The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersRussian Reaction Blog
The Navalny Curse
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

In May 2018, Navalny wrote:

“Pashinyan has been elected Prime Minister. I congratulate the Armenian people with preventing the usurpation of power. A great achievement. I hope that everything works out for Armenia. And Russians will be inspired by a successfully developing neighbor.”

Here are the latest “developments“:

The poor guy even had his perfume stolen.

***

It is generally America’s vassal states that have been tripping over themselves to recognize Biden as President-Elect before the courts or the electors have made their positions known.

As did their puppets:

But considering Navalny’s record, is that actually a good sign?

 

 
Hide 107 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Please keep off topic posts to the current Open Thread.

    If you are new to my work, start here.

    Commenting rules. Please note that anonymous comments are not allowed.

  2. I’m surprised Russia didn’t step in earlier, I thought the Russians would have backed Christian Armenia against Islamic Azerbaijan/Turkey.

  3. Beckow says:

    The mulatto did his work, the mulatto can go. They might even buy him a new perfume. (It is disturbing that Pashinyan perfumes, a secret signal to his betters?)

  4. Max Payne says:

    I dub thee ‘Worst Modern War Fighter Ever’

  5. AlexT says:
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    As Anatoly has pointed out before, the current government of Armenia is Soros sponsored and anti Russian. They were lucky Russia stepped in at all.

  6. Yevardian says:
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    That’s a very simplistic worldview, even under Tsars, the Russian Empire was only really forced to intervene largely against its will in the Balkans due to popular outrage.
    Anyway, its been discussed elsewhere, Azerbaijan has large oil reserves and Russia doesn’t want to spoil relations with Turkey. Although you’d think the Russian base and Turkey being extremely untrustworthy would outweigh that. Honestly I’m fucking embarassed by this Pashinyan fiasco, ‘stolen perfume’ indeed. The local security let the mob into parliament on purpose they were so demoralised and disgusted with the new government, though I can’t say it’s done much for the country’s image. What a mess.

    Anyway, at least the main population centres weren’t taken by the Turks, although who knows how long this Russian presence will hold.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
  7. I hope his cursed blessings are a sign of things to come.

    Really, Armenia probably would have been better off opting into the Federation when Putin came to power, or joining Iran. I can’t say it’d necessarily be better for either, but what regional power doesn’t want more high ground?

  8. @AlexT

    Fair enough, but it is still sad to see the Armenians get raped by the combined might of Turkey, Azerbaijan and Israel.

  9. @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    I’m proud knowing that we were able to hold out for 44 days, rather than just two weeks like Azerbaijan thought.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  10. Mikhail says: • Website
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    That clash of civilizations stuff isn’t often in sync with reality.

    Azerbaijan is of some importance and not so anti-Russian as some might think. Conversely, Armenia isn’t so pro-Russian as some might believe and (when compared to Azerbaijan) might not be deemed as being so geopolitically important.

  11. Mikhail says: • Website
    @Yevardian

    If I’m not mistaken, the Russians are (by the signed deal) going to be there as peacekeepers for five years.

    • Replies: @4Dchessmaster
  12. @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    Do not underestimate how weak Russia is. They could not even manage a favourable outcome in Belarus. Their belated action in Nagorno-Karabakh is probably more due to this than clever strategy. Generally, the Russians really have a poor hand. Their only friends in the world are Syria, Nicaragua, Belarus (sort of), Armenia (with clenched teeth), China (will only last as long as the Chinese need them) etc and then some sort of Eurasian Union thing that no one pays attention too. Remove China, it is not really an attractive contacts list. And they are on the same path of degeneracy as the West just with a small delay i.e. fertility is not budging, they are building churches which no one goes too, the women fill the brothels of the Gulf etc. The other tragedy for Armenia is they are stuck with them.

  13. @Agathoklis

    With such a fine attitude, I wouldn’t want to be friends with you either.

    • Agree: AltanBakshi
    • LOL: Anatoly Karlin
  14. @Mikhail

    Yes, but it would have to be renewed after that I believe.

  15. El Dato says:

    What’s the matter with Navalny?

    Does one get a good injection with a Deep Blue serum when one enters the EU?

    • Agree: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
  16. @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    First, Russia isn’t a Christian State (nor are Azerbaijan or Turkey Islamic States, for that matter).

    Second, here is a good recent example:

    The people ruling Armenia since 2018 have a similar mindset.

    • Agree: Ano4
    • LOL: Hugo Silva
  17. I don’t like this deal.

  18. Passer by says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    She/her

    There is “BLM” too.

    Well, the Armenian Government is a Sorosoid Government. Let the muslims have them.

    Btw i notice growing unease among liberals about muslims, especially the non-US liberals.

    They appear to be starting to understand that Islam will be incompatible with the Liberal World Order – LWO.

  19. @Anatoly Karlin

    “nor are Azerbaijan or Turkey Islamic States, for that matter”

    Perhaps one could have said that about Turkey in 1980 but today? Seriously.

    • Agree: AltanBakshi
    • Disagree: Ano4
  20. @El Dato

    Now put two and two together.

    ***

    Anyhow, he has no ideological affinity to Trump. As I have pointed out, the impression that Navalny is any kind of nationalist – a weird point of convergence for extreme svidomy and Kremlin propagandists – is many years out of date.

