Regional geopolitics

[Vrej1915]

Re: Regional geopolitics

http://www.eufunds.bg/en/

http://www.agrilandsales.com/bulgarian_farmland_news-75.html

[Hakob]

Re: Regional geopolitics

Looking at EU conduct in Ukraine. Specifically double standards in policies and media blockade or outright missinformation, I hink the end gme is the same for both EU or EEU. Diffrence is just one puts a soft pilow under heads of countries, while the other is more rude.
The question is with whom are we more connected with and who is geoplotitically closer at influencing most in our area.
Security is number one. Even with all the critics about arms supply or double game, I still don't see any alternative options from west that can fulfill our needs.
Lets face it, Eurasian economic Union will never be an equal competitor with west economically or innovatively. It's value will be natural resources and barter and profit distribution coming from it. Since the economic equilibrium is shifting from manufacturing and services to natural resources and controll of them by day, EEU has or will have some good options at prosperity. The point for us is the infiltration and bringing back home a bit bigger share than our country is allocated.
Remember the facts that in Soviet Union, Armenia being very small in every way had secured a bigger share for itself than any comparable population area, exept places like Moscow or Leningrad.
I believe in Armenian Business savvy. Also it could be that in just like SSSR, Armenia could become an IT center for EEU economy.
Most depends from us. The socioeconomic situation has to be improved in Armenia.
By the way, with entry into EEU, I see a better possibility for opposition in replacing current ruling government. Once, oposition will stop being synonimus with Prowest orange movement (since after entry to EEU, this political struggle will quiet down, and moscows fears with it), it will be easier to concentrate on fight against oligarkhy and corruption. At least reigning on those oligarkhs as much as in russian federation will be a big breakthrough.
As I said before, we've got to go behind this East -west divide as soon as posible. I don't see at this moment Prowest opposition succeding accept creatng unnecesary and divisive cyvil strife.
Once the choice is made and completed, the political field will be more clearer and more safe for internal political confrontations.
Actually, I will welacome those.

[Vrej1915]

Re: Regional geopolitics

Looking at EU conduct in Ukraine. Specifically double standards in policies and media blockade or outright missinformation, I hink the end gme is the same for both EU or EEU. Diffrence is just one puts a soft pilow under heads of countries, while the other is more rude.
The question is with whom are we more connected with and who is geoplotitically closer at influencing most in our area.
Security is number one. Even with all the critics about arms supply or double game, I still don't see any alternative options from west that can fulfill our needs.
Lets face it, Eurasian economic Union will never be an equal competitor with west economically or innovatively. It's value will be natural resources and barter and profit distribution coming from it. Since the economic equilibrium is shifting from manufacturing and services to natural resources and controll of them by day, EEU has or will have some good options at prosperity. The point for us is the infiltration and bringing back home a bit bigger share than our country is allocated.
Remember the facts that in Soviet Union, Armenia being very small in every way had secured a bigger share for itself than any comparable population area, exept places like Moscow or Leningrad.
I believe in Armenian Business savvy. Also it could be that in just like SSSR, Armenia could become an IT center for EEU economy.
Most depends from us. The socioeconomic situation has to be improved in Armenia.
By the way, with entry into EEU, I see a better possibility for opposition in replacing current ruling government. Once, oposition will stop being synonimus with Prowest orange movement (since after entry to EEU, this political struggle will quiet down, and moscows fears with it), it will be easier to concentrate on fight against oligarkhy and corruption. At least reigning on those oligarkhs as much as in russian federation will be a big breakthrough.
As I said before, we've got to go behind this East -west divide as soon as posible. I don't see at this moment Prowest opposition succeding accept creatng unnecesary and divisive cyvil strife.
Once the choice is made and completed, the political field will be more clearer and more safe for internal political confrontations.
Actually, I will welacome those.

1/ There is no such Pro West structured opposition in Armenia, as in Ukrain, or Georgia, etc..., the supposed opposition, is largely artificial, a toy in the hands of the regime, and claiming day and night their readiness to accept any russian diktat, provided they return to power, to plunder as they once did under MNA-Levon.

