#Azerbaijan is a rogue state | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

armenianassembly · 6 years

Text

Former National Security Adviser on Turkey’s Payroll Pleads Guilty for Lying to Federal Officials

Armenian Assembly Reiterates Call for Public Congressional Hearings on Turkey’s Surreptitious Influence on America’s Democratic Institutions

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn pleaded guilty for making “materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statements” to federal officials, reports the Armenian Assembly of America (Assembly). Department of Justice Special Counsel Robert Mueller indicted Flynn for lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) about conversations with the Russian Ambassador during the presidential transition, as well as false statements about his involvement with the Republic of Turkey.

The Statement of the Offense in the United States of America v. Michael T. Flynn identifies Turkey under the category “Other False Statements Regarding Flynn’s Contacts with Foreign Governments.” The statement notes multiple documents pertaining to a project performed by him and his company, the Flynn Intel Group, Inc., “for the principal benefit of the Republic of Turkey (‘Turkey Project’).” According to the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), Flynn made “materially false statements and omissions” regarding his lobbying activities on behalf of the Republic of Turkey and the Erdogan government.

Click here for the Department of Justice’s full Statement of the Offense.

“The newest revelations about Flynn is just the tip of the iceberg. While prosecutors have uncovered some vital information, there is much more yet to come to light, especially regarding Turkey’s continued use of illegal funds to influence national security at the highest levels. This practice has been ongoing and needs to be halted,” Assembly Co-Chairs Anthony Barsamian and Van Krikorian said. “As we have previously urged, there needs to be thorough public Congressional hearings to fully expose Turkey’s attempts to influence the United States Government, which is a direct attack on our democratic values,” they added.

Reports indicated that Flynn would be paid $15 million to secretly carry out Turkey’s bidding. Flynn was already paid $530,000 last year for work the Justice Department says benefited the government of Turkey, and did not register as a foreign agent at the time.

On October 18, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Ranking Member Elijah Cummings (D-MD), alongside 17 Members of Congress, sent a letter to Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-SC) requesting a subpoena on the White House to produce all documents related to Flynn’s “egregious conflicts of interest” in business dealings with foreign governments, which includes his unreported lobbying contract as a foreign agent on behalf of the Turkish government in 2016.

The letter stated: “We believe this paper trail must be pursued to answer the gravest question of all: Did Gen. Flynn seek to change the course of our country’s national security to benefit the same private interests he previously promoted, whether by advising President Trump, interacting with foreign officials, or influencing other members of the Trump administration?”

The Assembly has repeatedly highlighted Turkey’s attempts to gain surreptitious influence over U.S. officials to the detriment of U.S. national security, and has called for investigations therein. The Assembly has also urged Representatives who joined the Turkish and Azeri Caucuses to withdraw their membership. Some already have.

“Members ought not to associate themselves with such corrupt and authoritarian regimes. Given Turkey’s treatment of Christians, dangerously rogue behavior, denial of the Armenian Genocide and support for Azerbaijan’s ISIS-style beheadings and other attacks, it is well past time for Members of Congress to withdraw their membership from the Turkish and Azeri Congressional Caucuses,” reiterated the Assembly Co-Chairs.

Established in 1972, the Armenian Assembly of America is the largest Washington-based nationwide organization promoting public understanding and awareness of Armenian issues. The Assembly is a non-partisan, 501(c)(3) tax-exempt membership organization.

#Flynn #Michael Flynn #Mueller #robert mueller #Turkey #Erdogan #Recep Tayyip Erdogan #Department of Justice