    • Thanks: El Dato
    • Replies: @Kent Nationalist
  21. Svevlad says:

    Finally…

    Russian Vucic!

  22. Does Navalny ever criticize western governments? When did he last take a pro-Russian stance against EU or USA?

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  23. Armenia seems to me a pretty weird nation. When you look at the region, Turks/Kurds/Greeks etc. all of them have some degree of expanionist mindset as well as hatred towards the rest. I haven’t seen any nation plagued so much by this mindset expect Armenia. It looks like whole country and the nation lives in the different universe. I don’t think they will ever cope with this (Probably related with their diaspora whom are very radical.). They literally talk about implementing the treaty of Sevres at the highest level. I mean I don’t mind talking about it but they reall believe it. That’s pretty sad.

    • Replies: @Agathoklis
    , @4Dchessmaster
  24. I just posted this on the Saker blog:

    What you’re being told in the media is for mass consumption of the public and for everyone to save face but the way things unfolded in reality is a little different, if you read between the lines.

    Russia finally got fed up with all this nonsense in the Caucasus and decided to make its move without telling anybody anything or asking anything of anyone, by the way a move it had long planned, to roll into NK. A trigger happy commander shot down a Russian helicopter while still in Armenian air space late in the afternoon of 9th November and then everybody started sh*itting in their pants getting on the line to the Kremlin. Putin took his time answering the calls, having them all sweating, and then after midnight picked up the phone and stopped the war (if he dropped a couple of Kalibrs on Azerbaijan in the meantime in retaliation for the downed helicopter we may never know). There were no negotiations – the terms of the agreement are what Putin dictated and it was all “Yes Sir” thereon. Little green men appeared on the front line introducing themselves as peacekeepers with many more being flown in. Iran had also amassed troops on the border just in case Russians needed a helping hand but of course they could deal with these hot heads themselves. Armenians are not happy because they lost some territory in NK but then civilians and troops were making their getaway to Armenia and without Russian intervention they would have lost it all. Azeris have to be satisfied with the gains they made but it falls short of their objective to recover the entire enclave. That’s all folks. War is over.

    • Agree: El Dato
    • Replies: @Paulv
  25. @anonymous599

    You would be very hard pressed to find any sane Greek political or military official that has an expansionist mindset and Greece has good relations with all of its neighbours except for one. Where do you get this information?

    • Replies: @JL
    , @anonymous599
  26. @anonymous599

    As an Armenian, I can tell you that our diaspora is frozen in the 1920s. I don’t say that as a bad thing – I am a diasporan myself. However, some of us have not come to terms with the loss of land and people that took place a century ago. It is hard to explain, but there is a sense that we one day will have all that territory back. Personally, I don’t believe that at all. My hope is that one day, Turks and Azeris can simply accept and maintain the cultural heritage of the region and admit to their faults. That unfortunately to me is very unlikely to happen and I sometimes don’t care to even think about it.

    • Agree: Yevardian
  27. @4Dchessmaster

    It is indeed sad to think about. Few other nations’ future prospects were cut so short by the collapse of the Russian Empire as Armenia’s: https://www.unz.com/akarlin/turkey-population/

    • Agree: TheTotallyAnonymous
    • Replies: @4Dchessmaster
    , @Mr. XYZ
  28. songbird says:

    What are the odds of a continuation war about five years from now? Has Russia cowed Azerbaijan, or is it just a convenient time to pause the conflict?

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  29. @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    Russians did the best thing they could under the circumstances. Nothing more and nothing less than was called for. And at the right time. From their own point of view they really have no reason to favour the Armenians over the Azeris considering the recent developments in Armenia and the disposition of the Armenian government towards Russia.

  30. @Anatoly Karlin

    I agree with that.

    If the Bolshevik Revolution were going to ever happen, better it have happened at least two years after the Russian conquest of Ottoman Armenia. I’m not one of those Anti Communist neocon nuts- not at all- I do see that there were many benefits to The USSR. However, the famines in Russia and the massacres of Armenians by Ottomans in Nachkichevan and Artsakh in 1918-1921 devastated the demographics of both Russia and Armenia, with WW2 making it much worse.

    The Ukraine and Azerbaijan benefited from Soviet era ethnography and autonomy, while Russia and Armenia suffered setbacks that can still be felt today.

  31. @Shortsword

    Does Navalny ever criticize western governments? When did he last take a pro-Russian stance against EU or USA?

    He cannot criticize his paymasters. If he does that, the pay would stop. As treason is his only profession, he’d starve in that case. His wife would leave him for someone else who can afford her Gucci handbags.

    • Agree: Aedib
  32. Yevardian says:
    @4Dchessmaster

    Well yes, as nation Armenia has lost more people and territory than any other in modern times (the Jews obviously did extremely well out of the 20th Century, whatever they say), had things gone differently in WW1 we would have been a modest-sized nation such as Bulgaria or Portugal, instead of the statelet brain-drained rump dependent on foreign remittances as now. Well, people do put a lot of stock in Turkey being probably one of the most hated countries in the world by it’s neighbours, but everyone saw what the ‘Megali Idea’ did to Greece (not least in turning Athens into the ugliest city in the whole Mediterranean) or the mess in Cyprus, don’t want to mess with Turkey.
    The only comparable countries in terms of loss I can think of are Hungary and Serbia, though both of their implosions were self-inflicted to some degree.

