The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

[Armanen]

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

Before you get to confront him, maybe I can help you. Why don't you practice on me. I have a good feel of what these people are all about. So, what would you start off by saying or asking?

Anyway, I am sure there is nothing you can tell these people to "put them in their place," or to help them "realize their mistakes", or to help them "see the truth"...It's all a matter of perspective. They are on one side of the political fence, we on another. They have one view of the world, we another. They have their set of explanations and excuses, we have ours. In the end, no one is right, no one is wrong. Simply put, we are their enemies/competitors, they are ours. It's all relative. Nonetheless, in my opinion, all this geopolitical mess we are currently experiencing should be quite familiar to us because all this has already happened in the past. I would also say that the mechanisms driving the current global crisis forward cannot be stopped, it is all meant to happen.

For us Armenians this clash between East and West should be nothing new. I'm not saying this symbolically or historically. My approach is beyond the realm of physical perception, its more spiritual and in a sense, esoteric. I don't even want to mention the striking similarities of the current crisis to that of the Tsarist empire's numerous conflicts against western Europe and the Ottoman Empire, the current struggle between Russia and the West is quite similar, strikingly similar, to the ancient world's centuries old struggle between Parthia/Persia and Rome/Byzantium. In essence, Russia today is the Persian empire of old and the West, without a doubt, is the Roman/Byzantine empire. When we begin to look past superficial differences between the current political players what I'm alluding to here will make more sense. The fundamental nature and energy of a particular entity remains the same even if its physical appearance changes. There is as we know an obvious observable cycle of life in nature, what I am alluding to here however is the invisible or spiritual cycle of life in humanity. The fundamental players, including particular individuals, driving these global conflicts are the same in nature and essence to their historic predecessors. History, as with humankind, does not progress in a linear fashion, it actually recycles itself in a circular fashion. So, in a real sense, we have been through this path before. And based on our past life (or lives), we as a nation, have always been close to the mighty Persian empire and its modern manifestation, the Russian nation.

Some call it our fortune, some call it our curse, I call it our destiny.

Good observation. However, I'd like to add that with each cycle or age if you want to use LOTR terminolgy there are changes that occur which were not present in the past and may not be in the future. In the battle between east and west Armenia was the battle ground often and it is a reason why Armenia hasn't been a great power since the times of Tigran, but God willing and with some smart and hard work I think we can make Armenia a regional power again. I know we all wish to see Armenia reassert itself again, and while this is unrealistic now speaking in pure IR terms, esoterically speaking it would make sense for it to happen in this age.

War is brewing, and will come sooner than most expected, but just imagine what kind of position Armenia would be in after the war if we are relatively untouched by it...

[jgk3]

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

how could we possibly be untouched by it if we are one of the key tools/weapons used in it? We just have to use the best of our skills to ride the tidal waves if they come and hope for the best!

[Armanen]

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

Keyword was relatively. For example austria was less affected by ww2 than germany, but they were still touched by it. If you come out of a fight with less wounds and injuries you have a headstart (often) on those with worse condition.

[Yeznik]

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

In retrospect the events that have occurred within the last couple of months has given Armenia a great opportunity for advancement. Regarding the war in Georgia, the Russians have militarily crushed Georgia, to a major degree and now will crush it economically more specifically the pipeline and transported goods. Here is where the opportunity lies for Armenia. By my observations, it seems that the Russians will want to “push” all commerce for the region from Turkey through Armenia to Azerbaijan, thus further paralyzing Georgia. I wouldn’t be surprised if, to some degree, there would be a discussion of change in the pipeline going from Azerbaijan through Armenia sponsored by and protected by Russia sometime in the future.

In regards to Armenia becoming dependent on its neighbors, if the above scenario happens, even without a pipeline, and if the Turks or Azeri’s stop commerce through Armenia it will definitely affect all 3 countries not just Armenia. If for some reason they attack Armenia, Russians will step in for geopolitical interests. And under the current situation in the region it makes the most sense of having Armenia involved.

[Yeznik]

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

What I am basically suggesting is a what can be called a "Three Legged Stool" scenario, if one leg is taken out the stool cannot hold weight.

