Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited.
by Gevorg Mirzayan
[REGNUM] Strategic mistake. This is how Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan called the country's desire to rely exclusively on Russia in the field of security.
Continued from Page 5
“The security architecture of Armenia was 99.999% connected with Russia, including in the logic of acquiring weapons and ammunition. However, today, when Russia itself needs weapons, weapons and ammunition, in this situation it is clear that even if the Russian Federation wanted to, it would not be able to provide for the needs of Armenia's security. That is, that example should show us that in the field of security, depending on or being tied to only one place is in itself a strategic mistake ,” the head of the Armenian Cabinet said.
Here, of course, one can say a lot about the fact that one of the main goals of Nikol Pashinyan's career (first as a journalist, then as an oppositionist and since 2018 as prime minister) was the deterioration of Russian-Armenian relations with the further displacement of Russian influence from the South Caucasus.
It can be pointed out that this goal was set before him by his foreign friends, who sponsored and supported him throughout his career.
Finally, one can note the phrase “even if desired” in his words – hinting at the fact that Russia (whose peacekeepers are now saving the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh from the Azerbaijani invasion and whose base is saving the Armenian Armenians from the Turkish invasion) for some reason refuses to help the Armenians.
But it's much better to talk about something else. The fact that in theory Pashinyan is, of course, right - it is always better to diversify partners, including in military-political issues. It's always best not to depend on a single security provider, or more importantly, a survival provider. However, in practice - the specific Armenian practice - a single question arises: does Armenia have alternative suppliers of survival that are equivalent in terms of Russia's capabilities?
Of course, pro-Western Armenian activists will immediately name the United States . They will tell about the Armenian diaspora, about its influence on the US Congress. The fact that with hundreds of bases around the world, it will not be difficult for the States to allocate money for one more, which will be located on the territory of Armenia. And, of course, to protect the country from all external threats.
The Americans would really be interested in a base in Armenia. In the center of the South Caucasus, near the borders of Russia, Turkey and Iran. Near the routes of transit of Caspian hydrocarbons to Europe and one of the branches of the Chinese "Silk Road". The Americans place bases not in order to protect, but in order to influence and destabilize their neighbors - which means (and this is the first reason why this option does not suit Armenia), Yerevan automatically becomes an enemy for all regional countries. Including for now friendly Iran with Russia. At the same time, having lost all his friends, he will not find a defender either - the reliability of American defense guarantees raises very big questions. This can be confirmed by the Kurds, Georgians and many other countries, which the Americans first incited against stronger players, and then did not give the promised help.
Another option to replace Russia is France . The country, albeit less influential than the United States, has not been seen in the mass surrender of its allies. It would seem that the option is not bad - French politicians are now the loudest in favor of the rights of Karabakh Armenians. A number of senators there even call on President Emmanuel Macron to take control of the Lachin corridor (connecting Karabakh with Armenia) and thus end the blockade of the region by Azerbaijan.
However, the French have not two (like the Americans), but three serious disadvantages. Firstly, they do not have enough forces and means of its projection - in the event of a conflict in the Caucasus, France will not be able to transfer a sufficient number of troops there to protect Armenia due to the absence of these troops. Secondly, France (unlike the Americans) is not in a position to conflict with the main threat to the security of Armenia - Turkey, which is part of NATO together with the French. Macron's attempt to wrestle with Erdogan for the territorial rights of the Greeks ended, we recall, to no avail. Finally, thirdly, France will do whatever the Americans say. And if Washington demands that Paris use its presence in Armenia to destabilize its Armenian neighbors and the entire region, then the French Komsomol will answer “yes”.
The third option is Iran . It would seem that the Islamic Republic has both the ability to project force (it has a common border with Armenia), and the force itself (the Iranian army is far from the last in the region), and an interest in a stable friendly Armenia (Iran already has enough enemies on the borders), and unwillingness to use Armenia as a springboard against enemies. However, despite all these advantages, Iran is even less suitable for the role of the defender of Armenia than others - simply because it cannot afford a conflict not only with Turkey, but even with Azerbaijan. More Azerbaijanis live in Iran than in Azerbaijan itself, and an attempt to side with Yerevan will be fraught with riots in the northern Iranian provinces.
There is a fourth, extravagant option - Turkey . But in order to go under the wing of Erdogan, the Armenians must forget about the Genocide, and about sovereignty, and, possibly, about a number of their territories.
Finally, all of the above options have two more key disadvantages. First, the supplier of survival means not only a guarantee of security, but also the provision of economic well-being - and here none of them can give what Russia gives. Sales market and labor market.
It would seem that the Americans may well compensate for everything with money - just transfer some amount of money to the Armenians. However, these transfers can stop at any moment: the American population does not have any solidarity feelings towards the Armenian. And the Russian one is experiencing it: Moscow considers the post-Soviet space as part of the former Russian territory and as part of the current security contour of Russia, therefore it is ready to invest in the development of its neighbors.
But if the neighbors do not reciprocate Moscow, if they begin to intrigue, insult and try to go under the wing of the enemies, then Russian investments can really stop. With all the consequences, leaking and disappearing for these neighbors, who really made a real strategic mistake.
|