2/ Return to CCCP is not as accurate as a description. Probably more realistic would be return to Russian Empire of the Tzarist times. The CCCP was a historical accident, that will never return in its essence, since there is no such ideology in offer. The `new/old` Russian empire is as capitalist and rude, as any other entity, as was the case of Tsarist Russia. So the dreams of a new ASR are non substantial in any scenario. What did happen in the CCCP was, and can`t return. At best, we will have the autonomy of an oblast, like Kalmukia or Tatarstan. As we are not rich in natural resources, the best we can hope, is some share for the future `Erivan`oblast, in the Molybden and Copper exported, rather than full `Talan` as of now.... If anybody else than the Tsar of Russia will have any say, that will be the Kazakh Khan.....

3/ No Empire can last, relying only on natural resources, however huge they may be, in the XXI century. Specially when they have a shrinking population, and a huge, empty Sibir, next to the worlds most populated, and probably next N1 power. So the new Russian Empire is condemned, before its proclamation, rather sooner than later.

4/ Accepting as granted, the security garantee from Russia is very ungrounded. One needs to analyse what really happened between 1991-94, who did garantee what, and for how long? A honest and fact based analysis will show, that while roles were modified in both directions during all this vital period, our security was not, and thanks God for that, an object of interest only for Moskwa. The only power that was our ally from day 1 to the end, was our southern neighbor.

5/ While having some objective grounds, comparing the situation with beginning of XX century is not serious. The games, risks, and center of powers are not same. Regional powers, means of intervention, neither.... some of the changes are good, some others are bad.

6/ Major changes, put aside of the major two players that were non existent on global scale (US and China):
- Europe is no more the center of decision, with conflicting interests between France, UK and Germany, but yet unorganised, nevertheless virtually unique player (reserves on the UK)
- Iran, inexistant in the XX, is one of the three main regional players on the rise, and the only one in the region, with whom we have no conflicting strategic interests.
- Turkey is not the sick man of Europe, Europeans wanted to share, but a rising, pretentious entity, claiming global place, and center of a would be Turan. Contrary to 1900, technologically, Turkey is the best armed, compared to Russia and Iran, and less and less dependant on European know how. This same dangerous factor, is the reason, the EU (France/Germany/Poland) have strategic interest in any INDEPENDANT, or if possible allied force, able to contain Turkish threat.
- The US has a conflicting relationship with EU, as a potential threat if unified (since technologically and economically equal), and has used Turkey, as a tool to destroy the potential contender, but yet, for the last decade, sharing the objective of containment, when Turkey began to pretend to much bigger role, than what the US was ready to offer. So, partially, our strategic interests do coincide with the US, as long as the US is bullish. Things go bad, when they turn bearish...
The return of an agressive Russian Empire, aspiring to expand, is the best argument, strengtening the turkish hand for the US (much less for the EU, for whom, the turkish threat is such, that the Russian gestures will never reach (put aside Poland and the ex easterners).
- For the US, and the EU, there is no much choice, when it comes to conter Turkey on the south-east. Kurds or Armenians. Whit our suicidal policies, we do not let them much choice...


7/ The Armenian factor as a such, was perceived as a danger, not only for Turks, but for Russia, since ever. No need to mention soviet period. But we can recall objective collaboration of Tzarist Russia with the Osmans just before and after 1912, or 1875.... (remember Kukunyan? Remember 1905-07?? Remember confiscation of `Azkayin galvazk`, and persecution of the Armenian APOSTOLIC church, perceived as ENEMY of ORTHODOXY???) . We were interesting only in times of need, during active fighting against the ottomans, or as sheep, to fill the place of the expelled muslims in Northern Kavkaz, Abkhazia.....

