Ukraine

[hipeter924]

Re: Ukraine

[...]They stated that the incident "is an example of the right of peoples
to self-determination through free will". According to the Press
Service of the Armenian leader, the conversation was initiated by
Sargsyan. Yerevan's position on the Crimea caused a negative reaction
from US Ambassador to Armenia John Heffern.[...]

Well, the Obama Administration has been no friend of Armenia, at some point Obama tried to get US aid cut to Armenia: http://www.anca.org/press_releases/p....php?prid=2102

WASHINGTON, DC - President Obama has called for a sharp 19% reduction in economic aid to Armenia in the last budget request of his term, reported the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA).

The President has proposed $27,219,000 in Economic Support Fund (ESF) aid for Armenia in his Fiscal Year 2013 (FY13) budget, which is nearly $12,781,000, or 32%, less than the $40,000,000 approved by Congress for FY12. The President's ESF figures for FY13, however, do not include $2,824,000 in International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement assistance and 2,500,000 in Global Health Programs (USAID), both categories that were formerly included under the ESF heading. Adding these two line items to the $27,219,000 ESF proposal, brings the economic aid total to Armenia to $32,543,000, which is a sharp 19% cut, measured from FY12 to FY13.

That is before you get to Obama's broken promise on recognizing the Armenian Genocide, and his sucking up to Turkey.

[hipeter924]

Re: Ukraine

But back on topic, looks like Right-Sector is trying to threaten and un-stabilize the government there, again: http://rt.com/news/right-nationalist...m-ukraine-701/

Over 1,500 nationalists from the Right Sector have circled Ukrainian parliament in Kiev threatening to storm it on Thursday. They demanded the resignation of the interior minister after their leader Muzychko was killed in a police operation.

Up to 2,000 members of the Right Sector, which recently was revamped into a political party, flooded the square in front of Verkhovna Rada in the Ukrainian capital on Thursday night. The radicals, who brought car tires to burn with them, were banging on the Parliament’s doors, smashing the glass parts in them.

Wearing masks and brandishing bats, they were shouting "Avakov, get out!"

The parliament building was empty except for guards, some administrative staff and reporters. All the MPs had earlier left the building through an underground tunnel, RIA Novosti reported.

The protesters were threatening to break into the parliament if their demands were not met, journalists reported from the scene. The Rada’s security in the meantime concentrated in front of the entrance to the building and prepared water cannons, urging the journalists inside not to approach the windows looking onto Constitution Square.

[Haykakan]

Re: Ukraine

CRIMEA RUSSIA'S ARTSAKH

Editorial, 23 March 2014

For more than two decades Artsakh's fate has hinged on
two contradictory international principles: the territorial
integrity of states versus the inviolable right of people for
self-determination. These two key principles are enshrined in the
United Nations charter and in a number of fundamental international
documents. Armenians don't see a contradiction in the two schools of
thought when it comes to the status of Artsakh because they believe
that since Artsakh was illegally given to Azerbaijan, by Joseph Stalin
in the early '20s, the territorial inviolability of Azerbaijan did
not apply when the Armenians of Artsakh declared independence. They
were merely exercising their right of self-determination.

Thus when Russian-speaking Crimeans opted for self-determination
and joined Russia, President Serge Sarkissian of Armenia recognized
the Crimean referendum within a few days. And even if Armenia hadn't
believed in the principle of a people's right to self-determination
or there was no Artsakh issue, Armenia had no choice but to accede
to Vladimir Putin's wishes. That Armenia is dependent on Moscow
militarily, politically, and economically is no secret, especially
to neighboring countries such as Ukraine. Thus Kiev's high dudgeon
against Armenia is ingenuous.

Soon after Sarkissian recognized the Crimean referendum to join
Russia, Kiev recalled its ambassadors from Yerevan and threatened
Ukraine/Armenia relations were about to go south. One would have
thought Kiev authorities, aware of Armenia's circumstances and of
the centuries of friendship between the two people's would have
been more circumspect in their condemnation. When Kazakhstanâ?"a
much-stronger state than Armenia and a Turkic country in sympathy
with the Crimean Tatarsâ?"recognized the results of the referendum,
why would Ukraine pick on tiny Armenia? As well, Kiev should remember
that despite Ukraine's weapons sales to Azerbaijan, a country which
regularly threatens to invade Armenia, Yerevan did not complain,
let alone recall its ambassador from Ukraine.

