Tag Archives: Armenia

Agreement between Armenia and Azerbaijan favors NATO interests in the Caucasus

Posted on by Leave a comment

A lasting peace in the region will only be achieved through negotiations that take into account Russian, Iranian, and Turkish interests.

Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Associations, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert.

On August 8, the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan met on American soil to sign a “peace deal” brokered by the US. The agreement establishes conditions completely unfavorable to the Armenians and facilitates a plan to expand NATO intervention in the Caucasus. The measure is extremely damaging to Russia and Iran, which are historically the countries most interested in peace and stability in the Caucasus—despite being ignored by both Armenia and Azerbaijan, which have chosen to ally with NATO countries.

Armenian Prime Minister, Nikol Pashinyan, and Azerbaijani President, Ilham Aliyev, met with US President, Donald Trump, at the White House to sign a joint declaration opening a transport route in the disputed region between the two countries – the so-called Zangezur Corridor. Trump described the meeting as a “historic peace summit,” emphasizing the alleged benefits for both countries resulting from the agreed terms.

The route agreed upon by both sides connects Azerbaijan to its exclave of Nakhichevan through a strip of land passing southern Armenia. Superficially, this “solution” creates a compromise between the interests of both countries, preventing both the annexation of Armenian territory by Azerbaijan and the lack of access between Azerbaijani territories. However, there are several serious problems surrounding the agreement that make it dangerous for regional stability.

First, it’s important to remember that the agreement has largely favorable conditions for Azerbaijan, which will have the right to control a strip of land that runs through historically Armenian territories. In practice, Pashinyan is once again capitulating to foreign interests, prioritizing such impositions over the well-being of the Armenian people. On the other hand, Azerbaijan itself will not fully control this territory, as the strip will be called the “Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity” and will be managed by American companies—having even rumors of the presence of US PMCs in the region.

In practice, the agreement means both countries accept the American—and therefore NATO—presence in their disputed territories. The disadvantaged side is the one of the Armenian communities that will be displaced to establish the route, but neither Yerevan nor Baku will have complete control over this process. The long-term trend is for the region to become a kind of Western military fortress, severely undermining the stability of the Caucasus.

To make matters worse, the route runs along the border with Iran, creating a major problem for the historical relations between Tehran and the Caucasus countries. Iran opposes the project also because, in addition to the American presence in the region, the route strengthens Israel’s strategic position in the Caucasus. Despite being an Islamic country with a Shiite majority, Azerbaijan is a strong ally of Israel, which is Iran’s greatest enemy. This US-Israel-Azerbaijan alliance would be extremely detrimental to Tehran, with the possibility of the route functioning as a kind of siege against Iran.

Iranian authorities reacted negatively to the agreement. Iran made it clear that it welcomes peace between its neighboring countries, but it does not tolerate the existence of a transport route controlled by foreign agents. Russians and Iranians agree that peace between Azerbaijanis and Armenians will only be definitively achieved when both sides meet for negotiations mediated by the three main neighboring military powers: Russia, Iran, and Turkey. Interventionism by countries like the US only hinders the peace process, creating unfavorable conditions to which the sides are “forced” to agree despite having their legitimate interests harmed.

In practice, the US is adopting a position that until recently was expected to be jointly assumed by Europeans and Turks. During the Biden era, Western interventionism in the Caucasus was led by the EU—more specifically, France—on the Armenian side, and Turkey on the Azerbaijani side. The situation was heading toward a similar outcome, with expectations of sending “peacekeeping troops” on both sides. Both France and Turkey are NATO nations, which shows that this was also a plan by the Atlantic alliance to occupy the Caucasus.

However, Trump came to power promising to become “the great peacemaker” and end the wars started during the Democratic administration. He then assumed the role of chief negotiator, sidelining the French and Turks, and made an agreement that also favored Western interests, but centered on the US. In the current situation, Armenia’s domestic politics is heavily controlled by France, and Azerbaijan’s by Turkey, while the route between the two countries is officially controlled by the US. Similarly, Israel is attempting to expand its sphere of influence into the Caucasus, with full US support.

In practice, Armenia and Azerbaijan are ceasing to be sovereign countries—making the situation even more critical for Armenia, which has lost its historic territories. It remains to be seen whether Pashinyan’s already fragile and unpopular regime will be able to survive this further humiliation.

You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.

infobrics.org

Armenia deepens its submission to the West

Posted on by Leave a comment

Armenia is willing to cede part of its territory to the control of foreign powers.

Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert.

Armenia’s political subordination to the Collective West continues to advance. The Pashinyan regime is increasingly implementing measures that threaten national sovereignty and favor NATO expansionism in the Caucasus and the post-Soviet space. This creates an atmosphere of constant tension and instability, damaging the regional security architecture within the Russian strategic environment.

Western media recently announced that Armenia is discreetly negotiating the transfer of a strategic portion of its territory to direct US control. The area is located in Armenia’s central region, more specifically in the 42-kilometer Zangezur Corridor connecting Azerbaijan to the exclave of Nakhichivan. Local disputes have intensified since 2023, when Azerbaijan assumed full control of the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh (called Artsakh by Armenians). Baku’s territorial ambitions have been expanding, as has Armenia’s desperation for Western support to address this issue.