8/ Tzarist Russia , most of the time (put aside the first years after conquest in XVIII cent) never, objectively helped the strengtening of an Armenian factor, inside eastern Armenia. Contrary, it did its best, to divide and rule, always at our expense (eastern Armenia was divided artificially, to make us minority in Georgian provinces, or muslim ones (Lori, Javakhk in Tiflis), Artsakh and Zankezur in Elizavetpol, etc.... The real and only objective reason was our blind Russophilia. We would never protest, no matter how hard they would threat us (after 6 centuries of muslim yoke), while muslims or Georgians needed to be bribed...
The proportions you gave were first inaccurate, second the `purification` was not due to russian policy, rather a combination of 2 main factors:
a- All mixed regions, generally more prosperous and rich, ended out of the borders of the Armenian CP, so with it, automatically their muslims... and not due to purification (from the original 90.000 Km2 of eastern Armenia under russian control in 1914, only less than 30.000 ended in the Armenian CP+++): thanks to Soviet policy.
b- The few districts that were cleansed, were not due to Russian or Soviet policy, but thanks to a handful realistic minds, of our own: namely Rupen, Njdeh, Tro... . ( Harg tchem dessnum sa ankleren krel, payts yete kez bedk a, garam Hayerenov, arantzin tvargel kyugh ar kyugh, ov yerp a um makrel....). Contrary to your assumtion, after the return of soviet yoke, most of the few districts cleansed, ending in ACCP, did saw return of their muslims..., exeption being Talin, while trhe opposite never happened, neither in Northern Artsakh, Nakhitchevan AR, in the rest of Azarbaijan, inside NKAO, or inside Georgia (Treghk, Javakhk, etc...)

9/ If history has to teach us lessons, concerning Armenian-Russian relashionship, we must accept sad reality:
Russia`s policy was favorable to us, ONLY when Russia was weak and defeated, on the retreat.
Each time Russia was expending and self confident, we were treated as `granted mujiks`, good for any advanturus, however unlikely barter, to please the turks....

[Vrej1915]

Re: Regional geopolitics

Yet,
frankly speaking, I do not see the necessity, for Russia, to built the ST according pre-Khrim plans.
The only advantage would be, avoiding to pay new studies, new files and and Ok-s from different states....which is not much, when it comes to the financial benefits, of changing the plan all together.
If they do so, they will shift turkish EEZ, thus will not pay billions of commission for nothing to Turkey, and probably not use anymore Bulgaria as a terminus to their pipe on shore from Khrim, rather Romania.
No need to mention, the huge cost effectiveness of a short shallow water pipe from Khrim to Romania, compared to deep-sea, long and hard to built line from Northern Kavkaz to Bulgaria....
So I`m not sure, Bulgaria really looses anything.
I bet, they are out of the plan already, and try to get most benefit from EU as compensation, for their `sacrifice`.
I will really not be surprised.

After second taught,
I think all this is just a part of the propaganda war.
News of an unofficial veto of the EU(off course with US blessing or inspiration) was around in concerned circles much before Khrim, at the beginning of Maidan episode.
So, as a matter of fact, much before Russia did anything serious on the ground, while Putin taught he had the upper hand via Yanukovitch, this South Stream project, at least first version, was effectively vetoyed.
After Khrim, all the same, even with a EU blessing, the project turns senseless.
So, perfectly aware of the reality, Bulgarians try to grab something in concession for their loss from Brussells, and the EU/US do play the fool game, just to give the impression of a success, in their sanctions policy.
Won`t be surprised, if Russia does protest, to give the change, in same spirit, while knowing perfectly all the gesture is BS.
Better to protest about a harmless act, to avoid a real sanction.....

[Vrej1915]

Re: Regional geopolitics

US delegation told by White House: Don’t leave talks with Iran without an “improved” interim deal
DEBKAfile
June 8, 2014