It's too early to determine whether the Crimea development would
buttress Artsakh's assertion of people's right to self-determination,
particularly when so much of international politics depends on who
has the power to get what it wants. Russia can recognize Artsakh in a
jiffy and cite the principle of self-determination. But since Russia is
concerned in NATO's courtship of Baku, it sees no benefit in alienating
Azerbaijan to please Armenia, a small country dependent on Moscow.

The West will play similar games of self-interest: It backed
self-determination in Kosovo justifiably expecting that the
mini-state would be a Western puppet and a constant irritant
to hostile-to-the-West Serbia. Since an independent Artsakh or an
Artsakh united with Armenia is of no perceived benefit to the West,
it would let Artsakh's remain in suspended animation.

Whether Artsakh becomes independent or joins Armenia depends on Baku,
but not in a martial sense. If Baku decides to go to bed with the West,
Russia will at first try to abort that plan. If it fails, it will give
up on the Azerbaijan's rulers and punish them be recognizing Artsakh.

The story line might also change if Russian/European Union commercial
relations go into deep freeze and Germany, France, et al begin to
look for an alternative source for natural gas which they now buy from
Russia. A new natural gas source might be the Azerbaijan-Georgia-Turkey
pipeline. But the Azeri wells are now shallower than they were believed
to be a few years ago. Would the Europeans invest billions of dollars
when the well might go dry in ten to 15 years? A much richer source
is Iran. It has the second-biggest proven natural gas sources. But
Iran is in the bad books of the West, particularly that of the United
States. If Iran and the West make peace, Iranian fuel can be exported
to Europe through Syria's Mediterranean ports. If Iran and the West
make peace, Saudi Arabia and Qatar would halt their support of the
extremist Sunnis who want to topple Assad of Syria.

The next six months would be as unpredictable and suspenseful as a
chess match between two grandmasters. In this case the chess board is
three dimensional and the players a dozen or more. Armenia will be
a pawn in the match, but being a pawn isn't necessarily a bad thing
when you are on the side which says "Check mate."

[lampron]

Re: Ukraine

What is interesting is that Cyprus (that is Greek Cyprus) voted against Russia at the UN

The Cyprus problem was mainly about the Greek Cypriot majority campaigning to join Greece (and Turkey and Great Britain blocking this movement)

[hipeter924]

Re: Ukraine

What is interesting is that Cyprus (that is Greek Cyprus) voted against Russia at the UN

The Cyprus problem was mainly about the Greek Cypriot majority campaigning to join Greece (and Turkey and Great Britain blocking this movement)

Well, Greece at the time was basically a military dictatorship, so it wasn't surprising that Turkey invaded. Now Cyprus is divided (largely on ethnic lines) and whatever unity it had is now gone. Can't say I blame Greek Cyprus wanting to become part of Greece.

[Federate]

Re: Ukraine

UN RESOLUTION ON CRIMEA: WHY ARMENIA VOTED AGAINST UKRAINE – AND DID THE RIGHT THING
Editor Mar 28, 2014 Armenia, Nation, News Desk 5 Comments

Yesterday the United Nations General Assembly voted on a resolution that declared the Crimean referendum invalid. Armenia voted against the resolution and although it was joined by only ten other countries, the resolution barely passed with 100 votes because the other 82 countries either abstained or were no-shows.

Armenia’s decision to vote against the resolution and thus put it in the minority, opposed to the United States, Canada, and much of Europe, seems to have upset some people.

In no time, commonly repeated conspiracies about Russians forcing Armenia to make decisions against its will or visions of wild incompetence in Armenia’s foreign policy decisionmaking have been circulating in social media and elsewhere.

That Armenia is irresponsibly running roughshod over its image with no good reason chooses to ignore the very well-founded reasons Armenia may have had to vote against the resolution invalidating Crimea’s referendum.

So why was Armenia one of only 11 countries to vote against the resolution?

Put simply, Ukraine has not been a friend of Armenia’s.

In fact, although enemy might be too strong a word, it has freely aided and abetted Armenia’s enemy in Azerbaijan with seemingly nary a concern about any potential fallout it might cause with Armenia.

Armenia could not have possibly voted in favor of the resolution and there were some compelling reasons why it cast a vote against it, instead of abstaining.

The following gives the reasons why Armenia could not have voted in favor and why it may have chosen to vote against the resolution.

1) Ukraine supplied arms to Azerbaijan during the Artsakh War – and continued to do so.

In History on the Move: Views, Interviews and Essays on Armenian Issues, Edmond Azadian writes:

“[…] as subsequent events evolved it became all too apparent that Ukraine has steadfastly stood behind Azerbaijan in the Nagorno-Karabagh conflict all along. …it was reported from Stepanakert that Ukraine had shipped 40 tanks to Azerbaijan. Later that number was raised to 59. Ukraine had also supplied Azerbaijan with Mig-21 attack planes.”

