» » » » » » » » Pepe Escobar: What's At Stake In Armenia (Excerpts via Saker)

Pepe Escobar: What's At Stake In Armenia (Excerpts via Saker)

, , , , , , Edit
Pepe Escobar: What's At Stake In Armenia (Excerpts via Saker) - Hallo friendsDARMO NEWS TODAY, In the article you read this time with the title Pepe Escobar: What's At Stake In Armenia (Excerpts via Saker), We have prepared this article for you to read and retrieve information therein. Hopefully the contents of postings Article culture, Article economy, Article health, Article healthy tips, Article news, Article politics, Article sports, We write this you can understand. Alright, good read.

Title : Pepe Escobar: What's At Stake In Armenia (Excerpts via Saker)
link : Pepe Escobar: What's At Stake In Armenia (Excerpts via Saker)

Read too


Pepe Escobar: What's At Stake In Armenia (Excerpts via Saker)

 What’s at stake in the Armenia-Azerbaijan chessboard

Few geopolitical hot spots across the planet may rival the Caucasus: that intractable, tribal Tower of Babel, throughout History a contentious crossroads of empires from the Levant and nomads from the Eurasian steppes. And it gets even messier when one adds the fog of war.

At the collapse of the USSR, Nagorno-Karabakh had a mixed population of Azeri Shi’ites and Armenian Christians. Yet even before the collapse the Azerbaijani Army and Armenian independentists were already at war (1988-1994), which yielded a grim balance of 30,000 dead and roughly a million wounded.

The Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh declared independence in 1991: but that was not recognized by the “international community”. Finally there was a ceasefire in 1994 – with Nagorno-Karabakh entering the gray area/no man’s land of “frozen conflict”.

The problem is that in 1993, the United Nations had approved no less than four resolutions – 822, 853, 874 and 884 – establishing that Armenia should withdraw from what was deemed to be roughly 20% of Azerbaijani territory. This is at the core of Baku’s rationale to fight against what it qualifies as a foreign occupation army.

Yerevan’s interpretation though is that these four resolutions are null and void because Nagorno-Karabakh harbors an Armenian-majority population who wants to secede from Azerbaijan.

Pashinyan

Nagarno Karabakh harbours an Armenian majority at this time because a great many Azerbaijani's were ethnically cleansed from the area-  A fact that is being curiously/suspicously omitted from media coverage, alt and otherwise.

If we're striving for accuracy......

Wikipedia, soon to be censored, undoubtedly

Civil unrest in Nagorno-Karabakh in 1987 led to Azeris' being often harassed and forced to leave Armenia.[2] On 25 January 1988, the first wave of Azeri refugees from Armenia settled in the city of Sumgait.[2][3] Another major wave occurred in November 1988[3] as Azeris were either expelled by the nationalists and local or state authorities[4] or fled fearing for their lives.[5] Violence took place as a result of ethnic conflicts;[6] in November 1988, 25 Azeris were killed, according to Armenian sources (of those 20 in the town of Gugark);[7] and 217, according to Azerbaijani sources.[8]

Thus, in 1988–91 the remaining Azeris were forced to flee primarily to Azerbaijan.[4][9][10] It is impossible to determine the exact population numbers for Azeris in Armenia at the time of the conflict's escalation, since during the 1989 census forced Azeri migration from Armenia was already in progress. UNHCR's estimate is 200,000 persons.[5]

Crisis Group puts the IDP count much higher then 200,000 

Azerbaijan has made significant progress in recent years in caring for roughly 600,000 internally displaced persons (IDPs) who were forcibly evicted from Nagorno-Karabakh and seven surrounding districts by ethnic Armenian forces nearly two decades ago. Though many still face precarious existences, the state has been investing heavily in new housing and increasing benefits. But while some IDPs have fully integrated, many more are still in limbo. The government and most of the displaced favour return to their original homes.

Observation: It's interesting that ethnic cleansing can be played up or played down depending on the goal, situation, agenda.  

Example Israel: An land without people for a people without a land. Which wasn't true.

Example the Kurds backed by the US in N/E Syria: Documented they have been ethnically cleansing the Arab population- This is rarely ever spoken about.