    • Replies: @Agathoklis
  33. @Agathoklis

    Russian fertility IS increasing, it is just that Kavkaz fertility is decreasing ( still the top breeding regions) so overall Russian fertility is stagnating because of that and the inescapable problem that we are entering a period now of 5-7 years of demographic problem entirely due to the disaster in the 90s resulting in lack of child-bearing age women for now.

    So ethnic Russian fertility is increasing at respectable but not great levels,though feminism and mass urbanism in Russia compared to other states are also contributing issues…. but maternity state support is one of the best on the planet.

    As for ” churches that no one goes to”….total nonsense.

    Venezuela, Syria and Belarus…. that is 3 countries that would not have their current governments if not for Russian protection.
    All 3 countries, particularly Venezuela and Belarus are very important for the energy “security” and policies of several states in their region…..that are also US allies. Venezuela and Syria from migration are both important to the security of many states. Crimea, Pridnistroviye, Abkhazia & S. Ossetia (20% of initial Gruzian territory), Donbass are not example of “weak” Russian state – crucially in zero of those examples has developed a poor North Korea Communist ally versus rich Western-ally South Korea type situation against Russia.

    I should remind you that, Greece and Cyprus have had the ability to end EU sanctions against Russia, which “theoretically” require only 1 of the 28 EU states to reject for all sanctions to be removed. They could have ended it for reasons like Ukropia not even attempting to follow the Minsk agreements or it further becoming a 3rd World sh*thole…. but what did Russia get in 6 years? That Greece and Cyprus enjoy getting “grabbed by the p*ssy” from their western masters….. which makes it unfair to accuse Russia if being “weak”. Sensible would be my word for it.

    What did our KGB guy who married Onassis’s daughter ( eldest child and inheritor at the time) get financially? I think he was poorer after the marriage then before he met her!

    • Replies: @Passer by
  34. Aedib says:

    …defining the new leadership in a free and fair election.

    ROFL

  35. Aedib says:

    Sorosite Pashinyan rejected Lavrov’s offer. No he have the best possible deal in current scenario. Now, he can blame his own stupidity in order to explain Armenians how he lost half NK.

  36. @Yevardian

    “Well yes, as nation Armenia has lost more people and territory than any other in modern times”

    Perhaps, but Russia lost an enormous amount of people, territory and spheres of influence in the 20th century and it does not look like it is abating. Maybe Moldova is another that will breakaway in the next few weeks which times well with a new US administration.

    • Replies: @Yevardian
    , @Paulv
  37. Yevardian says:
    @Agathoklis

    Well I meant proportionately, of course Russian loses in WW2 dwarf any other country’s 20th century death-toll with the exception of China. Probably the biggest loss was the new construction of a separate Ukrainian identity, lol.

  38. Passer by says:
    @Gerard.Gerard

    Ethnic russian fertility is decreasing too, stop living in la la land of the stupid.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_subjects_of_Russia_by_total_fertility_rate

    And it dropped further in 2020. The situation is serious.

    Putin wouldn’t make this the biggest priority of the state if the problem wasn’t serious.

    State support for raising the birth rate won’t change anything too, the effect of massive pro-natalist programs across developed countries is zero. It is zero in Russia too.

    Only three things work to raise birth rate – religion, de-urbanisation, or low education.

  39. @Passer by

    Only three things work to raise birth rate – religion, de-urbanisation, or low education.

    Would you be interested in an uneducated religious village woman? Would you want her spawn to be your children? Judging by your correct spelling and Internet commenting, probably not.

    • Replies: @Passer by
  40. FYI, Navalny congratulated corrupt senile walking dead. Very natural, isn’t it?

  41. Paulv says:
    @Commentator Mike

    Good comment. Curious what Anatoly thinks of it.

    In Putins press conference, he seemed really pissed off. Which supports your theory

    • Thanks: Commentator Mike
  42. Paulv says:
    @Agathoklis

    Russia has few natural borders. So they are always moving. It could be argued that Russia has gained back the Eurasian Union states

  43. SveVid says:
    @Max Payne

    U mad bro?

    He is Greek…they can’t understand why Russia doesn’t fight Turkey on their behalf while they backstab Russia every chance they get

  44. @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    What did you want Russia to do?

    The only way that Russia could explicitly back Armenia’s side in this war is to directly attack Azerbaijan and possibly even go to war with Turkey/NATO.

    Something like what USA did to FR Yugoslavia in 1999, to Iraq in 2003, or previous Russian Empire/Soviet conquests and invasions of Azerbaijan over the centuries.

    There’s literally no other way for what you wanted to be done, and it’s obviously not worth it for Russia.

  45. Dmitry says:
    @songbird

    Peace deal is essentially a complete surrender by Armenia (which was wise from Armenia’s perspective by this stage), but in such a way that allows Russia share in the victory of Azerbaijan and Turkey.

    Armenian civilians will not be ethnically cleansed from Stepanakert, which is good for Aliev’s reputation internationally, and probably considered as an advantage from his point of view (by keeping some nominal Armenian civilians – this is will look like a humanitarian solution) . However, it seems all Armenian military forces are being kicked out and replaced with Russian , so Armenia has essentially surrendered power in all territories.

