The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

[Haykakan]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

President Of Russia To Arrive In Armenia On State Visit On August 19

ARKA
August 17, 2010
YEREVAN

At the invitation of Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan Russian
President Dmitry Medvedev and his wife, Svetlana Medvedev will arrive
in Yerevan on August 19 for a state visit, the press office of the
Armenian state reported.

President of Russia will visit the Yerevan memorial complex of the
Armenian Genocide.

"Then, on behalf of the President of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan a state
dinner will be given in the honour of President Dmitry Medvedev at
the residence of the Armenian State", the press service stated.

On August 20, the presidents of Armenia and Russia will meet
face-to-face, followed by talks in expanded format with participation
of delegations of the two states.

To be signed is a number of treaties and agreements aimed at developing
and strengthening the Armenian-Russian strategic cooperation.

Then, at the residence of the President of Armenia a joint press
conference between Serzh Sargsyan and Dmitry Medvedev will be held.

As part of the visit of the presidents of Armenia and the Russian
Federation will visit the city of Gyumri to attend the opening ceremony
of the memorial complex called, "Kholm Chesti".

Upon completion of his state visit, the president of Russia will also
take part in the informal summit of heads of states of the Collective
Security Treaty, which will be held in Armenia, August 20-22.

[Federate]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Closer Military Ties With Armenia To Boost Russia's Regional Clout

August 12, 2010

Russia looks set to strengthen its foothold in the South Caucasus by means of a new defense agreement with Armenia that will formally make it a guarantor of the country's security and pave the way for more Russian arms supplies to Yerevan.

The deal, which may well be sealed during Russian President Dmitry Medvedev's visit to Armenia next week, will have important repercussions for the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, the No. 1 threat to peace and stability in the entire region.

In what could be an effort to placate, and gain more leverage against Azerbaijan, Moscow is at the same time reportedly planning to sell sophisticated air-defense missiles to Armenia's arch-foe. The Azerbaijani government has so far been silent over this new twist in Russian-Armenian military cooperation that could further limit its ability to win back Karabakh and the Armenian-controlled territories surrounding it by force.

The deepening of Russian-Armenian military ties will take the form of amendments to a 1995 treaty regulating the presence of a Russian military base in Armenia. Armenian officials have essentially confirmed Russian media reports that Moscow will have its basing rights extended by at least 24 years, to 2044, and that the mission of some 4,000 Russian troops headquartered in the northern Armenian city of Gyumri will be upgraded.

The Interfax news agency reported on July 30 that a relevant "protocol" submitted to Medvedev by the Russian government makes clear that the troops will have not only "functions stemming from the interests of the Russian Federation," but also "protect Armenia's security together with Armenian Army units." It also commits Russia to supplying its regional ally with "modern and compatible weaponry and special military hardware."

Russia Offers Arms

Less than two weeks later, an Armenian government commission on defense approved plans to modernize the country's armed forces and expand the domestic defense industry. Speaking to journalists after the commission meeting on August 10, Defense Minister Seyran Ohanian said Armenia would specifically seek to acquire and even manufacture long-range precision-guided weapons that would "allow us to thwart free enemy movements deep inside the entire theater of hostilities."

Although Ohanian gave no further details, it is obvious that Russia is the only plausible source of such weapons (presumably surface-to-surface missiles), as well as technology for their production. Their acquisition by the Armenian military could be facilitated by separate plans to forge close cooperation between the Armenian and Russian defense industries. Senior security officials from both countries announced unpublicized agreements to that effect after two-day talks in Yerevan in late July. According to Armenian National Security Council Secretary Artur Baghdasarian, those agreements include the establishment of joint defense ventures.

The military alliance with Russia has always been a crucial element of Armenia's national security strategy, allowing the landlocked country to receive Russian weaponry at knockdown prices or free of charge and precluding Turkey's direct military intervention in the Karabakh conflict. It is taking on greater significance now that oil-rich Azerbaijan is increasingly threatening the Armenians with another war. Fresh (and more sophisticated) arms supplies from Russia would put Armenia and its ethnic kin in Karabakh in a better position to offset Azerbaijan's ongoing military build-up fuelled by massive oil revenues. Some observers speculate that Moscow would use the new mandate of the Gyumri base to intervene militarily on the Armenian side in the event of a resumption of hostilities.

