմանը եւ Հայաստանի քաղաքականությունը նրբանկատ, չափավոր ու զուսպ են համարում:

        Ռուսաստանը չի թաքցնում Հայաստանի արտաքին քաղաքականությունը փոխելու մտադրությունները՝ հենվելով որոշակի քաղաքական խմբերի վրա:

        Ռուսաստանն անիրական նախագիծ է առաջ քաշել՝ Եվրասիական միությունը, եւ այն պարտադրում է ԱՊՀ ու ՀԱՊԿ իր գործընկերներին:

        Ռուսաստանից քաղաքական ու տնտեսական մեծ կախվածության մեջ գտնվելով՝ Հայաստանը փորձում էր շարունակել Արեւմուտքի հետ մերձեցման ուղին եւ կարող էր հույս դնել ոչ միայն ՆԱՏՕ-ի ու Եվրամիության, այլ նաեւ Եվրոպայի շատ երկրների, ինչպես նաեւ ԱՄՆ աջակցության վրա:

        Սեպտեմների 3-ի իրադարձությունը, եվրասիական նախագծին միանալը Հայաստանին պատմական վնաս է հասցրել, դուրս մղել Արեւմուտքի հետ ինտեգրացիայի հեռանկարներ ունեցող պետությունների թվից: Այդպիսով, Ռուսաստանն առանց մեծ ջանքերի կարողացել է Հայաստանը դուրս բերել Արեւմտյան աշխարհի ազդեցությունից: Հայաստանի ղեկավարությունը «լուռ» հրահանգ է ստացել Ղարաբաղում ռուսների համար ընդունելի պայմաններ ստեղծել, այսինքն, չպետք է ոչ ստանդարտ իրավիճակներ ստեղծվեն:

        Հայաստանը շահագրգռված չէ ՆԱՏՕ-ի ու Ռուսաստանի միջեւ հեռավորության մեծացմամբ, սակայն պետք է հաշվի առնել, որ այդ հեռանկարը նույնպես հնարավոր է: Կասկած չկա, որ ամեն դեպքում Ռուսաստանը չի համակերպվի Հարավային Կովկասում ՆԱՏՕ-ի ու Եվրամիության երկարաժամկետ ազդեցության ներկայիս վիճակի հետ եւ փորձելու է ամրապնդել իր դիրքերը:

        Միեւնույն ժամանակ, հենց այդ քաղաքականությունը, որն Արեւմուտքին, նախեւառաջ եվրոպացիներին քաղաքական որոշում է թվում, Հայաստանի համար դարձել է Ռուսաստանի կողմից վասալացման ու գաղութացման գործոն: Բոլոր հնարավոր սպասումները ներկայում ձախողվել են, ինչը հասանելի չէ հայկական քաղաքական էլիտային:

        Արեւմուտքում հույս ունեին, որ հայերը կպահպանեն իրենց անկախ դիրքորոշման մի մասը, սակայն դա տեղի չունեցավ: Արդյոք դա Արեւմուտքի սխալն էր: Ավելի շուտ, Արեւմուտքը շատ անուշադիր է վերաբերվել իրավիճակին եւ հույս ուներ որոշակի պայմանավորվածությունների հասնել ռուսների հետ:

        ԱՄՆ-ը եւ Եվրամիությունը նախկինում շահագրգռված էին էներգիայի աղբյուրների ու էներգետիկ հաղորդակցությունների դիվերսիֆիկացիայի ու անվտանգության աջակցությամբ: Այն, որ Ադրբեջանին հաջողվել է ստանալ սպառազինությունների այդ տեսակները, Արեւմուտքի շահերից է բխում, առավել եւս, դա չի հանգեցրել Ռուսաստանի ազդեցության մեծացմանը:

        Ադրբեջանը մեծ ծավալի սպառազինություն է ձեռք բերում Իսրայելից ու Թուրքիայից, եւ Արեւմուտքը գտնում է, որ դա Ադրբեջանին կպաշտպանի Իրանի սպառնալիքներից: Միեւնույն ժամանակ, Արեւմուտքում հասկանում են, որ Հարավային Կովկասում ուժերի հարաբերակցության փոփոխությունը կարող է հանգեցնել խնդիրները ռազմական ճանապարհով լուծելու պատրանքների:

        Այդ պատճառով Արեւմուտքի պետությունները պատրաստ են զենք մատակարարել Հայաստանին, եթե պահպանվեն որոշակի պայմաններ:
        Իրավիճակն արմատապես փոխվել է, քանի որ Ադրբեջանը կարող է դառնալ անատոլիական քաղաքակրթության մաս նմանակման իմաստով, եւ գերադասում է գնալ Թուրքիայի հետեւից, ընդ որում՝ ամեն ինչում:

        Ադրբեջանի ջանքերն այլեւս ձեռնտու չեն Արեւմուտքին, առավել եւս, որ Բաքուն որպես երկրորդ ռազմավարական գործընկեր ընտրել է Ռուսաստանին, Թուրքիայից հետո: Սակայն Հայաստանն էլ է հայտնվել մարգինալի վիճակում, եւ ՆԱՏՕ-ն չի կարող զենքով օգնել Ռուսաստանի վասալին:

        Ինչպես տեսնում ենք, Եվրատլանտյան հանրության դիրքորոշումը բավական հակասական է, սակայն նկատենք մի շարք կարեւոր հանգամանքներ: Եվրատլանտյան հանրության քաղաքականությունը ներկայացնում են այդ տարածության ոչ բոլոր պետությունները, եւ չնայած Եվրոպայի ծանրության կենտրոնի ու ոճի նկատելի փոփոխությանը, սխալ կլիներ հերքել, որ Եվրատլանտյան հանրությունը ներկայացնում են նախեւառաջ Մեծ Բրիտանիան ու ԱՄՆ-ն:

        Մեծ Բրիտանիան իրեն պահում է բավական պրագմատիկ ու չի արտահայտում Եվրոպայի շահերը, օրինակ Թուրքիայի ինտեգրման մասով, սակայն դրանով հանդերձ, հենց Մեծ Բրիտանիան է ԱՄՆ-ի հետ համատեղ երկար տարիներ խթանում Արեւելյան Եվրոպայի պետությունների ինտեգրումը ՆԱՏՕ-ին:

        Ինի՞ց ելնելով պետք է Եվրատլատյան հանրությունը շահագրգռված լինի Հայաստանով՝ որպես նոր գործընկերոջ: Նախեւառաջ, պետք է նշել, որ բրիտանական ու ամերիկյան նախագծերն Ադրբեջանում ընդամենը գեոտնտեսական բնույթ ունեն, եւ նավթի ու գազի արդյունահանման ներկայիս տեմպերով դրանք շուտով կսպառվեն:

        Սակայն գլխավոր գործոնը ավելի հիմնարար է՝ Եվրոպայի հարավ-արեւելքում առաջանում են նոր խնդիրներ, այսինքն՝ Թուրքիայի զսպման քաղաքականությունը, որը փորձում է մերձենալ Ռուսաստանի հետ եւ Ադրբեջանի հանդեպ վարում է պատրոնաժի քաղաքականություն:
        Այս գործոնն էլ դառնում է հիմնական Հայաստանի հանդեպ Եվրո-ատլանտիզմի քաղաքականության բովանդակության մեջ: Այսինքն, խոսքը աշխարհքաղաքական խնդրի մասին է, որի գերակայությունը գեոտնտեսության նկատմամբ ակնհայտ է:

        - See more at: http://www.lragir.am/index/arm/0/com....Th5Gz0LK.dpuf

        Comment


        • Re: Regional geopolitics

          Russia is seeking military presence in South Caucasus – Aghasi Yenokyan
          06.02.15







          In an interview with Tert.am., political analyst Aghasi Yenokyan said that hostilities between Armenia and Azerbaijani are highly probable this year.

          Moreover, Azerbaijan is thoroughly preparing for them.

          As to the major factor which, according to experts, is a guarantee against the resumption of hostilities, that is, oily energy projects and huge profits other nations gain in Azerbaijan, Mr Yenokyan said:

          “According to the information at my disposal, British Petroleum is now extracting as much oil as possible in Azerbaijan within the shortest period possible.”

          Sabine Freizer, expert for the Atlantic Council stated on Friday an accidental war is highly probable. Other experts say that an attempt will be made to divert international attention from Ukraine by opening a second front in the South Caucasus.

          “I think a second front may be opened here, but I do not think it may be an accidental war. Thorough preparations for war are under way now, and a number of factors may prove conducive.