    Monopoly of power in Stepanakert is not quite Russian (as Russian forces are isolated in an island surrounded by Azerbaijan). But this is de facto mainly now Russian controlled territory.

    Stepanakert becomes a Russian operated ghetto for Armenian civilians inside Azerbaijan.

    Lachin corridor – operated by Border Service of the FSB.

    Nakhchivan corridor – operated by Border Service of the FSB. So there is now a short landroute between Turkey and Azerbaijan, but this is Russian control. So Turkey and Azerbaijan will take the economic benefits of the landroute, while Russia has the de facto power on it. There is a trilateral solution.

    If everything happens correctly, there shouldn’t be motivation for Azerbaijan to continue war (as what more do they want – when they won all their objectives?). However, it could be unstable if Armenia does not follow all terms.

    This is strategic victory for Russian power projection, without firing a bullet – so in some sense it looks like one of Putin’s greatest works of genius. Russia won the war, without doing anything.

    It looks like some diplomatic genius from Putin, to me. But sometimes this diplomatic success, can be more like “white man’s burden”. Now Russian soldiers responsibility for stopping brown people ethnically cleansing each other – is this is privilege?

    It will also presumably expensive. Russia is now responsible for the peace. Some of the most elite soldiers now tied up for 5 years there. It contributes to the power projection of Russia, but is it beneficial kind of power?

    • Agree: AP
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    , @JL
    , @songbird
  46. Mr. XYZ says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    At least the collapse of the Russian Empire eventually allowed Armenians to have their own independent country as opposed to them being very small fish within a Greater Russian superpower.

    • Replies: @AlexT
  47. Mr. XYZ says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Well, from a national self-determination perspective, Nagorno-Karabakh is just as much Armenian as Crimea is Russian.

  48. Mr. XYZ says:
    @Passer by

    Only three things work to raise birth rate – religion, de-urbanisation, or low education.

    Or waiting for the breeder share of the total population to increase.

  49. Dmitry says:
    @Dmitry

    more like “white man’s burden”. Now Russian soldiers responsibility for stopping brown people ethnically cleansing each other – is this is privilege?

    Kipling was an imperialist, but he doesn’t write about this type of “divide and rule power projection” as an enjoyable privilege (probably a bit accurately describing it like working as some kind of nursery teacher for half devil children):

    “Take up the White Man’s burden—
    Send forth the best ye breed—
    Go bind your sons to exile
    To serve your captives’ need;
    To wait in heavy harness
    On fluttered folk and wild—
    Your new-caught, sullen peoples,
    Half devil and half child.

    Take up the White Man’s burden—
    And reap his old reward:
    The blame of those ye better,
    The hate of those ye guard—”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_White_Man%27s_Burden

    • Agree: Ano4
    • Replies: @AaronB
  50. JL says:
    @Agathoklis

    Where do you get this information?

    Exhibit A would be your own comment #12. Apparently, though, you are so lacking in self awareness, you don’t even realize how much of your pathetic psychology is on display. Everyone else here picked up on it though. A Greek calling Russia a country of weak degenerates because it won’t fight the Turks on your behalf is the height of projection.

    Russia is weak in soft power, it’s true. Perhaps it has something to do with the Russian mindset. But it seems to do hard power quite well. And if forced to choose between one or the other, I’d say the choice is obvious.

    • Replies: @Agathoklis
  51. Considering Russia has an air force base in Armenia and the volatility of the region, why doesn’t it have an S-400 system in place there? Or does it?

    • Replies: @SveVid
  52. JL says:
    @Dmitry

    Some of the most elite soldiers now tied up for 5 years there.

    It’s good training for dealing with a civilian population in a delicate situation and dangerous environment. Also, the geographical location potentially allows for fairly rapid deployment to other hot spots, depending on where they are.

  53. @Agathoklis

    Do not underestimate how weak Russia is.

    Russia ended a war between two mortal fanatical enemy nations quicker than it took Americans to count their votes. Give them some credit.

  54. SveVid says:
    @Commentator Mike

    Considering Russia has an air force base in Armenia and the volatility of the region, why doesn’t it have an S-400 system in place there? Or does it?

    Currently they have a S-300VM unit stationed there, which is the Army’s version of the S-300 specialising in Counter-Ballistic missile defense, although it can be used against aircraft & cruise missiles.

    The S-300P/PM & S-400 (wheeled) is used by the Airforce…S-300V/VM /V4 (tracked) by the Army

    They use different type of missiles and I think their radars differ

  55. @4Dchessmaster

    I don’t suprise too much tbh since all diasporas are somewhat radical and their children always stuck with an era their parents/grandparents etc. left their homeland (Turkish diaspora and their kids are no better than Armenians in terms of living at past.). What you hope might be somewhat achieved if Armenians can accept the reality on the ground and decide to move on to the next page. I remember reading articles from journalist interviewing with Armenians at Yerevan after Turkish-Armenians talks at the end of 2000’s. Armenians were furious that they failed to take all of the lands claimed by them. Turkey and Azerbaijan had serious crisis during that time due to this. Also, young Armenians categorically rejected the have a friendship with Turkish (Kurdish as well I suppose) teenagers which was the opposite of Turkish response to the same question. I mean even Greek Cypriot hang out with Turks let alone others. I don’t really fully understand your expectation from Turks/Azeris (i.e. If you expect Turkey to say we commited genocide and expect somewhat German-Israel style agreement, it won’t happen. However, if you expect them to accept deaths and some sort of monetary payment, it might happen depending on what Armenians offer, but it is plausable.) but I can tell you that if Armenia decided to make move, the rest would follow. Tbh, I don’t really see any kind of short/long term solution to the problem as long as Armenia magically find oil reserve or something like that so they can get rid of diaspora’s influence and rebuilt their homeland. Current situation is actually quite a good point to restart your relationship but It’s a hard pill to swallow. Venizelos and Ataturk swallowed that pill, let’s see whether someone in Armenia is ready to do it.