Nonetheless, not all politicians and pundits in Yerevan are happy with the planned changes in the 1995 treaty. Some of them say that the Kremlin could exploit its security guarantees to exert undue influence on Armenian government decisions and even limit Armenia's sovereignty. Baghdasarian on August 11 dismissed such claims as "absurd."

...But Also To Azerbaijan

Moscow is facing a stronger Armenian uproar over the possible sale of S-300 antiaircraft systems to Azerbaijan. The Russian daily "Vedomosti" reported on July 30 that the Azerbaijani military signed a deal in 2009 with the Rosoboroneksport state arms exporter to purchase two batteries of the surface-to-air missiles worth $300 million. Although the report was denied by Rosoboroneksport and not confirmed by the Russian Defense Ministry, it is considered credible by many in Armenia.

Opposition leaders and independent analysts there warn that the deal would change the balance of forces in the Karabakh conflict in Azerbaijan's favor. Some have accused the Russians of betrayal.

The S-300 systems may be purely defensive weapons, but the danger for the Armenian side is that they would enable Baku to secure its vital oil and gas infrastructure in the event of renewed war. Those facilities, which form the backbone of the Azerbaijani economy, are widely seen as a likely target of Armenian missile strikes. Ohanian may well have had them in mind when he noted Armenia's desire to obtain "super-modern weapons" that would enhance "our long-range strike capacity."

The reported sale of S-300s to Azerbaijan seems at odds with Russia's stated readiness to boost military support for Armenia, and is raising questions about its true intentions. Ashot Manucharian, a veteran politician who held security posts in the Armenian government in the early 1990s and has long been known for his pro-Russian political orientation, believes that all this is part of a cynical plan to keep Armenia anchored to Russia and discourage it from forging closer security links with the West. By strengthening Azerbaijan militarily, Moscow leaves Yerevan even more dependent on Russian military aid, Manucharian claimed in an August 4 interview with the daily "Hraparak."

Whatever the truth, Russia is clearly consolidating its presence in the South Caucasus, two years after effectively thwarting Georgia's accession to NATO with the 2008 wars in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. It is now digging in for the long haul in Armenia and should continue to have more influence on the Karabakh conflict than any other foreign power.

-- Emil Danielyan

http://www.rferl.org/content/Closer_Military_Ties_With_Armenia_To_Boost_Russias_Regional_Clout/2126126.html?page=1&x=1#relatedInfoContainer

[Haykakan]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

PRESIDENT SERZH SARGSYAN HAD A TELEPHONE CONVERSATION WITH THE PRESIDENT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION DMITRY MEDVEDEV

president.am
Aug 9 2010
Armenia

Today, President Serzh Sargsyan had a telephone conversation with
the President of the Russian Federation Dmitry Medvedev.

The President of Armenia once again expressed condolences and sympathy
for the victims and losses caused by the wildfires ravaging in Russia.

President Sargsyan noted that the Armenian people know too well how
important the support of friendly states is in emergency situations and
offered the assistance of the Armenian firefighters and rescue teams in
extinguishing fires and eliminating the consequences of the disaster.

The Presidents of Armenia and Russia agreed to engage Armenian
firefighters and rescue operation team in fighting this natural
disaster.

[Haykakan]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

RUSSIAN EXPERT: "MOSCOW UNDERSTANDS THERE'S NO ALLY EXCEPT YEREVAN"

Panorama
July 22 2010
Armenia

"I don't think OSCE MG activities should be optimistically or
pessimistically expressed. We should acknowledge that the conflict
should be settled by the conflict sides," Russian political expert
Albert Zulkharneev referred to NK conflict resolution in a talk with
"Day.az He said neither Moscow, nor Washington or Paris could do
anything if their recommendations are disliked by the conflict
sides. The expert said the conflict can be settled only by the
conflict sides.

"I've been Baku recently, then I met with Armenian representatives
in Moscow, and, I should point, regretfully, that the dispositions
of the sides are far from being close," Russian expert said.

To the question how Russia would act if a war starts, he said:
"Everything depends on the situation. Moscow understands they have
no other ally except Yerevan, and if they don't support Armenia,
they would have tough disposition beyond the CSTO states."

