Regional geopolitics

[Vrej1915]

Re: Regional geopolitics

Iran airlifts thousands of Shiite fighters to Syrian port of Latakia to boost Aleppo warfront
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report
February 21, 2015


DEBKAfile’s exclusive military and intelligence sources have discovered a large-scale Iranian airlift is in progress for bringing thousands of Shiite fighters to the Syrian Mediterranean port of Latakia to reinforce the Syrian army forces falling back from the key city of Aleppo. Some of the flights are taking off from Baghdad airport. The Syrian rebels in heavy fighting Thursday and Friday, Feb. 19-20 repulsed a Hizballah-backed Syrian army offensive to recapture the town and took scores of Hizballah fighters prisoner.

The incoming reinforcements are being transferred directly to the Aleppo battle-front in an effort to stabilize it and reverse the Syrian army’s retreat.

The incoming reinforcements are made up of Iraqi, Afghan and Pakistani Shiite militiamen.The fact that Tehran was able to raise this force in less than 24 hours from the Syrian army’s defeat in Aleppo demonstrates Iran’s total military and strategic commitment to swift action for averting a Syrian-Hizballah retreat from a key front of the four-year old civil war.

The Iranian planes are taking two routes to Syria, starting out either in Baghdad or Tehran. In Baghdad, they touch down in the military section of the international airport and collect the Iraqi Shiite militiamen destined for the Syrian battlefield. This step necessitated the consent of the Iraqi government and Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi.

The Iranian operation therefore exposes two exceedingly disturbing developments which are causing Israel’s army chiefs to burn the midnight oil: The fall of the Abadi government under Tehran’s sway is one; and Iraq’s direct involvement for the first time in the military actions of the Syrian civil war.

DEBKAfile’s military experts extrapolate from Tehran’s immediate readiness to transfer thousands of foreign troops into Syria to save Assad’s army from retreat, that the same response is to be expected from a possible setback of the same alliance in South Syria - especially when Iranian Revolutionary Guards officers are leading a Syrian-Hizballah-Shiite drive to capture the Golan town of Quneitra across from Israel’s lines.

Our sources add that President Barack Obama was in a position, had he wished, to intervene with Baghdad and hold back the Iranian troop airlift to Syria. This has not happened. The administration’s inaction places it squarely behind Iran’s military steps in the Middle East and its direct intervention in key trouble spots.

[Haykakan]

Re: Regional geopolitics

THREE FRONTS FOR RUSSIA: HOW WASHINGTON WILL FAN THE FLAMES OF CHAOS IN CENTRAL ASIA?

Sri Lanka Guardian
Feb 24 2015

by Ivan Lizan
Translated by Robin

( February 24, 2015, Boston, Sri Lanka Guardian) U.S. Gen. "Ben"
Hodges' statement that within four or five years Russia could
develop the capability to wage war simultaneously on three fronts
is not only an acknowledgment of the Russian Federation's growing
military potential but also a promise that Washington will obligingly
ensure that all three fronts are right on the borders of the Russian
Federation.

In the context of China's inevitable rise and the soon-to-worsen
financial crisis, with the concomitant bursting of asset bubbles,
the only way for the United States to maintain its global hegemony
is to weaken its opponents. And the only way to achieve that goal is
to trigger chaos in the republics bordering Russia.

That is why Russia will inevitably enter a period of conflicts and
crises on its borders.

And so the first front in fact already exists in the Ukraine,
the second will most likely be between Armenia and Azerbaijan
over Nagorno-Karabakh, and the third, of course, will be opened in
Central Asia.

If the war in Ukraine leads to millions of refugees, tens of thousands
of deaths, and the destruction of cities, defrosting the Karabakh
conflict will completely undermine Russia's entire foreign policy in
the Caucasus.

Every city in Central Asia is under threat of explosions and attacks.

So far this "up-and-coming front" has attracted the least media
coverage - Novorossiya dominates on national television channels, in
newspapers, and on websites -, but this theater of war could become
one of the most complex after the conflict in the Ukraine.

A subsidiary of the Caliphate under Russia's belly

The indisputable trend in Afghanistan - and the key source of
instability in the region - is to an alliance between the Taliban
and the Islamic State. Even so, the formation of their union is in
its early days, references to it are scarce and fragmentary, and
the true scale of the activities of the IS emissaries is unclear,
like an iceberg whose tip barely shows above the surface of the water.