  56. Not sure if this is the post for it, but regarding this Russian peacekeeping operation there are a few ambiguities and future problems that should be contemplated.

    1: Will there be Turkish peacekeepers in Karabakh? I’m not sure if this is just a rumor Aliyev spread among Azeris to get them to support this agreement or something legit. If true, then this arrangement is not very good for Russia at all, let alone Armenians.

    2: Will Aliyev actually invoke the clause to request the end of Russian peacekeeping presence after 5 years?

    Maybe Aliyev won’t do it because of informal pressure by Russia to make this a longer term arrangement?

    Once it comes to to this clause being invoked, it’s clear that the future status of Karabakh is still unresolved and this will likely mean future war/trouble between Armenians and Azeris.

    3: Like with the Madrid Principles/Lavrov’s Plan, the final status of Karbakh is still up in the air, although frozen by Russian peacekeepers for at least a 5 year period.

    Although Armenians have suffered a severe setback, again, this still isn’t over yet …

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  57. @Agathoklis

    I didn’t mention anyone at the highest level but current situation in the Eastern Mediterranean is an example of this from both sides as a result of Greeks maximalist claims. I don’t know a lot about Greek’s relationship with other nations, so can’t really comment on what you say but I know enough to say it’s a lie (look at Macedonia). The one neighbour you mentioned on your comment always have a bad relationship with Greeks as a result of their mindset. You don’t see them with their absurd claims on all the issues with their neighbours. Greeks always have that as far as I can see since they are always backed by Western imperial powers, they think they can ask more than their fair share. Then, they lose and start to cry like a little kid. Pretty sad if you ask me.

    • Replies: @Agathoklis
  58. @4Dchessmaster

    Putin is a fair and resolute arbiter.

    I suppose Armenians are miserable because they couldn’t beat the Azeris, whom they consider as their inferiors, and grab yet more territory like they have done in previous wars. It is only just that both land locked enclaves should be connected to their mother countries by corridors/roads. It would seem that the lands the Armenians have to give up in the deal were buffer zones they previously occupied as a result of wars. NK is now secure and safe as anyone thinking of taking it would have to deal with the Russians. And Erdogan, who was firing up the Azeris to take it all, will have to shut up.

  59. @JL

    Please specify where I have ever suggested that Russia should fight Turkey on Greece’s behalf?

    However, Russia should fight Turkey for its own benefit. If it chooses not too, then they will have to deal with the consequences at some point i.e. Erdogan will quickly do a switcheroo at some point and then you have a NATO power having strong influence right near Russia’s Muslim-dominated oblasts.

    • Replies: @TheTotallyAnonymous
  60. @anonymous599

    “I don’t know a lot about Greek’s relationship with other nations, so can’t really comment”

    But you did stupidly comment about a supposed expansionary mindset. In fact, the Greek political and military elite suffer from the opposite, a contractionary mindset.

    An important element of a successful foreign policy is to be on the side of the winners. By and large Greece has chosen wisely and has almost always benefited.

  61. @Anatoly Karlin

    The American election was a battle for control between the Jews who hate Russia more and the Jews who hate Iran more.

    • Replies: @Passer by
  62. @TheTotallyAnonymous

    Well, Russia has now sent in its troops to the NK region, a region which is apparently internationally recognised as part of Azerbaijan, so I doubt Russia ever had any qualms about being seen as “defending an illegal Armenian occupation” as they are now.

    They could easily have sent in peacekeepers earlier on, and the Azeris would not have even bothered to attack the enclave as killing Russians would not have been within their area of comfort (as Commentator Mike says in comment #25, the shootdown of the Russian helicopter seems to have triggered a panic on the Azeri side)

    Now Russia obviously wants good relations with Turkey and Azerbaijan as well, but would relations really have soured if Russians just said “no, we are not going to allow you to wage a war of aggression against Armenia”?

    On the other hand, this could be a ploy by the Russians to foment a regime change in Armenia as the Armenians are quite rightly very annoyed by the incompetence and cowardice of their national leadership, paving the way for a more pro-Russian regime.

    • Replies: @TheTotallyAnonymous
  63. Passer by says:
    @AnonFromTN

    I said “or”, not “and”. Not nesseserily a combination of these factors. A rural woman with higher education or a religious woman with higher education will have reasonably higher birth rate too on average.

    Low earnings among women are strongly correlated with high birth rate too, so a combination of educated + stay at home mother will work too. Actually stay at home mothers have higher birth rate than working mothers.

    @Mr. XYZ

    Or waiting for the breeder share of the total population to increase.

    I don’t believe that this works. At least it did not work in the last 200 years. It looks like environmental factors have higher influence on birth rate than genetic factors, and overwhelm them.

