On April 17 in a Washington Times published an article by Lloyd green (Lloyd Green), in which the author writes about the Karabakh-Azerbaijani conflict and its consequences for the entire region and the international community. Many of the arguments made in the article of my colleague distorted, in connection with which the reader may receive a misconception about the real causes of the conflict and the current geopolitical situation in the Caucasus. The first misconception is that Armenia has occupied the territory of neighboring Azerbaijan.
In reality Nagorno-Karabakh is a historically Armenian people, and he was transferred created the Bolshevik government of Soviet Azerbaijan for political reasons. The Soviet Union exercised territorial expansion against Iran, and creating the Republic called Azerbaijan, Moscow has made their claims to the Iranian province of West and East Azerbaijan. Thus, the transfer of the Armenian territories of Nagorno-Karabakh and Nakhichevan to Azerbaijan was based on pragmatic geopolitical calculations of the Soviet leadership.
Under Soviet rule, Nagorno-Karabakh had the status of autonomy. According to the Constitution, he had the right to declare independence, like all the national republics. In 1988 the Karabakh deputies appealed to the Central authorities with a request to consider and positively to resolve the question of transferring the Nagorny Karabakh Autonomous region of the Armenian SSR. Then began the mass killings of Armenians in the Azerbaijani cities of Baku and Sumgait. By the way, the United States first reacted to these acts of aggression.
Senators Claiborne Pell (Claiborne Pell) (the then chair of the Senate Committee on foreign Affairs) and Robert Dole (Robert Dole) (the Republican leader in the Senate), and John Kerry and Joseph Biden sent a letter to Mikhail Gorbachev demanding the end to violence against Armenians. Since the reaction from Moscow is not forthcoming, the Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians, who survived in 1915-1923 genocide of Ottoman Turkey, announced its withdrawal from Azerbaijan.
In response, the government of Azerbaijan has sent troops into the territory of Armenia, having committed an act of aggression. That it was an act of aggression of Azerbaijan against Nagorno-Karabakh, evidenced by the consistent official position of Washington, which he held for the duration of the conflict. So, during a meeting with Soviet foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze in 1990, Senator Pell told him that America is concerned about the Azeri aggression against the Armenian Karabakh. Moreover, Pell gave the Minister a letter in which many influential senators demanded from Moscow to transfer Nagorno-Karabakh to Armenia.
At the peak of the armed conflict, Congress adopted Section 907 of the Act in support of freedom, who were forbidden the provision of any American aid and assistance to Azerbaijan because of its aggression and the illegal blockade of the borders of Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh. Moreover, Nagorno-Karabakh along with Armenia was included in the official list of countries which America to this day annually provides financial assistance. If you believe the statements of green’s, it turns out that America supported the aggressor — Armenia and Karabakh. Is this possible?
Today, the United States, Russia and France are permanent co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk group on the Karabakh-Azerbaijani conflict. In numerous statements of this group it is noted that the peaceful solution of this problem there is no alternative. The only country that does not share submitted by the Minsk group opinion of the world community, Azerbaijan.
The leadership of this state has openly stated that Armenians all over the world are enemies of Azerbaijan, regardless of their political views or country of residence. The entire civilized world has condemned President Ilham Aliyev, when he had public honors to Lieutenant Ramil Safarov, who killed with an axe a sleeping Armenian officer Gurgen Margaryan, with whom he trained in the framework of the NATO program “Partnership for peace” in Budapest.
During a massive Azerbaijani aggression in April last year against peaceful villages and cities were used the most dangerous weapons, including heavy flamethrower system TOS-1. The white house has again condemned this aggression, stating that the conflict must be resolved with respect for the right of Nagorno Karabakh people to self-determination. The Chairman of the house Committee on foreign Affairs ed Royce (Ed Royce), the ranking Democrat of the intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff (Adam Schiff), Senator Robert Menendez (Robert Menendez) and other lawmakers also opposed the military aggression of Azerbaijan.
If you carefully analyze the aggressive rhetoric of Azerbaijan, as well as systematic violations of the ceasefire and subversive activities against the civilian population, it will be clear why Armenia has bought from Russia a system of “Iskander”. Green is deeply mistaken, saying that the Armenian side intends to use these systems against Western energy infrastructure. In addition, he pulls out of context statements by senior politicians who can be easily checked. Official Yerevan considers the complex “Iskander” not as an element of intimidation and as a weapon to curb the aggressive plans of Baku. Conscious of current realities, I would like to ask a colleague Lloyd green question: does Christian Armenia the right to provide security for its people, if its nearest neighbor every time declares the need to wipe the Armenian people off the face of the Earth?