Essentially, the terms of the agreement stipulate that Armenia must hand over local security management to an American private military company (PMC). The goal would be to receive international support in the face of a possible Azerbaijani incursion—something many analysts expect to happen in the near future if tensions escalate again.

The news of the agreement was expectedly denied by the Armenian government, but Yerevan failed to provide concrete evidence of its real plans for the region. This makes the Armenian denial a weak narrative, sounding like mere cover-up. The media has been reporting on the case, claiming to have received reliable information from sources familiar with the matter in France – a country where the ethnic lobby of the Armenian diaspora is massive and exerts significant influence over foreign policy.

Furthermore, US officials have made ambiguous statements, suggesting that a major change in Armenia’s territorial configuration is imminent. For example, the US ambassador to Turkey recently commented on a proposal to hand over southern Armenia to the US. Furthermore, the ambassador stated that the agreement was negotiated in partnership with Turkey – which is Azerbaijan’s biggest supporter.

“They are arguing over 32 kilometers of road, but this is no trivial matter. It has dragged on for a decade – 32 kilometers of road (…) So what happens is that America steps in and says: ‘Okay, we’ll take it over. Give us the 32 kilometers of road on a hundred-year lease, and you can all share it’,” he said.

For years, the situation in the South Caucasus has been progressively worsening. Historically, Armenia and Russia have enjoyed strong and stable relations, but this has changed since the rise of Pashinyan, who promoted a pro-Western shift as a way of distancing his country from Moscow. The result was clear: the military defeat in Nagorno-Karabakh and heightened tensions, leading to an escalation of foreign interventionism in the region.

For the foreign powers involved in the geopolitics of the Caucasus, Russia increasingly appears as a common adversary. While France and the US influence the Armenian decision-making process, Turkey, which is also a NATO member despite its ties with Moscow, is interested in a military occupation of the Caucasus through Azerbaijan.

This NATO expansionism violates the legitimate strategic interests of the Russian Federation in the post-Soviet region. In this sense, it is clear that inviting an American PMC into the Zangezur Corridor poses a major threat to Russia – as well as to Iran, a country with access to the Caucasus and in open enmity with the US.

Once again, it is clear that tensions in the Caucasus are carefully planned by NATO powers to generate regional instability against their geopolitical enemies. While Russia and Iran want peace and stability in their shared strategic environment, countries like France and the US see the heightened historic tensions between Azerbaijan and Armenia as an opportunity to advance their geopolitical projects in the region.

In the end, Armenia fell into a real trap. The country was persuaded by its Western “partners” to abandon Russia, its historic ally, and is now being militarily occupied by foreign powers. It seems only a matter of time before any vestige of sovereignty disappears from the Armenian state.

To stop this wave of public demoralization, submission to foreign powers, and political defeats, Armenia must halt the legacy of Westernization initiated by the Pashinyan regime. It is up to Armenian citizens to seek the necessary changes to save their own future.

You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.

infobrics.org

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The buy me a coffee link is below.

Free Ebook on Spiritual Warfare

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

PayPal Link

The Latest Trouble In Russian-Azerbaijani Relations Might Be Part Of A Turkish-US Powerplay

Posted on by Leave a comment

Guest post by Andrew Korybko on Substack

Turkiye sees an opportunity to turbocharge its rise as a Eurasian Great Power along Russia’s entire southern periphery in ways that autonomously align with American grand strategic interests.

Russian-Azerbaijani relations are in trouble as a result of two scandals. The first concerns the recent police raid against suspected ethnic Azeri criminals in Yekaterinburg, during which time two of them died in circumstances that are now being investigated. That prompted Baku to officially complain to Moscow, after which a vicious infowar campaign was launched on social media and even among some publicly financed outlets as well alleging that Russia is “Islamophobic”, “imperialist”, and “persecuting Azeris”.

This was shortly thereafter followed by a police raid on Sputnik’s office in Baku, which had been operating in a legal gray zone after the authorities moved to effectively shut it down in February, thus resulting in the detainment of several Russians. That earlier decision was suspected to be connected to Azerbaijan’s displeasure with Russia’s response to late December’s airline tragedy in the North Caucasus that was caused by a Ukrainian drone attack at the time. Readers can learn more about it here and here.

Before determining who’s responsible for the latest trouble in bilateral ties, it’s important to recall the larger context within which all of this is unfolding. Prior to late December’s incident, Russian-Azerbaijani relations were proceeding along a very positive trajectory in accordance with the strategic partnership pact that President Ilham Aliyev agreed to with Putin on the eve of the special operation in late February 2022. That built upon Russia’s role in mediating an end to the Second Karabakh War in November 2020.