But it has been established that IS agitators are active in Pakistan
and in Afghanistan's southern provinces, which are controlled by the
Taliban. But, in this case, the first victim of chaos in Afghanistan is
Pakistan, which at the insistence of, and with help from, the United
States nurtured the Taliban in the 1980s. That project has taken on a
life of its own and is a recurring nightmare for Islamabad, which has
decided to establish a friendlier relationship China and Russia. This
trend can be seen in the Taliban's attacks on Pakistani schools,
whose teachers now have the right to carry guns, regular arrests
of terrorists in the major cities, and the start of activities in
support of tribes hostile to the Taliban in the north.

The latest legislative development in Pakistan is a constitutional
amendment to expand military court jurisdiction [over civilians].

Throughout the country, terrorists, Islamists and their sympathizers
are being detained. In the northwest alone, more than 8,000
arrests have been made, including members of the clergy. Religious
organizations have been banned and IS emissaries are being caught.

Since the Americans do not like putting all their eggs in one basket,
they will provide support to the government in Kabul, which will allow
them to remain in the country legitimately, and at the same time to
the Taliban, which is transforming itself into IS. The outcome will be
a state of chaos in which the Americans will not formally take part;
instead, they will sit back on their military bases, waiting to see
who wins. And then Washington will provide assistance to the victor.

Note that its security services have been supporting the Taliban for a
long time and quite effectively: some of the official security forces
and police in Afghanistan are former Taliban and Mujahideen.

Method of destruction

The first way to destabilize Central Asia is to create problems on
the borders, along with the threat that Mujahideen will penetrate the
region. The testing of the neighbours has already started; problems
have arisen in Turkmenistan, which has even had to ask Kabul to hold
large-scale military operations in the border provinces. Tajikistan
has forced the Taliban to negotiate the release of the border guards
it abducted, and the Tajik border service reports that there is a
large group of Mujahideen on its borders.

In general, all the countries bordering Afghanistan have stepped up
their border security.

The second way is to send Islamists behind the lines. The process
has already begun: the number of extremists in Tajikistan alone grew
three-fold last year; however, even though they are being caught, it
obviously will not be feasible to catch all of them. Furthermore, the
situation is aggravated by the return of migrant workers from Russia,
which will expand the recruiting base. If the stream of remittances
from Russia dries up, the outcome may be popular discontent and
managed riots.

Kyrgyz expert Kadir Malikov reports that $70 million has been allocated
to the IS military group Maverenahr, which includes representatives
of all the Central Asian republics, to carry out acts of terrorism
in the region. Special emphasis is placed on the Fergana Valley as
the heart of Central Asia.

Another point of vulnerability is Kyrgyzstan's parliamentary elections,
scheduled for this fall. The initiation of a new set of color
revolutions will lead to chaos and the disintegration of countries.

Self-supporting wars

Waging war is expensive, so the destabilization of the region must
be self-supporting or at least profitable for the U.S.

military-industrial complex. And in this area Washington has had some
success: it has given Uzbekistan 328 armored vehicles that Kiev had
requested for its war with Novorossiya. At first glance, the deal isn't
profitable because the machines were a gift, but in reality Uzbekistan
will be tied to U.S. spare parts and ammunition. Washington made a
similar decision on the transfer of equipment and weapons to Islamabad.

But the United States has not been successful in its attempts to
impose its weapons systems on India: the Indians have not signed
any contracts, and Obama was shown Russian military hardware when he
attended a military parade.

Thus the United States is drawing the countries in the region into
war with its own proteges - the Taliban and Islamic State - and at
the same time is supplying its enemies with weapons.

***

So 2015 will be marked by preparations for widespread destabilization
in Central Asia and the transformation of AfPak into an Islamic State
subsidiary on the borders of Russia, India, China, and Iran. The
start of full-scale war, which will inevitably follow once chaos
engulfs the region, will lead to a bloodbath in the "Eurasian Balkans,"
automatically involving more than a third of the world's population and
almost all the United States' geopolitical rivals. It's an opportunity
Washington will find too good to miss.

Russia's response to this challenge has to be multifaceted: involving
the region in the process of Eurasian integration, providing military,
economic, and political assistance, working closely with its allies
in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the BRICS, strengthening
the Pakistani army, and of course assisting with the capture of the
bearded servants of the Caliphate.

But the most important response should be the accelerated modernization
of its armed forces as well as those of its allies and efforts to
strengthen the Collective Security Treaty Organization and give it
the right to circumvent the highly inefficient United Nations.