[Armenian]

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

I understand you dear. I really liked how pointed out this new (optimistic) perspective to the issue but I wonder if you'd still call it a victory for Armenia if the borders open?? At this stage, yes I agree with you; it is apparently a 'diplomatic' victory for us but in the long run, with borders opened- something which sounds very probable with Georgia being paralyzed these days- this diplomatic victory may turn into an 'economic' defeat for Armenia, for reasons that you know better... Don't you think so? In any case, the biggest victor here, seems to be Russia.

Thus far, everything is a speculation. We simply don't know what is going on behind closed doors in Ankara, Moscow and Yerevan. Thus far, all the signs suggest: Moscow and Turkey need to trade and Turkey desperately needs an unhindered access route to Azerbaijan. With Georgia and the Black Sea region highly unstable, with Iran under threat and a major regional player in its right, the Republic of Armenia remains the only territory through which Moscow's and Ankara's ambitions can be realized. As a result, there is opportunity in this for us. If our politicians can convince Ankara and Moscow to conduct their great commerce through Armenian territory, Armenia can potentially benefit economically and politically.

Regarding opening of Armenia's borders with Turkey:

When I was in Yerevan this summer renovating my home, I was stunned by the amount of Turkish goods found in the country. I made a conscious effort to avoid purchasing Turkish products. However, in the case of purchasing windows, for instance, there wasn't even a choice, its was either the Turkish product - or nothing. Many Armenians don't realize this but Turkey is a 'major' producer of consumer goods and their market is primarily all of Europe and Russia. From glues to windows, from washing machines to floor tiles, from toys to cosmetics, from clothing to food, Turkish products have saturated the Armenian market. Turkish products in Armenia are considered the most cost effective for the consumer, they are thought to be affordable and relatively of good quality. High end items in Armenia are European goods and the low end are Iranian. It's no secret that due to its location and circumstances, Armenia's choices are very limited. Moreover, it's truly unfortunate that Russia is not a big producer of goods and it's equally unfortunate that Iranian products are limited in variety and inferior in quality. So, with Russian products in Armenia being very limited; with European products being very expensive; with Iranian products being substandard; this leaves Turkish products as the most cost effective and readily available. And the people buy it without reservations simply because they don't have a choice.

To make a further point, there are no real obstructions in obtaining Turkish goods in Armenia. As I said, Turkish goods are already in Armenia and in quite large quantities. It's as if the closed borders between the two nations are closed only for a political show. Needles to say, in such a case, the situation hurts Armenia and not Turkey. Why? Because the borders remains officially closed Turkish good are forced to get into Armenia via Georgia, greatly increasing their transportation costs which the Armenian consumer has to end up paying for. The Turks are selling their items at standard prices but the Armenian consumer is buying it at above market value due to the additional costs of bringing it into Armenia via Georgia.

Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on how one looks at it, the opening of borders between Armenia and Turkey is not a black and white issue. Prior to this new reality in the region, opening of our borders with Turkey could have had dire long term consequences for Armenia, making Armenia dangerously dependent on Ankara. And depending on the way it was opened, I don't think Moscow would have been happy with it either, fearing it could lose control over Yerevan, which may be why Moscow remained silent throughout the fifteen years of the Turkish blockade. Now, however, under Moscow's watchful eyes, Ankara has been forced to come to our door. Don't forget, as far as the Turkish elite is concerned, they could careless about trading with a tiny, poor, aggressive Armenia, who's people incidentally are already purchasing Turkish goods via Georgia,... What they want is access eastward. They want access to Azerbaijan. They are having problems going through Georgia. They can't invade Armenia. They couldn't break Armenia economically. So, now, they need to talk...

No need to panic and no need to predict doom and gloom. Let's at least listen to what they have to say.

One last important thought. I feel that Armenia is now more secure militarily and politically than it has ever been. Without a doubt, Armenia is gradually becoming a major regional player. Barring some unforeseen Russian withdrawal from the Caucasus region, Armenia will continue to grow in stature. The only problem that is hindering our forward progression remains our fragile economy. We as a nation will never be able to reach our potential as long as our economy remains underdeveloped. Perhaps the aforementioned are the reasons why I am no longer terrified of opening our borders with Turkey.

The following post is an interesting geopolitical analysis regarding this topic:

[Armenian]

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

Turkish-Armenian Reconciliation Is Possible – and Necessary!

