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 Mher View Post
    I agree with the first part of your statement, but I couldn't disagree more with the second. What incentive would America ever have in recognizing the Artsakh Republic. Their policy is, and always will be that there is the NKA Oblast, and then there is the "occupied territories". Russia's policies might be self serving, they might be ultimately hurtful to the Armenian cause, but they are helpful in that no de jure final settlement equals de facto settlement in our favor. So who does Russia stop from NKR. I don't think too many countries are lining up to do so. Maybe Uruguay lol, but I doubt Russia has much influence there. Also recognition doesn't mean anything if you can be blown to pieces by the other side. So what if anyone recognizes Artsakh and Azerbaijan has the upper hand to retake it. It would make no difference
    First, it's not my statement.....

    1/ Things change, and are not frozen, specially in our region. It is the duty of each national leadership, to try and take as much as possible, for their national interests, from the game of superpowers, when a possibility shows up.

    2/ The US position changed substantially in our region, from 1991... their first move was to use us among others, to brake the USSR (Hayrikyan, Levon...). Then they tried the Goble plan, which meant our neutralisation, as a factor....., in Key West they tried a Pax Americana, at the hight of their glory..... but yet again, their policy of BTC served as best guarantor of peace in the Transkavkaz. In 2008, it was their intervention, that neutralised/stopped Russia's Medvedev's plan of "land for Russian Peace".
    Think the evolution is evident.
    Nothing guarantees that things will not change on a reverse mode, to a "Goble II", but until very recently (changes may occur after Sept 3 + Khrim??), their policy in our region, specially regarding the containment of Turkey they so well ochastrated, suited quite well our national interests.
    It is the duty of our leadership, to try to get the most of it, provided we have that ambition....

    3/ On a contrary, Russia, oficially, systematically, and consistently considered Artsakh's future solution with:
    - return of territories, if not all NKR under azerbaijani rule.(as a price, for the "shift" Baku is supposed to do from the West towards Maskwa)
    - deployment of russian troops in and around Artsakh, as guarantor of russian presence in all Transkavkaz.
    - Russia systematically rejected, any pretentzia of NKR to self determination, in the aftermath of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.... same will be the case for Khrim, in a couple of months, once things will calm down there.

    4/ The independance/liberation of NKR was not the result of a backing, planning in Moskwa, Washington, or even , in much extent, in Yerevan. It was the result of the unpredictable tenacity of the Artsakhian people's will, first of all, backed by the creme of the Armenian Nation's patriotic part. Russian contribution is nil, at best, if you consider all parameters.
    Outside Armenia, if any state had any contribution in this victory, it is only our Southern neighbor....

    5/ By todays's probabilities, if any power will end up recognising NKR as an independent state, it is the US, or its "cliens", in all likelyhood, and certainly not Russia.

    -------
    NB: Granted that every actor acts according its interests, and not 'for sympathy' towards us.....

    Comment


    • Re: Regional geopolitics

      Originally Posted by Vrej1915
      U.S. Will Be First To Recognize NKR
      Originally posted by Mher View Post
      I agree with the first part of your statement, .......


      This sounds like coffeehouse conversation.

      I will believe it when I see it.
      Politics is not about the pursuit of morality nor what's right or wrong
      Its about self interest at personal and national level often at odds with the above.
      Great politicians pursue the National interest and small politicians personal interests

      Comment


      • Re: Regional geopolitics

        Originally posted by bell-the-cat View Post
        But not all "gas" is the same. There is already lng export of US gas and oil to European refineries where it is used for chemical production, and this is planned to grow. That must be because Russian gas supplies are unsuitable.


        Armenia did it partly by giving control of, or selling at discounted prices, its national assets to Russia in return for not very cheap gas. Is Ukraine going to have to start to do that with America?

        I was not referring whether the technology of LNG transportation exists or not,
        but the additional capacity to replace and reduce dependence on Russian gas.

        There aren't exactly LNG transportation ship sitting idly awaiting for their call, nor is there the excess capacity idly waiting to liquefy gas for export.

        .
        Politics is not about the pursuit of morality nor what's right or wrong
        Its about self interest at personal and national level often at odds with the above.
        Great politicians pursue the National interest and small politicians personal interests

        Comment


        • Re: Regional geopolitics

          Originally posted by Vrej1915 View Post

          3- This source, however unrealistic it might look, is at least as credible as the East Mediterranean option on the scene, for the last 5 years... (Cyprus/izrayel/Lebanon)

          4- The potential 3 sources, unless new discoveries made, for the EU are:
          - Iran
          - Central Asia (Turkmenistan)/Caspian : (remember Nabucco)
          - Esat Mediterranean I mentioned.
          This US option is supposed to add an other option, since all others are already exploited (Nort Africa/algeria, North Sea/Norway), or Russia dependant (Stockman/Arctic);

          From all these, the only certain reserves, and likely solution, as of today, is Iran: this factor is not ignored in recent shift of alliances we see ??
          And yet, at the end of the day, even for this source, one of the likely transport options might well be LNG. (See my previous posts about this one, the 3 likely pipe options, and wars in the ME, and relations with Armenia's gas network)
          I am surprised the name of Nabucco is even mentioned, it was a pipe dream and now its not even that.