4 notes · View notes

yahoonews7 · 4 years

Link

(Bloomberg Opinion) -- In the space of just a few momentous weeks, one of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s most ambitious projects — a Russian natural gas export system to match the new geopolitical reality rather than the Cold War-era one — has taken its final shape. It will probably last, without major change, until the end of Russia’s run as a top energy exporter. The finishing touches to the project, begun in 2001 with the construction of the Blue Stream pipeline to Turkey, include the launch of the Power of Siberia pipeline to China on Dec. 2, last week’s U.S. sanctions on the Nord Stream 2 pipeline to Germany, a new gas transit deal with Ukraine and the commissioning of the TurkStream pipeline, planned for January.External pressure and market circumstances have helped shape the new Russian gas export system so that it can’t really be used as a sinister tool of Putin’s rogue foreign policy. Meanwhile, it’s structured in a such a way that post-Putin Russia will still be able to maintain its energy market share and use it as a basis for useful trade partnerships. That makes it a positive part of Putin’s legacy, if not entirely thanks to Putin.Problems Inherited and Self-MadeRussia inherited contracts from the Soviet Union to supply natural gas to Europe, one of the biggest sources of hard currency for Russia’s reeling post-Communist economy. But the Soviet pipelines were laid across Ukraine and Belarus, which were part of the empire. But they became independent nations that demanded transit fees and low-priced energy supplies in exchange for maintaining Russia’s energy supplies to Europe, or rather, to its ex-Communist part, where Russia and everything that came from it were newly unpopular.At the same time, gas suppliers in Central Asia and Azerbaijan presented a competitive threat: It was relatively easy for them to pipe gas to Turkey, which could deliver it further to Europe.In the 2000s, when Putin and his advisers nurtured the notion of Russia as an “energy superpower,” it became clear to Kremlin strategists that they needed more flexibility to increase supplies and get more economic leverage over neighbors in Europe and Asia. Blue Stream, laid across the bottom of the Black Sea to the Turkish port of Samsun and opened in 2003, was the opening move of the Putin gas game.But Blue Stream’s capacity of 16 billion cubic meters of natural gas per year was dwarfed by the roughly 180 billion cubic meters the Soviet-built pipelines could export to Europe via Ukraine and Belarus. It helped Russia compete in Turkey, but didn’t solve the bigger problem of Russia’s dependence on Ukraine and Belarus. The share of European natural gas imports that came from Russia kept falling.In 2011, Russia obtained full control over the Belarussian gas transit system in exchange for discounted gas supplies. But Ukraine remained firmly in control of its pipelines, which accounted for the lion’s share of Russia’s export capacity.Putin wanted more direct access to southern and western Europe. He wanted to be able to bypass Ukraine, for both economic and political reasons. The Ukrainian pipeline system, run by National JSC Naftogaz Ukraine, was falling into disrepair, and Gazprom, the Russian export monopoly for pipeline gas, feared it might have to invest in fixing it without having much influence over its operation. At the same time, Putin wanted leverage over the Ukrainian government to keep it in Moscow’s orbit. Twice in the 2000s, Russia cut off gas supplies to Ukraine to try to bring it to heel, but without alternative export routes, such tactics were unsustainable.In 2012, Russia made another major move with the opening of Nord Stream, stretching across the bottom of the Baltic Sea to northern Germany. With a capacity of 55 billion cubic meters a year, it boosted Russia’s share of European imports. At the same time, Russia was planning a major pipeline to southern Europe, South Stream, across the Black Sea to Bulgaria. From there it would branch out to carry gas to Greece, Italy, Serbia and on to central Europe. The 2014 Crimea annexation made it imperative for Putin to redraw the gas export map. Now, Ukraine wasn’t just an inconvenient partner, it was an adversary, and bypassing it became a geopolitical necessity for Putin. Europe, too, was more worried than ever about increasing gas exports from Russia, which could use it to expand its political influence. The European Union scuppered South Stream in late 2014 by putting pressure on Bulgaria. Plans to expand Nord Stream by laying two parallel strings of pipe, known as Nord Stream 2, also became politically toxic, especially given U.S. resistance to that project: In Washington, fears of increased Russian leverage over Germany were compounded by the desire to supply more U.S. liquefied natural gas to Europe.Art of the PossibleThe way Russia altered its gas export plans in the last five years reflects a major shift in its geopolitical thinking. Putin’s anti-Western partnerships with key authoritarian regimes — those of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Chinese President Xi Jinping — had to be backed up with gas pipelines. At the same time, Putin wanted to maintain a lifeline to Germany, with its history of regime-agnostic Ostpolitik; Putin, a German speaker and a former Soviet intelligence agent in East Germany, sees Russia’s relationship with Europe as one with Germany first, even if Chancellor Angela Merkel is one of the continent’s least Putin-friendly leaders.So South Stream mutated into TurkStream, a pipeline with a planned capacity of 31.5 billion cubic meters running to the western part of Turkey, from where gas will flow to the Balkans. It was first filled with gas in late November, and Putin and Erdogan plan to inaugurate it on Jan. 8.The pipeline to China, Power of Siberia, which should be delivering 38 billion cubic meters of gas a year by 2024, opened early this month, with Putin and Xi watching via video link. It runs from Gazprom’s deposits in Eastern Siberia, too far from Europe for deliveries to make economic sense.At the same time, Russia has made a point of competing with the U.S. and Middle Eastern suppliers on the new and fast-expanding European market for liquefied natural gas. Novatek PJSC, a private company in which state-owned Gazprom is a minority shareholder along with France’s Total SA, started exporting from its enormous LNG facility on the Yamal Peninsula in 2018, and this year it approved a $21 billion investment in a second LNG plant. (Gazprom and Rosneft, another state company, have their own LNG capacity, but mostly for export to Asian markets). In the third quarter of 2019, Russia was the EU’s second biggest LNG supplier after Qatar, with 15% of imports; the U.S. was fourth, with 12% — although data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration show that the U.S. has overtaken Russia more recently.All these developments make it almost inevitable that Russian natural gas exports will keep increasing as spare production capacity keeps shrinking. Though vessels laying pipe for Nord Stream 2 and their owners have been sanctioned by the U.S., and Swiss contractor Allseas has suspended work on the project to avoid falling afoul of the U.S. government, that pipeline will be completed, too. Gazprom and one of its Russian contractors have pipe-laying vessels of their own. Though they’ll move slower than the bigger one provided by Allseas, Peter Beyer, the German government’s coordinator for trans-Atlantic issues, said in a radio interview on Monday that the government expected Nord Stream 2 to be operational in the second half of 2020. The delay has forced Russia to do a better deal with Ukraine than it would have been able to negotiate had there been no Nord Stream 2 sanctions. To replace the transit deal that runs out at the end of this year, Russia was trying to sign a mere one-year extension. Ukraine and the EU, which mediated the talks, were fighting for a 10-year contract that would spell out a minimum amount of gas for Gazprom to pump every year. Ukraine gets about $3 billion a year in transit fees from Gazprom, and it would develop a major hole in its budget without the funds.Russia agreed to a five-year deal with a minimum of 65 billion cubic meters to be supplied in 2020 (slightly less than this year’s projected imports) and 40 billion cubic meters in the following years. Both sides compromised on outstanding litigation that arose from the two countries’ previous tumultuous relationship as partners in the natural gas business. Gazprom agreed to pay Naftogaz the $3 billion it had won in an arbitration case, and Naftogaz agreed to drop lawsuits seek an additional $8 billion and to refrain from filing any others.Other compromises may have been reached, too. It’s been reported in Ukraine that Russia might resume direct supplies of gas for Ukraine’s own needs — something unthinkable under former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko’s government, when Ukraine was buying Russian gas in the EU rather than deal with the invader of Crimea. Russia is denying that direct supplies are part of the deal, but current Ukiraine president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, is more pragmatic than Poroshenko was and eager to end the armed conflict Russia has instigated in Ukraine’s eastern regions. The new gas deal, described by the EU official who brokered it as a win-win solution for both sides, shows that Putin, with his transactional approach to foreign policy, values Zelenskiy’s willingness to bargain and compromise. As a result, Ukraine will remain an important pillar of the new Russian gas export scheme at least for the next five years. Though Putin didn’t originally want that, making every effort to establish gas supply channels that go around it, Russia’s resulting export system is remarkably balanced. It links Russia to China, Turkey, southern, northern and eastern Europe. All these markets are competitive, especially in Europe, where the EU has cracked down on Gazprom’s earlier attempts at monopoly pricing.Putin may have made and changed his plans for export channels in hopes of geopolitical leverage. This — and the big infrastructure contracts for Kremlin cronies that came with the pipeline buildout — helped justify the tens of billions of dollars invested in the pipeline and LNG projects. Gazprom’s capital expenditure has averaged $6.4 billion per quarter in the last five years, some 23% of the average quarterly revenue over the same period. The company has remained profitable throughout, but it has more than doubled its debt load since 2013, while revenue has increased by a projected 40% this year compared with 2014.Now that the infrastructure mostly is in place and the deposits needed to feed it are either online or coming online in the near future, the marginal cost of exporting gas will be relatively low, and Russia is guaranteed a solid export revenue stream in a fast-changing global gas market. That’s important for a country that exported $49.1 billion worth of natural gas in 2018 and collected some 7% of its budget revenues from the gas industry. Russia's export partners, of course, eventually move to phase out fossil fuels. That, however, won’t be happening anytime soon, as both Europe and China will need more gas as they replace coal. Russia is projected to account for around a third of the EU’s gas supply at least until 2040. Putin will be gone by then, but Russia’s energy trade will be more diversified than when he came to power. More benign Russian governments will be able to use it as a basis for good neighborly relations rather than as an instrument of pressure. The results of Putin’s grand project show how multiple players — Putin the ambitious authoritarian, his situational allies such as Erdogan and Xi, his adversaries such as the U.S., his reluctant partners such as the EU and his victims such as Ukraine — can combine efforts to build something worthwhile. To contact the author of this story: Leonid Bershidsky at [email protected] contact the editor responsible for this story: Robert Burgess at [email protected] column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Leonid Bershidsky is Bloomberg Opinion's Europe columnist. He was the founding editor of the Russian business daily Vedomosti and founded the opinion website Slon.ru.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinion©2019 Bloomberg L.P.

from Yahoo Finance https://ift.tt/39mVXXA

#World news

0 notes

newstfionline · 6 years

Text

Raqqa’s dirty secret

By Quentin Sommerville and Riam Dalati, BBC, 14 November 2017

The BBC has uncovered details of a secret deal that let hundreds of IS fighters and their families escape from Raqqa, under the gaze of the US and British-led coalition and Kurdish-led forces who control the city.

Lorry driver Abu Fawzi thought it was going to be just another job.

He drives an 18-wheeler across some of the most dangerous territory in northern Syria. Bombed-out bridges, deep desert sand, even government forces and so-called Islamic State fighters don’t stand in the way of a delivery.

But this time, his load was to be human cargo. The Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), an alliance of Kurdish and Arab fighters opposed to IS, wanted him to lead a convoy that would take hundreds of families displaced by fighting from the town of Tabqa on the Euphrates river to a camp further north.

The job would take six hours, maximum--or at least that’s what he was told.

But when he and his fellow drivers assembled their convoy early on 12 October, they realised they had been lied to.

Instead, it would take three days of hard driving, carrying a deadly cargo--hundreds of IS fighters, their families and tonnes of weapons and ammunition.

Abu Fawzi and dozens of other drivers were promised thousands of dollars for the task but it had to remain secret.

The deal to let IS fighters escape from Raqqa--de facto capital of their self-declared caliphate--had been arranged by local officials. It came after four months of fighting that left the city obliterated and almost devoid of people. It would spare lives and bring fighting to an end. The lives of the Arab, Kurdish and other fighters opposing IS would be spared.