[Haykakan]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

THE END OF THE BATTLE FOR KOSOVO

U.TV

http://www.u.tv/News/The-end-of-the-battle-for-Kosovo/477010d0-a146-42ba-bdec-92365c996428

July 22 2010

Simon Tisdall: When the dust settles, common sense and self-interest
may dictate Serbia's acceptance of Kosovo's independence

Separatists, secessionists and splittists from Taiwan, Xinjiang and
Somaliland to Sri Lanka, Georgia and the West Country will welcome
today's precedent-setting legal opinion from the UN's international
court of justice effectively upholding Kosovo's unilateral declaration
of independence from Serbia.

With hindsight it seems clear the 1990 reunification of Germany ran
contrary to modern history's tide, marking a sort of last stand for
the old 19th-century model of the unitary nation state. Since the
Berlin wall came down and the Soviet Union disintegrated two years
later, things everywhere have been falling apart.

Fractious minority movements seeking recognition, autonomous rights,
or outright independence since the cold war's end loosened the global
geostrategic straitjacket have become commonplace across Europe. Spain
frets about its Basques and Catalans, the unifying impact of its
World Cup success notwithstanding. Italy's Germans often give cause
for concern.

The United Kingdom may prospectively be obliged to change its name,
should breakaway Scottish and Welsh nationalist parties have their
way. Some speak passionately of independence for the ancient kingdom
of Kernow, otherwise known as Cornwall. And if it's Kernow redux,
then why not Northumbria, Mercia, and Wessex, too? In Wiltshire they
await a new Arthur.

The accelerating trend towards the assertion of minority national,
basically tribal rights, usually defined in terms of sovereign
territory, delineated borders, ethnicity, language and history,
appears global in nature. Vuk Jeremic, Serbia's foreign minister,
who led opposition to Kosovo's UDI, suggested the fracturing of the
nation state paradigm, like cracks in glass plate, could spread widely
and do great damage.

Speaking before Kosovo's formal 2008 break with Serbia, Jeremic looked
beyond the Balkans to countries such as Sudan, a country that is likely
to break in half this winter. In Africa, he said, "there are about
50 Kosovos waiting to happen". International acceptance of Kosovo's
unilateral act "would be a very dangerous signal, a signal that
there are no rules. Serbia wants to play by the rules. You just can't
come along and say they don't matter any more." Boris Tadic, Serbia's
president, revisited this argument this week. A ruling favouring Kosovo
"would destabilise many regions of the world", he said.

Now that Serbia's worst fears have been realised, it remains to be
seen whether such dire predictions prove accurate. More prosaically,
the world court's delayed advisory opinion hardly came as a surprise
and must now be managed politically if new strife, most possibly in
ethnically mixed northern Kosovo, is to be avoided. In the end the
ruling was more a matter of hard-headed realpolitik than carefully
appraised international law.

The US, Kosovo's principal sponsor, was adamant all along the court's
opinion would have little practical impact, a view echoed by Tony
Blair, Kosovo's self-styled liberator, during a visit this week. Joe
Biden, the US vice-president, also emphasised that independence was
a done deal while affording Kosovan prime minister Hashim Thaci the
Washington red carpet treatment on Wednesday.

Independence was not primarily a matter of law, a White House spokesman
said. "We do not believe that declarations of independence are legal
acts whose legality is affirmed or denied by this international
court. They are political facts that have to be established
through political realities." The US has its own experience in this
department. In 1776, American independence came at the muzzle of a
musket, not in the form of a lawsuit against George III.

Despite their protestations, and they will be long and angry, Serbia
and its main backer, Russia, half expected this outcome. Their best
course now may be to turn it to their maximum advantage rather than
play a spoiler's game at the UN general assembly (which must endorse
the ruling). One obvious approach is to accept the EU's proposed
technical talks on creating a pragmatic modus vivendi between Belgrade
and Pristina while seeking support, as a tacit quid pro quo, for a
renewed effort to advance Serbia's EU membership bid.

