Michel, I agree with your analysis. I am not sure the US is ready to do much with or for Armenia. As for Karabakh, I think its fate is sealed.
Incidentally, it appears I may have been wrong about who killed the Russians on Wednesday the 20th. Azerbaijan's leader has called Russian President Putin and apologized, and also offered compensation to the families. It seems they mistook the vehicle for Armenian and thought it was a threat.
As Barack Obama supposedly said about his V.P., "Never underestimate Joe's ability to f#@k things up!"
Not that Joe is in charge of much of anything, but his national security team (Blinken, Nuland, Sullivan, Austin, etc) are just as capable of 'f#@king things up.' Based on their performance of the last two years, I wouldn't be surprised by anything these clowns try to pull off.
They would view an Armenian adventure as part of their grand plan to 'overextend' Russia. And how has that worked out so far?
Anytime I see protests in a part of the world where English is not the first language, but the protest signs are in English, its always a red flag that something shady is afoot. The word "occupiers" seems to be popular these days amongst the protest crowd.
As for the people of Karabakh, I have to wonder about their fate. A very small spot of land in the world with a small population who have their fate in the hands of much more powerful geopolitical players.
What is your opinion on this post of Russians With Attitude ?
"One final thought on the Armenia/Karabakh question: a huge percentage of the Armenian people, perhaps the majority, has no desire to defend Karabakh and fight for it. They wished for someone who would rid them of this troublesome problem. They have found this someone: Pashinyan.
They wanted a politician who'd sell out the Armenians in Karabakh, but in a way that wouldn't make the Armenians in Armenia feel bad about it. That is, he would need to create a false narrative in which it's actually Russia's fault. The imaginary “Russian support of Azerbaijan” has been the key political myth in Armenia (and even more so in the diaspora) in recent years.
Armenia is a democracy. They elected a person who would save them from the Karabakh problem. They reelected him after he shamefully lost a war that they had 30 years to prepare for (& didn't dig a single trench). If the people of Armenia were opposed to Pashinyan, they would throw him out. They haven't and won't. Because he is this savior they've been waiting for.
Pashinyan will surrender Karabakh to the Azeris. He will do it in such a way that he can blame it on “the evil Russians who stabbed us in the back”. He will do exactly what he was elected to do: to get rid of Karabakh, and save the Armenians in Armenia from the guilt of having betrayed their countrymen.
Currently, the Armenian government & society are working much harder on building a narrative that would explain why it is Moscow's fault that the entire population of Artsakh was raped, tortured and killed with farm instruments than they're working on their military readiness.
They don't want Russia or Iran to protect Karabakh. They don't want to protect Karabakh themselves. They just want a moral excuse for their betrayal of their fellow Armenians. It's a pity, because the people of Artsakh are very brave, and they are ready to fight and die for their land. But Russia cannot help them if Armenia doesn't want to.
From the point of view of geostrategic logic, the only thing that matters to Russia in Armenia right now is the Zangezur corridor that connects to Iran.
Russian diplomatic efforts saved Armenia from a complete military catastrophe in 2020. Russian peacekeepers made sure that at least a part of Artsakh would remain Armenian. But Russia simply cannot commit to the protection of Artsakh if the Armenian state isn't committed to it. The Armenian state hopes that it can sell out its countrymen as Danegeld to the Azeris and keep limping along, perhaps on Western life support. This is wishful thinking, of course. But it's what they've decided. You can't save people against their will. Thus, Russia shouldn't get involved at all, unless to safeguard its own direct interests."
I read this, too and thought it was a very interesting analysis. It seems to coincide with another piece I read by Brad Pearce, who writes here on Substack as the Wayward Rambler. Over the past few days I've seen commentors on other blogs/sites I visit, who claim to be Armenian and they seem to be split 50/50. Half do think Pashinyan has betrayed the Armenian people and are very angry. Half seem to think "we can't trust the Russians because they didn't save us" but they never mention the people of Karabakh.
I have been living in this region for a quarter century. I have not heard a single respectable analyst suggesting that the US would seriously get entangled in Armenia and "set up a base".
Your characterization of Russia's actions in the region are entirely off.
can you indicate what the evidence is for your assertion that a base (your parlance) in Armenia is on the cards? Recently this was denied by the US Embassy in Tbilisi even with reference to Georgia, where there has been a strategic partnership for 20+ years.
(I mean the comments I read here, one does scratch one's head -- do read Tom de Waal, Laurence Broers, or other people who have worked on the region, rather than thinking of this as some game of Risk or Diplomacy.)
What happens if you call it "Turkey" instead of whatever the new spelling is? What's next, will it be compulsive to say Deutschland instead of Germany?
Not even mentioning the fact that the 'u' with double dots above it, is absent from our keyboards, just to remark how stupid is Turkey's request of a new spelling, and how even more inane are those that duly comply with it
so you go dig up ascii tables to get the u with double dots
just so no one can have any possible ground of accusing you of being a western chauvinist
Just a preventive move to avoid a potential accusation of having been politically incorrect, accusation which may be cast sometime down the line in the future
I understood Russian peacekeepers, standing by in Karabagh as Azeris moved back in again, mainly as a warning to more important Georgia not to flirt (like Armenia recently, praising Ukraine and hosting US exercises) with The West?
Michel, I agree with your analysis. I am not sure the US is ready to do much with or for Armenia. As for Karabakh, I think its fate is sealed.