More recently, Putin visited Baku last August, the significance of which was analyzed here and here. This was followed by Aliyev visiting Moscow in October in connection with the CIS Heads of State Summit. Shortly before late December’s airline tragedy, Aliyev then gave an extended interview to Rossiya Segodnya head Dmitry Kiselyov in Baku, where he elaborated on Azerbaijan’s multi-aligned foreign policy and newfound suspicions of the West’s regional intentions towards the South Caucasus.

On that topic, the Biden Administration sought to exploit Armenia’s loss in the Second Karabakh War to more radically turn it against Russia and thus transform the country into a joint French-US protectorate for dividing-and-ruling the region, which worsened relations with Azerbaijan. The Trump Administration appears to be reconsidering that, however, and might have even agreed to let Armenia become a joint Azeri-Turkish protectorate instead. It’s this perception that’s driving the latest unrest in Armenia.

From Russia’s perspective, the French-US protectorate scenario could spark another regional war that might spiral out of control with unpredictable consequences for Moscow if they weaponize the revival of Armenian revanchism. Similarly, the Azeri-Turkish protectorate scenario could turbocharge Turkiye’s rise as a Eurasian Great Power if it leads to an expansion of its influence (especially military) in Central Asia. The ideal scenario is therefore for Armenia to return to its traditional status as a Russian ally.

Having explained the context within which the latest trouble is unfolding, it’s now time to determine who’s responsible. Objectively speaking, the Azerbaijani authorities overreacted to the recent police raid in Yekaterinburg, which signaled to civil society that it’s acceptable (at least for now) to wage a vicious infowar campaign against Russia. Some officials with an unclear connection to Aliyev then authorized the raid on Sputnik’s office as an escalation under the implied pretext of an asymmetrical response.

Given the ambiguity about Aliyev’s role in Azerbaijan’s overreactions, it’s premature to conclude that he decided to jeopardize the strategic ties with Russia that he himself cultivated, though he must still take responsibility even if mid-level officials did this on their own. That’s because Baku’s official complaint to Moscow and its raid on Sputnik’s office are state actions, unlike the recent police raid in Yekaterinburg, which is a local action. He’ll thus likely have to talk to Putin sometime soon to resolve everything.

The abovementioned observation doesn’t explain why mid-level officials might have overreacted to the Yekaterinburg police raid, which can be attributed to the deep-seated resentment that some have against Russia and speculative foreign influence. Regarding the first, some Azerbaijanis (but importantly not all and seemingly not the majority) harbor such sentiments, while the second might be linked to the scenario of the US letting Armenia becoming a joint Azeri-Turkish protectorate.

To elaborate, the US and France would struggle to turn Armenia into their own joint protectorate due to Georgia successfully repelling several rounds of Biden-era Color Revolution unrest, which aimed to pressure the government into opening up a “second front” against Russia and toppling it if it refused. The military logistics required for turning Armenia into a bastion from which they could then divide-and-rule the region therefore are no longer reliable since they could only realistically run through Georgia.

Accordingly, the Trump Administration might have decided to cut their predecessor’s strategic losses by “giving” Armenia to Turkiye and Azerbaijan, which would repair the troubled ties that he inherited with both. In exchange, the US might have requested that they take a harder line towards Russia if the opportunity emerges, knowing that neither will sanction it since that would harm their own economies but hoping that a future situation would develop to serve as the pretext for escalating political tensions.

Mid-level officials wouldn’t be privy to such talks, but the aforesaid speculative request could have trickled down to them from their superiors, some of whom might have implied state approval for overreacting to any forthcoming “opportunity”. This sequence of events could bestow Aliyev with the ability to “plausibly deny” his role in events as part of a de-escalation deal with Putin. The whole purpose of this charade might be to signal to Russia that a new order is forming in the broader region.

As was earlier explained, that order could be a Turkish-led one upon Ankara and Baku subordinating Armenia as their joint protectorate, after which they’d streamline military logistics across its territory to turn the “Organization of Turkic States” (OTS) into a major force along Russia’s entire southern periphery. To be clear, the OTS isn’t controlled by the West, but its Turkish leader and increasingly equal Azerbaijani partner could still autonomously advance the West’s strategic agenda vis-à-vis Russia in that scenario.

Just like the US and France have unreliable military logistics to Armenia, so too does Russia, so it could struggle to deter an Azerbaijani(-Turkish?) invasion of its nominal but wayward CSTO ally if Baku (and Ankara?) exploits its latest unrest (such as if Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan falls). Moreover, the most optimal branch of the North-South Transport Corridor (NSTC) runs through Azerbaijan, which could block it if Russia takes decisive action in defense of Armenia (however limited due to the special operation).

To be clear, Russia has no intention to fight Azerbaijan, but Azerbaijan’s overreaction to the recent police raid in Yekaterinburg might be a ploy to preemptively craft the perception that Russia “backed down” as a result if Moscow doesn’t take decisive action to deter Baku if regional tensions over Armenia worsen. Had it not been for that raid, then perhaps some other pretext would have been exploited or concocted, but the point is that Russia and Azerbaijan have polar opposite visions of Armenia’s geopolitical future.