The US may think it's got ahead. But Russia could win both ways, not
least in terms of its Georgia intervention. The court's failure to
oppose Kosovo's secession "would automatically weaken the west's case
against the recognition of [the independence of] Abkhazia and South
Ossetia by Russia," said Petr Iskenderov of the Russian Academy of
Science in International Affairs magazine. Moscow could also use the
decision to push for an "overhaul" of the international community's
approach to frozen disputes in the Balkan and Caspian regions that
affect its interests, such as that between Armenia and Azerbaijan
over the breakaway enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh, he said.

Serbia now faces the prospect of increased international recognition
of Kosovo, the country's prospective membership of the UN, and the
permanent loss of a territory its regards as a defining part of its
sovereignty and history. At the same time, the gates to Europe swing
open. It is a bitter pill to swallow. It could trigger domestic
political upheavals. But when the dust settles, common sense and
self-interest may dictate acceptance of the outcome. Like the Battle
of Kosovo Field in 1389 that was so critical to Serbia's identity,
the modern day battle for Kosovo is lost.

[Haykakan]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

ARMENIAN POLITICIAN: RUSSIAN AND THE UNITED STATES HAVE FOUND A COMMON LANGUAGE IN THE SOUTH CAUCASUS

ArmInfo
2010-07-09 16:43:00

ArmInfo. As a result of "restart" of relations between Russia and
the United States, these powers have agreed their positions in the
South Caucasus, Chairman of the Constitutional Law Union Party Hayk
Babukhanyan said at today's press conference.

According to him, the core of the agreement reached is that the
specified region is the "zone of influence" of Russia; on the other
hand, Moscow reckons with Washington's interests connected with the
transit of energy resources. Babukhanyan also thinks that the period
of "color revolutions" in the post-Soviet area and the NATO expansion
to the East have completed, and at the moment the process of the CIS
countries' consolidation is going on according to Europe's example.

Moreover, he said that Washington will not hinder the consolidation of
the CIS countries, which is going on under Moscow's "patronage". "It
is much better for the USA to see Russians in Middle Asia than
various Islamic movements which threaten both the USA and Russia",-
he stressed.

[Eddo211]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

However she didn't refer to Artsakh as occupied territory and she did not refer to Azerbaijan as a sovereign state like she did to Georgia. She also visited the AG memorial.....not that I would defend her or anything, far from it. The West wants both borders opened but they have no real control in the region.

I know that a lot of Azeris and Turks are very upset about this to say the least....hahaha

[Haykakan]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

I wish Russia would say the same about Artsakh as it does here.

RUSSIAN FOREIGN MINISTRY ACCUSES HILLARY CLINTON OF BIAS

PanARMENIAN.Net
July 7, 2010 - 20:22 AMT 15:22 GMT

The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has noted the statements by
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during her visit to Tbilisi on
July 5 that the United States will not accept the "Russian occupation
of Georgia's territories" and will seek "de-occupation of Georgia."

"Under international law, occupation is a temporary stationing of
the troops of one state on the territory of another in conditions
of a state of war between them. Moreover, authority in the occupied
territory is exercised by the military command of the occupying state.

Thus, the use by Secretary of State Clinton of the term "occupation"
has no foundation beneath it. There is not a single Russian service
member in the territory of Georgia. In the region there are Russian
military contingents, but they are stationed in the territories of
Abkhazia and South Ossetia, which have seceded from Georgia as a result
of the aggression unleashed by the Saakashvili regime. At the same
time Abkhazia and South Ossetia have their own democratically formed
legislative, executive and judicial authorities fully operational;
political parties are actively working there.

Russian troops and bases in the two republics are stationed on the
basis of bilateral interstate agreements in full accordance with the
norms of international law.

We expect that our partners will take account of this objective reality
in their public and practical activities," reads the statement of
the Russian Foreign Ministry.

[KanadaHye]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

I'm just wondering if Russia is undermining US and Israel and still providing Iran with military hardware even though they claim they aren't.... hrm.

Freezing S-300, Russia's loss

Russia's failure to deliver the S-300 defense systems to Iran will be to Moscow's own loss as Iran has already manufactured all military equipment banned by the West.

Chairman of Iran's parliamentary (Majlis) Committee on National Security and Foreign Policy Alaeddin Boroujerdi said Iran has developed all military equipment which has been banned under Western sanctions.