          “The first is the Ukraine developments. To divert attention Russia will have to open a second front. Russia needs victories, and Putin needs a second front besides Ukraine. Putin has not given up the idea of Russia’s military presence in Azerbaijan. And by Azerbaijan they mean Nagorno-Karabakh as well. It is up to Putin whether it is going to be a military base or deployment of peacemakers.

          “The second factor is the sides have acquired a great amount of weaponry. We are well-informed of Azerbaijan’s arms purchases totaling $5 billion, and much has been said of Armenia being one of the world’s most militarized states.

          “One more factor is a decline in oil prices. Azerbaijan is well aware is has to unleash war now because it will not be able to in the future due to most serious financial problems.

          “One more factor is the domestic political situation in Armenia and Azerbaijan. We see both the leaders obeying the Russian president’s will. Otherwise, they are likely to resign. They are the major factors and, I think, their combination in one year may make hostilities highly probable.”

          Mr Yenokyan believes it is a large-scale war both on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border and on the Line of Contact.

          “Besides, Russia may take aggressive steps against Georgia. So it may develop into a regional war on two fronts.”

          Armenia is a Collective Security Treaty Organization member (CSTO), and CSTO Secretary General Nikolay Bordyuzha, in commenting on the recent border tension, said that Armenians should not expect Russia to respond because, according to the CSTO Regulations, Russia cannot interfere in the case of border tension

          “Armenian FM Edward Nalbandian presented the CSTO’s activities, procedure of applying to it and we have come to realize there was no sense in applying to the CSTO because its interference requires consent by all the CSTO member-states. In this case, if not Russia, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan will not give their consent to the use of their forces in the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. On the other hand, the possibility of the CSTO’s interference is not ruled out and Russian ‘peacemakers’ may come to the region as CSTO forces only to stay here. So the CSTO factor may play a double role.”

          Armenia’s president and experts have repeatedly stated that the one unleashing war will suffer defeat. Asked which of the sides Russia may force into unleashing war, Mt Yenokyan said:

          “I think it is Azerbaijan because, as I have just mentioned, Azerbaijan may face problems in unleashing war in the future. However, it may be Armenia as well.”

          As regards expert opinions that Azerbaijan will not dare unleash war because of oil projects in its territory, Mr Yenokyan said:

          “According to the information at my disposal, British Petroleum is now extracting as much oil as possible in Azerbaijan within the shortest period possible. That is, they do not rule out the possibility of war as well. Secondly, the oil reserves at their disposal may have decreased. That is, oil import from Azerbaijan may not prove as profitable as before because of the fall in oil prices.”

          Asked about a possible way out of the situation, he said:

          “Regrettably, the ways out of the situation hardly depend on us. It is only a U-turn in Russia’s policy that could provide a peaceful solution. That is, it is a replacement of the Putin regime. I mean it is not up to us to avert war.

          “The way out is Russia’s benefit. Regardless of how many territories Armenia and Azerbaijan lose or how many Armenians or Azerbaijanis are killed, Russia will gain. First, it will improve its reputation because it will be able to ‘solve’ one more conflict just as it did in Afghanistan or South Ossetia.”

          As to whether the international community can prevent Russia’s actions, Mr Yenokyan said:

          “We can see the international community cannot do anything in Ukraine, which is much closer to Europe. If a region is farther, the international community will not focus its attention on it, especially since it is dealing with Ukraine. It will not be as much interested in settling this conflict as in solving the Ukraine problem.”

          Spokesman for Armenia’s ministry of Defense Artsrun Hovhannisyan wrote about “a slowly progressive war on the border.” According to him “even if we suffer defeat in this war, we will lose our positions, without suffering human losses.”

          In commenting on Mr Hovhannisyan’s statement, Mr Yenokyan said:

          “It is seizure of territories by both Armenia and Azerbaijan that is in question. That is, Azerbaijan may seize some of Armenian positions, while Armenia may seize some of Azerbaijan’s.”

          Comment


          • Re: Regional geopolitics

            6 February 2015

            Ukraine crisis: Russia tests new weapons

            By Keir Giles
            Conflict Studies Research Centre, Oxford


            Eastern Ukraine has become a testing ground for Russia's new military capabilities.

            When Russia last went to war, in Georgia in 2008, it looked like an easy victory. But Russia's generals were deeply concerned at how badly their forces performed in some key areas of modern warfare.