That same future is pivotal for the future of the broader region as was written, but Russia has limited means for shaping the course of events due to its complex strategic interdependence with Azerbaijan vis-à-vis the NSTC and its understandable military prioritization of the special operation. The preceding constraints are self-evident, and Aliyev (and Erdogan?) might be preparing to take advantage of them, emboldened as he(/they?) might be by Russia’s perceived setback in Syria after Assad’s downfall.

Azerbaijan is aware of its irreplaceable role in turbocharging allied Turkiye’s rise as Eurasian Great Power, which is dependent on subordinating Armenia in order to then streamline the OTS’ military logistics between Asia Minor and Central Asia via the South Caucasus. If Aliyev came to believe that his country has a brighter future as part of a Turkish-led regional order instead of a Russian-led one, especially if the US signaled approval of this as speculated, then Baku’s overreaction to recent events makes more sense.

The Moscow-mediated Armenian-Azerbaijani ceasefire of November 2020 calls for the creation of a Russian-controlled corridor across Armenia’s southern Syunik Province, which Baku calls the “Zangezur Corridor”, for connecting both parts of Azerbaijan. Pashinyan hitherto refused to implement this due to pressure from the West and the Armenian diaspora therein, but if Trump decided to “give” Armenia to Azerbaijan and Turkiye instead, then he might do it but only after squeezing Russia out of this route.

Russian control would prevent Turkiye from streamlining its military logistics to Central Asia through this corridor for the purpose of replacing Russia’s influence there with its own as part of a grand strategic powerplay that autonomously aligns with the Western agenda in the pivotal Eurasian Heartland. Azerbaijan (and Turkiye?) might therefore invade Syunik if their envisaged client Pashinyan either flip-flops on squeezing Russia out or before Russia is invited into there by a new government if he falls.

The consequences of Turkiye obtaining unhindered military access to Central Asia through either sequence of events could be disastrous for Russia since its influence there is already being challenged by Turkiye, the EU, and even the UK, which just signed a two-year military agreement with Kazakhstan. That country, with whom Russia shares the longest land border in the world, has been pivoting towards the West as was assessed here in summer 2023 and this troubling trend could easily accelerate in that event.

Reflecting on all this insight, the latest trouble in Russian-Azerbaijani relations might therefore be part of a Turkish-US powerplay, one which Trump could have agreed to with Erdogan and Aliyev later jumped on board but might still have his doubts. That would account for his “plausibly deniable” role in Azerbaijan’s overreaction to recent events. If taken to its conclusion, this powerplay could risk Azerbaijan becoming Turkiye’s junior partner with time, which he’s thus far sought to avoid through his multi-alignment policy.

If that’s the case, then it might not be too late for Putin to avert this scenario so long as he can convince Aliyev that Azerbaijan has a brighter future as part of a different regional order, one that would center on Azerbaijan continuing its Russo-Turkish balancing act instead of turbocharging Turkiye’s rise. The NSTC could figure prominently in this paradigm, but the problem is that Azerbaijan’s ties with Iran and India are very strained right now, so he’d have to prospectively mediate a rapprochement for this to happen.

Anyhow, the point is that it’s premature to assume that the latest trouble in Russian-Azerbaijani relations is the new normal or that it might even precede a seemingly inevitable crisis, though both possibilities are nonetheless credible and should be taken seriously by the Kremlin just in case. The best-case scenario is that Aliyev and Putin soon hold a call to amicably resolve the issues that have abruptly toxified their ties otherwise the worst might be yet to come and it could be disadvantageous for both.

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The buy me a coffee link is below.

Free Ebook on Spiritual Warfare

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

PayPal Link

Azerbaijan Signaled That It Might Be Preparing Its Own Special Operation Against Armenia

Posted on by Leave a comment

Armenia is widely recognized as the first nation to adopt Christianity as its state religion. According to historical tradition, Christianity was introduced to Armenia by the apostles Bartholomew and Thaddeus in the 1st century AD. Armenia officially established Christianity as its state religion in 301 AD, when King Tiridates III was convinced to convert by St. Gregory the Illuminator. This event is traditionally dated to 301 AD and marks Armenia as the first country to adopt Christianity as its state religion, predating the Roman Empire’s adoption of Christianity by several decades.

Now the first Christian nation’s very existence is threatened, just as we predicted it would be when the world stood by and let Azerbaijan take over Armenian territory bit by bit over the past 7 years. I said then that doing nothing would embolden Azerbaijan to simply take over the entire country of Armenia. That time has arrived.

Guest post by Andrew Korybko

Azerbaijan demands that Armenia demilitarize, denazify, no longer contain it on behalf of foreign (Western) powers, stop obstructing regional trade routes, and allow ethnically cleansed Azeris to return.

Azerbaijani President Ilhan Aliyev gave a nearly three-hour-long interview to several local TV channels last week, during which time he signaled that his country might be preparing its own special operation against Armenia along the lines of Russia’s ongoing one in Ukraine. He of course didn’t use that term, but describing Armenia as a fascist state whose foreign-backed military buildup poses a threat to regional security very closely resembles Putin’s words about Ukraine ahead of large-scale hostilities.