The region is extremely important: if Ukraine is a fuse of war, then
Central Asia is a munitions depot. If it blows up, half the continent
will be hit.

http://www.slguardian.org/?p=26861

[Vrej1915]

Re: Regional geopolitics

Թուրք-ադրբեջանական ավիավարժանքների ժամանակ ուսումնական ինքնաթիռ է կործանվել. կա 2 զոհ
168.AM

Մարտ 5 2015

Թուրքական Anadolu լրատվական գործակալության փոխանցմամբ՝ Թուրքիայում պլանային ուսումնական թռիչքի ժամանակ կործանվել է F-4E 2020 մարտական ինքնաթիռ:

Այս մասին հայտարարել է Թուրքիայի զինված ուժերի Գլխավոր շտաբը: Վերջինիս հաղորդմամբ՝ միջադեպը գրանցվել է Քոնիայի զորավարժարանում: Ինքնաթիռն ընկել է Քոնիայից Աքսարայ տանող ճանապարհի 5-րդ կիլոմետր վրա:

Ինքնաթիռի երկու օդաչուները զոհվել են: Ադրբեջանական մամուլն իր հերթին հայտնել է, որ ինքնաթիռը կործանվել է Քոնիայում ընթացող թուրք-ադրբեջանական Turaz şahini 2015 ռազմաօդային զորավարժության ժամանակ, և որ ինքնաթիռը պատկանել է Թուրքիայի ռազմաօդային ուժերին:

Հիշեցնենք, որ օրեր առաջ էլ Թուրքիայում (Մալաթիա) անցկացված զորավարժությունների ժամանակ կործանվել էր F4 Fantom տիպի երկու մարտական ինքնաթիռ, ինչի հետևանքով զոհվել էր 4 օդաչու:

Ամբողջական հոդվածը կարող եք կարդալ այս հասցեով՝ http://168.am/2015/03/05/463930.html
© 168 Ժամ առցանց լրատվական կայք

------
This make 4 outdated F4 out of turkish inventory, if we add the one shot by the syrians at the beginning of their war in 2012.

[Vrej1915]

Re: Regional geopolitics

News Analysis: Three Scenarios For A Succession In Russia



The Sick Man Of Moscow
Vladimir Putin may or may not be sick. But the Russian political system certainly is -- and is showing increased signs of distress.
By Robert Coalson
March 13, 2015

For a decade and a half, Vladimir Putin has sat at the top of a closed, hierarchical, and personality-based political system that allows for no competition.

As a result, opinion polls in Russia routinely show the public sees "no alternative" to Putin's leadership.

So what would happen in Russia if Putin suddenly and without warning left the political stage? Over the last few days, we have seen the anxiety that even the rumor of such an event can produce in Russia and around the world. If Putin is the guarantor of stability in Russia, then does a scenario without Putin automatically imply instability -- even violent instability?

The Constitutional Scenario

Formally, of course, Russia has a constitution and a process for handling a president's incapacity. Article 92 of the Russian Constitution states that if the president is unable to fulfill the duties of the office -- although the process for declaring him incapacitated is unclear -- the prime minister would become acting president and a new presidential election would be held within three months.

The acting president would not have the power to disband the Duma, schedule a referendum, or alter the constitution.

Under Russian election law, each party represented in the State Duma -- United Russia, the Communist Party, the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia, and A Just Russia -- would have the right to nominate a candidate. Other parties would have to scramble to assemble the required 100,000 signatures and get them approved by the Central Election Commission in such a tight time frame.

So if Putin unexpectedly left the scene and the constitution were followed to the letter, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev would return to the Kremlin and a competitive election would take place in three months.

The Consensus Scenario

Of course, such a smooth and legal transition of power is unlikely in Russia.

In Soviet times, political heavyweights wrestled behind the scenes until a successor emerged through some unfathomable communist alchemy.

More recently, when President Boris Yeltsin decided to retire, political insiders reached a consensus and produced the unimaginable candidacy of Vladimir Putin as his successor. They then used a combination of their financial, administrative, and media resources to get him elected.

Yeltsin's inner circle, despite its divisions, had the benefit of time in making its decision. In addition, they also had the experience of reaching a similar crucial consensus during the period around the 1996 presidential election, when the major oligarchs agreed to work together to reelect the ailing and increasingly unpopular Yeltsin.

The Conflict Scenario

But what if consensus can't be reached?

Under Putin, the political system has become more personalized and centered around the president himself, who has balanced conflicting parties. And he has almost certainly stifled all discussion of what could or should happen in a post-Putin era.

But the divisions in Putin's inner circle, always latent, have become more manifest with the Ukraine crisis and have intensified since the February 27 assassination of opposition figure Boris Nemtsov.

