Announcement

**freakyfreaky** · 02-01-2008, 04:46 PM

Re: Aliyev: Yerevan belongs to Azerbaijan

You have obviously got a sick sense of humor, Siamanto.

**skhara** · 02-01-2008, 05:29 PM

Re: Aliyev: Yerevan belongs to Azerbaijan

Maybe someone should this lunatic to present a map of such an Azerbaijani republic.

**Siamanto** · 02-02-2008, 08:34 AM

Re: Aliyev: Yerevan belongs to Azerbaijan

Originally posted by freakyfreaky View Post

You have obviously got a sick sense of humor, Siamanto.

Just curious, what do you with such a surrealistic absurdity?

**Siamanto** · 02-02-2008, 08:44 AM

Re: Aliyev: Yerevan belongs to Azerbaijan

Originally posted by skhara View Post

Maybe someone should this lunatic to present a map of such an Azerbaijani republic.

What's the likelihood for such childish claims to be taken seriously by the EC??? Do you really think that the Armenian - or non-Armenian - authorities take into considerations such inept claims? This is not the first time that they utter total non-sense.

Originally posted by Siamanto View Post

PRESS TV, Iran
Jan 28 2008

Aliyev: Yerevan belongs to Azerbaijan
Mon, 28 Jan 2008 22:21:20
.....
The remarks may further strain ties between the two neighbors which
fought a war over their territorial disputes in 1988-1999.

How can such absurdities be taken seriously to have an impact on reality?
Apparently, the author of the article has the "same" "sense of humor" as Aliev????

**Selpak** · 02-02-2008, 10:26 AM

Re: Aliyev: Yerevan belongs to Azerbaijan

It is Revan. It is neither Azeri nor Armenian city. "All Turks were exiled" doesn't mean it is not Turkish. Little history search can help you.

**KarotheGreat** · 02-02-2008, 02:56 PM

Re: Aliyev: Yerevan belongs to Azerbaijan

Originally posted by Selpak View Post

It is Revan. It is neither Azeri nor Armenian city. "All Turks were exiled" doesn't mean it is not Turkish. Little history search can help you.

Turkish stupitiry at work lol

**skhara** · 02-02-2008, 03:11 PM

Re: Aliyev: Yerevan belongs to Azerbaijan

Originally posted by Siamanto View Post

What's the likelihood for such childish claims to be taken seriously by the EC???

If there is a political need to take it "seriously", they'll take it seriously.

**TomServo** · 02-02-2008, 04:18 PM

Re: Aliyev: Yerevan belongs to Azerbaijan

Originally posted by Selpak View Post

It is Revan. It is neither Azeri nor Armenian city. "All Turks were exiled" doesn't mean it is not Turkish. Little history search can help you.

Adrianople, Constantinople, Smyrna... all Greeks were exiled?

**TomServo** · 02-02-2008, 04:21 PM

Re: Aliyev: Yerevan belongs to Azerbaijan

Karabakh Commentary: Aliyev’s threats must be taken seriously
Special to ArmeniaNow By Jirair Haratunian
Past Chairman of the Armenian Assembly of America Board of Directors

One of Armenia’s top generals, Colonel General Seyran Ohanian, recently cautioned that Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev’s frequent threats to resume war against Karabakh and Armenia must be taken seriously. Aliyev’s latest foray was a proclamation that “War with Armenia is not over; only the first stage is over.” He added, “Nagorno Karabakh will never be independent.” Aliyev’s bellicosity aside, his regime budgeted one billion dollars this year to modernize and train its military forces. That billion dollar military budget is what prompted General Ohanian to caution that Karabakh’s and Armenia’s security problems are real.

Flushed with oil revenues, Baku’s diplomatic posture regarding Armenia and Karabakh has become publicly arrogant and uncompromising. Unfortunately, American indulgence towards Baku has served to embolden Aliyev. Washington views Azerbaijan as a strategic asset in its confrontation with Teheran over Iran’s growing nuclear capacity. Coupled with this are the massive investments, largely sponsored by Washington, for the new Caspian pipelines that carry petroleum and natural gas to Western markets from Azerbaijan through Georgia, to Turkey. These, of course, circumvent Armenia and were designed to bypass Russian territory. Washington’s motives are as much political as economic. Proof of this were statements made in Baku by Senator Richard Lugar, Republican from Indiana and minority leader of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who asserted, “The long term (American) interests are not to allow Russia to be dominant in the South Caucasus and Central Asia.”

Little wonder then that Azerbaijan believes geography and abundance of oil will ultimately succeed in imposing its will on Armenia and Karabakh, and confident enough to threaten war with impunity. It must be said though, that United States and European diplomats have cautioned Baku, perhaps too mildly, against renewed warfare. They have in mind, of course, that the billions of dollars invested in Caspian oil production and delivery could be jeopardized in the event of a new conflict. Also, during their last visit to the region, the co-chairmen of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Minsk Group cautioned that war would be devastating for both countries. Instead, they lobbied for their latest written proposal as the best basis for an agreed framework for peace negotiations.

Where the Karabakh problem is heading is hard to discern. But what is clear is that Azerbaijan continues a ceaseless political and economic offensive against Armenia on multiple diplomatic fronts. Currently, the Nagorno Karabakh question has been inserted onto the agenda of the United Nations General Assembly. It is part of a resolution submitted by the GUAM coalition of states comprised of Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, and Moldova, to condemn the independence efforts of Nagorno Karabakh and other frozen conflict regions of the former Soviet Union. Ironically, this movement coincides with a contradictory effort led by the United States that calls for the independence of Kosovo. Its supporters repeatedly claim that Kosovo is a unique case that needs prompt resolution. They assert that Kosovo is not a precedent for other unresolved separatist conflicts. Russia disagrees and the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, Terry Davis, is unsure. He told the news agency Trend that it is very hard to predict the influence of the declaration of independence of Kosovo on Nagorno Karabakh and other “frozen conflicts.” In any event it appears certain that Kosovo will be declared an independent state in the near future despite Russia’s objections, without a UN Security Council endorsement and, even the unanimous concurrence of the European Union.

Is Kosovo a precedent for Karabakh’s independence? The answer is ambivalent. Nonetheless, Baku is fearful of Kosovo’s independence because it strengthens Armenian claims, and Armenia has said that the Nagorno Karabakh question is predicated on its own historic roots. However, there are more similarities than differences between Kosovo’s circumstances and Karabakh’s. Each emerged as a result of military actions that defeated Serbian and Azerbaijan armed forces. It took a NATO force to expel Serbian forces and the Nagorno Karabakh Republic was created through the victory of its own security forces. In both instances oppressive regimes that ruled over ethnic minority regions were expelled. New governmental processes were instituted in both regions. However, in Karabakh its new republic resulted from the free will and independent actions of its citizenry while in Kosovo NATO authorities still exercise oversight and control over the levers of government.

Thus, whether or not Kosovo constitutes a precedent in the eyes of Kosovo’s western supporters, they will be hard pressed to choose between the validity of one over the other. In the end, it is principle not precedent that should and hopefully will determine Karabakh’s future.

Source: http://www.armenianow.com/?action=vi...0&IID=&lng=eng