Aliyev began that part of his interview by defending Azerbaijan’s increased military budget as a response to the arms race that Armenia initiated. This is being partially fueled by the “European Peace Facility”, whose military loans are written off after a certain period, he said. Armenia is therefore basically receiving arms from the bloc for free. To make matters even more alarming, an Armenian-EU-US cooperation platform was launched last April, which Aliyev claimed has a de facto military component.

He then declared that “The independent Armenian state is actually a fascist state because this country has been led by proponents of fascist ideology for nearly 30 years.” As evidence of this, he cited its ethnic cleansing of Azeris from Armenia and Karabakh, which the first Armenian President bragged about in a newly unearthed video that was dubbed into Russian here while an excerpt was dubbed into English here. He added that Armenia is also “Islamophobic, Azerbaijanophobic, racist, (and) xenophobic”.

Aliyev upped the ante right after by thundering that “We are neighbors with such a fascist state, and the threat of fascism is not going away. Therefore, fascism must be destroyed. Either the Armenian leadership will destroy it or we will. We have no other choice.” The Azerbaijani leader suggested that “France and other countries that provide it with weapons must terminate and cancel these contracts. The weapons that have already been sent to Armenia must be returned. This is our condition.”

He hopes that his words will be heeded now that “The Soros era has ended in America” with Trump’s return. Aliyev said that “The Biden administration was, in fact, governed by the Soros method of governance. It is no coincidence that one of Biden’s last decisions was to present Soros with America’s highest award.” He also claimed later on in the interview that “the Soros government” was in power “during the eight years before Trump” in a clear allusion to Obama.

Other Armenian allies who’ve been “shamefully removed from the political scene” as Aliyev phrased it are Assad and Trudeau, while Macron is still hanging on by a thread, and this overall trend might lead to an Azerbaijani-Armenian peace treaty. For that to happen, the Minsk Group would have to be abolished, and Armenia has to amend its constitution due to a clause therein implying territorial claims to Azerbaijan. Aliyev said that Azerbaijan doesn’t need a peace treaty if these conditions aren’t met.

He also demanded that Armenia stops acting as a “geographical barrier between Turkiye and Azerbaijan”, to which end “The Zangezur corridor must and will be opened. The sooner they understand this, the better it is. Why should we have to go to Nakhchivan, an integral part of Azerbaijan, through different ways? We should have a direct connection, and this connection does not question Armenia’s sovereignty.” Aliyev implied that Armenia’s obstructionism is part of an imperialist divide-and-rule policy.

The West, specifically France whose “full control over Armenia is also a reality”, is behind this. His earlier words about how “we believe that the Organization of Turkic States can become a serious power center on a global scale” in the “new world order” that’s emerging suggests that Armenia is being exploited as their geopolitical tool for preventing that group from reaching its full strategic potential. This is similar to what Putin claimed three years ago about how the West was exploiting Ukraine to contain Russia.

Aliyev reminded his interviewers that “I once said that they should not upset us and understand that we are the ones who have the say here and that Azerbaijan is the leading economy, the leading military power and the leading state in the South Caucasus. In today’s world, the power factor is at the forefront and no one should forget this.” This too resembles Russian rhetoric in the sense of conveying what could soon come to pass if Azerbaijan’s national security and strategic interests aren’t respected.

The final demand that he made was for Armenia to accept the return of the 300,000 Azeris who were ethnically cleansed from Armenia, which he referred to as Western Azerbaijan since “All the toponyms there are of Azerbaijani origin” in Imperial-era maps. The total is “several times greater” when their descendants are included, but “Returning to those areas would not pose a significant problem” since “the majority of the villages where Azerbaijanis lived are now completely empty”, especially in Zangezur.

Although different in substance, Aliyev’s interest in the rights of ethnic Azeris in Armenia make observers recall Putin’s interest in the rights of ethnic Russians in Ukraine, thus representing another commonality between them which hints at Azerbaijan possibly preparing its own special operation. To summarize, Azerbaijan demands that Armenia demilitarize, denazify, no longer contain it on behalf of foreign (Western) powers, stop obstructing regional trade routes, and allow ethnically cleansed Azeris to return.

With Trump about to return in less than two weeks’ time, who Aliyev praised in his latest interview and made sure that his audience didn’t forget that he also did so over the summer before the debate with Biden when it wasn’t popular, it’s possible that America might finally restore its balanced regional policy. Aliyev mentioned that Biden sacrificed relations with Azerbaijan for relations with Armenia and implemented double standards against it vis-à-vis Ukraine as regards the principle of territorial integrity.

If the returning American leader corrects his predecessor’s mistakes, which were made due to Soros’ influence over the Biden Administration as can be intuited by what Aliyev shared in his latest interview, then Armenia might be pressured into complying with Azerbaijan’s demands. That would avert another regional war that Armenia is doomed to lose no matter how much some of its policymakers and citizens have convinced themselves otherwise due to Western political backing in recent years.