"Now the conflict between the clans has become very seriously intense," says journalist and analyst Raf Shakirov. "It is obvious that different groups are pushing for different paths."

The main fault line, he says, is between "hawks" who have become ascendant due to the Ukraine crisis and Russia's showdown with the West and a "liberal group" responsible for the economy who would prefer a thaw at home and a rapprochement abroad.

The former group, Shakirov says, will probably fight fiercely in any transition to preserve their primacy. "This group understands that for them any normalization would mean, not the end of the world, but a loss of position," Shakirov says. "They cannot risk the loss of the almost unlimited power that they have now."

Likewise, political analyst Marat Guelman sees conflict as the likely scenario. These are "people who have tasted lawlessness, who already feel that they have the right to break the law, to kill," he says in reference to the Kremlin hard-liners.

With reporting by RFE/RL's Russian Service correspondents Yelena Rykovtseva and Lyubov Chizhova

[Haykakan]

Re: Regional geopolitics

News Analysis: Three Scenarios For A Succession In Russia



The Sick Man Of Moscow
Vladimir Putin may or may not be sick. But the Russian political system certainly is -- and is showing increased signs of distress.
By Robert Coalson
March 13, 2015

For a decade and a half, Vladimir Putin has sat at the top of a closed, hierarchical, and personality-based political system that allows for no competition.

As a result, opinion polls in Russia routinely show the public sees "no alternative" to Putin's leadership.

So what would happen in Russia if Putin suddenly and without warning left the political stage? Over the last few days, we have seen the anxiety that even the rumor of such an event can produce in Russia and around the world. If Putin is the guarantor of stability in Russia, then does a scenario without Putin automatically imply instability -- even violent instability?

The Constitutional Scenario

Formally, of course, Russia has a constitution and a process for handling a president's incapacity. Article 92 of the Russian Constitution states that if the president is unable to fulfill the duties of the office -- although the process for declaring him incapacitated is unclear -- the prime minister would become acting president and a new presidential election would be held within three months.

The acting president would not have the power to disband the Duma, schedule a referendum, or alter the constitution.

Under Russian election law, each party represented in the State Duma -- United Russia, the Communist Party, the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia, and A Just Russia -- would have the right to nominate a candidate. Other parties would have to scramble to assemble the required 100,000 signatures and get them approved by the Central Election Commission in such a tight time frame.

So if Putin unexpectedly left the scene and the constitution were followed to the letter, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev would return to the Kremlin and a competitive election would take place in three months.

The Consensus Scenario

Of course, such a smooth and legal transition of power is unlikely in Russia.

In Soviet times, political heavyweights wrestled behind the scenes until a successor emerged through some unfathomable communist alchemy.

More recently, when President Boris Yeltsin decided to retire, political insiders reached a consensus and produced the unimaginable candidacy of Vladimir Putin as his successor. They then used a combination of their financial, administrative, and media resources to get him elected.

Yeltsin's inner circle, despite its divisions, had the benefit of time in making its decision. In addition, they also had the experience of reaching a similar crucial consensus during the period around the 1996 presidential election, when the major oligarchs agreed to work together to reelect the ailing and increasingly unpopular Yeltsin.

The Conflict Scenario

But what if consensus can't be reached?

Under Putin, the political system has become more personalized and centered around the president himself, who has balanced conflicting parties. And he has almost certainly stifled all discussion of what could or should happen in a post-Putin era.

But the divisions in Putin's inner circle, always latent, have become more manifest with the Ukraine crisis and have intensified since the February 27 assassination of opposition figure Boris Nemtsov.

"Now the conflict between the clans has become very seriously intense," says journalist and analyst Raf Shakirov. "It is obvious that different groups are pushing for different paths."

The main fault line, he says, is between "hawks" who have become ascendant due to the Ukraine crisis and Russia's showdown with the West and a "liberal group" responsible for the economy who would prefer a thaw at home and a rapprochement abroad.

The former group, Shakirov says, will probably fight fiercely in any transition to preserve their primacy. "This group understands that for them any normalization would mean, not the end of the world, but a loss of position," Shakirov says. "They cannot risk the loss of the almost unlimited power that they have now."

Likewise, political analyst Marat Guelman sees conflict as the likely scenario. These are "people who have tasted lawlessness, who already feel that they have the right to break the law, to kill," he says in reference to the Kremlin hard-liners.

With reporting by RFE/RL's Russian Service correspondents Yelena Rykovtseva and Lyubov Chizhova

What a load of utter crap!!! What else could we expect from this poster..

[Haykakan]

Re: Regional geopolitics

Just read this and see who Armenia's friends and enemies are.