This is in addition to documented reports of Ukrainian mercenaries fighting among Azeri forces as well as flying air attacks against Armenian soldiers.

Since the war, according to Azerbaijani sources reporting as late as 2010, Ukraine has continued to provide Azerbaijan with lethal military hardware.

As an aside: Besides Ukraine and Ukrainians, Russia fought against Armenians in Artsakh and continues to supply weaponry to Azerbaijan. These are both true and undeniable. But the fact is that Ukraine and Russia cannot be equated. While both had people fighting against Armenians in Artsakh and both have supplied arms to Azerbaijan, only one supplies Armenia with advanced weaponry and large-scale military support that it does not make available to Azerbaijan and that is Russia.

2) Ukraine and Azerbaijan were two of the founding members of GUAM.

GUAM, or the Organization for Democracy and Economic Development, was started by Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, and Moldova. Although denied by the founding members, it was largely seen as an anti-Russia alternative to the CSTO, which was a security organization.

Tomas Valasek, a scholar, published a piece at the Harvard’s Kennedy School Belfer Center in 2000 that put it plainly:

GUUAM [note: it included Uzbekistan back then] was established with the express purpose of forging close institutional ties with the West, which, in the military realm, means NATO.

Armenia was left out of GUAM, although it neighbored two of its founding members, excluding it from any of the projects that the organization might implement. This wasn’t the only instance of an agreement between Azerbaijan and Georgia that excluded Armenia – the Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan Pipeline was another instance. It’s that in this iteration, it was done with the agreement of Ukraine.

No explanation was given why Armenia was not asked to be a part of GUAM.

The relationship between these GUAM countries would be represented more explicitly – and detrimentally – later on.

3) Ukraine voted in favor of a UN resolution “affirming the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and demanding withdrawal of all Armenian forces” from Artsakh.

That’s right. Ukraine voted for what was probably the most anti-Armenian resolution in UN history.

Any argument that Ukraine has a new government which shouldn’t be held responsible for past transgressions would have to stand against the fact that this was in 2008 and that’s when Yulia Tymoshenko was prime minster. The same Yulia Tymoshenko who was released from prison almost immediately after this new Ukrainian government took over and who has, post-revolution, declared her candidacy for Ukraine’s presidency.

Also included in the 39 votes in favor – out of 193 members – were Georgia and Moldova.

Click here for the full text of the resolution.

There simply could not have been any justification, considering Ukraine’s record, for Armenia to vote in favor of the resolution.

Why didn’t Armenia abstain?

The only legitimate question regarding Armenia and the vote on Ukrainian territorial integrity is why Armenia didn’t just abstain. After all, why vote on an unpopular issue?

Several reasons may have been at play and the following are our thoughts.

1) Principle.

As explained above, at best, Ukraine helped advance the anti-Armenia agenda of Azerbaijan in the United Nations and possibly in other arenas. At worst, it is one of the few countries who have provided one-sided military support for Azerbaijan in what is a conflict that can be considered an existential threat to Armenia.

To have voted for was out of the question. To have abstained would have been to neglect Ukraine’s atrocious track record, including in the UN, of serious issues that concerned Armenia and sent the message that there are no consequences for slapping Armenia in the face.

The “no” vote was an opportunity for Armenia to make the point that in dealing with it, countries should expect that their decisions will have consequences, if not immediately, in the future.

2) The UN General Assembly has done nothing for Armenia; Votes in the UN GA rarely have any impact; And thus, Armenia had nothing to lose and everything to gain.

This is a body that did nothing to save the cemetery of Djulfa from destruction by Azerbaijan or to stop the bombardment of the civilian population of Stepanakert by Azeri forces from Shushi.

What it comes down to is that votes in the UN General Assembly are usually for show and really have little impact on the international order. Indeed, this very resolution on Ukraine was non-binding, meaning that, in effect, it had no power.

So, by rejecting the resolution, Armenia had nothing to lose.

But what did it have to gain?

Armenia, all the other reasons notwithstanding, used the vote as a gesture of goodwill toward Russia. It was actually a deft policy decision to support Russia because it was giving nothing up but gaining credit for future dealings.

There might be some who think Armenia gave up its standing with other world powers in rejecting the vote; it would be worth reminding them of the Armenia-Turkey Protocols.

After experiencing the wrath of its domestic population and its Diaspora, Armenia was made to look like a fool when Turkey didn’t ratify the agreement. And the US, apparently the lead on the endeavor, hardly mustered up the breath to criticize the Turks.