The US delegation to the bilateral talks with Iranian officials taking place in Geneva on June 9-10 has been directed by the White House not to leave the table empty-handed. The meeting was initiated for a supreme effort to cover up the fact that the P5+1 negotiations with Iran are at an impasse, with no chance of achieving their goal of a final nuclear accord by the July deadline – or even by the extended timeline of Jan. 15, 2015 (first revealed by DEBKAfile on May 24.), and have something to show for the venture into nuclear diplomacy.
A US official said that the bilateral stage was fitted in ahead of the full-dress round between all six powers and Iran on June 16-20 “to engage in as much active diplomacy a we can to test whether we can reach a diplomatic solution with Iran on its nuclear program.”
The avowed objective which the negotiations started out with, of a comprehensive agreement finally setting to rest the issues of Iran’s nuclear program, has obviously been dropped from US officialese. But the optimistic comments of “progress” accompanying round after round of failed discussions had to be explained away.
To this end, US President Barack Obama whipped out the undercover team which had been running his back-channel to Tehran from Oman in the past year. It was on that track that the real business was contracted between Washington and Tehran, whereas the P5+1 forum was pretty much a showpiece (as DEBKAfile reported.)
Therefore, for the Geneva meeting starting Monday, US Deputy Secretary of State Bill Burns, who headed the back-channel team in Oman, was brought out in the open. He supersedes Under Secretary of State Wendy Sherman, who failed to make any headway in the formal rounds of talks. With him is another team member, Vice President Biden’s national security advisor Jake Sullivan.
President Obama brought the team out for a last-ditch effort to save the day because of four developments:
1. Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has forbidden President Hassan Rouhani and Foreign Minister Mohamed Javad Zarif to make any further concessions, especially on uranium enrichment and nuclear-capable ballistic missiles, thus foredooming to failure the diplomatic process Obama so cherished. Khamenei dug in his heels after he heard the US president virtually rescinding America’s option against Iran in his West Point speech.
2. Obama and his advisers came to the conclusion that the most the Iranians can be expected to cede – and only then in the second half of 2014 - is an improved version of the interim nuclear accord struck by the six powers and Iran last November.
DEBKAfile’s Washington sources report that William Burns is under orders from the White House to clinch an “improved interim accord” in Geneva. This is vitally important in order to turn the failed nuclear negotiations around and hold them up as a success.
3. Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi announced Saturday that Iran would take part in the bilateral talks, but would go straight from the meeting with the US delegation to a separate one with Russian negotiators in Rome on June 11-12.
Tehran has thus provided itself with the option of improving on Washington’s offer by getting a better deal from Moscow. This maneuver also brings to the attention of the Obama administration that Iran means henceforth to line up its Middle East policy and strategy with Moscow.
The American source commented wryly that the two-day Geneva encounter would undoubtedly provide the stage for further US concessions if the delegation wishes to come out with any sort of accord in hand.

[Vrej1915]

Re: Regional geopolitics

First big Syrian rebel tank, artillery attack on southern army position
DEBKAfile June 7, 2014,

The Syrian civil war took a dramatic turn in the South Saturday with the first major rebel attack with tanks and artillery. It was staged against the important Syrian army Tel Jam’a position in Deraa, DEBKAfile’s military sources report. This was the first time in the more than three-year war that the rebels had fielded a large, well-ordered force armed with tanks and heavy 120mm mortars. Tel Jam’a commands the Deraa-Damascus and Deraa-Quneitra highways. The rebels’ takeover of this key Syrian army post would enable them to cut the Syrian 60th Brigade off from its supply bases and reinforcements.

[Haykakan]

Re: Regional geopolitics

"Accepting as granted, the security garantee from Russia is very ungrounded. One needs to analyse what really happened between 1991-94, who did garantee what, and for how long? A honest and fact based analysis will show, that while roles were modified in both directions during all this vital period, our security was not, and thanks God for that, an object of interest only for Moskwa. The only power that was our ally from day 1 to the end, was our southern neighbor. "

What a joke and pile of bs. I guess the turks did not attack us because they had guilt feelings about the whole genocide thing? Never mind 70 years of security, never mind that our biggest enemy has not dared to attack little ole Armenia in 90 years..they must be terrified of the likes of Vrej maybe that is why they did not attack..what a pile of utter bs.

[Vrej1915]

Re: Regional geopolitics

"Accepting as granted, the security garantee from Russia is very ungrounded. One needs to analyse what really happened between 1991-94, who did garantee what, and for how long? A honest and fact based analysis will show, that while roles were modified in both directions during all this vital period, our security was not, and thanks God for that, an object of interest only for Moskwa. The only power that was our ally from day 1 to the end, was our southern neighbor. "

What a joke and pile of bs. I guess the turks did not attack us because they had guilt feelings about the whole genocide thing? Never mind 70 years of security, never mind that our biggest enemy has not dared to attack little ole Armenia in 90 years..they must be terrified of the likes of Vrej maybe that is why they did not attack..what a pile of utter bs.

Ba hooooooooooooooo
Bidza mart yess, targi eli.....

REMIND THE RULES FOR YOU:
Rules of the game:
1- Stick to the Content.
2- If you have a problem with the Contender, be kind and well educated, go to:

http://forum.hyeclub.com/showthread....llowed-to-read

3- When unhappy about what you read, before reacting, You have permission to use your mind.
4- If you have an objection, respect rule N 1.

