Regional geopolitics

[Serjik]

Re: Regional geopolitics

The frenchies cannot be trusted just like the brits and the ameros. But we have fake nationalists like vrej the fake war veteran that will bend over for frenchies any day because it makes him feel like a cultured westerner. LOL

The US has put in place a government in Kiev that is taking its orders from the EU/NATO. How independent is Ukraine now?

Which countries are truly independent?

What does the US or France or Germany have to do with Ukraine? The name "ukraine" never applied to a large section from the present Russian border to Odessa which for centuries was known as Russia


It would be highly dangerous to believe anything that Mr Hollande has to say

People easily forget how France gave support to Armenian autonomy to Cilicia in 1916 and then completely abandoned the survivors of the genocide who had returned there

Another recent example of French deception: In 1993 France sent aid to Nakhijeven, claiming it was under blockade by Armenia (but that territory has borders with Iran and Turkey)

The territory that was under real blockade was Karabakh, but France never showed any interest in helping it

[UrMistake]

Re: Regional geopolitics

Your Russiophobia is entering new phase. You must be clinically insane or delusional to think we were in a better position back then than today. Oh bro, I forgot you get your news and history lessons from a CIA run think tank like Lra-glir LOL

Now wait a minute Serjik ..Vrej might write xxxxy things from xxxxy Lragir but he is right on that one .

All the above said is right and clearly hit the point.

[Haykakan]

Re: Regional geopolitics

Now wait a minute Serjik ..Vrej might write xxxxy things from xxxxy Lragir but he is right on that one .

All the above said is right and clearly hit the point.

No he is not right at all. He has typical mentality of dashnaks who have much more hair then brains. It is thinking like this that got us into things like the genocide. Lets take up arms against those we have no chance of beating and lets rely on intervantion from vague promises made by distant powers and lets expose our unarmed population many of whome do not even support us to death and destruction while giving them no way to defend themselves. Reliance on USA is just as stupid and idiotic as reliance on france was. No we will not subject our population to massacre again because of poorly planned reckless adventures initiated by idiots. We must consolidate as much as we can from kharabagh and await our next opportunity patiently. Russia has no interest in a strong Armenia and despite the fact that i have said this many times i am still branded rusophile by idiots. Russia may not want a strong Armenia but she does want a Turkish wedge and she cannot do this without us. We must be patient and await our opportunities. We must recognize opportunities when they are there and take advantage of them for they are not many. I do not understand why exactly but forum members here seems to be suffering from mass amnesia or a huge blindspot. The Azeris were weak when we beat them-they had no moral fortitude to fight and were not fighting for their lives as Armenians were. The amnesia and the blindspot are references to Turkey. We seem to forget about the giant killer of Armenians next door to us. Yeh ok so spit on Russias face go to the west and then watch the west sit by as you get slaughtered yet again. Fool me once shame on you- fool me twice shame on me. What the turcks did to us was horrible and it was very much concieved by them but if we let this happen again then we will only have ourselves to blame. Successful nations learn from history idiot nations become history.

[UrMistake]

Re: Regional geopolitics

He is still right about his 2 and 3 part .

[Haykakan]