The visit by Turkish President Abdullah Gul to Yerevan on September 6 will be remembered as a historic event, even if concrete results are not to be expected immediately. Accepting the invitation by Armenian President Serzh Sargysyan, to attend the World Cup qualifying 2010 football match between the two countries' teams, Gul broke a tabu and opened the way for a process of reconciliation to begin, following decades of bitter enmity. If a genuine peace process unfolds, it could not only reestablish normal relations between the two neighbors, but contribute to stabilizing the Caucasus and far beyond. Such a development would have been difficult to imagine without the crisis that erupted with Georgia's military move against South Ossetia, and the subsequent Russian response. The Russian-Georgian war effected a kaleidoscopic shift in the geostrategic relations among the nations in the region, whereby the relatively small Armenia has acquired a new significance. Several factors have to be taken into consideration to clarify this new reality.

First and foremost, the Georgian-Russian crisis laid bare the extreme vulnerability of Georgia as a transit land for oil and gas deliveries from Azerbaijan to the West. The conflict led to a halt in exports and an evacuation of some expatriate oil workers. As Michael Chossudovsky showed in a recent article (https://www.globalresearch.ca/index....xt=va&aid=9907) , the war had everything to do with oil. Georgia's belligerent attack came on the heels of a U.S.-GUAM summit, which included Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan and Moldava, countries seen as appendages of NATO deployed to militarily protect the U.S.-backed pipelines. U.S. oil policy, as conceived and implemented by xxxx Cheney, has been to promote pipelines from Azerbaijan westwards, which would by-pass both Russia and Iran, considered enemy countries. The corollary of this policy has been to sabotage any pipelines involving Russia or Iran, and thwart economic cooperation which includes them as well as China and the Central Asian Republics. As Chossudovsky shows, the Cheney strategy has not met success, as powerful coalitions stretching from Iran across Asia have come into being around concrete economic, political and military cooperation. The Russian response to Mikhail Saakashvili's foolish adventure has thrown a hefty monkey-wrench into the entire Cheney approach.

A second consideration involves the role of Turkey. A NATO member and staunch U.S. ally, Turkey is a key element of the pipeline routes: the Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline carries Azeri oil across Georgia and to Turkey's Mediterranean port at Ceyhan. A further extension of the pipeline is envisioned in the Nabucco project across Turkey into Austria via Bulgaria, Rumania and Hungary. Gas from Turkmenistan is also being discussed. However, as analyst Andrew Neff from Global Insight put it, "without Azeri gas, the Nabucco pipeline is dead on the drawing board." Azerbaijan’s state oil company, SOCAR, decided on August 7 to deliver oil now through the Baku-Novorossisk pipeline. Turkey could be seriously damaged by the spin-off effects of the Georgia crisis, not only if the pipeline were blocked, but also if relations with Russia were to deteriorate. Already on Sept. 2, Turkish Daily News reported that Russia had stopped Turkish trucks at customs check-points following the crisis, and some mooted that this was Moscow’s way of punishing Ankara for having allowed U.S. warships to pass through the Bosphorus with aid for Georgia. Turkey cannot afford problems with Moscow, as it depends on Russia for 29% of its oil and 63% of its gas. Were these supplies interrupted, Turkey "would be in the dark," as Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan once said. The two countries have a significant trade volume of $38 billion for the current year, and it is growing.

Turkey’s Stability Initiative

It may be as a result of such considerations that the Turkish government of Erdogan launched an intriguing new initiative, known as the Caucasus Stability and Cooperation Platform (CSCP), which aims to bring together Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Turkey and Russia. Speaking to the press at a reception given by the General Staff command in Ankara for Victory Day on August 30, Erdogan made the following remarks: "Why did we call this the ‘Caucasus Stability and Cooperation Platform’? Why is Armenia included in this, why is Georgia included in this? Because we chose [them] for inclusion [in the platform] on a geographic basis. We have to succeed in this so that the region will become a region of welfare and ease." He added: "We need to shape the future of the Caucasus together. It is a time when we need to take brave steps to prevent the regional tension from turning into global turmoil. Channels of dialogue must be kept open."