The West will not go to war against Azerbaijan, which could turn into a war with its Turkish ally that could tear NATO apart in an instant if it happens, over Armenia. If Trump signals a policy reversal towards the region, then the rest of the West will follow suit, possibly even France too with time. Even if it doesn’t, French arms won’t lead to Armenia defeating Azerbaijan and Turkiye, so the writing is on the wall and it’s therefore better for Armenia to do what Aliyev demands or risk total destruction.

VIDEO: Armenian Christians under siege by Israel

Posted on by One comment
white concrete building

Jeremy Loffredo visits the Armenian Quarter of Jerusalem’s Old City, where a community of Armenian Christians dating back to the 4th century face displacement at the hands of a shadowy Israeli corporation called Xana Capital and the violent settlers it uses as hired muscle.

Source The Gray Zone

Nagorno-Karabakh separatist Republic ceases to exist

Posted on by Leave a comment

Lucas Leiroz, journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.

The history of the breakaway Republic of Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh) appears to be coming to an end. After the humiliation suffered by the local people with yet another military defeat by Azerbaijani troops, the local government opted for the dissolution of the secessionist state, dissolving public institutions and handing over the local territory to Azerbaijani forces.

On September 28, Artsakh President Samvel Shahramanyan issued a decree to end the state’s existence by January. In an official statement it was literally said that “the Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh (Artsakh) ceases to exist”. Regarding the local people, it is said that ethnic Armenian citizens must “familiarize themselves with the conditions of reintegration offered by the Republic of Azerbaijan.”

The measure was taken “in connection with the current difficult military-political situation” and aims to save the lives of local citizens amid the growing process of ethnic cleansing promoted by Azerbaijani troops. To cease hostilities once and for all and guarantee conditions of coexistence between Armenians and Azeris, the authorities decided to give up political separatism, concluding a definitive process of capitulation.

As a region with an ethnic Armenian majority within the Azerbaijani territory, since 1991, Nagorno-Karabakh has struggled for international recognition. Seen by the global community as part of Azerbaijan, the Republic has only been officially recognized by other similarly separatist governments. However, relations with Armenia have guaranteed some level of stability for the region over the decades, avoiding direct conflicts with Baku.

This situation began to change radically in 2018, when Armenia experienced a pro-Western color revolution. The result of the local regime change was the rise of the current prime minister, Nikol Pashinyan, whose policies focused on reducing ties with Russia and moving closer to Western powers. With Moscow being the side most interested in maintaining peace in the Caucasus, the worsening of relations between both countries could have no other end than catastrophe.

In 2020, Armenia/Artsakh and Azerbaijan had a new military confrontation in which the Armenian forces were defeated, and there has been a strong regional security crisis since then. Victorious in the war, Baku increased its anti-Armenian policies several times in the following years, including by imposing a blockade on humanitarian aid to Artsakh between 2022 and 2023.

The deterioration of local security reached an extreme point when earlier in September the Azerbaijani government ordered the start of an “anti-terrorist operation” with the alleged aim of neutralizing Armenian military facilities in the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh. The strikes killed dozens of ethnic Armenian civilians, but even so Yerevan cowardly refused to protect its people, claiming to have no troops in Artsakh and demanding military action against Baku from Russian peacekeepers.

Since 2020, Moscow has maintained peacekeepers in Artsakh under the terms of the trilateral agreement that ended hostilities that year. These troops, however, are few in number and their work is focused on peaceful and non-violent operations, such as rescue, demining and humanitarian aid. The Russians are not allowed to act militarily against either side in the conflict, which is why Pashinyan’s claims that it would be “Russian responsibility” to prevent the Baku operation are absolutely unfounded.

The Armenian government also requested Western help but did not receive any security guarantee – which was already expected, since the best scenario for Western interests is precisely chaos in the Caucasus. So, without any international support, the defense forces of Nagorno-Karabakh became absolutely incapable of protecting their claimed territory, leaving no option other than military and political capitulation.

Obviously, the decision to end the existence of the Republic was not accepted by all local politicians and separatist activists. For example, Artak Beglaryan, a former state minister and human rights ombudsman of Artsakh, said in social media: “Artsakh President’s decree on dissolving the Republic is illegal & illegitimate: 1. No President has the power to dissolve the Republic formed by the people with referendum; 2. That decree was signed as a result of Azerbaijani harsh aggression & threat of force. It’s null & void.”

From a legal point of view, this type of argument can be valid. Obviously, it is not a president’s right to dissolve an entire state by decree. But the particular case of Artsakh must be analyzed carefully, as it is a non-recognized separatist republic, and therefore does not have a conventional legal state structure.

Furthermore, even if “invalid”, Shahramanyan’s decision only admits the reality of Artsakh’s current situation. The Azeris already control the territory and if there is resistance on the part of the Armenians there will be greater chances of hostilities escalating. So, in practice, the government’s decision works as a conciliatory attempt to peacefully reintegrate the Armenian people into Azerbaijan and stop ethnic cleansing by Baku.