Re: Regional geopolitics

[QUOTE=UrMistake;350925]He is still right about his 2 and 3 part .[
Yes i agree with much of these points as well. Sovereignty is and should be our goal but Vrej is under the illusion that Armenia has the power to act in its own interest all the time or perhaps most of the time but this is dead wrong. I do not say this because i enjoy it but Armenia really is that weak and we must thread carefully as we take advantage of our opportunities without angering our master. And yes you do need to understand that Russia is our master now and anything else is an illusion..not because i like Russia but because this is the fact on the ground. Nations do not grow unless they achieve sovereighnty and i do not agree with many here that sovereignty is a relative thing and that no one really has it..to understand what it means we should look at china and india. Both of these countries were in stagnation while under british rule and attempted multiple times to rebel and were defeated. They continued to stagnate until they finely successfully overthrew the british and it was only after this that they gained sovereignty and started growing into powers themselves. The difference for us is that we are not China nor India and we simply do not have the manpower and resources we need to be independent. We have tobuild these things before we can demand our independence and we have to do it under the radar because quite frankly we can not survive as we are now even if russia handed us our independence today on a silver platter. The fact is we need a master now. We let the kharabagh victories go to our heads a bit too much but forget that it was Russia who prevented the turk from helping its relatives to the east and without russia we would be dead as a nation no matter how you want to look at it. Vrej reminds me of a small child who wants to drive a car and when his parent tells him you are too young to drive a car he throws a temper tantrum - of course if he was allowed to drive the car as a small child he would crash and die perhaps killing others in the process as well..but small childeren do not think that far and that is why parents do not let you do whatever you want when you are a kid.

[Hakob]

Re: Regional geopolitics

Here is an article from Guardian. Deep in this you should see that policies inEU are becoming incoherent and irelevant. Not long before before turmoil This week's crucial vote is in Europe – but not in the European Union

If Ukraine can hold a democratic election for its president next Sunday, there's a hope it can return to peaceful negotiations
107 comments

Armed pro-Russian militants move to positions as they engage in skirmishes with Ukrainian soldiers outside Slovyansk, in eastern Ukraine. Photograph: Maxim Shipenkov/EPA
Timothy Garton Ash
Monday 19 May 2014 04.00 EDT

This week Europe will have 30 elections: 28 national ones for the European parliament, one European Union-wide vote to anoint a so-called Spitzenkandidat to lead the European commission, and Ukraine's presidential election on 25 May. Between them, they will draw the map of a continent in disarray.

Unless all the opinion polls are wrong, the 28 national elections will produce a large vote for a zoological array of "anti" parties – from Ukip in Britain, Jobbik in Hungary, the Front National in France to Syriza in Greece. Most of these are on the xenophobic right, but you can't say that of Syriza or Beppe Grillo's Five Star Movement in Italy. The one thing they all have in common is that they are anti. Anti the established order; anti the mainstream parties; anti the EU as it is at the moment.

Anti-unemployment, on the left and the right. Anti-immigration, mainly on the right. Anti-boredom too – and most mainstream European politicians can bore for Belgium.

These parties will get a lot of votes because they reflect the anger and disillusionment of a lot of Europeans. People feel that their lives are getting worse, one way or another, and that Europe has become part of the problem rather than the solution.



According to the regular Eurobarometer poll, trust in the EU across its member states had sunk from as high as 50% in autumn 2004 to 31% at the end of last year. Although a recent Pew poll showed a slight upturn in favourable views, it also found that two-thirds of EU citizens feel their voices do not count and the EU does not understand the needs of its citizens. Turnout in every successive election to the European parliament since 1979 has declined, while distrust of it has soared. And yet, under the Lisbon treaty, it will have more powers than ever. Formally speaking, most of what the EU does now requires the parliament's assent.

Euro-idealists have a logical answer to this problem: more democracy. Hence the idea of what in most European languages are called Spitzenkandidaten: leading candidates for president of the European commission from the main pan-EU groupings of political parties. Did you watch their televised debate on Eurovision last Thursday? Go on, surprise me. Really? And did you stay awake?

Say what you like about the Eurovision song contest: the staging is spectacular and acts like the raunchy Polish faux-folk girls and Austrian drag queen Conchita Wurst are fun. Hard to believe it was the same Eurovision that produced this dreary show, under a blue-drape ceiling that seemed ready to collapse on the contestants at any moment. The Green candidate, Ska Keller, stood out visually and with her no-nonsense style from the men in suits, but then she started saying things like "unfortunately, we missed the chance in the last multiannual financial framework".

Anyone who thinks a combination of Spitzenkandidaten and more power to the European parliament is going to solve the problem of popular trust needs to think again. The victorious Spitzenkandidat may anyway not be the best person to head the European commission, which is meant to be above the party-political fray.