    • Agree: AltanBakshi
  64. Passer by says:
    @Kent Nationalist

    The American election was a battle for control between the Jews who hate Russia more and the Jews who hate Iran more.

    And white retards who thought that China is the biggest enemy. Actually multipolarity and the Eurasia region are the only thing that could stop a liberal take over of the world (which is Communism 2, this time based in the West, but this new communism will be about identity politics), so propping up the US Empire is suicidal for them.

    Don’t expect for white retards to get that, though.

    • Agree: Kent Nationalist
  65. @Agathoklis

    Do you have an ability to read and understand English or you just want to troll? You should use translation before responding to my comment, I will not waste my time responding you.

  66. @Agathoklis

    By and large Greece has chosen wisely and has almost always benefited”

    How can you make such a statement effectively confirming Greek state as weak, unprincipled and duplicitous ( where snake slimeball US Ambassador Pyatt was able to work his “magic” filth, unresisted, soon after his actions in Ukraine)…. and then criticise Russia?

    BTW, why don’t you call NATO states “weak” for never cutting off air, rail or shipping routes between mainland Russia and Kaliningrad? You not think they would just blackmail Russia on this if we were a “weak” state?

    I would add that Europe could not even run Fifa because of the megalomania of the US, shown by the mass arrests of FIFA officials in Switzerland afew years before.

  67. @Agathoklis

    Please specify where I have ever suggested that Russia should fight Turkey on Greece’s behalf?

    However, Russia should fight Turkey for its own benefit.

    LOL

    Seriously, is it possible to be any more insincere and disingenuous?

    You’re way more see-through than you think you are, or maybe than you’re even conscious of.

    Anyway, fighting Turkey (at least attacking it) in an open war is obviously bad for Russia because it involves war with NATO, so it’s obviously out of the question unless circumstances radically change. As for fronts where Russia and Turkey clash or “co-operate”, Russia has clearly outplayed Turkey in Syria, Libya is unclear (don’t have enough expertise to comment), and Russia has just prevented a decisive Turkish victory by proxy in Karabakh despite Armenian incompetence.

  68. @Agathoklis

    An important element of a successful foreign policy is to be on the side of the winners. By and large Greece has chosen wisely and has almost always benefited.

    Promising …

    How did this work out in the 1920’s regarding Asia Minor? …

    How about in the 1970’s regarding Cyprus?

    In fact, everything that’s wrong with Greece currently has most of its roots in the Greek political and national debacle over Cyprus in the 1970’s. Although you can’t seem to even begin to understand that …

    • Replies: @Agathoklis
  69. @Agathoklis

    An important element of a successful foreign policy is to be on the side of the winners.

    Armenia chose to be on the side of winners like Soros, too. See how well that’s working out for them.

  70. @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    They could easily have sent in peacekeepers earlier on, and the Azeris would not have even bothered to attack the enclave as killing Russians would not have been within their area of comfort

    The problem is that for Russia to send in peacekeepers, not a military invasion force, it needs the consent of both sides for that to happen without incident, which is not entirely guaranteed given the theoretical possibility of rogue local/individual actors.

    This also includes the consent of Armenians, who would’ve been reluctant to accept such an agreement as they currently have, before Azerbaijan launched this round of war.

    (as Commentator Mike says in comment #25, the shootdown of the Russian helicopter seems to have triggered a panic on the Azeri side)

    That shootdown came from Nakhijevan/Nakhichevan part of Azerbaijan that is directly connected by land to Turkey and has Turkish soldiers based there. It’s very likely that this was done by Turkey as a provocation or effort to threaten/taunt Russia. Similar to previous incidents with a shot down Russian pilot in 2016, and etc.

    It definitely has to do with the matter of whether there will be Turkish peacekeepers at Karabakh or not.

    Now Russia obviously wants good relations with Turkey and Azerbaijan as well, but would relations really have soured if Russians just said “no, we are not going to allow you to wage a war of aggression against Armenia”?

    USA, France, EU and Minsk Group all said things similar to what you wanted Russia to say and look at how worthless and irrelevant it was. It would have also been completely worthless and irrelevant for Russia to say the same thing without any willingness to engage in decisive military action on Armenia’s side.

    I don’t think you understand (just like many other pro-Armenian people) what it means for Russia to use overwhelming military force against Azerbaijan. Here are a few historical examples that Russia would have to repeat for such an outcome as you wanted:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Persian_War_(1804%E2%80%931813)

    Most notable in this war is this part that retains to a direct Russian military conquest of a city currently in present-day Azerbaijan:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ganja_(1804)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Persian_War_(1826%E2%80%931828)

    During this war again something similar:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ganja_(1826)

    Not Russia but USSR, still, the point should be clear by now:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Army_invasion_of_Azerbaijan

    Literally nothing besides Russia (or maybe Iran) using raw and overwhelming military force against Azerbaijan could’ve stopped them from starting this war. Many pro-Armenian people and even Armenians themselves don’t seem to understand this at all …

    • Agree: Ano4, Commentator Mike
    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  71. I’m really surprised Pashinyan didn’t say “the war situation has developed not necessarily to Armenia’s advantage”.

    http://ww2today.com/15-august-1945-war-not-necessarily-to-japans-advantage

    Must say these Israeli and Turkish drones seem to have done a lot of damage, and it seems none of Armenia’s Russian equipment could counter them (although I don’t know what their counter-drone stuff is). Not a good sign.