But it also enabled many hundreds of IS fighters to escape from the city. At the time, neither the US and British-led coalition, nor the SDF, which it backs, wanted to admit their part.

Great pains were taken to hide it from the world. But the BBC has spoken to dozens of people who were either on the convoy, or observed it, and to the men who negotiated the deal.

In a greasy yard in Tabqa, underneath a date palm, three boys are busy at work rebuilding a lorry engine. They are covered in motor oil. Their hair, black and oily, stands on end.

Near them is a group of drivers. Abu Fawzi is at the centre, conspicuous in his bright red jacket. It matches the colour of his beloved 18-wheeler. He’s clearly the leader, quick to offer tea and cigarettes. At first he says he doesn’t want to speak but soon changes his mind.

He and the rest of the drivers are angry. It’s weeks since they risked their lives for a journey that ruined engines and broke axles but still they haven’t been paid. It was a journey to hell and back, he says.

“We were scared from the moment we entered Raqqa,” he says. “We were supposed to go in with the SDF, but we went alone. As soon as we entered, we saw IS fighters with their weapons and suicide belts on. They booby-trapped our trucks. If something were to go wrong in the deal, they would bomb the entire convoy. Even their children and women had suicide belts on.”

Publicly, the SDF said that only a few dozen fighters had been able to leave, all of them locals.

But one lorry driver tells us that isn’t true.

“We took out around 4,000 people including women and children--our vehicle and their vehicles combined. When we entered Raqqa, we thought there were 200 people to collect. In my vehicle alone, I took 112 people.”

Another driver says the convoy was six to seven kilometres long. It included almost 50 trucks, 13 buses and more than 100 of the Islamic State group’s own vehicles. IS fighters, their faces covered, sat defiantly on top of some of the vehicles.

Footage secretly filmed and passed to us shows lorries towing trailers crammed with armed men. Despite an agreement to take only personal weapons, IS fighters took everything they could carry. Ten trucks were loaded with weapons and ammunition.

The drivers point to a white truck being worked on in the corner of the yard. “Its axle was broken because of the weight of the ammo,” says Abu Fawzi.

This wasn’t so much an evacuation--it was the exodus of so-called Islamic State.

The SDF didn’t want the retreat from Raqqa to look like an escape to victory. No flags or banners would be allowed to be flown from the convoy as it left the city, the deal stipulated.

It was also understood that no foreigners would be allowed to leave Raqqa alive.

Back in May, US Defence Secretary James Mattis described the fight against IS as a war of “annihilation”. “Our intention is that the foreign fighters do not survive the fight to return home to north Africa, to Europe, to America, to Asia, to Africa. We are not going to allow them to do so,” he said on US television.

But foreign fighters--those not from Syria and Iraq--were also able to join the convoy, according to the drivers. One explains:

“There was a huge number of foreigners. France, Turkey, Azerbaijan, Pakistan, Yemen, Saudi, China, Tunisia, Egypt...”

In light of the BBC investigation, the coalition now admits the part it played in the deal. Some 250 IS fighters were allowed to leave Raqqa, with 3,500 of their family members.

“We didn’t want anyone to leave,” says Col Ryan Dillon, spokesman for Operation Inherent Resolve, the Western coalition against IS.

“But this goes to the heart of our strategy, ‘by, with and through’ local leaders on the ground. It comes down to Syrians--they are the ones fighting and dying, they get to make the decisions regarding operations,” he says.

While a Western officer was present for the negotiations, they didn’t take an “active part” in the discussions. Col Dillon maintains, though, that only four foreign fighters left and they are now in SDF custody.

As it left the city, the convoy would pass through the well-irrigated cotton and wheat fields north of Raqqa. Small villages gave way to desert. The convoy left the main road and took to tracks across the desert. The trucks found it hard going, but it was much harder for the men behind the wheel.

A friend of Abu Fawzi’s rolls up the sleeve of his tunic. Underneath, there are burns on his skin. “Look what they did here,” he says.

According to Abu Fawzi, there were three or four foreigners with each driver. They would beat him and call him names, such as “infidel”, or “pig”.

They might have been helping the fighters escape, but the Arab drivers were abused the entire route, they say. And threatened.

“They said, ‘Let us know when you rebuild Raqqa--we will come back,’” says Abu Fawzi. “They were defiant and didn’t care. They accused us of kicking them out of Raqqa.”

A female foreign fighter threatened him with her AK-47.

Shopkeeper Mahmoud doesn’t get intimidated by much.

It was about four in the afternoon when an SDF convoy drove through his town, Shanine, and everyone was told to go indoors.

“We were here and an SDF vehicle stopped by to say there was a truce agreement between them and IS,” he says. “They wanted us to clear the area.”

He is no fan of IS, but he couldn’t miss a business opportunity--even if some of the 4,000 surprise customers driving through his village were armed to the teeth.

A small bridge in the village created a bottleneck so the IS fighters got out and went shopping. After months of fighting and taking cover in bunkers, they were pale and hungry. They filed into his shop and, he says, they cleared his shelves.

“A one-eyed Tunisian fighter told me to fear God,” he says. “In a very calm voice, he asked why I had shaved. He said they would come back and enforce Sharia once again. I told him we have no problem with Sharia laws. We’re all Muslims.”

Instant noodles, biscuits and snacks--they bought everything they could get their hands on.

They left their weapons outside the shop. The only trouble he had was when three of the fighters spied some cigarettes--contraband in their eyes--and tore up the boxes.

“They didn’t appropriate anything, nothing at all,” he says.

“Only three of them went rogue. Other IS fighters even chastised them.”

He says IS paid for what they took.

“They hoovered up the shop. I got overwhelmed by their numbers. Many asked me for prices, but I couldn’t answer them because I was busy serving other people. So they left money for me on my desk without me asking.”

Despite the abuse they suffered, the lorry drivers agreed--when it came to money, IS settled its bills.

“IS may have been homicidal psychopaths, but they’re always correct with the money,” says Abu Fawzi with a smile.

North of the village, it’s a different landscape. A lonely tractor ploughs a field, sending a plume of dust and sand into the air that can be seen for miles. There are fewer villages, and it’s here that the convoy sought to disappear.

In Muhanad’s tiny village, people fled as the convoy approached, fearing for their homes--and their lives.

But suddenly, the vehicles turned right, leaving the main road for a desert track.

“Two Humvees were leading the convoy ahead,” says Muhanad. “They were organising it and wouldn’t let anyone pass them.”

As the convoy disappeared into the haze of the desert, Muhanad felt no immediate relief. Almost everyone we spoke to says IS threatened to return, its fighters running a finger across their throats as they passed by.

“We’ve been living in terror for the past four or five years,” says Muhanad.

It will take us a while to rid ourselves of that psychological fear. We feel that they may be coming back for us, or will send sleeper agents. We’re still not sure that they’ve gone for good.”

Along the route, many people we spoke to said they heard coalition aircraft, sometimes drones, following the convoy.

From the cab of his truck, Abu Fawzi watched as a coalition warplane flew overhead, dropping illumination flares, which lit up the convoy and the road ahead.

“When the last of the convoy were about to cross, a US jet flew very low and deployed flares to light up the area. IS fighters shat their pants.”

The coalition now confirms that while it did not have its personnel on the ground, it monitored the convoy from the air.

Past the last SDF checkpoint, inside IS territory--a village between Markada and Al-Souwar--Abu Fawzi reached his destination. His lorry was full of ammunition and IS fighters wanted it hidden.

When he finally made it back to safety, he was asked by the SDF where he’d dumped the goods.

“We showed them the location on the map and he marked it so uncle Trump can bomb it later,” he says.

Much is hidden beneath the rubble of Raqqa and the lies around this deal might easily have stayed buried there too.