The remark was made in response to the Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's statement about freezing the delivery of the S-300 missile defense systems.

"Iran's missile capability is reflective of the country's military abilities," Boroujerdi said.

Iran signed a contract with Russia in December 2005 to purchase at least five S-300 surface-to-air defense missile systems. However, Russia, under fierece pressure from Israel and the US, has repeatedly delayed the delivery of the sophisticated defense system.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id...onid=351020101

[Haykakan]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

This is a interesting Article noting fear of weakening EU and a srengthening Russia. I have noticed many are concerned about the warming of ruso-turckish relations but this article kind of tells you that turcks are still pretty worried about the big bear as is Europe.

Sunday's Zaman, Turkey
June 13 2010


EU's contradictory approach to the South Caucasus

by AMANDA PAUL

The EU's new approach to foreign policy, which materialized under the
Lisbon Treaty, was supposed to create a united, streamlined and
proactive approach to diplomacy within the framework of the freshly
created EU External Action Service. So far there is little evidence of
this, particularly in the EU's own backyard, including the South
Caucasus. While one EU institution says one thing, another branch
seemly gives a contradictory message. While a few weeks ago the
European Parliament adopted a resolution urging for an EU strategy for
the South Caucasus, which recommends beefing up what is currently on
offer including pushing for the EU to have a greater role in conflict
resolution, at the same time a few days ago the EU's foreign policy
czar, Catherine Ashton, called for the abolition of the EU's special
representatives to the South Caucasus, Central Asia and Moldova as
part of streamlining EU foreign policy. Not surprisingly this
announcement came as something of a shock to the countries of the
region that interpreted it as the EU rolling back, rather than
increasing, its clout in the region.

Indeed representatives of the South Caucasus have often complained
that the EU fails to take the region seriously. The EU presently deals
with the region via the European Neighborhood Policy and the Eastern
Partnership, which so far have proved to be a rather lightweight
policies that have failed to deliver anything of concrete value and as
a consequence have also failed -- for the most part -- to bring the
much-desired political and economic transformation and democratization
in the countries the policy encapsulates. Furthermore, on conflict
resolution, while the EU has taken on a more high-profile role in the
conflicts in Georgia -- this was principally as a result of the August
2008 war -- prior to that the EU was quite happy to be a backseat
observer. In the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict the EU remains little more
than an inactive observer, supporting the negotiating efforts of the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Minsk group
and dong little else.

The European Parliament resolution was a long time coming, and as a
result there have been real hopes and expectations that many of the
recommendations cited in the resolution would be taken up by the EU
both in the council and a commission and that the EU had recognized
the need for a stronger and more active role in the region, which is
of increasingly geostrategic importance. These days, keeping the
region anchored to Euro-Atlantic integration, with an increasingly
pushy Russia making a `comeback' in the region, US engagement being
rolled back and a rapidly advancing China, is crucial. The EU needs to
be at the heart of the region's transformation and development before
it's too late.

However, the news that Ashton is planning to scrap the EU special
representative has not been well received. Indeed the announcement was
made without consulting the EU special representative to the region,
Peter Semneby, in advance. Although the plan has not yet been
officially announced, it would in principle involve the transferring
of power from the special representatives to local EU embassies.

This move would represent a fundamental shift in the EU's authority in
the South Caucasus. Presently, Semneby covers all three countries,
giving him an important regional mandate. Under the new setup the EU's
ability to carry out multilateral diplomacy may be reduced given that
three different ambassadors would be in charge. Furthermore, embassies
tend to focus on technical and nitty-gritty issues rather than having
expertise (or concern) for conflict resolution. Even beefing up the
powers of the new ambassadors would probably not be enough to sustain
the current efforts that are being carried out by Semneby, let alone
bring into the picture some of the recommendations in the European
Parliament's resolution that may be indicative of the EU's real
intentions there.

While it is clear that EU institutions frequently do not sing from the
same hymn sheet, this contradictory approach can only have one result
-- to increase skepticism of the EU towards the region and give the
impression that the EU views the region through `Russian-tinted'
glasses (given that the EU is attempting an Obama-style reset with the
men in the Kremlin) rather than increasing confidence. In short, it
represents another example of the EU's divided and mystifying approach
to foreign policy.

13.06.2010