    • Replies: @TheTotallyAnonymous
  72. @YetAnotherAnon

    it seems none of Armenia’s Russian equipment could counter them (although I don’t know what their counter-drone stuff is). Not a good sign.

    Wrong.

    Russia’s anti-drone weaponry works completely fine (in reality much better than otherwise claimed).

    The problem is that Armenia did not have access (the Russian military bases in Armenia did though) to this weaponry from the start of the war, only near the end of it in the past 1 or 2 weeks.

    This is ultimately because of Pashinyan refusing to integrate Armenia’s anti-air system with Russia’s.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikol_Pashinyan#Relations_with_Russia

    https://iwpr.net/global-voices/opposition-over-russian-armenian-air-defence

    http://www.eng.kavkaz-uzel.eu/articles/35810/

    This is actually tragicomic in a way for Armenians because it’s clear that if Russia’s proposal was accepted, it would immediately have had access to Russia’s latest equipment and weaponry before this war began (Russia would’ve turned the other way to Armenians using those weapons over Artsakh), instead of Pashinyan LARPing sovereignty against Russia.

    LARPing sovereignty when you don’t have it clearly has a price …

    • Agree: Commentator Mike
  73. @Passer by

    I was thinking in 2017/2018 statistics (which only partially confirm my big opening statement about higher Russian fertility). I did read recently that Tfr in Moscow was only behind Chechnya for all the country.

    Main thing my conclusion was based on is that age 0-10 years people in Russia is around 20 million, 10-19 age is 14-15 million, 20-29 age is only 16 million people, normal healthy demographic is 30-39 age which is about 25million. So the 0-10age group is successful measure of current policies – a clear improvement on those born after collapse of USSR to 2010…. but as I say it is not great because its not 25 million. We can also compare to how much superior it is to Ukrop and Belarus- pressures are less on us because of more migrant streams, slavic and non-slavic, in our favour. There is also nothing we can do on side-effect from low birth rate in 90s effecting people available to give birth now….. we just have to wait and fulfil village/rural infrastructure objectives in national projects.

  74. AaronB says:
    @Dmitry

    For the first time I realize how ironic that poem is, and thst Kipling may have been a crypto anti-imperialist.

  75. AP says:

    WSJ has a map of the peace settlement:

    It indicates that Azerbaijan will not only regain all of the occupied buffer territory but will also keep all of the areas of NK proper that it has captured, such as Shusha – about 40% of it. Only the green parts will remain under “Armenian” control (which is, actually, Russian peacekeeper control).

    • Thanks: AltanBakshi
  76. One can only hope the Navalny curse operates on Biden/Harris before the Electoral College votes.

  77. @AaronB

    For the first time I realize how ironic that poem is, and thst Kipling may have been a crypto anti-imperialist.

    Here was also ahead of his time when it came immigration…

    The Stranger within my gate,
    He may be true or kind,
    But he does not talk my talk—
    I cannot feel his mind.
    I see the face and the eyes and the mouth,
    But not the soul behind.

    The men of my own stock,
    They may do ill or well,
    But they tell the lies I am wonted to,
    They are used to the lies I tell;
    And we do not need interpreters
    When we go to buy or sell.

    The Stranger within my gates,
    He may be evil or good,
    But I cannot tell what powers control—
    What reasons sway his mood;
    Nor when the Gods of his far-off land
    Shall repossess his blood.

    The men of my own stock,
    Bitter bad they may be,
    But, at least, they hear the things I hear,
    And see the things I see;
    And whatever I think of them and their likes
    They think of the likes of me.

    This was my father’s belief
    And this is also mine:
    Let the corn be all one sheaf—
    And the grapes be all one vine,
    Ere our children’s teeth are set on edge
    By bitter bread and wine.

    Immigrants then:

    Immigrants now:

    • Replies: @AaronB
  78. AaronB says:
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    Kipling is one of my favorite writers. His novel Kim is the finest ever to be written on India and one of my favorite novels of all time. His Jungle Books are surprisingly good even for adults, with an almost Biblical simplicity and grandeur. Many of his stories are excellent. Only Conrad excels him in 19th century English literature.

    He was hated by the Left of his time, although Orwell saw he was a great writer even though he had reservations about his jingoism.

    Kipling said the only two places he wanted to live in were Bombay and Vermont, and he was denied both. He loved India and wanted to live out his life there, and no one depicted its color and variety better. He looked dark and Indian himself.

    He had an intuitive grasp of the desire to live among ones own kind of the ordinary person, but he himself wanted to live among Indians in an extremely exotic locale.

    I appreciate wanting to live among ones own kind, but why limit that to race? I am White, but I would rather live among life and beauty loving Italians who are much darker than me than dour and gloomy White Protestants even though they look more like me.

    Why not vommunities based on temperament and lifestyle and values instead of just race? Race is a factor, yes. But just one.

  79. @TheTotallyAnonymous

    That shootdown came from Nakhijevan/Nakhichevan part of Azerbaijan that is directly connected by land to Turkey and has Turkish soldiers based there.