The numbers leaving were much higher than local tribal elders admitted. At first the coalition refused to admit the extent of the deal.

The Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces, somewhat improbably, continue to maintain that no deal was done.

And this may not even have been about freeing civilian hostages. As far as the coalition is concerned, there was no transfer of hostages from IS to coalition or SDF hands.

And despite coalition denials, dozens of foreign fighters, according to eyewitnesses, joined the exodus.

The deal to free IS was about maintaining good relations between the Kurds leading the fight and the Arab communities who surround them.

It was also about minimising casualties. IS was well dug in at the city’s hospital and stadium. Any effort to dislodge it head-on would have been bloody and prolonged.

Raqqa was effectively IS’s capital but it was also a cage--fighters were trapped there.

The deal to save Raqqa may have been worth it.

But it has also meant battle-hardened militants have spread across Syria and further afield--and many of them aren’t done fighting yet.

All names of the people featured in the report have been changed.

#Syrian conflict #Raqqa #Islamic State

0 notes

dougielombax · 2 months

Text

Once again.

Fuck Azerbaijan for this bullshit!

Reblog the shit out of this.

#dougie rambles #news #europe #caucasus #political crap #armenia #azerbaijan #fuck Azerbaijan #azerbaijan is a terrorist state #un security council #international law #war crimes #terrorism #rogue state

16 notes · View notes

dougielombax · 1 year

Text

Okay!

I need to point something out.

People who call for Ireland to join NATO are all too quick to overlook that a third of the country is already occupied by a NATO member. I blame THAT on partitionist brain rot, but that’s besides the point.

And the UK do fuck all to protect the north anyway. Plus they were using the British army to slaughter innocent civilians there (with help from the RUC, loyalist murder gangs and the UDR) as recently as thirty years ago.

I’d rather NOT see Irish troops (unlike their British counterparts, the Irish armed forces have never committed war crimes!) being commanded by British or Turkish generals fwiw (Turkey is also a NATO member and has tons of its own imperialist baggage, in addition to its ongoing fuckery in Syria overseeing the slaughter of innocent Kurds, Assyrians and Armenians, in addition to helping Russia evade sanctions and assisting Azerbaijan in its ongoing genocidal crusade against Armenia (yes that includes Artsakh! Shut up!). But that’s a different topic)

This isn’t an anti-NATO screed btw, I can understand perfectly why the other countries joined NATO in the first place. I’m not gonna go off on some rant about depleted uranium or end up shrieking about Kosovo like some deranged Serbian nationalist. I’m above that shit.

And you sure as shit won’t see me defending Putin’s stupid military vanity project in Ukraine either. Or any of his regime’s prior instances of fuckery.

I know some out there want me to do so.

But I shan’t. So there!

Ireland merely has reason enough NOT to join NATO on accounts of a current NATO-member rogue state having spent the last few centuries fucking around with us for its imperialist vanity project.

I do think Ireland should spend more on defence, drastically, in all aspects of said area. And I think reunification can provide the perfect opportunity for such an overhaul. Plus it can finally rid the Irish Defence Forces of that insidious partitionist mindset which has plagued it since fucking forever.

Plus I think the Irish Defence Forces need to undergo a MAJOR overhaul at all levels in every area such as operations, wages, contingency planning, defence doctrine, military equipment acquisitions and trading. Among others.

And no. Conscription alone will NOT solve the issues faced by the Defence Forces! Most Irish people would sell out their own country for a corn chip (trust me! I’d know!) or a few pretty little pennies anyway, so if there was a draft during a war you’d see more people ending up in jail rather than signing up I promise you that.

Plus it would fill the military with poorly skilled people who don’t want to be there.

I’d personally rather see the Defence Forces become a well armed well trained Republican-thinking (in the Irish sense!), all-Island defence force which helps out in international peacekeeping and conflict resolution.

As opposed to the weedy, pitiful little ill-equipped, short-staffed, barely existent token gendarmerie/potato militia the Irish government wants to reduce it to.

At the least!

For fuck’s sake!

#personal stuff #dougie rambles #vent post #political crap #ireland #northern ireland #irish reunification #Irish defence forces #fuck’s sake #NATO

0 notes

dougielombax · 1 year

Text

Okay.

Repeat after me.

Azerbaijan is an authoritarian rogue state.

#personal stuff #dougie rambles #political stuff

0 notes

armeniaitn · 3 years

Text

Artsakh welcomes European Parliament resolution calling for release of POWs

New Post has been published on https://armenia.in-the.news/politics/artsakh-welcomes-european-parliament-resolution-calling-for-release-of-pows-73840-21-05-2021/

Artsakh welcomes European Parliament resolution calling for release of POWs

Artsakh’s Foreign Ministry has welcomed the adoption of the resolution of the European Parliament (EP) on 20th of May following the urgent debate where inter alia the European Parliament demands the immediate and unconditional release of all Armenian prisoners, both military and civilian, captured during and after the war unleashed against the people of Artsakh by the Azerbaijani-Turkish tandem.

“We commend the efforts of the overwhelming majority of EP members to address this issue of humanitarian emergency by keeping constant pressure on Azerbaijan to ensure that Azerbaijan respects its own international obligations, particularly, with regard to ECHR and Geneva Conventions. This resolution is a significant contribution to the collective efforts of the international community to return the Armenian prisoners back home,” the Ministry said in a statement. It hailed the fact that the resolution attaches great importance to the security of Artsakh and the protection of its cultural heritage in territories currently under Azerbaijani occupation. It is commendable that the European Parliament insists that Equal Rights and Self-Determination of Peoples are imperative principles for determining the future status of Nagorno-Karabakh. “We also welcome the resolution adopted on May 19th by the European Parliament on May 19 calling on the EU and its Member States to add the “racist right-wing extremist” ‘Grey Wolves’ movement to their terrorist list, to ban their associations and organizations in EU countries. The resolution is a crucial step toward fighting extremism and racism in the region. It will also be a clear and important message to rogue states that the international community stands up to their genocidal policies,” the Ministry stated.

Read original article here.

#Artsakh #Karabakh #Politics

0 notes

armeniaitn · 3 years

Text

ANCC urges PM Trudeau to recognize Artsakh and ban all arms sales to Turkey and Azerbaijan

New Post has been published on https://armenia.in-the.news/politics/ancc-urges-pm-trudeau-to-recognize-artsakh-and-ban-all-arms-sales-to-turkey-and-azerbaijan-65076-13-11-2020/

ANCC urges PM Trudeau to recognize Artsakh and ban all arms sales to Turkey and Azerbaijan

On November 13, 2020, the Armenian National Committee of Canada (ANCC) issued a letter to the Prime Minister of Canada, the Rt. Hon. Justin Trudeau, regarding the latest developments in Artsakh and to express the Armenian-Canadian community’s collective outrage regarding the destructive use of Canadian technology by Azerbaijan.

In the letter, the ANCC addressed the grievous peace agreement that was signed on November 9, 2020, by Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan and urged Canada to go beyond just statements and take decisive action to save the Republic of Artsakh and permanently ban the destructive and irresponsible sale of arms technology to Turkey.

The letter, signed by ANCC Co-Presidents Hrag Darakdjian and Shahen Mirakian said “This disastrous agreement poses a very real threat to the long-term stability and security in the South Caucasus region. Moreover, the ramifications of this agreement will pose a significant danger to the national identity of Armenia and Artsakh, will de-stabilize Armenia’s economic potential, threaten the demographic composition of the region, all the while paving the way for Turkey and Azerbaijan to continue their state-sponsored campaigns of ethnic cleansing and cultural appropriation in Artsakh and beyond.”