And if, as seems quite possible, national leaders decide to propose someone else, the whole thing will have been a farce. Back in 1979 it was a perfectly logical idea to suppose that direct elections to the European parliament would gradually create Europe-wide parties, politics, media and eventually a European demos. But it simply hasn't happened. European politics remain overwhelmingly national, played out in different languages in national media.

A large vote for the anti-parties will mean the European parliament buildings in Brussels and Strasbourg become glasshouses full of people throwing stones; but the mainstream parties will then pull together to create a de facto grand coalition.

The sausage factory of European law-making will become more inspissated than ever, further compromised by the extraordinary opportunities it gives for lobbyists to insert themselves into the sausage-making process.

Not to mention a profligate expenses system that has enabled the Ukip leader, Nigel Farage, to use his allowances as a member of the European parliament to pay his German wife to help him bite the hand that feeds them both. Taken all in all, these 28+1 elections are most unlikely to be the creative shock our union needs to galvanise it into effective action for its more than 500 million citizens.

Meanwhile, there is again war in Europe. Not the great war of 1914 or 1939, but a bloody little one, like former Yugoslavia in the 1990s. The annexation of Crimea was made possible by a Russian military operation, and the downward spiral of paramilitary violence in eastern Ukraine has horrible echoes of the beginning of the Bosnian conflict.

So the most important of all this week's elections is the one that takes place in Europe but not in the EU. If Ukraine can successfully hold a democratic presidential election across most of its territory next Sunday, then there is a chance – just a chance – that it can return to a peaceful, negotiated, constitutional process. The result of that negotiation would have to be an unambiguously independent, sovereign Ukraine, but one with far-reaching devolution to its very different provinces.

And who, in the mighty EU, with the world's largest economy, can make a difference there? Not the Spitzenkandidaten, to be sure – all of whom waffled away in different directions when asked about Ukraine ("We need a lot of dialogue," said Keller. "We shouldn't have fascists there," exclaimed Alexis Tsipras of Syriza. Who exactly did he have in mind?). Not the European parliament.

No, it is national governments, constrained by multiple national parliaments and publics. What the EU does, with its councils of ministers and its own foreign service, is to give them ways of working closely together, and at best crafting a common strategy. Above all, it depends on Germany. If there is one country in Europe that Vladimir Putin will listen to, if there is one country in Europe that can bring together the EU's potentially large economic sticks and carrots, it is Germany.

German leaders have recently declared that they want to face up to the international responsibility that comes with their country's power. The chance has come sooner than they imagined, and in the most agonising way.

Thus today's European politics are both mind-numbingly complex and stunningly simple. Thousands of words may not capture them, but two will also do the job: Germany's call.

Twitter: @fromTGA

[Vrej1915]

Re: Regional geopolitics

[QUOTE=Haykakan;350938]

He is still right about his 2 and 3 part .[
Yes i agree with much of these points as well. Sovereignty is and should be our goal but Vrej is under the illusion that Armenia has the power to act in its ---------- whatever you want when you are a kid.

A simple question, since I tend to loose my humor with seniles arguing the necessity to abandon land, they have never seen, apart on a map:
Once you accept that you have a 'Master', and have no capacity to resist his orders:
- What will you do if he orders you to abandon not only Artsakh, but Vartenis too?? And if by any chance he orders to abandon more? And why didn't you accept the orders of your master at first hand, to begin with??? in 1988, 89, 90, 91, 92.....????

Simple question, simple answer, not capitulationist diarrhea please .

[Haykakan]

Re: Regional geopolitics

[QUOTE=Vrej1915;350942]

A simple question, since I tend to loose my humor with seniles arguing the necessity to abandon land, they have never seen, apart on a map:
Once you accept that you have a 'Master', and have no capacity to resist his orders:
- What will you do if he orders you to abandon not only Artsakh, but Vartenis too?? And if by any chance he orders to abandon more? And why didn't you accept the orders of your master at first hand, to begin with??? in 1988, 89, 90, 91, 92.....????