The CSCP is to be on the agenda of the talks between the presidents of Turkey and Armenia, as indicated in a series of important bilateral meetings among members of the proposed grouping. Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan, in a press conference with his Georgian counterpart Eka Tkeshelashvili in Istanbul reported on Sept. 1 by Today’s Zaman, said a Turkish delegation going to Yerevan to prepare Gul’s visit, would discuss the CSCP. Subsequent reports confirmed that was the case. Erdogan himself discussed the idea on visits to Moscow, Tblisi and Baku. The foreign minister of Azerbaijan addressed the matter in Ankara on August 29, and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov dealt with it in talks in Istanbul on Sept. 2. Lavrov expressed outright support for the initiative. While denying that Russian controls on Turkish imports had been politically motivated, Lavrov said his country appreciated Turkey’s efforts to stabilize the region, adding that "This initiative [the CSCP] is based on common sense." On the same day, Armenian President Sargsyan met with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in Sochi, to discuss new bilateral cooperation projects, and, of course, the Caucasus crisis. Both the Armenian and the Azeri governments have said they would discuss the CSCP proposal.

The Parameters of Cooperation

What the Erdogan government has proposed is ambitious, courageous and most necessary. But it will not be easy to implement. The countries invited to participate in the CSCP are not at all thinking on the same wave length, nor do they share the same self-perceived geostrategic interests. Since the "Rose Revolution," Georgia has been functioning as a plaything of the George Soros-operated networks based in the U.S., and supported by the Bush-Cheney administration, and has been being used as an attack-dog against Moscow, as the recent South Ossetia tragedy showed. Azerbaijan, a Muslim nation, had more or less been in the pocket of xxxx Cheney and his oil magnate friends since independence. Azerbaijan is technically still in a state of war against Armenia, since the latter took the Armenian enclave Nagorno-Karabagh and occupied contiguous Azeri territory in the war following independence. Turkey, which was the first to recognize Armenia’s independence in 1991, is, however an ally of Turkic Azerbaijan, and following the Nagorno-Karabagh war, broke off all relations with Yerevan in 1993. This meant closing the borders to Armenia, as Azerbaijan had already done. Armenia has had good relations historically with Georgia, which is also a Christian state, and has very close relations with Russia. Armenia’s economy is deeply integrated with Russia’s: it relies on Russia for oil and gas (though some comes from Iran), for its nuclear fuel, and for financing of its nuclear plant. Russia controls its communications and transportation networks. Russian companies are prospecting for uranium ore in Armenia, and there are plans afoot for constructing another nuclear plant. Russian companies are also the largest foreign investors in the economy, to the tune of $1.3 billion, in energy, banking, mining, metallurgy, telecommunications, and construction, Historically, Russia has also functioned as the protector of Christian populations and nations.

In the current strategic juncture, Russia could exert its influence in ways that could either help or hurt neighboring countries. Its intervention in Georgia has made clear what pull it has; it could exert pressure on Azerbaijan regarding the Nagorno-Karabagh issue. Considering the precedent of Russia’s recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent republics, one might entertain the possibility (albeit remote) that Moscow could hint at possible recognition of Nagorno-Karabagh. The official Russian position has embodied the rational approach, that the entire matter must be settled through bilateral negotiations. In this extremely complicated combination, there are two alternative routes that might be taken: either each nation (with its international sponsor if there is one) seeks to gain its own perceived geostrategic gain, at the expense of others, thus exacerbating the crisis; or each comes to terms with the fact that the game being played in the Caucasus is being manipulated by forces outside the region – the Anglo-American oil interests represented by Cheney et al – whose ultimate aims collide with those of any of the independent nation states of the region, if seen as such.

Thus, the Turkish initiative should be taken up and pursued. Some sources in Turkey have told this author that they are suspicious of the CSCP, and there have been reports in the Turkish press to the same effect. This view says that what is really behind the Erdogan initiative is an operation, coordinated with Washington, aimed at coopting Armenia, via Turkey, in essence, to wean Armenia away from its relationship with Russia. Thus, even the football diplomacy of Gul would be considered a ploy in this game. This author is skeptical of such a reading; initial reports in the Turkish press indicated that Washington was not at all pleased with the CSCP, because a) it does not contemplate the presence of the U.S. or any other nation from the West, and b) the U.S. had not been informed of the idea. Turkish press reports now say that Washington has been informed, and that it reportedly agrees; that may prove to be true, but the fact remains the grouping envisioned in the initiative includes Russia, but not anyone in the West. Be that as it may, there are certain facts that cannot be denied. First, as a result of its economic interdependence on Russia, Armenia cannot (and would not like to) be turned into an enemy of Moscow overnight. Secondly, the Georgian-Russian war has altered the situation on the ground. It is incumbent upon Turkey at this point to open its borders with Armenia, and Azerbaijan as well.