[Vrej1915]

Re: Regional geopolitics

http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2014/05/27/sept-graphiques-pour-comprendre-la-nouvelle-donne-energetique-mondiale_4426865_3244.html

http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/infographie/2014/06/02/les-principaux-gazoducs-en-europe_4430317_3244.html

[Vrej1915]

Re: Regional geopolitics

Ess el lsetzink.....
Shutov rusnere mez gabatzutzen, vor arekage ganatch a..., yev lav ganenk, yergu tzerov mer kerezmane porenk, hanun medzen russatz gayssri...

-----

Քաղաքագետ. Թուրքիայի ասոցատիվ անդամակցությունը ԵՏՄ-ին կկանխի նրա ագրեսիվ գործողությունները հետխորհրդային միջավայրում


Հունիս 08, 2014

Թուրքիայի ասոցատիվ մասնակցությունը կօգնի նրան ներգրավել Եվրասիական տնտեսական միության համագործակցության մեջ եւ այդ կերպ թույլ չտալ Թուրքիայի ագրեսիվ գործողությունները հետխորհրդային միջավայրում: Այդ մասին NEWS.am-ի թղթակցի հետ զրույցում հայտարարել է ռուս քաղաքագետ Միխայիլ Ալեքսանդրովը՝ մեկնաբանելով Ղազախստանի նախագահի հայտարարությունն այն մասին, որ Թուրքիան ապագայում կարող է ԵՏՄ ասոցատիվ անդամ դառնալ:

Նրա խոսքով՝ ԵՏՄ-ին Թուրքիայի ասոցատիվ անդամակցության գաղափարը վատը չէ, քանի որ նախկինում Նազարբաեւն առաջարկում էր Թուրքիան ներառել Եվրասիական միության կազմում, ինչն իրականում անիրական է: «Իսկ ահա ասոցատիվ անդամակցությունը մի շարք այլ պետությունների հետ, բոլորովին այլ հարց է, ինչպես օրինակ Մոնղոլիան, Աֆղանստանն, Իրանը: Ասոցատիվ անդամներն, ինչպես երեւում է, ինչ-որ առավելություններ ունեն ԵՏՄ հետ առեւտրում, կարող են մասնակցել ԵՏՄ որոշ նիստերի դիտորդի կարգավիճակում, իրենց տեսակետն առեւտրական, տնտեսական հարցերում»,- նշել է Միխայիլ Ալեքսանդրովը: Նա կարծում է, որ նման ձեւաչափը շատ շահավետ կարող էր լինել, քանի որ թույլ կտար ընդլայնել եվրասիական շուկան: «Մենք ընդամենը 170 մլն ենք, իսկ եթե հավելենք Իրանին, Թուրքիային, Աֆղանստանին եւ Մոնղոլիային, ապա մենք շատ լավ շուկա կունենանք. այդ ժամանակ 300 մլն կլինենք: Դա արդեն համեմատելի է ԱՄՆ-ի եւ ԵՄ հետ»,- ընդգծել է քաղաքագետը, նաեւ հավելելով, որ Թուրքիայի ասոցատիվ անդամակցության գաղափարը վերացնում է բոլոր հակասությունները, որոնք ծագել են Ռուսաստանի եւ Ղազախստանի միջեւ:

Հիշեցնենք, որ Ղազախստանի նախագահ Նուրսուլթան Նազարբաեւը Բոդրումում թուրքալեզու պետությունների համագործակցության խորհրդի IV գագաթաժողովի արդյունքների հիման վրա ճեպազրույցում հայտարարել է. «ԵՏՄ-ն բաց է այլ պետությունների անդամակցության համար, օրինակ, Թուրքիան եւ մյուս երկրները կարող են ապագայում տվյալ միության ասոցատիվ անդամներ դառնալ»: Ղազախստանի նախագահը նաեւ նշել է, որ միությանը ծրագրում են միանալ Հայաստանն ու Ղըրղըզստանը, իսկ մի շարք այլ երկրներ հետաքրքրություն են ցուցաբերում:


Լուրեր Հայաստանից - NEWS.am