The problem is that this is unlikely to work in long term. Azerbaijan is a Turkish proxy and Ankara has expansionist interests in the Caucasus that will not be limited to the retaking of Nagorno-Karabakh. Indeed, there is a great possibility of Baku carrying out raids against Armenia’s undisputed territory in the future.

NATO’s objective is to place as many troops as possible close to the Russian border, which is why a Turkish incursion against Armenia would be “useful” for the West as it could “legitimize” the sending of forces under the excuse of “peacekeeping” – resulting in practice in the mere division of the Caucasus between Turkish and Western NATO forces. Only a responsible policy of friendship and military cooperation with Moscow will be able to avoid this.

 You can follow Lucas on Twitter and Telegram.

Source: InfoBrics

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we havePayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The new buy me a coffee link is below. 

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

Paypal Link: https://paypal.me/johnnystorm?country.x=US&locale.x=en_US

With pro-NATO politicians, security of Armenians is uncertain

Posted on by One comment

Lucas Leiroz, journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.

The sides involved in the Artsakh/Nagorno-Karabakh conflict have fortunately reached a temporary ceasefire agreement. But the crisis seems far from over. Being governed by a pro-NATO junta, Armenia will have many problems in the near future, both in Artsakh and in its own territory, since evidently the West’s intention is to increase chaos in the region as much as possible.

There is no doubt that Nikol Pashinyan’s irresponsible and unpopular government is to blame for the recent escalations in the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Having come to power through a pro-Western color revolution, Pashinyan has strived since 2018 to make Yerevan a NATO proxy state in the Caucasus, exponentially increasing ties between Armenia and countries such as the US and France while creating frictions with Russia.

Unable to achieve any real guarantee of security from his Western partners and adopting a hostile behavior towards Russia, Pashinyan led Armenia to absolute strategic weakness at a time of new high tensions with Azerbaijan, culminating in the attacks that occurred between 19 and 20 September during Baku’s so-called “anti-terrorist operation”. Cowardly, Pashinyan made it clear that he would not participate in the conflict, almost forcing the Armenians of Artsakh to surrender in order to avoid a humanitarian catastrophe.

More than 120,000 Armenians are now fearing their future in the face of Azerbaijani aggression, without being able to count on their partners in Yerevan to help in the crisis. In practice, Pashinyan “handed over” the lives of his compatriots to an enemy country, putting his own people at risk and showing a lack of concern for the safety of ethnic Armenians. All this to continue following the government’s number one goal, which is to please Western “allies”.

It must be remembered that Pashinyan’s Western “friends” made a real trap for Armenia by mediating the so-called “Prague agreements“. At the time, Yerevan recognized Azerbaijani sovereignty, which was mistakenly seen by the mainstream media as a “step towards peace”. The problem is that the agreement did not establish any real conditions to resolve the dispute over Artsakh, therefore serving to further legitimize Baku’s interest in the region. With Armenia recognizing Azerbaijani territorial integrity, the country was left without any justification to prevent further Azerbaijani aggressions against the ethnic Armenians of Artsakh.

In practice, Pashinyan legitimized Turkish-Azerbaijani expansionism in Nagorno-Karabakh and “authorized” the beginning of ethnic cleansing, abandoning more than 120,000 Armenians. This was the Western intention when promoting such an “agreement”, whose terms, instead of achieving peace, legitimized even more conflicts. This obviously serves Western interests, since in the face of new hostilities, Yerevan, unable to intervene, tends to request help from NATO – exactly as the Armenian Ambassador in Washington did – thus allowing Western troops to arrive in the region. In this scenario, Baku would certainly also request international help, calling the Turks. In the end, the Caucasus would become a NATO zone of influence and the Russian presence in the region would be minimized or even terminated.

Of course, all of this became clear recently, leading to a wave of mass protests and criticism against Pashinyan. In addition, the “Civil Contract” party received the lowest number of votes in five years in the last Council of Elders elections, being supported by only 32% of voters. There is evidently a crisis of legitimacy, and it is possible that the end of the Pashinyan era is a matter of time.

The main problem, however, is that Pashinyan is not an isolated agent. He is just one of the members of the pro-NATO junta that rules today’s Armenia. In addition to him, there are other politicians similarly willing to make Yerevan subordinate to Western plans. For example, the Secretary of the Security Council, Armen Grigoryan, who many analysts see as someone with the possibility of growing politically and becoming the new prime minister, is an even more pro-Western politician than Pashinyan.

Linked to the Soros Foundations, Grigoryan openly says that he will promote Armenia’s integration into NATO, advancing the policies started by Pashinyan. Furthermore, Grigoryan is already notorious for his pro-Western militancy, having even been accused of leaking confidential documents from the CSTO to NATO, which shows his high level of subservience to foreign interests.

So, unfortunately, there is no good expectation about the future of Armenia. The country would need to undergo a radical political change to reverse the catastrophic effects of the 2018 coup. If this does not happen, Yerevan will continue to be governed by pro-Western politicians, and the only point of divergence between them will be on how to be even more obedient to NATO.