The Armenian-Turkish Dispute

If there is to be a rapprochement between Ankara and Yerevan, a number of other important issues are going to have to be dealt with. The two countries have been at odds, and not only since Turkey closed its borders in 1993. The enmity goes back to 1915, when the Young Turk government of the Ottoman Empire carried out an extermination policy against the Armenian population, leading to the deaths of an estimated 1.5 million. Although the post-war Turkish government in 1919 put the Young Turk leaders on trial and convicted them; although Ataturk, father of the modern Turkish nation, was not involved; still, no Turkish government has acknowledged charges, brought by Armenians in the diaspora and in Yerevan, that what occurred was a conscious policy of genocide. The official Turkish view is that, in the course of the terrible First World War, Armenians were deported because they were suspected of having been allied with Russia, and that, during the deportations, unfortunately many (and the figures are greatly reduced) perished. This issue has been the thorniest in bilateral relations. The Turkish government proposes that a joint commission of historians from both sides examine the facts to determine what actually occurred. Ankara also demands that the Armenian diaspora cease its international campaigns to recognize the genocide. Then, there is the issue of Nagorno-Karabagh, which the Russians have wisely proposed be dealt with through negotiations. Finally, Turkey demands that Armenia recognize the current borders between the two nations. Armenia demands recognition of the genocide and calls for reopening diplomatic relations without conditions.

[...]

Source: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...t=va&aid=10083

[Armenian]

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

Interesting piece.

************************

Geopolitical Diary: Olmert’s Canceled Trip to Moscow, the Broader Picture

The Jerusalem Post reported Tuesday that Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert canceled his trip to Moscow scheduled for Sept.14. The trip was apparently canceled because of a recommendation made Sept. 7 by the Israeli police to indict Olmert on bribery charges. While the explanation seems plausible, it is unlikely. If Olmert was unable to go because of political heat at home, a high-level Israeli official could have gone in his place or the visit could been rescheduled. Instead, the cancellation seems to indicate that Israel is switching its strategy on how to handle a resurgent Russia, from a policy of accommodation to one of potential confrontation.

The relationship between Russia and Israel has had its fair share of ups and downs, beginning with a close alliance between the nascent xxxish state and the Soviet Union in the late 1940s. This was followed by a period of Soviet patronage of Israel’s enemies, mainly Egypt and Syria which was designed primarily to strike at U.S. interests in the Middle East but also threatened Israel, an ancillary effect. But with the end of the Cold War, Moscow’s influence receded from the Middle East. Israel’s biggest existential threat is not from its Arab neighbors but rather from a global power seeking to establish its own interests in the Middle East. In other words, Israel’s neighbors only become a threat once they obtain outside patronage making them bold, organized and armed enough to strike at Israel from all sides. While Israel has made peace with Egypt and Jordan and is eyeing a similar relationship with Syria, there is no guarantee that an emergent global power would not offer alternatives to Israel’s neighbors — alternatives lacking in the post-Cold War world. Russia is exactly such a power.

A resurgent Russia once again looking for potential allies in the Middle East (such as Iran, Syria or perhaps in a highly hypothetical scenario even Egypt) that would challenge the United States has always been one of Israel’s main concerns. Therefore, Israel actively engaged in checking Russian power by selling weapons to Georgia. The idea was to contain Moscow and force it to deal with challenges on its periphery, thus keeping it from mucking about in the Middle East. Israel got wind of Moscow’s plans for Georgia before the Aug. 8 intervention and decided that a confrontation with the Kremlin was not a wise strategy, precisely because Israel understands the danger in Russian support of Syria and Iran. Hence, a week before Russian tanks rolled into South Ossetia it announced that it would end all weapon sales to Georgia. This was followed by a general acquiescent attitude toward Moscow after the Georgian intervention, to the obvious chagrin of the Americans who were looking for a concerted effort against the Kremlin. The subsequent Olmert visit on Sept. 14 was supposed to affirm an accommodating policy toward Moscow and to secure guarantees from the Kremlin that Iran and Syria would not be emboldened to threaten Israel. However Russia has not fallen into line with Israel’s overtures. This is not because Moscow is hoping for open confrontation with Israel, but rather because Russia’s current priority is to keep Americans embroiled in the Middle East.