            Russia has spent the seven years since then rearming, re-equipping, and retraining, in order to deal with those deficiencies, and to try to close the capability gap with modern Western armies.

            Now the results can be seen in eastern Ukraine, where pro-Russian separatists have gained ground against Ukrainian government troops.

            Hi-tech electronics


            Ukraine's army has not gone through the same intensive modernisation process, and is suffering the effects, facing the newer weapons and systems supplied by Russia.

            Two key examples are the use of UAVs (drones) for surveillance and targeting, and the use of electronic warfare.

            Both technologies were identified as areas of weakness in the Russian forces in 2008, and both have been intensively developed since. Now, they are in widespread use in eastern Ukraine, placing Ukrainian government forces at a strong disadvantage.

            Grad rockets used by rebels
            Here a rebel Grad rocket system is deployed at a cemetery
            Ukrainian forces are short of secure communications systems. The result is that their communications are both subject to jamming, and often also show their location to Russian direction-finding equipment. This can lead to being swiftly targeted by Russian artillery, including Grad and other, more powerful, rocket systems.

            As part of the non-lethal aid provided by the US, Ukraine has received special radar to try to pinpoint the source of incoming mortar fire. But their use is limited by the difficulty in communicating the results to other forces.

            And, for the time being, Ukraine has not received the more sophisticated systems that would pinpoint the source of fire from longer-range artillery systems.

            Ukraine map
            Tanks and missiles
            Ukrainian forces are also outclassed by the tanks arriving from Russia. Not only are these more modern than Ukrainian models, but Ukraine is also short of effective anti-armour weapons in working order.

            All of these systems, plus medical support and field hospital equipment, are on the list of Ukrainian requests for support, to increase the survivability of their forces when confronting new Russian military equipment.

            Losses of Ukrainian aircraft over the conflict zone show how well-equipped the Russian-backed separatists are for air defence. This includes not just the Buk missile system - blamed for downing Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 - but also others like Strela for use at lower altitudes and shorter ranges, and a wide range of lighter, shoulder-launched missiles.


            Most of the Ukrainian army's equipment is also Russian-made


            Independent experts, as well as Nato, Western leaders and the Kiev government, say there is clear evidence of direct Russian military involvement, despite Russian denials.

            As part of its military transformation process, Russia has been practising for conflict with an intensive programme of exercises and manoeuvres, involving tens of thousands of servicemen across the country.

            These exercises have been increasing in size and complexity, and often have a storyline which is directly hostile to the West.

            Now, in addition, Russia has the benefit of a live testing ground in eastern Ukraine, where it can try out its new weapons, systems and tactics. The results - especially if all of these are tested against any potential new US defensive systems supplied to Ukraine - will help Russia assess how its forces would fare in a direct confrontation with Nato.

            Keir Giles is an analyst with the Conflict Studies Research Centre in Oxford, and an Associate Fellow with the Russia and Eurasia Programme at Chatham House in London.

            Comment


            • Re: Regional geopolitics

              7 February 2015

              Ukraine crisis: 'Last chance' for peace says Hollande


              A peace plan drawn up by France and Germany is "one of the last chances" to end the conflict in east Ukraine, French leader Francois Hollande says.
              German Chancellor Angela Merkel said it was unclear if the plan would succeed, but it was "definitely worth trying".

              Mr Hollande said the plan would include a demilitarised zone of 50-70km (31-44 miles) around the current front line.
              The leaders are attempting to end the fighting in Ukraine between government troops and pro-Russia rebels.
              Russia is accused of arming pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine - claims it denies.

              Mr Hollande and Mrs Merkel are due to discuss the peace plan with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian leader Petro Poroshenko by telephone on Sunday.

              Few details have emerged, but the plan is thought to be an attempt to revive a failed ceasefire deal signed in Minsk, in Belarus, in September. Since then, the rebels have seized more ground, raising alarm in Kiev and among Ukraine's backers.
              The UN says fighting has left nearly 5,400 people dead since April, when the rebels seized a big swathe of the Luhansk and Donetsk regions following Russia's annexation of Crimea.

              Mr Hollande and Mrs Merkel visited Kiev and Moscow earlier this week, in what appeared to be a speedily arranged visit to discuss the peace proposal.
              Diplomatic talks have been continuing at an international security conference in the German city of Munich, where Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said he "sincerely" hoped the latest peace plan would "produce results".