The so-called trilateral peace agreement was signed outside the framework of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairmanship that since 1990’s has been responsible for the mediation of the conflict.

The letter also addressed the complete absence of decisive action from Canada and the rest of the international community that allowed Turkey and Azerbaijan to continue their crimes with impunity.

“The international community and Canada not only failed in condemning Turkey and Azerbaijan, but they also weren’t able to sustain the internationally accepted mediation process through the OSCE Minsk Group, allowing rogue states such as Turkey to impose their will on the international community. This is the direct result of the international community’s reluctance and refusal to properly condemn the aggressors and hide behind a negotiation process that they couldn’t even impose.” read part of the letter.

Moreover, the use of Canadian drone technology by Azerbaijan was strongly criticized, noting that without the use of such sophisticated technology, Azerbaijan would have not had the necessary strategic advantage over Armenia nor the ability to kill scores of innocent Armenians.

“Whatever the arrangements or ill-advised considerations may have been to grant these destructive exemptions, the government must come clean and realize that the Turkish Bayraktar TB2 drones, illegally transferred to Azerbaijan, equipped with their most essential feature – the WESCAM target acquisition gear – is what gave the Azerbaijani Army the advantage over the less sophisticatedly equipped Defense Army of Artsakh. That very advantage has now led us to today’s egregious peace agreement and the effective destruction of the Republic of Artsakh.” said Darakdjian and Mirakian in the letter.

In late October, the ANCC had asked the government to dispatch diplomatic staff from the Moscow Embassy to Yerevan, in order to verify the evidence first hand and conclude the investigation. Despite many attempts, no action was taken.

“Canadians deserve answers as to why and how these exemptions were made in the first place, given that in October 2019, the government placed a ban on all arms exports to Turkey. That very exemption not only has cost the lives of innocent Armenian civilians, it has had a very negative impact on Canada’s international reputation as a peacemaking nation. This alone warrants a much stronger position that must be adopted by the Government of Canada against the joint Turkish-Azerbaijani aggression.” added Darakdjian and Mirakian.

To this effect, the ANCC urged the government to go beyond just statements and take decisive and swift action based on a number of policy suggestions that were listed in the letter.

The policy suggestions urge the government to; 1) Recognize the independence of the Republic of Artsakh to bring lasting peace and deter a second genocide of the Armenian people, 2) Enforce a permanent and unconditional ban on arms sales to Turkey and Azerbaijan in light of the irrefutable evidence that is now publicly available, 3) Publicly condemn the ongoing aggression from Turkey and Azerbaijan, 4) Establish a permanent Embassy in the Republic of Armenia, 5) Continue working with NATO allies to impose the necessary sanctions on Turkey and reconsider its membership. Apply similar sanctions on Azerbaijan, 6) Advocate for the peaceful and just settlement of the conflict within the framework of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairmanship that recognizes and respects Artsakh’s Independence and right to self-determination,

The ANCC is committed to working with government to continue advocating for the full and unconditional recognition of the Republic of Artsakh and for all other related matters to ensure the Armenian people’s safety, security and right to independence and self-determination.

Read original article here.

#Armenia #Armenians #Artsakh #Caucasus #Yerevan #Politics

0 notes

armeniaitn · 4 years

Text

Excluding Turkey Caucasus is the key to peace in the Caucasus – Armenian President

New Post has been published on https://armenia.in-the.news/politics/excluding-turkey-caucasus-is-the-key-to-peace-in-the-caucasus-armenian-president-63137-16-10-2020/

Excluding Turkey Caucasus is the key to peace in the Caucasus – Armenian President

Excluding Turkey Caucasus is the key to peace in the Caucasus, Armenian President Armen Sarkissian said in an interview with The Critic.

He said all international pressure—including from the UK government, from prime minister Boris Johnson—has to be directed at Turkey with the message that it has to get out of this conflict.

The full text of the interview is provided below:

Kapil Komireddi: Russia brokered a temporary truce on Saturday. It was violated within minutes of its signing. Who broke it?

Armen V Sarkissian: Factually, it was the Azeris. At 12 o’clock the ceasefire was announced, and immediately after that there was shelling of the civilian population of Stepanakert. That’s the fact. And if you’re looking to understand why they shelled, well, it’s all logical, because the Armenian side did not start this war. The Armenian side is fighting for their homes. A victory for Armenians means protecting your home, your house, your children, your grandchildren, your grandparents, your heritage, the life you had there for thousands of years—not hundreds of years, but thousands of years—and protecting your religion. And that is why, if you look at the military structures in Karabakh, all military units are always away from the villages and the cities. You know why? Because they worry that their presence could jeopardise the safety of the civilians. They don’t want to give the enemy the opportunity of harming the civilians by using the excuse that the military was the target. The civilians are their families. Armenians did not start the war and they do not have any intention of continuing it. It’s Azerbaijan that started it with the aim, they claim, to “free” Nogorno-Karabakh from the Armenians, who are the majority there.

KK: A missile struck the city of Ganja in Azerbaijan. Ganja is outside the disputed region. What possible justification can there be for striking it?

AVS: I can speak as president of the republic, on behalf of the Armenian government, and on the basis of the information that I’m provided by the ministry of defence of Armenia. The ministry of defence, and the foreign minister in his interviews the day before, clearly stated that it was not Armenia that hit Ganja. So, if there is a question, I think that’s a question to the defence army of Nagorno-Karabakh. But let’s look at it in context. How on earth is the Azeri side expecting to fight a war—from the first day of the war, the 27 of September, as you spoke to our prime minister, they started hitting Stepanakert. If you look at Stepanakert today from a drone it will look like a city after the Second World War—all destruction. Not one, not two buildings, but half of the city is gone. Now somebody shells from Nagorno-Karabakh maybe—I don’t know because I do not have any information about that—and it’s a big, big issue. How on earth—you want to start a war and you break all of the rules, start shelling civilians everywhere, and then you are surprised that somebody has shelled you once.

KK: So you’re saying that—

AVS: I don’t have information that the army of self-defence has done it, but I am analysing the outrage. When there were thousands of times of shelling here and one there, you are putting them on some equilibrium?

KK: If you’re speculating that this could’ve been a retaliatory shelling for the shelling on Armenian civilians by the Azeris, would it not imply that the army of self-defence—

AVS: I don’t think so, I don’t think so. That’s why I have doubts. There is nothing that you achieve by shelling and destroying one building or two buildings. What Nogorno-Karabakh will get out of the Ganja event is negative PR. So why on earth would they do that? That’s why I am not very sure that Nogorno-Karabakh did it. And they have said they haven’t done it. I know for sure from my minister of defence and my foreign minister that the Armenian side—the republic—has not done it. Regardless, any loss of life, for any side, be that a young soldier’s life or civilian life specially, I regret. Because it’s a loss of life.

KK: There are two possibilities that stand out. One, this could be a rogue element who chose retaliatory shelling because the civilian areas in Nogorno-Karabakh were struck. Or this could be a false-flag operation by the Azeris themselves. If it’s the first—

AVS: Well, you said that, I didn’t. I leave it to you to speculate on it because the president cannot speculate—

KK: But the first part of it is rather troubling, isn’t it, because it would imply that you are not in control?

AVS: It’s also troubling that our focus today is on this one shelling. Right now, as we speak, they are shelling Stepanakert.

KK: I understand that. I just want to—

AVS: When what is happening there is the ceasefire announced and brokered by—they are not keeping the ceasefire.

KK: I just want to get one thing across: are the self-defence forces under your control?

AVS: My control?

KK: Are the Nogorno-Karabakh forces—are they defying Armenia? Because if they are shelling without your knowledge, aren’t they defying you?