To do that, from the Kremlin perspective, Iran has to remain a threat and — if possible — Syria ought to reemerge as a threat. Russian actions, designed to allow Moscow room to maneuver in the Caucasus and Europe, have therefore — as an ancillary consequence — threatened Israel’s national security. Specifically, a resurgent Russia supporting Iran with nuclear technology and advanced strategic air defense systems, like the late model variants of the S-300, is a direct threat to Israel even though Moscow’s actual intention is to embolden Tehran against the United States. A particularly nightmarish scenario for Israel would be a refocused and reorganized Syria (or a hypothetical post-coup Egypt) with renewed Russian patronage. This changes the strategic calculus that Israel has had since the end of the Cold War. For the past 18 years Israel’s biggest concern was not the strength of the Arab states, but rather their weakness — the fear that if there was a war with its neighbors Israel’s military superiority would be so catastrophic that it would destroy the enemy to the point where the resulting chaos would usher in not another secular state but an Islamist one that would sponsor waves of terror attacks against Israel. Israel therefore found itself in the odd position of wanting (and often overtly trying) to keep various Arab secular dictators in power in order to avoid having to deal with a worse alternative.

With Russia back in the game, a secular regime backed by the Kremlin is much worse than an unaligned Islamist regime from Israel’s perspective. Therefore, Israel may still have a few cards to play should Russia jump back into the sandbox, starting with destabilizing neighbors that choose to side with Moscow.

Source: http://www.stratfor.com/geopolitical...roader_picture

In related news:

Israel Bans Arms Dealers from Visiting Georgia

Israel has ordered to halt all sales of military equipment to Georgia, The Associated Press reported with reference to the sources with Israeli defense community. Of interest is that the Israeli government ordered the freeze because of objections from Russia. In Israel, they apprehend that the Kremlin may set to large-scale supplies of sophisticated weapons to the states of the Middle East that are hostile to Israel, including Iran. A day before, Russia’s General Staff Deputy Chief General-Colonel Anatoly Nogovitsyn told foreign ambassadors and military attaches that the General Staff had no data about the continuation of military cooperation of Georgia and Israel. At the same time, Nogovitsyn confirmed that Israel had supplied to Tbilisi eight drones, including four Hermes 450 spying drones. Those drones were spying in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, Nogovitsyn reminded, adding that the Israeli experts trained Georgian military to operate the drones in 2007. Besides, Israel supplied to Georgia more than 100 sets of mine-clearing charges used to make passages in the antitank minefields and 50 sets used for the passages in the antipersonnel minefields, as well as 500 sets of camouflage nets.

Source: http://www.kommersant.com/p-13185/Ar...eorgia_Israel/

[Lucin]

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

I don't know if Dr. Armen Ayvazian has commented on the recent developments but I would really like to know what he has to say, considering he was not either in favour of opening the borders...

[Armenian]

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

I don't know if Dr. Armen Ayvazian has commented on the recent developments but I would really like to know what he has to say...

I know Dr. Armen Ayvazian through a friend, I have met him on several occasions. I have read and seen many of his works. I have great respect and admiration for him. He embodies what an ideal political 'think tank' in Armenia should be all about. He has commented on this issue on many occasions in the past and he continues to do so. He sees potential risks for the Armenian state if borders with Turkey are opened. Many, including I, agree with him. His approach to the matter is purely geostrategic, not emotional or extremist. He also is concerned about the degree of concessions Armenians are willing to accept to have normal relations with their neighbors. He warns against giving up any territories in Artsakh. He warns about Armenians being satisfied with living in a tiny landlocked nation. He wants better relations with Russia and Iran, he also wants normal cordial relations with EU and US. We desperately need voices like his in the current political environment in Yerevan. Although I personally see some positives, or good potential, in the current situation between Yerevan and Ankara, I, nonetheless, want the negatives, the risks of open borders, to also be expressed in pubic without reservation. You can read and view many of his interviews and commentaries in his homepage:

Ararat Center For Strategic Research:

Homepage: http://blog.ararat-center.org/

Videos: http://blog.ararat-center.org/?cat=3

Several interviews of Armen Ayvazian:

Armen Ayvazyan Talk Show (Turkish-Armenian border is discussed at 9:30): http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...alk+Show&hl=en

Interview with Dr. Armen Ayvazyan by Dr. Mkhitar Moradian: http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...90745478951677

Interview with Dr. Armen Ayvazyan by Mr. Hamlet Nercissian: http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...46238499&hl=en