              Mrs Merkel told the conference that while there was no guarantee diplomacy would succeed, it was essential to try. "I believe we owe that much to those who are affected in Ukraine," she said.

              Mr Hollande told French TV that eastern Ukrainian regions would need extensive autonomy. "These people have gone to war," he said. "It will be difficult to make them share a common life."

              The US is considering pleas to send weapons to Ukraine but Mrs Merkel said she could not "imagine any situation in which improved equipment for the Ukrainian army leads to President Putin being so impressed that he believes he will lose militarily".

              The statement put her in opposition to Nato's top military commander, US Air Force general Philip Breedlove, who told reporters that Western allies should not "preclude out of hand the possibility of the military option".

              The German Chancellor - speaking here in Munich for the first time since her return from her peace mission to Kiev and Moscow - has provided a fascinating insight into her own political underpinnings.

              She passionately defended her opposition to the idea of selling arms to Ukraine - something that is under active consideration in Washington.
              She pointed to her own personal experience - she said that as a girl she had seen the Berlin Wall go up but nobody had intervened to help the citizens of what became the Eastern bloc, because there was no realistic expectation of success. Her implication was that this realism was needed now.

              Her view is that no amount of weaponry will convince Mr Putin that Russia would lose militarily. More arms she insisted would lead to more victims.
              There was significant applause at these remarks, though noticeably neither US Vice-President Joe Biden or the Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko were clapping.


              The BBC's Sarah Rainsford in Moscow says that any peace plan would have to address the route of any new ceasefire line - given the rebel advances of recent weeks - how to enforce it, and the future status of the conflict zone.

              Russia is still denying any direct role in the conflict, while Kiev insists above all that Ukraine must remain united, our correspondent says.
              In Munich, Mr Poroshenko brandished what he said were passports of Russian troops who had come to Ukraine.

              Mr Putin, speaking at a labour union conference in Sochi, said there was "no war", but an attempt "to curb [Russia's] development". Western sanctions could not be effective against Russia, he said, but they could "cause certain damage".

              Meanwhile, Nato Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg told the BBC that he had seen evidence of increased supply of heavy military weapons to the rebels, some "very advanced - they can only come from Russia".

              Some 1.2 million Ukrainians have fled their homes since the Ukraine conflict began.
              On Saturday, Ukraine's military said five servicemen had been killed and 26 wounded in the past day of fighting. At least seven civilians were reported to have been killed.

              Ukraine also said rebels were amassing forces around the strategic town of Debaltseve and in Granitne, 35km north-east of Mariupol.
              Michael Bociurkiw, a spokesman for the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) told the BBC the situation was "getting very dire indeed".

              More than 3,000 people had been evacuated in the past few days and some were being accommodated in cold conditions in train carriages, he said.

              Comment


              • Re: Regional geopolitics

                Պատերազմի վերսկսման հավանականությունը Ղարաբաղում

                ԻԳՈՐ ՄՈՒՐԱԴՅԱՆ, Քաղաքագետ
                Մեկնաբանություն - 07 Փետրվարի 2015,


                Չնայած նրան, որ Հայաստանն ակնհայտ վերածվում է Ռուսաստանի վասալի, ԱՄՆ-ում ու Եվրոպայում հետաքրքրություն են ցուցաբերում, թե ինչպես են զարգանալու Ռուսաստանի հետ Հայաստանի հարաբերությունները, որքանով է Հայաստանը համատեղելու հարաբերությունները Ռուսաստանի ու Արեւմտյան հանրության միջեւ, կա՞ն արդյոք Հայաստանի հետ հարաբերությունների վերաբերյալ տարբեր կարծիքներ Մոսկվայում:

                Հետաքրքրում է նաեւ, թե ինչի կապակցությամբ Հայաստանը զենքի մատակարարման աղբյուրներ կցանկանար ունենալ Արեւմուտքում, զենքի ինչ տեսակներով է հետաքրքրված, որքանով է Հայաստանի քաղաքական ղեկավարությունը վստահ Արեւմուտքի ուղղությամբ իր քաղաքականության մեջ, արդյոք այդ կուրսին աջակցում է ռազմական հրամանատարությունը:

                Այս հանգամանքներից բացի, հետաքրքրություն է ներկայացնում Հարավային Կովկասում պատերազմի ռիսկերի ու սպառնալիքների վերաբերյալ գնահատականը: Որքան հայտնի է փորձագետներին, ՆԱՏՕ-ի անդամ պետությունների գլխավոր շտաբներում, ինչպես նաեւ ՆԱՏՕ-ում այդ խնդրի վերաբերյալ դերային խաղեր չեն անցկացվել, եղած վերլուծական մշակումները բավարար խորություն չունեն, տեղեկատվությունը, որը ստացվում է Հարավային Կովկասում ՆԱՏՕ-ի անդամ երկրների դեսպանատներից, հաճախ հակասական է, երբեմն առկա է նյութի չիմացություն:

                Ընդհանուր առմամբ, համարվում է, որ վերջին տարիների ընթացքում Լեռնային Ղարաբաղի հակամարտության գոտում իրավիճակը լարված, բայց կայունից անցել է բարձր ռիսկերի իրավիճակի: Ձեռք է բերվում մեծ քանակի զենք, հասարակության մեջ աճում է միլիտարիստական քարոզչությունը, մշտապես հնչում են ագրեսիվ հայտարարություններ: Ներկայում որեւէ հույս չկա, որ կարգավորման բանակցություններում էական առաջընթաց կլինի:
                Խոշոր պետությունները, այդ թվում Թուրքիան, Ռուսաստանը եւ Իրանը, շահագրգռված չեն պատերազմի վերսկսման մեջ: ՆԱՏՕ-ն եւ Եվրոպական միությունը նույնպես անթույլատրելի են համարում ռազմական գործողությունները:

                Լեռնային Ղարաբաղի հարցում ԱՄՆ-ն, Ռուսաստանը եւ Ֆրանսիան համաձայնեցնում են իրենց գործողությունները: Ադրբեջանը, որպես ռազմական գործողությունների հավանական նախաձեռնող, պատրաստ չէ իրականացնել դրանք: Նա, ով կսկսի պատերազմը, եւ այն երկրները, որոնք կաջակցեն նրան, կհայտնվեն միջազգային մեկուսացման մեջ, նախեւառաջ ՆԱՏՕ-ի, Եվրոպական միության եւ ԱՄՆ-ի կողմից:

                Թուրքիան գրավում է Ադրբեջանին զսպելու դիրք եւ դա հավաստում է ՆԱՏՕ-ի իր գործընկերների հետ խորհրդակցություններում: Թուրքիան շահագրգռված չէ պատերազմով, որը կարող է հանգեցնել աղետալի հետեւանքների: Այս կապակցությամբ եզրահանգումներ են արվում, որ պատերազմի վերսկսման հնարավորությունն ու ռիսկերն այնքան բարձր չեն, որքան կարող են պնդել առանձին փորձագետներ ու դիտորդներ:

                Կարելի՞ է արդյոք Հարավային Կովկասում սպառազինության մրցավազքին Արեւմտյան հանրության լուռ հետեւելը բացատրել Արեւմուտքի շահագրգռությամբ՝ որպես Հայաստանի վրա ճնշման գործոն, ինչը հանգեցնում է ՆԱՏՕ-ին ու Եվրոպական միությանը նրա մերձեցմանը:

                ՆԱՏՕ-ի եւ Եվրոպական միության հետ Հայաստանի մերձեցումը բխում է ամենեւին էլ ոչ Ադրբեջանի հետ ռազմական ոլորտում մրցակցությունից: Հարավային Կովկասում ուժերի հավասարակշռության խախտումը կարող է հանգեցնել խնդիրները ռազմական ճանապարհով լուծելու փորձերի, ինչը սպառնալիք է տարածաշրջանում Արեւմտյան հանրության քաղաքականությանը:

                Տարածաշրջանում ուժերի հավասարակշռության պահպանումն Արեւմտյան հարության նպատակը չէ, նպատակը խնդիրների կարգավորումն է, սակայն ուժերի հավասարակշռությունը կայունության ու անվտանգության պայմանն է: Այդ պատճառով ժամանակն է քննարկել զենքի մատակարարման ոլորտում Հայաստանի հետ համագործակցության հնարավորությունը:

                Լիովին հասկանալի է, որ Հայաստանի վասալացման գործընթացը հնարավոր դարձավ եւ պայմանավորված էր Ռուսաստանի կողմից Ադրբեջանին ժամանակակից զենքի զանգվածային մատակարարումներով:

                - See more at: http://www.lragir.am/index/arm/0/com....BS31l57d.dpuf

                Comment


                • Re: Regional geopolitics

                  Just read this bs and think about what he is saying, why he is saying it, and what are his potential intentions in saying this.