AVS: First of all, I am not involved at all there. Absolutely not. They are the self-defence forces and the army of an independent republic, and those people have voted. In fact, they have this year had elections, quite democratic compared with some of our neighbours, and they have a democratically elected parliament and a president. They have their own army and they run it. It’s a different story that there are volunteers from Armenia. There are a lot of them there and you cannot stop them because, well, they are the same nation. If Erdogan is saying that the Turks have “ethnic” connections with Azerbaijan, well this is more than a “connection”—these are Armenians. And it’s not only Armenians from Armenia. These are Armenians from all over the word. And I know as the president of a republic, but also a nation, that there are queues of thousands of Armenians—be that in Russia, in California, in New York, in Argentina—that want to fly in fight as volunteers because for them this war is a reminder of the genocide that happened 105 years ago. The Turkish involvement and the rhetoric, the aggressiveness, the usage of its resources—starting from aeroplanes, drones, military equipment, military advisers, officers, even Islamic terrorists. Turkey has brought them all in—all remind Armenians of the events that happened 105 years ago.

KK: As the president of a nation that became dispersed and was sought to be liquidated by Turkey a century ago, how do you suppose the world ought to look at this spectacle of Turkey coordinating, as prime minister Pashinyan put it to me, the war against Armenia?

AVS: You can have different perspectives on how to look at an issue. Let me give you a couple of different perspectives. For Azerbaijan, this is a war in which they want to exercise ethnic cleansing. They want to show that this is about their piece of land, to prove that even under the Soviet Union they had rule over this region for 65 years. They want to “free” Nagorno-Karabakh from the Armenians living here. And that purge is ethnic cleansing. That’s the war that Azerbaijan wants to run.

What is there in it for Turkey? One is to teach a lesson to Azerbaijan: you guys cannot [defeat Armenia]. See how we can help you to do it. You are our brothers—our ethnic brothers—but you cannot do it. You need us: you will need us today, you will need us tomorrow, and you will need us forever. Second: to teach a lesson to Armenians: if you are hoping or expecting or thinking that we are going to recognise the genocide, forget about it. Because we are here and we will continue what we started a hundred years ago and make another [genocide]. To the international community—to be honest, they don’t care about the international community and its opinions. They don’t care that countries like Russia, Germany, France—and even the Senate of the United States—have recognised the Armenian genocide. Turkey is bluntly refusing to acknowledge that.

What is there in this for Armenians the world over? It’s a reminder of the genocide—and Armenians would never allow it to happen again. What is there for the people of Armenia in Armenia? Karabakh was always a part of Armenia. We didn’t recognise Nogorno-Karabakh for a simple reason. Because the approaches of Armenians and Azeris are always different. We could have easily recognised Nogorno-Karabakh in 1994. Even the Soviet Armenian parliament had recognised it, but we stopped it. In 1994, after the first war, which the Armenians won, we were free to recognise it, and there’s no way either Turkey or Azerbaijan could have objected. But because the Minsk process kickstarted the peace negotiations, the Armenian side decided not to recognise it unilaterally—thus giving a chance to negotiations for a lasting solution to the problem. Recognition would have complicated that.

That’s been the Armenian approach. But if the pressure keeps rising in Nogorno-Karabakh and the prospect of negotiations dies, then of course Armenia will have no choice but to recognise Nogorno-Karabakh. Let me give you an example of what we face. The second biggest city near Stepanakert is Shushi. There was in that city always a large Armenian community and a small Azeri community. There were Armenian churches and one mosque. After the first war, the Armenians restored the big cathedral, Christ the Saviour. Three hundred metres from the cathedral is a mosque. And the mosque was also restored by the Armenians in Nogorno-Karabakh. What’s one of the first things the Azeris hit in Shushi? It was the church. The Armenian approach is restoring a mosque. The Azeri approach is destroying a church—a church in which children and elderly people were taking refuge. These are two very different approaches.

KK: You say the Turks don’t care about the international community. We often hear the phrase “never again”. Given the history of the Armenian people, should the international community care about Turkey?

AVS: There are two answers. One answer is based on our history—our genocide. For the international community, allowing the Turks to do it again, in the 21st century, after a hundred years—in the middle of which you had the Holocaust and Rwanda and so much bloodshed—says these hundred years were wasted and we learnt no lesson. And so, we are going to allow the same guy to do the same thing again and again and again. That’s one dimension.

The second dimension is Turkey’s interest is also to occupy Azerbaijan by staying there with slogans of brotherhood and so on. The moment they are there—and regardless of whether the conflict here is over or not—they will stay. They will use preposterous excuses—ethnic brotherhood, PKK fighters, protecting oil and gas—to stay. But they will stay there exerting enormous influence over Azerbaijan. They will define the future of Azerbaijan. And they will control the energy sources from the Caspian to Europe. Once they are in Azerbaijan, they are not recipients—they are the ones who control the pipelines. All those on the Caspian, the central Asian republicans, and extending all the way to Europe will become hostages once Turkey assumes real control of energy sources from the Caspian.

KK: Turkey hasn’t been demure in its support for Azerbaijan. It has said we are “two states, one nation”. Russia, on the other hand, has been somewhat coy in throwing its support behind you—despite Armenia being a member of the Collective Security Treaty Organisation. Are you disappointed by Moscow’s response?

AVS: I am disappointed on many counts. I am disappointed that NATO is allowing their member state to become involved in a third-party conflict with which Turkey has nothing to do. A NATO member is using the most advanced NATO-grade weapons—F-16s, drones—and soldiers without a mandate. I raised these issues with the head of NATO. I am also disappointed that there is not enough pressure from the European Union. I am disappointed there isn’t much pressure from America, but I can understand. The timing was well chosen: America is busy with the presidential elections. I’m also disappointed particularly that Israel continues supplying Azerbaijan with weapons. I am disappointed because I have a lot of Jewish friends and I am close to Jewish communities. I travelled to Israel to mark the 75th anniversary of the Holocaust. I know that the majority of Israelis—like Jewish people everywhere—want the Armenian genocide recognised. But the current government refuses to do that. In fact, what the government is doing is selling what they call “defensive” weapons to a country that is engaged in an offensive against the Armenian people. They should have stopped supplying when the war began. They did not. I am not alone in my disappointment. My Jewish friends—from Israel to New York to Moscow—are profoundly unhappy with this.

Now, coming to Russia—Russia has conveyed that if there is an attack on the Republic of Armenia, they will honour all of their agreements, bilateral and multilateral. They will stand with Armenia if there is an attack on the Republic of Armenia.

KK: And you are satisfied with that assurance—

AVS: That’s what the Russian side has said. Now the Russian Federation also has good relations with Azerbaijan. That’s no secret. It maintains good relations with both the Republic of Armenia and Azerbaijan. That means Russia is uniquely suited to be an honest mediator. Turkey cannot play that part. Turkey has taken a side openly. I don’t buy their nonsense about “two states, one nation”, of course. By that logic, Turkey can claim other central Asian republics. Russia’s good relationship with Azerbaijan means it can be a broker of a ceasefire. Both sides would trust Russia.

I would like to see more pressure from all of our friends, including Russia, on Azerbaijan. But I would like to see much more pressure from everybody on Turkey. Turkey is the key negative factor in this conflict. The moment you take Turkey out, I assure you the war will stop in a day or two. Turkey remaining will make matters worse by sucking others in. It will be disastrous. We will end up with a huge conflict in the Caucasus that could be much worse even than Syria. Excluding Turkey is the key to peace. All international pressure—including from the UK government, from prime minister Boris Johnson—has to be directed at Turkey with the message that it has to get out of this conflict.

KK: Prime Minister Pashinyan described the conflict to me as an “existential threat” to Armenia given Turkey’s involvement. I spoke to him a day after the outbreak of hostilities last month. Many have died in the intervening weeks. Do you fear the Republic of Armenia is now in peril?