          Biggest problem was its cost.

          To justify the cost there had to be the volume of gas.
          Another variable in the overall equation was, each participant country had to finance its section of the pipeline.
          As far as I recall only Turkey was prepared to finance ( its section ) because of the anticipated lucrative transportation fees.


          GAS in the Easter Mediterranean

          At present we can only assume Israel and Cyprus.
          The potential to be developed gas fields overlap their exclusive territorial waters, therefore a partnership exists.

          There are two options to transport this gas, build an LNG plant in Cyprus and ship it to any country and destination giving it independence and flexibility OR
          rely on pipelines in the “vicinity”. Here the only candidate is Turkey.

          Volume is again the decision maker.

          Israel is not over the moon about becoming an energy exporting country, she much rather keep it for internal consumption for security reasons.
          The remaining gas is not enough to make viable building an LNG plant.

          Cyprus has said it will not enter into any agreement with Turkey before the Cyprus problem is resolved.

          At present politics are in play, the powers to be are trying to force Cyprus to accept conditions that please Turkey etc.
          Any condition “imposed” will be subject to a referendum.

          Central Asia ..... Turkmenistan/Caspian

          Building any pipeline (in the Caspian) is subject to Russian agreement.
          Turkmenistan has already a long term contract to ship gas through Russia, enough said.


          Originally posted by Vrej1915 View Post
          The EU already uses LNG for the North African gas imports to South Europe.
          My reply in the previous post.

          .
          Politics is not about the pursuit of morality nor what's right or wrong
          Its about self interest at personal and national level often at odds with the above.
          Great politicians pursue the National interest and small politicians personal interests

          Comment


          • Re: Regional geopolitics

            USA recognizing NKR ... i do not see it. I do agree that the region is very fluid and is very possible for major changes to occur but simple recognition is meaningless unless security is also provided. Yes it was the people of NKR that rose up and won their freedom but it has been Russia stopping the Azeris from restarting the war. The USA is not going to put its troops in NKR and provide security indefinetly. USA policy has been destabalizing and leaving and this is not what we need in Armenia nor NKR. Armenia is in a rough neighborhood to be sure and it is this location that brings it so many problems. I can understand why our last king packed up and moved his kingdom...but the problems seem to follow him around anyways.
            Hayastan or Bust.

            Comment


            • Re: Regional geopolitics

              Originally posted by londontsi View Post
              I am surprised the name of Nabucco is even mentioned, it was a pipe dream and now its not even that.

              Biggest problem was its cost.

              To justify the cost there had to be the volume of gas.
              Another variable in the overall equation was, each participant country had to finance its section of the pipeline.
              As far as I recall only Turkey was prepared to finance ( its section ) because of the anticipated lucrative transportation fees.


              GAS in the Easter Mediterranean

              At present we can only assume Israel and Cyprus.
              The potential to be developed gas fields overlap their exclusive territorial waters, therefore a partnership exists.

              There are two options to transport this gas, build an LNG plant in Cyprus and ship it to any country and destination giving it independence and flexibility OR
              rely on pipelines in the “vicinity”. Here the only candidate is Turkey.

              Volume is again the decision maker.

              Israel is not over the moon about becoming an energy exporting country, she much rather keep it for internal consumption for security reasons.
              The remaining gas is not enough to make viable building an LNG plant.

              Cyprus has said it will not enter into any agreement with Turkey before the Cyprus problem is resolved.

              At present politics are in play, the powers to be are trying to force Cyprus to accept conditions that please Turkey etc.
              Any condition “imposed” will be subject to a referendum.

              Central Asia ..... Turkmenistan/Caspian

              Building any pipeline (in the Caspian) is subject to Russian agreement.
              Turkmenistan has already a long term contract to ship gas through Russia, enough said.




              My reply in the previous post.

              .
              however unrealistic it might look, is at least as credible as the East Mediterranean option on the scene

              Comment


              • Re: Regional geopolitics

                Ուկրաինայի զինված ուժերը պնդում են, որ հետ են մղել ռուսներին


                15.03.2014
                Ուկրաինայի պաշտպանության նախարարությունը պնդում է, որ ուկրաինական զինված ուժերը հետ են մղել ռուսական զինծառայողների՝ Ղրիմին հարակից Խերսոնի տարածաշրջանի Արբատսկայա Ստրելկա տարածք մուտք գործելու փորձը:

                Միևնույն ժամանակ, ուկրաինական սահմանապահ զորքերի խոսնակ Օլեհ Սլոբոդանը «Ասոշիեյթեդ պրեսին» հայտնել է, որ շաբաթ օրը մոտ 120 ռուսաստանցի զինծառայողներ գրավել են Ղրիմից մոտ 10 կիլոմետր հեռավորության վրա գտնվող «Ստրելկովա» գազաբաշխիչ կայանը:

                Տարբեր հաշվարկներով, Ղրիմում կա 15,000-ից 20,000 ռուս զինծառայող:

                Ուկրաինայի արտգործնախարարությունը հայտարարել է, որ Ուկրաինան «իրեն իրավունք է վերապահում գործադրել բոլոր միջոցները՝ Ռուսաստանի կողմից ռազմական ներխուժումը կանխելու համար»:

                Comment


                • Re: Regional geopolitics

                  Originally posted by Haykakan View Post
                  USA recognizing NKR ... i do not see it. I do agree that the region is very fluid and is very possible for major changes to occur but simple recognition is meaningless unless security is also provided.
                  Well US did declare that the new NKR has been holding the most democratic elections ever and are an example of how democracy works.....according to the US observers in Artsakh, so a recognition by US would not surprise me.

                  Yes it was the people of NKR that rose up and won their freedom but it has been Russia stopping the Azeris from restarting the war.
                  Bullsh1t comrade.......Security is provided by NKR defense Army that is more of a match to the mighty Azeri military.

                  The USA is not going to put its troops in NKR and provide security indefinetly. USA policy has been destabalizing and leaving and this is not what we need in Armenia nor NKR. Armenia is in a rough neighborhood to be sure and it is this location that brings it so many problems. I can understand why our last king packed up and moved his kingdom...but the problems seem to follow him around anyways.
                  Armenians will hold the ground and no King will exit stage left......there is nowhere to fking run, loosing Artsakh will be the last page of our history Comrade.
                  B0zkurt Hunter

                  Comment


                  • Re: Regional geopolitics

                    Originally posted by Eddo211 View Post
                    Well US did declare that the new NKR has been holding the most democratic elections ever and are an example of how democracy works.....according to the US observers in Artsakh, so a recognition by US would not surprise me.

                    Bullsh1t comrade.......Security is provided by NKR defense Army that is more of a match to the mighty Azeri military.

                    Armenians will hold the ground and no King will exit stage left......there is nowhere to fking run, loosing Artsakh will be the last page of our history Comrade.
                    the United States has nothing to gain from recognizing Artsakh and much to lose. For one Turkey would not allow it. Furthermore, the all powerful oil companies wouldn't find it too conducive to their business atmosphere. Third of all, America still needs Azerbaijan for its location near Iran and Afghanistan. Given all of these factors, I do not see how the United States would risk all of that to recognize Artsakh in the near future. What would it have to gain from doing so?

                    However, the region is changing rather quickly and in our favor. A few changing factors.

                    1. End to Afghanistan/improving relations with Iran are going to devalue the importance of Azerbaijan
                    2. Decrease in global oil demand + Expected decline in world oil prices + Decrease in Azeri oil ---> less importance in Azeri oil
                    3. Decrease in oil ----> decreasing military capability by Azerbaijan


                    I do not doubt that in battle Armenia by itself could have defeated Azerbaijan even in their current dystopian "golden years". after all we did it in our absolute worst days. However I rather not find out. The Russian factors helps in the very fact that it decreases the possibility of war. I think Armenia will have more freedom in its foreign policy in a few years down the line. However at the current moment, Russia is not exactly an option.
                    <<եթե զենք էլ չլինի' ես քարերով կկրվեմ>>

                    Comment


                    • Re: Regional geopolitics

                      Originally posted by Mher View Post
                      the United States has nothing to gain from recognizing Artsakh and much to lose. For one Turkey would not allow it. Furthermore, the all powerful oil companies wouldn't find it too conducive to their business atmosphere. Third of all, America still needs Azerbaijan for its location near Iran and Afghanistan. Given all of these factors, I do not see how the United States would risk all of that to recognize Artsakh in the near future. What would it have to gain from doing so?
                      Yea I know but still, I wont be surprised if they did it (or threaten to do it) to piss off Turks.

                      However, the region is changing rather quickly and in our favor. A few changing factors.

                      1. End to Afghanistan/improving relations with Iran are going to devalue the importance of Azerbaijan
                      2. Decrease in global oil demand + Expected decline in world oil prices + Decrease in Azeri oil ---> less importance in Azeri oil
                      3. Decrease in oil ----> decreasing military capability by Azerbaijan
                      good news yes.

                      I do not doubt that in battle Armenia by itself could have defeated Azerbaijan even in their current dystopian "golden years". after all we did it in our absolute worst days. However I rather not find out. The Russian factors helps in the very fact that it decreases the possibility of war. I think Armenia will have more freedom in its foreign policy in a few years down the line. However at the current moment, Russia is not exactly an option.
                      true Russia is always a factor.......but I bet you anything it is Turkey that has a bigger say telling Azerbaijan not to make move.....Turks know Azeris will loose.

                      Artsakh forces are more than ready and capable of stopping an Azeri full attack without Russia.
                      B0zkurt Hunter

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X