IS ARMENIA AMERICA'S ALLY OR IRAN'S?

Daily Caller
March 12 2015

by Dan Burton, Former Congressman

Even as events in the Ukraine unfold so tumultuously, a subtler but
comparably disturbing situation elsewhere in the former USSR threatens
to undermine Western interests there and throughout the Middle East.

Although widely assumed to be a solid ally, Armenia has by all
indications quietly moved toward a strategic rapprochement with Iran -
and, by extension, Russia - that for starters will help U.S.

adversaries circumvent the critical provisions of the Iran Sanctions
Act (ISA) and sanctions against Russia.

As a matter of sheer realpolitik, it's not hard to understand the
motives at play in Yereva, the Armenian capital city. Flash back to
the efforts of both the Clinton and the second Bush administrations
to use ISA sanctions as a way to interdict oil pipeline routes that
would have enriched Iran. What emerged as a result was an alternative
U.S.-approved route from Azerbaijan to Turkey.

But Azerbaijan is Armenia's direct economic and geopolitical antagonist
while there hasn't been much love lost between Armenia and Turkey
since the tragic events of 1915 under the Ottoman Empire, however
shrouded in time those events may be. In global politics, as in life,
my enemies' enemy often has certain charms. For Armenia, those charms
now entail stronger, more extensive economic relations with Iran. It
is certainly no secret that, for one, Armenia is Iran's biggest direct
gas customer, especially since May 2009 when Iran and Armenia launched
a trans-national gas pipeline built by Gazprom, the world's largest
extractor of natural gas based in and owned by - yes - Russia.

Further evidence of Armenian/Iranian friendship is plentiful. Both
Tehran and Yerevan have pushed hard for progress on the construction
of the Southern Armenia Railway, which will more closely link the
two countries. Meanwhile, in May 2014, Iran and Armenia increased
weekly flights between the two countries from three to 50. That's
not tourism. That's business.

The situation is yet more perilous. Armenia has reassured the West
that its banking controls are strong and that Iran cannot launder
money through its banks. According to U.S. officials, however, Iran
has easy access to Armenian banks operating in the Armenia-occupied
Nagorno-Karabakh territory whence Iran can draw on funds to expand
its nuclear and missile programs or, for that matter, continue to
subsidize terrorist organizations.

Even as events in the Ukraine unfold so tumultuously, a subtler but
comparably disturbing situation elsewhere in the former USSR threatens
to undermine Western interests there and throughout the Middle East.

Although widely assumed to be a solid ally, Armenia has by all
indications quietly moved toward a strategic rapprochement with Iran -
and, by extension, Russia - that for starters will help U.S.

adversaries circumvent the critical provisions of the Iran Sanctions
Act (ISA) and sanctions against Russia.

As a matter of sheer realpolitik, it's not hard to understand the
motives at play in Yereva, the Armenian capital city. Flash back to
the efforts of both the Clinton and the second Bush administrations
to use ISA sanctions as a way to interdict oil pipeline routes that
would have enriched Iran. What emerged as a result was an alternative
U.S.-approved route from Azerbaijan to Turkey.

But Azerbaijan is Armenia's direct economic and geopolitical antagonist
while there hasn't been much love lost between Armenia and Turkey
since the tragic events of 1915 under the Ottoman Empire, however
shrouded in time those events may be. In global politics, as in life,
my enemies' enemy often has certain charms. For Armenia, those charms
now entail stronger, more extensive economic relations with Iran. It
is certainly no secret that, for one, Armenia is Iran's biggest direct
gas customer, especially since May 2009 when Iran and Armenia launched
a trans-national gas pipeline built by Gazprom, the world's largest
extractor of natural gas based in and owned by - yes - Russia.

Further evidence of Armenian/Iranian friendship is plentiful. Both
Tehran and Yerevan have pushed hard for progress on the construction
of the Southern Armenia Railway, which will more closely link the
two countries. Meanwhile, in May 2014, Iran and Armenia increased
weekly flights between the two countries from three to 50. That's
not tourism. That's business.

The situation is yet more perilous. Armenia has reassured the West
that its banking controls are strong and that Iran cannot launder
money through its banks. According to U.S. officials, however, Iran
has easy access to Armenian banks operating in the Armenia-occupied
Nagorno-Karabakh territory whence Iran can draw on funds to expand
its nuclear and missile programs or, for that matter, continue to
subsidize terrorist organizations.