Simple question, simple answer, not capitulationist diarrhea please .

Its about knowing what you can and cannot get away with. Soviet Armenia had this type of relationship to and gave up some things but got some things to. Things like peace and prosperity, intellectual and scientific, and artistic progress have value and they existed in soviet Armenia and can exist again. What good is the land if there are no Armenians living on it? Having land is meaningless if you are not willing to use it, live on it. The master may be in a strong position but there is still negotiation involved and opportunity for both to get most of what they want. It is important to understand who you are dealing with because it may determine how much you will have to give and how much you can take. In this situation even the weak side has some bargaining chips - they may not be much in Armenias case but we do have some. Soviet Armenia was better then anything we have seen since.Quality of life for the average Armenian was way better then despite 25 years of "progress" despite closed economy. We had population growth along with elevation in living standards. Now we have freedom where you are free to leave the country and most who could did just that and are still doing it. People living outside of the country have the freedom to move into Armenia but you do not see that happening much because of lack of opportunities and saaging living conditions for the masses with the threat of war hanging over your head. I will give you a real life example so perhaps it will help you understand the importance better of security and prosperity. My mom had three brothers and one sister when they lost their mother while they were all children, her father was wounded in WW2 and was an invalid because of it. These kids were not only able to grow but my mom became a doctor, my uncle became one of the heads at a major museum, my other aunt and uncle did not want to get educated yet they to did well and supported families through good jobs and enjoyed good standard of living. Now ask yourself how would this family fair in todays Armenia? How about in todays USA? The answers are there we just need to open our eyes. Eurasion union will give us the chance not to just reach the living standards of the soviet days but to surpass them by leaps and bounds. Why do you think the USA is so up in arms in trying to stop it from happening? Notice Vrej that it is not Russia who is making headlines saying Armenia must give up all of the lands it gained but the representative of the USA yeh you know where the all mighty diaspora and their super duper interest groups have soo much power. This aint no "capitulationist diarrhea" these are the facts. If we can get peace and prosperity by giving up mostly empty lands so be it but not the way the USA representative wants it done. He wont let us keep even Lachine which is insane! He wants the refugees returned ok well you know we had a lot of refugees to but he ignores them as if they never existed. Is this the better alternative?I think not. We can negotiate with our "master" and with our enemy and come to a solution all can live with but it will take time and the right conditions to achieve this and i do believe we are getting there. The sad reality no matter how you look at it is that we are not going to survive alone right now and there is no better master for us then the one we got now. We do not have any real choices but to accept these two facts as they are and find as much wiggle room as we can under the present conditions. I think Serj tried to test the limits of this wiggle room and he knows what those limits are now.

[Vrej1915]

Re: Regional geopolitics

[QUOTE=Haykakan;350943]

This aint no "capitulationist diarrhea" these are the facts. If we can get peace and prosperity by giving up mostly empty lands so be it but not the way the USA representative wants it done.

1/Ok, so I have back a capitulationist diarhea....

2/You are Ok with giving lands; for some already past economic specters of proto-soviet era, that are not even actual. Tells a lot, about the seriousness of the talk, coming from an economics teacher, mastering his art in the West.....

3/ As usual, you understood nothing from all you read, and remain volontary blind. No cure to that. Motto is 'SLAVA RASSIA, Period!"....

4/ The return of territories is a Russian plan, for more than a decade. You are ok with it, since it is Russian plan..... bright!

5/ You did not answer the question, the unique one asked: What will you do, if your Master, orders you to give much more, than your mind, however slaveminded, can't perceive?

[Haykakan]

Re: Regional geopolitics

Vrej there is no point in talking to you. Take a matroshka and use it for target practice if you like i do not give a xxxx. I am done with you.