What’s more, Armenia didn’t reap the benefits of cooperation with the US in the form of renewed Millennium Challenge Funds or a Trade and Investment Framework Agreement.

So, Armenia’s foreign policy calculus likely didn’t prioritize going out of its way to appease the US, which was leading the vote effort. After all, there hadn’t been much in it for Armenia when they did.

3) Territorial Integrity

Azerbaijan’s call to action in getting countries to support its false claims to Artsakh is by yelling “territorial integrity” every chance it gets. The resolution which Azerbaijan introduced in the UN with that same tagline, which Ukraine supported, was, as might be expected, rejected by Armenia while citing that it supported the self-determination of peoples.

Now, given Ukraine’s track record supporting “territorial integrity” against Armenia and Azerbaijan’s known intentions about implanting “territorial integrity” into the discourse, Armenia could either stay silent, whereas previously it hadn’t, and potentially give firepower to Azerbaijan because it changed course. Or it could continue with the precedent it had set when confronted with the same issue, with essentially the same language in the past, showing consistency in its principles.

Armenia chose the latter and rejected the idea of territorial integrity when it clashes with a people’s right to self-determination.

Whatever your stance is on the referendum in Crimea – whether it was real or a Russian ploy to cover its annexation of the peninsula – Armenia was voting on the language presented by Ukraine in that resolution and it did so by maintaining its established position on self-determination.

***

Finally, much of the 140-character discussions have centered on the group of sketchy countries that also voted against the resolution, including North Korea, Sudan, Nicaragua, and Belarus. Most of it is disbelief that Armenia finds itself among this crowd but why that’s important is difficult to ascertain.

If the company you’re in after a UN vote makes a difference, then we should ask ourselves what it says about the United States and Canada that when they voted against Palestine becoming an observer state in the United Nations, they counted among their company Palau, Micronesia, and Nauru.

Nothing? That’s the point.



Read more: http://thearmenite.com/newsdesk/un-r...#ixzz2xmuKdwE1

[londontsi]

Re: Ukraine

UN RESOLUTION ON CRIMEA: WHY ARMENIA VOTED AGAINST UKRAINE – AND DID THE RIGHT THING
Editor Mar 28, 2014 Armenia, Nation, News Desk 5 Comments

........

Read more: http://thearmenite.com/newsdesk/un-r...#ixzz2xmuKdwE1

Excellent article.

We should do more to highlight our grievances in front of the international community.

If anybody got the impression we are stooges of Russia should start to think again.

It is about time to stop being a political punching bag.

.

[Haykakan]

Re: Ukraine

GAZPROM HIKES GAS PRICE FOR UKRAINE

http://www.armradio.am/en/2014/04/01/gazprom-hikes-gas-price-for-ukraine/

17:08 01.04.2014

The price of Russian natural gas for Ukraine will make up $385.5
per 1,000 cubic meters from April 1, Gazprom CEO Alexei Miller told
reporters on Tuesday, Itar-Tass reports.

Under the effective gas supply contract, the gas price for Ukraine
will be $385.5 per 1,000 cubic meters in the second quarter, Miller
said, adding that Gazprom's "December discount" for Ukraine can no
longer be used.

Ukraine has failed to meet its commitments to pay its 2013 gas debt,
and there is no 100-percent payment for current supplies, which
further increases Ukraine's gas bill, he said.

"As of now, the debt has reached $1.711 billion," Miller said.

According to the Gazprom CEO, the price of gas transit across Ukraine
will increase by 10%, as envisioned by the pricing formula in the
gas transportation contract of 2009.

Miller underlined that "Gazprom will pay a higher tariff for gas
transit, fully meeting its obligations under the contract."

[hipeter924]

Re: Ukraine

Excellent article.

We should do more to highlight our grievances in front of the international community.

If anybody got the impression we are stooges of Russia should start to think again.

It is about time to stop being a political punching bag.

.

Didn't know this about Ukraine, a good article.

[lampron]

Re: Ukraine

Well, Greece at the time was basically a military dictatorship, so it wasn't surprising that Turkey invaded. Now Cyprus is divided (largely on ethnic lines) and whatever unity it had is now gone. Can't say I blame Greek Cyprus wanting to become part of Greece.

There is a parallel - between Cyprus having wanted to join Greece and Crimea wanting to join Russia.
Yet Cyprus voted against Crimea-Russia in the UN so they looked like complete hypocrites
Of course for some years Greek Cyprus (as well as Greece itself) has been paying pays lip service to Orthodox unity with Russia etc etc, all designed to attract Russian money

But when it comes to taking a political position Greek Cyprus has shown its true colors