TalkMarkets If You Listen Carefully, The Bankers Are Actually Telling
Us What Is Going To Happ...TalkMarkets Undo Universities Academy
Probably The Best Job In The World...Universities Academy Undo Sniper
X Program The Internet Loophole That Made One Man a Millionaire!Sniper
X Program Undo by Taboolaby Taboola Sponsored LinksSponsored Links
Promoted LinksPromoted Links

In 2013, one Western UN diplomat identified Armenia's ACBA as "a bank
that has come up in connection with Iran." The former Soviet Republic
is a real plum for Tehran in any event since Armenia is a listed U.S.

ally and, as a former Soviet republic, purportedly wary of the Russian
bear. For America, that is very reassuring. For Iran, it's a ready-made
fifth column.

"The Iranian relationship with Armenia is driven by a shared sense of
isolation," says Richard Giragosian, director of the Yerevan-based
Regional Studies Center. "For Armenia, Iran offers an important
alternative to closed borders [with Turkey and Azerbaijan] and
unresolved conflict [of Nagorno-Karabakh with Azerbaijan] and tension
with its other neighbors, and offers an opportunity to overcome
Armenia's geographic isolation as a small landlocked state."

Then, of course, there's the Putin factor. When in January 2015,
Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif visited Armenia (with scant
media fanfare), he lauded Armenia's accession to the Russia-dominated
Eurasian Economic Union (EEU), citing the EEU as a platform for
"broader cooperation options to Iran, Armenia, and Russia." Earlier,
Iran's ambassador to Moscow, Mehdi Sanai, said that Tehran will
seriously look at signing a memorandum of understanding on trade with
the EEU. In fact, Sanai has publicly envisioned Iranian-Russian trade
jumping from the present annual $3-5 billion to $70 billion.

The geopolitical ramifications are obviously significant, especially as
Russia will now have more alternatives to soften the blow of Western
sanctions. But Russia has even more to gain than that.

To better assess the ominous signals that Zarif and Sanai are sending,
we need to look more closely at Russia's role in the region. Since
Armenian independence in 1991, Russia has served Yerevan - not as a
sword-rattling aggressor-in-waiting - but as a geopolitical protector.

When we combine that traditional role with the impact of the EEU and
the economic assets that it's already secured in Armenia, what's clear
is that Russia stands to be the key economic force in Armenia. Putin
thus has everything to gain by helping to buttress the burgeoning
Armenian/Iranian partnership. And we have everything to lose.

Happily, we need not underestimate current levels of concern
in the U.S. Congress. Recently, the Subcommittee on Terrorism,
Nonproliferation, and Trade of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs
held a hearing dubbed "State Sponsor of Terror: The Global Threat of
Iran." At that hearing, Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA) nailed it
when he raised "questions about Russia's involvement through Armenia in
the backdoor circumvention of the sanctions that are in place today,"
and that "Russia's involvement is making it clear [that] all they are
really doing is guaranteeing a slow march toward a nuclear Iran ... We
would be remiss if we did not ... recognize that all the way back in
the early 80s...President Ronald Reagan referred to an evil empire,
at that time the Soviet Union."

The placards of Politburo chieftains may be gone but the same
imperialist agenda remains. Today, Iran's partnership with Russia,
a fundamentally destabilizing force in world affairs, is aided and
abetted by Armenia's partnership with both members of that unholy
alliance.

Perhaps our "ally" in Yerevan needs to be reminded of the price that
small countries must ultimately pay for helping enemies of the US
circumvent sanctions.

Dan Burton is a former Member of Congress representing Indiana's
5th Congressional District. He served in Congress from 1983 until
2013 notably serving on the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/12/is-armenia-americas-ally-or-irans/

[Vrej1915]

Re: Regional geopolitics

Just read this and see who Armenia's friends and enemies are.


http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/12/is...ally-or-irans/

So what?
You just proved that you are not the only jackass in the US.
The difference is the above signature is paid in cash by the turks to propagate ampty propaganda so evident, does not deserve reaction, while yourlikes are motivated by instinctive/blind slavemind.
He at least has the excuse of money .....

[londontsi]

Re: Regional geopolitics

Just read this and see who Armenia's friends and enemies are.



IS ARMENIA AMERICA'S ALLY OR IRAN'S?

Daily Caller
March 12 2015

by Dan Burton, Former Congressman

Even as events in the Ukraine unfold so tumultuously, a subtler but
comparably disturbing situation elsewhere in the former USSR threatens
to undermine Western interests there and throughout the Middle East.

Although widely assumed to be a solid ally, Armenia has by all
indications quietly moved toward a strategic rapprochement with Iran -
and, by extension, Russia - that for starters will help U.S.

adversaries circumvent the critical provisions of the Iran Sanctions
Act (ISA) and sanctions against Russia.