We see this same scenario playing out present time in Nagorno Karabakh. Though the history and fact isn't getting a lot of attention (Pepe's article is about the most honest on the recent background so far)

Back to Pepe's article: 

All this time, something important was developing in the background: Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, who came to power in May 2018, and Aliyev started to talk: “The Azerbaijani side thought this indicated Armenia was ready for compromise (this all started when Armenia had a sort of revolution, with the new PM coming in with a popular mandate to clean house domestically). For whatever reason, it ended up not happening.”
Pashinyan is a western flunkie- was he playing/manipulating the Azerbaijani leader? Offering the carrot before the stick? It appears that way.

Don’t forget Pipelineistan

Armenian PM Pashinyan could be described as a liberal globalist. The majority of his political team is pro-NATO. Pashinyan went all guns blazing against former Armenian President (1998- 2008) Robert Kocharian, who before that happened to be, crucially, the de facto President of Nagorno-Karabakh.

Kocharian, who spent years in Russia and is close to President Putin, was charged with a nebulous attempt at “overthrowing the constitutional order”. Pashinyan tried to land him in jail. But even more crucial is the fact that Pashinyan refused to follow a plan elaborated by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov to finally settle the Artsakh/Nagorno-Karabakh mess.

 NATO lackey Pashinyan refused to follow a peace plan elaborated by Sergey Lavrov? Russia will keep that in mind when dealing with Mr Globalist (a fact, again, that is just not mentioned or downplayed) 

Pipelineistan was not forgotten here!

The dangerous actions of Armenia risks to further destabilize the region, which has a strategic importance for Azerbaijan and Europe, as it provides energy and transport links to Georgia, Turkey and Europe for the Azerbaijani oil and gas as well as other export commodities. By jeopardizing major infrastructure projects, such as the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline, Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum gas pipeline, Baku-Tbilisi-Kars railway, Armenia could put European energy and transport security at huge risk."

 What’s the point of this war?

So what happens next? A nearly insurmountable impasse, as Mr. C outlines it:

1. “The peace talks are going nowhere because Armenia is refusing to budge (to withdraw from occupying Nagorno-Karabakh plus 7 surrounding regions in phases or all at once, with the usual guarantees for civilians, even settlers – note that when they went in in the early 1990s they cleansed those lands of literally all Azerbaijanis, something like between 700,000 and 1 million people).”

2. Aliyev was under the impression that Pashinyan “was willing to compromise and began preparing his people and then looked like someone with egg on his face when it didn’t happen.”

3. “Turkey has made it crystal clear it will support Azerbaijan unconditionally, and has matched those words with deeds.”

4. “In such circumstances, Russia got outplayed – in the sense that they had been able to play off Armenia against Azerbaijan and vice versa, quite successfully, helping to mediate talks that went nowhere, preserving the status quo that effectively favored Armenia.”

And that brings us to the crucial question. What’s the point of this war?

Mr. C: “It is either to conquer as much as possible before the “international community” [in this case, the UNSC] calls for / demands a ceasefire or to do so as an impetus for re-starting talks that actually lead to progress. In either scenario, Azerbaijan will end up with gains and Armenia with losses. How much and under what circumstances (the status and question of Nagorno-Karabakh is distinct from the status and question of the Armenian occupied territories around Nagorno-Karabakh) is unknown: i.e. on the field of battle or the negotiating table or a combo of both. However this turns out, at a minimum Azerbaijan will get to keep what it liberated in battle. This will be the new starting point. And I suspect that Azerbaijan will do no harm to the Armenian civilians that stay. They’ll be model liberators. And they’ll take time to bring back Azerbaijani civilians (refugees/IDPs) to their homes, especially in areas that would become mixed as a result of return.”

So what can Moscow do under these circumstances? Not much,

“except to go into Azerbaijan proper, which they won’t do (there’s no land border between Russia and Armenia; so although Russia has a military base in Armenia with one or more thousand troops, they can’t just supply Armenia with guns and troops at will, given the geography).”

As of today, the fighting continues; Russia will remember Pashinian's double cross. So will Azerbaijan.




Thus Article Pepe Escobar: What's At Stake In Armenia (Excerpts via Saker)

That's an article Pepe Escobar: What's At Stake In Armenia (Excerpts via Saker) This time, hopefully can give benefits to all of you. well, see you in posting other articles.

You are now reading the article Pepe Escobar: What's At Stake In Armenia (Excerpts via Saker) with the link address https://darmonewst.blogspot.com/2020/10/pepe-escobar-whats-at-stake-in-armenia.html

Subscribe to receive free email updates:

0 Response to "Pepe Escobar: What's At Stake In Armenia (Excerpts via Saker)"

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)