AVS: The war has intensified. It has grown in scale. The number of lives lost is now in the thousands.

KK: Thousands on the Armenian side?

ASK: On both sides. The Azeri side don’t announce lives lost. On the Armenian side, every day on television the names of the departed—both in Nogorno-Karabakh and of Armenian volunteers—are announced. They are announced the moment they are identified. Hundreds of names have already been officially announced. The problem is the ceasefire was not honoured by Azerbaijan and there are a lot of bodies lying on the battlefield. Then there is the aggressive rhetoric of Turkey, growing every day. If there is an event or an announcement from the Armenian side, the first to react is not Baku. It is Ankara. They have just identified themselves with this conflict. Their fight is with a small republic of 150,000 people in a beautiful country where you will find remnants of Armenian kingdoms starting from the first century BC up to the churches from fourth and fifth centuries when there were no “ethnic brothers” of Turkey—neither them or their “ethnic brothers”—in that area at all. This is a small but proud nation that has seen Genghis Khan and the great Timur come and go. But when you look this huge empire—Turkey—fighting this small republic, what you are seeing is a people fighting for their lives, for their history, for their heritage, for their children, their grandchildren, their religion. They are also, in a broader sense, fighting for the security of Russia, Iran, and even Azerbaijan. They are also, indirectly, fighting for the energy security of Europe. If Turkey and its mujahideen stay here, they will be a threat to the Caucasus and beyond. This small nation, fighting for its survival, is also putting up a line of defence for others.

KK: President Macron of France spoke recently in terms that favoured Armenia’s position. Britain, however, has limited itself to a somewhat bland joint statement with Canada. You were one of the longest serving ambassadors to Britain of any country. You have closely studied Britain as a diplomat, academic, and politician. And I know you maintain a deep and affectionate interest in Britain. How do you explain the indifference here to what’s happening there?

AVS: For us, this is an issue of national survival. And since Armenians are everywhere in the world—from Singapore to Argentina and Brazil, and of course America, Europe, and in Manchester—I ask all Armenians and friends of Armenia and friends of mine to pay attention. Britain, being out of the European Union, controls its own destiny now. If Britain has decided to be out of the EU, and that referendum is honoured by the current government, I ask it to think about those people whose democratic choice in a referendum to secede from Azerbaijan brought them war and death and displacement. For the UK, becoming independent from the European Union and working hard for its economic recovery and political presence, this is the appropriate time to raise its voice as an independent state parallel to the EU and stand up for the human rights of the people who have chosen to make their own destiny. What is happening in Nogorno-Karabakh may seem distant, but it is not. The moment Turkey takes over this region, God help us all.

Read original article here.

#Armenia #Armenians #Caucasus #Karabakh #Politics

0 notes

armeniaitn · 4 years

Text

Recognition of the Republic of Artsakh the shortest way to restoring peace and stability – MFA

New Post has been published on https://armenia.in-the.news/politics/recognition-of-the-republic-of-artsakh-the-shortest-way-to-restoring-peace-and-stability-mfa-61128-01-10-2020/

Recognition of the Republic of Artsakh the shortest way to restoring peace and stability – MFA

Reports on the involvement by Azerbaijan of foreign fighters and mercenaries affiliated with various terrorist and extremist organizations in the aggression against the Republic of Artsakh are receiving documentary evidence, the Artsakh Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

According to numerous reports, including from various independent sources, Turkey has recruited several thousand foreign fighters and mercenaries in Middle East countries and through its territory has been transferring them to Azerbaijan for direct participation in hostilities against the Republic of Artsakh and the Republic of Armenia. Some of them have already taken part in the battles against the Artsakh Defense Army and suffered losses. “The methods used by Azerbaijan and Turkey that are inherent to rogue countries, pose a serious security threat not only to the Republic of Artsakh and the Republic of Armenia, but also to all countries of the region and the international order as a whole. We recall that during the war of 1991-1994, Azerbaijan also resorted to the help of foreign fighters and mercenaries. However, this did not help Azerbaijan to avoid a military defeat,” the Ministry said.

“Involvement of foreign fighters and mercenaries in the conflict zone was the main factor that contributed to the transformation of Azerbaijan in the mid and late 1990s into a transit country for smuggling of drugs to Russia and Europe, as well as a transit point for terrorists, where the organization and financing of their terrorist activities was carried out. In order to avoid a repetition of such a scenario, the international community must take decisive steps right now,” it added. In this regard, the Ministry noted that the use, recruitment, financing, protection and training of foreign fighters and mercenaries is prohibited by numerous international legal norms, which are binding, including for Azerbaijan and Turkey. Moreover, realizing the importance of collective fight against the activities of foreign fighters and mercenaries, the international community obliges states to prevent and suppress such practices. “Neglecting the elementary rules of international co-existence, deliberately and systematically violating their own commitments, pursuing a criminal line in their foreign policy, Azerbaijan and Turkey not only openly oppose themselves to the world community, but also directly threaten its security,” the Foreign Ministry stated. “We emphasize that in the current situation, when the calls of the international community for peace are not only rejected, but also subjected to harsh criticism from the political leadership of both Turkey and Azerbaijan, the shortest path to restoring peace and stability in the region is the international recognition of the Republic of Artsakh,” the Ministry stated.

Read original article here.

#Armenia #Artsakh #Politics

0 notes

armeniaitn · 4 years

Text

Azerbaijani ambassador to US: Armenia's actions undermine realistic prospects for peace process

New Post has been published on https://armenia.in-the.news/politics/azerbaijani-ambassador-to-us-armenias-actions-undermine-realistic-prospects-for-peace-process-44850-06-08-2020/

Azerbaijani ambassador to US: Armenia's actions undermine realistic prospects for peace process

BAKU, Azerbaijan, Aug.6

Trend:

Armenia’s recent actions and statements clearly damage the established negotiation format and undermine any realistic prospects for the peace process over Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, Azerbaijani Ambassador to the US Elin Suleymanov wrote in his article published by the authoritative US media outlet Newsmax, Trend reports on August 6.

The ambassador stressed that the latest flare of hostilities between Armenia and Azerbaijan in July came at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic in the region with health and safety of citizens at the top of most governments’ agenda.

However, Armenia’s own COVID-19 crisis did not prevent its military from launching an attack against Azerbaijan in the direction of Tovuz district across the international border between the two nations, the article said.

The ambassador points to the fact that Armenia’s attack took place hundreds of miles north from the line of contact in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan and that it clearly speaks about the intentions behind this latest act of aggression,

“The protracted Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict remains a major threat to peace and security in greater Eurasia. Armenia’s illegal occupation and ethnic cleansing campaign of about 20 percent of Azerbaijan’s internationally-recognized territory has caused a significant humanitarian challenge by displacing a million people,” said the article. “Now, 30 years later, the internally displaced persons still live in exile unable to return to their homes.”

Suleymanov noted that in spite of the four UN Security Council resolutions and numerous other international documents calling for immediate withdrawal of Armenian troops, Armenia continues to defy basic principles of international law and negotiation efforts by the OSCE Minsk Group co-chaired by France, Russia and the US.

“Although formally independent, Armenia has never really acquired full sovereignty due to its constant conflicts with neighbors and external dependencies,” the ambassador said adding that its borders are guarded by Russian border guards, it has a foreign military base on its territory and it has minimal control over its own economy.

“Today, Armenia remains one of the last relics of the Soviet past in the region offering little strategic value and unable to move forward towards integration and growth,” Suleymanov stated. “Similarly, Armenian society continues to be plagued by its poor record on anti-Semitism and its uneasy relationship with Nazi collaborators and Middle Eastern terrorist groups. With a high ratio of emigration, Armenia was recently ranked as the angriest nation globally. Some of this anger spills outside Armenia’s borders.”