As a matter of sheer realpolitik, it's not hard to understand the
motives at play in Yereva, the Armenian capital city. Flash back to
the efforts of both the Clinton and the second Bush administrations
to use ISA sanctions as a way to interdict oil pipeline routes that
would have enriched Iran. What emerged as a result was an alternative
U.S.-approved route from Azerbaijan to Turkey.

But Azerbaijan is Armenia's direct economic and geopolitical antagonist
while there hasn't been much love lost between Armenia and Turkey
since the tragic events of 1915 under the Ottoman Empire, however
shrouded in time those events may be. In global politics, as in life,
my enemies' enemy often has certain charms. For Armenia, those charms
now entail stronger, more extensive economic relations with Iran. It
is certainly no secret that, for one, Armenia is Iran's biggest direct
gas customer, especially since May 2009 when Iran and Armenia launched
a trans-national gas pipeline built by Gazprom, the world's largest
extractor of natural gas based in and owned by - yes - Russia.

Further evidence of Armenian/Iranian friendship is plentiful. Both
Tehran and Yerevan have pushed hard for progress on the construction
of the Southern Armenia Railway, which will more closely link the
two countries. Meanwhile, in May 2014, Iran and Armenia increased
weekly flights between the two countries from three to 50. That's
not tourism. That's business.

The situation is yet more perilous. Armenia has reassured the West
that its banking controls are strong and that Iran cannot launder
money through its banks. According to U.S. officials, however, Iran
has easy access to Armenian banks operating in the Armenia-occupied
Nagorno-Karabakh territory whence Iran can draw on funds to expand
its nuclear and missile programs or, for that matter, continue to
subsidize terrorist organizations.

Even as events in the Ukraine unfold so tumultuously, a subtler but
comparably disturbing situation elsewhere in the former USSR threatens
to undermine Western interests there and throughout the Middle East.

Although widely assumed to be a solid ally, Armenia has by all
indications quietly moved toward a strategic rapprochement with Iran -
and, by extension, Russia - that for starters will help U.S.

adversaries circumvent the critical provisions of the Iran Sanctions
Act (ISA) and sanctions against Russia.

As a matter of sheer realpolitik, it's not hard to understand the
motives at play in Yereva, the Armenian capital city. Flash back to
the efforts of both the Clinton and the second Bush administrations
to use ISA sanctions as a way to interdict oil pipeline routes that
would have enriched Iran. What emerged as a result was an alternative
U.S.-approved route from Azerbaijan to Turkey.

But Azerbaijan is Armenia's direct economic and geopolitical antagonist
while there hasn't been much love lost between Armenia and Turkey
since the tragic events of 1915 under the Ottoman Empire, however
shrouded in time those events may be. In global politics, as in life,
my enemies' enemy often has certain charms. For Armenia, those charms
now entail stronger, more extensive economic relations with Iran. It
is certainly no secret that, for one, Armenia is Iran's biggest direct
gas customer, especially since May 2009 when Iran and Armenia launched
a trans-national gas pipeline built by Gazprom, the world's largest
extractor of natural gas based in and owned by - yes - Russia.

Further evidence of Armenian/Iranian friendship is plentiful. Both
Tehran and Yerevan have pushed hard for progress on the construction
of the Southern Armenia Railway, which will more closely link the
two countries. Meanwhile, in May 2014, Iran and Armenia increased
weekly flights between the two countries from three to 50. That's
not tourism. That's business.

The situation is yet more perilous. Armenia has reassured the West
that its banking controls are strong and that Iran cannot launder
money through its banks. According to U.S. officials, however, Iran
has easy access to Armenian banks operating in the Armenia-occupied
Nagorno-Karabakh territory whence Iran can draw on funds to expand
its nuclear and missile programs or, for that matter, continue to
subsidize terrorist organizations.

TalkMarkets If You Listen Carefully, The Bankers Are Actually Telling
Us What Is Going To Happ...TalkMarkets Undo Universities Academy
Probably The Best Job In The World...Universities Academy Undo Sniper
X Program The Internet Loophole That Made One Man a Millionaire!Sniper
X Program Undo by Taboolaby Taboola Sponsored LinksSponsored Links
Promoted LinksPromoted Links

In 2013, one Western UN diplomat identified Armenia's ACBA as "a bank
that has come up in connection with Iran." The former Soviet Republic
is a real plum for Tehran in any event since Armenia is a listed U.S.

ally and, as a former Soviet republic, purportedly wary of the Russian
bear. For America, that is very reassuring. For Iran, it's a ready-made
fifth column.