                  U.S. POINTED TO WAY OF WITHDRAWAL OF RUSSIAN BASE

                  Hakob Badalyan, Political Commentator
                  Comments - 12 February 2015, 11:42

                  The U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs
                  Eric Rubin said that a Russian military presence in Armenia should
                  restrain neither the Armenian nor the American sides. Rubin announced
                  that the United States intends to strengthen bilateral relations in
                  these spheres because Armenia and the South Caucasus are very close
                  to the world's most dangerous spots. Rubin said they therefore intend
                  to deepen relations with the Armenian government, the military and
                  security agencies.

                  He announced that they intend to deepen cooperation and implement new
                  bilateral projects in this sphere. As to the Russian military presence,
                  Rubin said the Russian military presence is reality conditioned on
                  the current situation in Armenia and is not a hindrance.

                  In other words, Rubin hints that the situation must be changed to
                  change the reality. This is not an easy task, considering that this
                  situation has formed for decades. This change is a must for Armenia
                  because withdrawing Armenia from dominance of Russia, full dependence
                  on Russia stems from the national interests and sovereignty of Armenia.

                  In this sense, the United States is an important partner to Armenia,
                  there is harmony of interests which opens up opportunities that
                  should be used. Security is a primary sphere, it is the basis for
                  relationship, cooperation, partnership. Efficient and long-term
                  relations in other spheres depend on it. Here the spectrum is
                  broad, ranging from methodological support to technological and arms
                  assistance. In this regard, the United States which is an undisputable
                  leader of the security system in Armenia is a key partner to Armenia.

                  The problem is limited to opportunities to promote cooperation.

                  Russia is jealous. But perhaps jealousy is overestimated, and as Rubin
                  hints, everything depends on the situation: once situation changes,
                  risks related to jealousy will decrease.

                  In this sense, practical expressions of cooperation over security
                  are important to change stereotypes that affect the situation in
                  Armenia considerably and are regularly manipulated by Russia and
                  certain Armenian governmental and non-government circles serving
                  its interests in Armenia. The stereotype that Russia is the "only
                  deliberator" must be destroyed. The Armenian public has been made
                  believe that only Russia can protect Armenia from danger. In addition,
                  dangerous manipulations are in place, which produce a deep effect
                  not only on information and propaganda but also fundamental social
                  and national psychology.

                  The problem is that Armenia is a security consumer in the
                  Armenian-Russian security relationship. In other words, Armenia itself
                  is not capable of anything, and only Russia generously protects us.

                  And in return for this "generosity" the opinion is spread that even if
                  Armenia is not noticed, is ignored, hit or steps are taken behind its
                  back which infringe on its interests, Armenia must tolerate everything
                  for the sake of "generous imperialistic security."

                  Meanwhile, Armenia has a different objective and must: change public
                  psychology by busting stereotypes and, instead of instilling the
                  psychology of security consumer develop Armenia into a subject of
                  international security system. It means methodological assistance
                  besides direct assistance to defense, which lies at the basis
                  of the U.S.-Armenia cooperation. This cooperation is aimed at the
                  modernization of the defense system in Armenia, reforms of methodology
                  and values and structures.

                  Security in the modern world is a broad and multi-component notion,
                  it is strong in the wholeness of its system. The United States offers
                  Armenia the model of systemic security, when Armenia is not under
                  someone's strong care but becomes part of the international modern
                  security system. This is the change of situation in which case the
                  Russian military base in Armenia automatically loses its mythical
                  importance because it has lost its practical importance or has never
                  had such importance from the point of view of the interests of Armenia.

                  In other words, the problem is to withdraw Armenia from the Russian
                  military base.

                  http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/com....MGL7tmJJ.dpuf
                  Hayastan or Bust.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Regional geopolitics

                    Originally posted by Haykakan View Post
                    Just read this bs and think about what he is saying, why he is saying it, and what are his potential intentions in saying this.

                    U.S. POINTED TO WAY OF WITHDRAWAL OF RUSSIAN BASE

                    Hakob Badalyan, Political Commentator
                    Comments - 12 February 2015, 11:42

                    The U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs
                    Eric Rubin said that a Russian military presence in Armenia should
                    restrain neither the Armenian nor the American sides. Rubin announced
                    that the United States intends to strengthen bilateral relations in
                    these spheres because Armenia and the South Caucasus are very close
                    to the world's most dangerous spots. Rubin said they therefore intend
                    to deepen relations with the Armenian government, the military and
                    security agencies.