Pashinyan increasingly seems to understand that he will be replaced by someone more “competent.” Not surprisingly, there are rumors that his wife recently started looking for estate in Switzerland and his son is already living in Canada. Unlike the Armenian people of Artsakh, Pashinyan will be able to leave the country with his family, not seeing firsthand the catastrophe he created for his own people.

You can follow Lucas on Twitter and Telegram.

Source: InfoBrics

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we havePayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The new buy me a coffee link is below. 

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

Paypal Link:  https://paypal.me/johnnystorm?country.x=US&locale.x=en_US

Israeli Military Deployed to border of Azerbaijan and Iran

Posted on by 5 comments
close up of the flag of israel

The Israeli military is located a few kilometers from the border with Iran.

The presence of the Israeli military has been recorded on the border with Iran for the past few months. The latter were discovered after the interception of conversations on the VHF band. Moreover, the Israeli military is suppressing the Iranian fleet and a number of military bases located near the border with Iran with the help of powerful electronic warfare systems. Information on this subject is provided by the Iranian journalist Khayal Muazzin.

As follows from the data presented, over the past few months, the Israeli military, using electronic warfare, has been jamming GPS signals in Iran and conducting electronic warfare against Iranian warships in the waters of the Caspian Sea. Moreover, thanks to the interception of communications, it was established that we are talking about the Israeli military. This, against the background of several flights of Israeli military aircraft to Azerbaijan, indicates that Azerbaijan is actively contributing to the presence of the IDF in close proximity to the borders of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

“For almost a month now, the GPS of Iranian ships in the Caspian Sea, passing near the coastal strip of the Republic of Azerbaijan, has been violated. On the VHF bands, there were several times people who spoke Hebrew , ”reports Iranian journalist Khayal Muazzin.

In all likelihood, it is precisely with this fact that the direct presence of Iranian troops on the border with Azerbaijan is connected, since earlier information has repeatedly appeared that Israeli attack drones and fighter jets may be located on the territory of Azerbaijan, preparing to strike at the Islamic Republic.

Thousands of Troops Deployed London: https://halturnerradioshow.com/index.php/en/news-page/world/bulletin-thousands-of-soldiers-deploying-on-streets-of-london

80KM Chinese Column: https://halturnerradioshow.com/index.php/en/news-page/world/something-going-on-in-china-military-convoy-80km-long-headed-to-beijing

US Navy Drones: https://warnews247.gr/thalassia-drones-ton-ipa-sta-cheria-roson-tha-ktypousan-tin-vasi-tou-rosikou-stolou-amerikanos-axiomatouchos-i-oukrania-echei-sovaro-provlima-me-ta-iranika-uav/

Iran: https://www.foxnews.com/world/protestors-clash-revolutionary-guard-northern-iran-torch-irgc-base-reports

London Bridge

Подробнее на: https://avia.pro/news/izrailskie-voennye-perebrosheny-v-azerbaydzhan-na-granicu-s-iranom

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so we have PayPal and Cash App left to us below.  We have also added a new monthly support option through the website.  That link is below as well.  Thank you again and God bless!

Monthly Support Option: https://dontspeaknews.com/donations/

PayPal Link: https://paypal.me/johnnystorm

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

Armenia vs Azerbaijan, Why are They Fighting? What’s Behind the Conflict?

Posted on by Leave a comment

Here is a good 500 word summary from the BBC with pictures and maps to help some folks understand why this is happening. Some of you have asked me in the comments to give you some background on the war so here you go.


The Caucasus are a strategically important mountainous region in south-east Europe. For centuries, different powers in the region – both Christian and Muslim – have vied for control there.

Modern-day Armenia and Azerbaijan both became part of the Soviet Union when it was formed in the 1920s. Nagorno-Karabakh was an ethnic-majority Armenian region, but the Soviets gave control over the area to Azerbaijan authorities.

Map of the region

The Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh made several calls to be transferred to Armenian authority control in the following decades. But it was only as the Soviet Union began to collapse in the late 1980s that Nagorno-Karabakh’s regional parliament officially voted to become part of Armenia.

Azerbaijan sought to suppress the separatist movement, while Armenia backed it. This led to ethnic clashes, and – after Armenia and Azerbaijan declared independence from Moscow – a full-scale war.

An Armenian soldier watches Azerbaijani troops on the frontline near the town of Hadrut, Nagorno-Karabakh (April 1993)
image captionArmenian forces drove out Azerbaijani troops from Nagorno-Karabakh in the 1990s

Tens of thousands died and up to a million were displaced amid reports of ethnic cleansing and massacres committed by both sides.

Armenian forces gained control of Nagorno-Karabakh before a Russian-brokered ceasefire was declared in 1994. After that deal, Nagorno-Karabakh remained part of Azerbaijan, but since then has mostly been governed by a separatist, self-declared republic, run by ethnic Armenians and backed by the Armenian government.

It also established the Nagorno-Karabakh Line of Contact, separating Armenian and Azerbaijan forces.

Read the rest of the story at the BBC.com.