Touching upon recent violent attack of Armenian radicals on small group of Azerbaijanis during a protest in front of the Azerbaijani Consulate General in the US Los Angeles, he noted that the local police department has launched its investigation.

“A quick look at the map would reveal that Armenia’s reckless militarism has much wider ramifications.” he wrote. “The South Caucasus region includes Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia and is a key strategic area of the world. For instance, Azerbaijan, which is the only nation in the world that borders both Russia and Iran, is also an important partner and friend of Israel.”

“Moreover, Azerbaijan provides the unique connection between Europe and Asia across the energy-rich Caspian Sea and its capital city of Baku is the origination point of the strategic Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline, which provides some 40 percent of Israel’s annual oil supply and was once featured in the James Bond film, “The World is Not Enough,” said the ambassador.

Suleymanov also reminded that the Southern Gas Corridor pipeline, beginning in Azerbaijan, spans such countries as Georgia, Turkey, Greece, Albania and Italy.

“These pipelines along with the railways connecting Asia to Europe and the critical overflight corridor for NATO aircraft transiting to and from Afghanistan all pass in the vicinity of the area attacked by Armenia.”

“Unable to add any value to development and cooperation, Armenia chose to reassert its relevance by threatening regional security and energy infrastructure of global significance,” the article reads. “Just months before the Southern Gas Corridor is fully operational, Armenian military attacks some 15 miles from its route.”

As the ambassador pointed out, Armenia attacked the area along the border, where Azerbaijan has been de-escalating by replacing its Army units with lighter armed border guards, and shelled residential houses causing casualties and damage.

“By striking across the international border far away from the line of contact of the two militaries, Armenia hoped to trigger support from its treaty allies under the auspices of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO),” he wrote.

However, this attempt to enlarge the scope of the conflict failed and the CSTO rejected Armenia’s request for support since it was obvious who initiated the hostilities, the ambassador stressed.

“Armenia’s leaders could have heeded Secretary Pompeo’s call for substantive peace talks and engage in meaningful negotiations with Azerbaijan to ensure a brighter future for the Armenian people and a lasting peace for the entire South Caucasus. Instead, Armenia once again acted as a rogue player and a proxy by attacking the key elements of prosperity and security architecture for the region and beyond,” Suleymanov emphasized.

“The international community should help people of Armenia by explaining to their leaders that the dividends of peace are abundant and the costs of aggression continue to rise,” the ambassador concluded.

The conflict between the two South Caucasus countries began in 1988 when Armenia made territorial claims against Azerbaijan. As a result of the ensuing war, Armenian armed forces occupied 20 percent of Azerbaijan, including the Nagorno-Karabakh region and seven surrounding districts.

The 1994 ceasefire agreement was followed by peace negotiations. Armenia has not yet implemented four UN Security Council resolutions on the withdrawal of its armed forces from Nagorno Karabakh and the surrounding districts.

Read original article here.

#Armenia #Caucasus #Covid-19 #Karabakh #Politics

0 notes

armeniaitn · 4 years

Text

Amb. Eli Suleymanov: Our Dispute With Armenia and Regional Security

New Post has been published on https://armenia.in-the.news/economy/amb-eli-suleymanov-our-dispute-with-armenia-and-regional-security-43984-05-08-2020/

Amb. Eli Suleymanov: Our Dispute With Armenia and Regional Security

The latest flare of hostilities between Armenia and Azerbaijan in July came at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic in the region with health and safety of citizens at the top of most governments’ agenda.

However, Armenia’s own COVID-19 crisis did not prevent its military from launching an attack against Azerbaijan in the Tovuz region across the international border between the two nations.

The location of Armenia’s attack hundreds of miles north from the line of contact in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan, where Armenian and Azerbaijani forces have been facing each other for some three-decades, speaks volumes about the intentions behind this latest act of aggression.

The protracted Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict remains a major threat to peace and security in greater Eurasia. Armenia’s illegal occupation and ethnic cleansing campaign of about 20 % of Azerbaijan’s internationally-recognized territory has caused a significant humanitarian challenge by displacing a million people.

Now, 30 years later, the Internally Displaced Persons still live in exile unable to return to their homes.

In spite of the four United Nations Security Council resolutions and numerous other international documents calling for immediate withdrawal of Armenian troops, Armenia continues to defy basic principles of international law and negotiation efforts by the OSCE Minsk Group co-chaired by France, Russia and U.S.

In fact, Armenia’s recent actions and statements clearly damage the established negotiation format and undermine any realistic prospects for the peace process.

Although formally independent, Armenia has never really acquired full sovereignty due to its constant conflicts with neighbors and external dependencies.

Its borders are guarded by Russian border guards, it has a foreign military base on its territory and it has minimal control over its own economy.

Today, Armenia remains one of the last relics of the Soviet past in the region offering little strategic value and unable to move forward towards integration and growth.

Similarly, Armenian society continues to be plagued by its poor record on anti-Semitism and its uneasy relationship with Nazi collaborators and Middle Eastern terrorist groups.

With a high ratio of emigration, Armenia was recently ranked as the angriest nation globally. Some of this anger spills outside Armenia’s borders.

Most recently, in July, the Los Angeles Police Department has launched a hate-crimes investigation of several Armenian radicals, who violently attacked and injured a much smaller group of Azerbaijani-Americans during a protest in front of the Azerbaijani Consulate General in Los Angeles.

A quick look at the map would reveal that Armenia’s reckless militarism has much wider ramifications.

The South Caucasus region includes Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia and is a key strategic area of the world.

For instance, Azerbaijan, which is the only nation in the world that border both Russia and Iran, is also an important partner and friend of Israel.

Moreover, Azerbaijan provides the unique connection between Europe and Asia across the energy-rich Caspian Sea and its capital city of Baku is the origination point of the strategic Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline, which provides some 40% of Israel’s annual oil supply and was once featured in the James Bond film, “The World is Not Enough.”

The Southern Gas Corridor, a project that spans six nations from Azerbaijan to Georgia, Turkey, Greece, Albania and Italy and is vital for Europe’s energy security, also begins just south of Baku.

These pipelines along with the railways connecting Asia to Europe and the critical overflight corridor for NATO aircraft transiting to and from Afghanistan all pass in the vicinity of the area attacked by Armenia.

Unable to add any value to development and cooperation Armenia chose to reassert its relevance by threatening regional security and energy infrastructure of global significance.

Just months before the Southern Gas Corridor is fully operational, Armenian military attacks some 15 miles from its route.

Along the border, Armenia attacked the area, where Azerbaijan has been de-escalating by replacing its Army units with lighter armed border guards, and shelled residential houses causing casualties and damage.

By striking across the international border far away from the line of contact of the two militaries, Armenia also hoped to trigger support from its treaty allies under the auspices of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) including Russia and a number of other post-Soviet states.

This attempt to enlarge the scope of the conflict failed and the CSTO rejected Armenia’s request for support since it was obvious who initiated the hostilities.

Armenia’s leaders could have heeded Secretary Pompeo’s call for substantive peace talks and engage in meaningful negotiations with Azerbaijan to ensure a brighter future for the Armenian people and a lasting peace for the entire South Caucasus.

Instead, Armenia once again acted as a rogue player and a proxy by attacking the key elements of prosperity and security architecture for the region and beyond.

The international community should help people of Armenia by explaining to their leaders that the dividends of peace are abundant and the costs of aggression continue to rise.

Elin Suleymanov is Azerbaijan’s ambassador to the United States.

Read original article here.

#Armenia #Caucasus #Covid-19 #Economy

0 notes