                    He announced that they intend to deepen cooperation and implement new
                    bilateral projects in this sphere. As to the Russian military presence,
                    Rubin said the Russian military presence is reality conditioned on
                    the current situation in Armenia and is not a hindrance.

                    In other words, Rubin hints that the situation must be changed to
                    change the reality. This is not an easy task, considering that this
                    situation has formed for decades. This change is a must for Armenia
                    because withdrawing Armenia from dominance of Russia, full dependence
                    on Russia stems from the national interests and sovereignty of Armenia.

                    In this sense, the United States is an important partner to Armenia,
                    there is harmony of interests which opens up opportunities that
                    should be used. Security is a primary sphere, it is the basis for
                    relationship, cooperation, partnership. Efficient and long-term
                    relations in other spheres depend on it. Here the spectrum is
                    broad, ranging from methodological support to technological and arms
                    assistance. In this regard, the United States which is an undisputable
                    leader of the security system in Armenia is a key partner to Armenia.

                    The problem is limited to opportunities to promote cooperation.

                    Russia is jealous. But perhaps jealousy is overestimated, and as Rubin
                    hints, everything depends on the situation: once situation changes,
                    risks related to jealousy will decrease.

                    In this sense, practical expressions of cooperation over security
                    are important to change stereotypes that affect the situation in
                    Armenia considerably and are regularly manipulated by Russia and
                    certain Armenian governmental and non-government circles serving
                    its interests in Armenia. The stereotype that Russia is the "only
                    deliberator" must be destroyed. The Armenian public has been made
                    believe that only Russia can protect Armenia from danger. In addition,
                    dangerous manipulations are in place, which produce a deep effect
                    not only on information and propaganda but also fundamental social
                    and national psychology.

                    The problem is that Armenia is a security consumer in the
                    Armenian-Russian security relationship. In other words, Armenia itself
                    is not capable of anything, and only Russia generously protects us.

                    And in return for this "generosity" the opinion is spread that even if
                    Armenia is not noticed, is ignored, hit or steps are taken behind its
                    back which infringe on its interests, Armenia must tolerate everything
                    for the sake of "generous imperialistic security."

                    Meanwhile, Armenia has a different objective and must: change public
                    psychology by busting stereotypes and, instead of instilling the
                    psychology of security consumer develop Armenia into a subject of
                    international security system. It means methodological assistance
                    besides direct assistance to defense, which lies at the basis
                    of the U.S.-Armenia cooperation. This cooperation is aimed at the
                    modernization of the defense system in Armenia, reforms of methodology
                    and values and structures.

                    Security in the modern world is a broad and multi-component notion,
                    it is strong in the wholeness of its system. The United States offers
                    Armenia the model of systemic security, when Armenia is not under
                    someone's strong care but becomes part of the international modern
                    security system. This is the change of situation in which case the
                    Russian military base in Armenia automatically loses its mythical
                    importance because it has lost its practical importance or has never
                    had such importance from the point of view of the interests of Armenia.

                    In other words, the problem is to withdraw Armenia from the Russian
                    military base.

                    http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/com....MGL7tmJJ.dpuf
                    --- the united states which is an undisputed leader of the security system in Armenia ---
                    My first sentence is taken from Hakakan's above post.
                    The USA is the undisputed advocate of the turcs, -- NOT -- Armenia.
                    That entire article is pure propaganda and nothing more.
                    HARK

                    Comment


                    • Re: Regional geopolitics

                      Originally posted by Artashes View Post
                      --- the united states which is an undisputed leader of the security system in Armenia ---
                      My first sentence is taken from Hakakan's above post.
                      The USA is the undisputed advocate of the turcs, -- NOT -- Armenia.
                      That entire article is pure propaganda and nothing more.
                      Exactly!!! Propaganda is all Lragir ever prints. What this guy is saying is very typical of what Europe has done to us many times before. They told us you do not need Russians, we will take care of you....and as soon as the Russians were forced out we got slaughtered every dam time!!!! I hope for our people's sake we do not fall for the same stupid crap all over again.
                      Hayastan or Bust.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X