"The Iranian relationship with Armenia is driven by a shared sense of
isolation," says Richard Giragosian, director of the Yerevan-based
Regional Studies Center. "For Armenia, Iran offers an important
alternative to closed borders [with Turkey and Azerbaijan] and
unresolved conflict [of Nagorno-Karabakh with Azerbaijan] and tension
with its other neighbors, and offers an opportunity to overcome
Armenia's geographic isolation as a small landlocked state."

Then, of course, there's the Putin factor. When in January 2015,
Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif visited Armenia (with scant
media fanfare), he lauded Armenia's accession to the Russia-dominated
Eurasian Economic Union (EEU), citing the EEU as a platform for
"broader cooperation options to Iran, Armenia, and Russia." Earlier,
Iran's ambassador to Moscow, Mehdi Sanai, said that Tehran will
seriously look at signing a memorandum of understanding on trade with
the EEU. In fact, Sanai has publicly envisioned Iranian-Russian trade
jumping from the present annual $3-5 billion to $70 billion.

The geopolitical ramifications are obviously significant, especially as
Russia will now have more alternatives to soften the blow of Western
sanctions. But Russia has even more to gain than that.

To better assess the ominous signals that Zarif and Sanai are sending,
we need to look more closely at Russia's role in the region. Since
Armenian independence in 1991, Russia has served Yerevan - not as a
sword-rattling aggressor-in-waiting - but as a geopolitical protector.

When we combine that traditional role with the impact of the EEU and
the economic assets that it's already secured in Armenia, what's clear
is that Russia stands to be the key economic force in Armenia. Putin
thus has everything to gain by helping to buttress the burgeoning
Armenian/Iranian partnership. And we have everything to lose.

Happily, we need not underestimate current levels of concern
in the U.S. Congress. Recently, the Subcommittee on Terrorism,
Nonproliferation, and Trade of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs
held a hearing dubbed "State Sponsor of Terror: The Global Threat of
Iran." At that hearing, Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA) nailed it
when he raised "questions about Russia's involvement through Armenia in
the backdoor circumvention of the sanctions that are in place today,"
and that "Russia's involvement is making it clear [that] all they are
really doing is guaranteeing a slow march toward a nuclear Iran ... We
would be remiss if we did not ... recognize that all the way back in
the early 80s...President Ronald Reagan referred to an evil empire,
at that time the Soviet Union."

The placards of Politburo chieftains may be gone but the same
imperialist agenda remains. Today, Iran's partnership with Russia,
a fundamentally destabilizing force in world affairs, is aided and
abetted by Armenia's partnership with both members of that unholy
alliance.

Perhaps our "ally" in Yerevan needs to be reminded of the price that
small countries must ultimately pay for helping enemies of the US
circumvent sanctions.

Dan Burton is a former Member of Congress representing Indiana's
5th Congressional District. He served in Congress from 1983 until
2013 notably serving on the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/12/is...ally-or-irans/

I do not think the article says anything about Armenia’s friends and enemies, rather what kind of idiots become American congressmen.

His logic is so flawed its ridicules.

.

[Mher]

Re: Regional geopolitics

Just read this and see who Armenia's friends and enemies are.



IS ARMENIA AMERICA'S ALLY OR IRAN'S?

Daily Caller
March 12 2015

by Dan Burton, Former Congressman

http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/12/is...ally-or-irans/

He's paid for his prostitution work as a civilian. He doesn't dictate or influence any policy. So I fail to see how this is a representation of who Armenia's allies are. I'm sure similar junk gets pushed by Azerbaijan in other countries too.

The Azerbaijan America Alliance Announces Former Congressman Dan Burton as Chairman of the Board

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/the-azerbaijan-america-alliance-announces-former-congressman-dan-burton-as-chairman-of-the-board-191097441.html

Also, I don't think anyone was trying to suggest America is Armenia's ally, or should be in some future point...

[Haykakan]

Re: Regional geopolitics

I agree that this article is not the exact representation of reality but this article is a piece of the overall puzzle that defines USA/Armenia relations. Many decades of refusing to recognize the genocide, many decades of helping our enemies, many decades of promising help but then backing out, Doing nothing when gross injustice is committed against us(Sufarov) and demanding injustice instead(asking us to release the azeri murderers). If this is "prostitution work" then it highlights the corrupt system that is the USA today. the fact that you guys try in vain to make excuses in defending the undefendable shows just how blinded and brainwashed you are.