Incidentally, it appears I may have been wrong about who killed the Russians on Wednesday the 20th. Azerbaijan's leader has called Russian President Putin and apologized, and also offered compensation to the families. It seems they mistook the vehicle for Armenian and thought it was a threat.
As Barack Obama supposedly said about his V.P., "Never underestimate Joe's ability to f#@k things up!"
Not that Joe is in charge of much of anything, but his national security team (Blinken, Nuland, Sullivan, Austin, etc) are just as capable of 'f#@king things up.' Based on their performance of the last two years, I wouldn't be surprised by anything these clowns try to pull off.
They would view an Armenian adventure as part of their grand plan to 'overextend' Russia. And how has that worked out so far?
Anytime I see protests in a part of the world where English is not the first language, but the protest signs are in English, its always a red flag that something shady is afoot. The word "occupiers" seems to be popular these days amongst the protest crowd.
As for the people of Karabakh, I have to wonder about their fate. A very small spot of land in the world with a small population who have their fate in the hands of much more powerful geopolitical players.
What is your opinion on this post of Russians With Attitude ?
"One final thought on the Armenia/Karabakh question: a huge percentage of the Armenian people, perhaps the majority, has no desire to defend Karabakh and fight for it. They wished for someone who would rid them of this troublesome problem. They have found this someone: Pashinyan.
They wanted a politician who'd sell out the Armenians in Karabakh, but in a way that wouldn't make the Armenians in Armenia feel bad about it. That is, he would need to create a false narrative in which it's actually Russia's fault. The imaginary “Russian support of Azerbaijan” has been the key political myth in Armenia (and even more so in the diaspora) in recent years.
Armenia is a democracy. They elected a person who would save them from the Karabakh problem. They reelected him after he shamefully lost a war that they had 30 years to prepare for (& didn't dig a single trench). If the people of Armenia were opposed to Pashinyan, they would throw him out. They haven't and won't. Because he is this savior they've been waiting for.
Pashinyan will surrender Karabakh to the Azeris. He will do it in such a way that he can blame it on “the evil Russians who stabbed us in the back”. He will do exactly what he was elected to do: to get rid of Karabakh, and save the Armenians in Armenia from the guilt of having betrayed their countrymen.
Currently, the Armenian government & society are working much harder on building a narrative that would explain why it is Moscow's fault that the entire population of Artsakh was raped, tortured and killed with farm instruments than they're working on their military readiness.
They don't want Russia or Iran to protect Karabakh. They don't want to protect Karabakh themselves. They just want a moral excuse for their betrayal of their fellow Armenians. It's a pity, because the people of Artsakh are very brave, and they are ready to fight and die for their land. But Russia cannot help them if Armenia doesn't want to.
From the point of view of geostrategic logic, the only thing that matters to Russia in Armenia right now is the Zangezur corridor that connects to Iran.
Russian diplomatic efforts saved Armenia from a complete military catastrophe in 2020. Russian peacekeepers made sure that at least a part of Artsakh would remain Armenian. But Russia simply cannot commit to the protection of Artsakh if the Armenian state isn't committed to it. The Armenian state hopes that it can sell out its countrymen as Danegeld to the Azeris and keep limping along, perhaps on Western life support. This is wishful thinking, of course. But it's what they've decided. You can't save people against their will. Thus, Russia shouldn't get involved at all, unless to safeguard its own direct interests."
https://twitter.com/RWApodcast/status/1701298875477192753
I read this, too and thought it was a very interesting analysis. It seems to coincide with another piece I read by Brad Pearce, who writes here on Substack as the Wayward Rambler. Over the past few days I've seen commentors on other blogs/sites I visit, who claim to be Armenian and they seem to be split 50/50. Half do think Pashinyan has betrayed the Armenian people and are very angry. Half seem to think "we can't trust the Russians because they didn't save us" but they never mention the people of Karabakh.
I have been living in this region for a quarter century. I have not heard a single respectable analyst suggesting that the US would seriously get entangled in Armenia and "set up a base".
Your characterization of Russia's actions in the region are entirely off.
I disagree. The US has clearly promoted a military relationship with Armenia.
can you indicate what the evidence is for your assertion that a base (your parlance) in Armenia is on the cards? Recently this was denied by the US Embassy in Tbilisi even with reference to Georgia, where there has been a strategic partnership for 20+ years.
(I mean the comments I read here, one does scratch one's head -- do read Tom de Waal, Laurence Broers, or other people who have worked on the region, rather than thinking of this as some game of Risk or Diplomacy.)
What happens if you call it "Turkey" instead of whatever the new spelling is? What's next, will it be compulsive to say Deutschland instead of Germany?
Not even mentioning the fact that the 'u' with double dots above it, is absent from our keyboards, just to remark how stupid is Turkey's request of a new spelling, and how even more inane are those that duly comply with it
nothing happens
Then why do you comply with this
no particular reason
and I am not complying with anything --entirely my choice
so you go dig up ascii tables to get the u with double dots
just so no one can have any possible ground of accusing you of being a western chauvinist
Just a preventive move to avoid a potential accusation of having been politically incorrect, accusation which may be cast sometime down the line in the future
not really --I just copy it
then you can copy also Česko or España, or Việt Nam for that matter. I am expecting consistency
I understood Russian peacekeepers, standing by in Karabagh as Azeris moved back in again, mainly as a warning to more important Georgia not to flirt (like Armenia recently, praising Ukraine and hosting US exercises) with The West?