    If you find the actual location of the downed helicopter near Yeraskh and that of the air force base in Gyumri on the map, it does raise the question of what it was doing there. If it was escorting a military convoy, as claimed, it could have been one coming from Iran. It does seem all rather odd. Anyway, on my hypothetical timeline in comment #25 I got the times wrong: the helicopter was shot down at 18:30 local time and the peace deal was struck by midnight, even faster than I thought.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  80. Aedib says:

    According to NationalInterest.org, the Ukrainian regime feels itself emboldened by the Azeri triumph and Biden’s victory. It started to shell several spots along the contact line with the Donbas Republics. It wants to re-write Minsk-II. Someone should tell Zelensky that this gaime will eventually end with him with a bloody nose, just as Porky ended.

  81. @Aedib

    Ukrainian regime feels itself emboldened by the Azeri triumph and Biden’s victory.

    Well, nobody won the US presidential election yet, no matter what BS the MSM spread and which globalist lapdogs congratulated Biden with victory that did not happen.

    As to Donbass, maybe Ukies want Russian peacekeepers there, like in Karabakh? They might get their wish with a vengeance, all the way to the Polish border, where Polish guards would be only happy to shoot Banderites trying to cross it.

    Then again, if Ukies were just a tad smarter, they wouldn’t have been so deep in shit today.

    • Agree: Gerard-Mandela
  82. @Aedib

    As expected and predicted by many.

    They should take care, though. Biden administration is quite likely to be more bark than bite.

    • Replies: @4Dchessmaster
  83. songbird says:
    @Dmitry

    It’s hard for me to understand the motivation for it, from a Russian perspective. I mean, I wouldn’t guess that Armenia was one of the countries Russians wanted to be in a union with, when the Soviet Union started to fissure. (Maybe, I am wrong?) I guess there might be an argument for trying to maintain a sphere of influence, even at some expense – in order to discourage other powers from encroaching.

    • Replies: @4Dchessmaster
  84. @songbird

    Can you elaborate? I don’t quite get what you are implying.

    • Replies: @songbird
  85. @Anatoly Karlin

    I don’t think anything will be tried by Ukraine. The US has become a paper tiger. Turkey will turn a blind eye since they got what they wanted in Artsakh. The Ukrainians are crazy to think that the world will advocate for them as hard as they did in 2014 during the Crimea debacle.

  86. Dmitry says:
    @TheTotallyAnonymous

    status of Karbakh is still up

    Armenia is surrendering control of all of Nagorno Karabakh in this peace plan – I don’t see there is much question about its status if the plan is implemented in the next months. Armenia loses control over it, and it will become a territory mostly controlled by Azerbaijan, with a smaller extent of Russian control.
    (Area around Stepanakert – Russian guarded ghetto provided for Armenian civilians and their safe passage.)

    Azerbaijan is allowing Armenian civilians of the region to apply for an Azerbaijani passport, so there is some “outward show of generosity” from Aliev in terms of the Armenian civilians and their status. But Aliev has said he won’t provide any political autonomy for the region. So politically it will governed from Baku.

    Question whether the Armenian civilians in Stepanakert will accept Azerbaijani citizenship? It’s possible a lot of them are expected emigrate to Armenia. If there is such an internal migration, then it will at least be useful for Armenia in boosting the demographics in its core economic centre – i.e. Yerevan.

    arrangement is not very good for Russia at all, let alone Armenians.

    This agreement is good for Russian power. Russian power is increasing in concrete ways over both Armenia and Azerbaijan, compared to the pre-war situation.

    Obviously, if you compare to the situation in September, then this is not good for Armenia – they are doing a military surrender of all of Nagorno Karabakh.

    However, relative to the situation of a few days ago, this is surely good for Armenia, as their soldiers were defenseless human target practice for the aerial attacks and drones. If the war had continued, there would have been a worse loss of life and equipment.

    Pashinyan has made the correct choice for Armenia, finally. But it would have been better dif he had made a peace deal earlier in the year, or even in the beginning of October after the first week of the war (they might have been able to maintain some territory a month ago, and without the loss of so much military equipment and soldiers).

    The drone situation was clear in the first days of the war. Videos uploaded by Azerbaijan in the first day of the war, showed that their defenses were technologically obsolete, and reminiscent of a past century. Once the technological disparity was clea, Pashinyan should have negotiated an earlier surrender on better terms than now.

    From the first day of war, it was clear to military experts that Azerbaijan had an absurd advantage. Pashinyan should have begun process to surrender immediately, and the outcome would have been better for Armenia.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
    , @4Dchessmaster
    , @g2k
  87. Dmitry says:
    @Commentator Mike

    For the last 28 years, Russian soldiers patrol this border area between Armenia, Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic, Turkey and Iran. This is their job.

    This is based on the old agreement from the end of 1992.

    It basically functions as another defense subsidy from Russia to Armenia (defensive patrol of one of Armenia’s borders is performed by Russian soldiers).

    Patrol of Russian soldiers on the border of Armenia and Iran, is also continuation of an old Soviet border. Russian soldiers continuing to patrol this small section of territory between Armenia and Iran, is almost like a nostalghia, as it was part of the Southern border of the USSR.

    • Thanks: Commentator Mike
  88. Dmitry says:
    @Dmitry

    without the loss of so much military equipment and soldiers).

    And in the last day defending around Shusha, before the peace deal, Armenian soldiers were apparently being killed in such concentrated groups:

    It was an increasingly bad human cost as the war progressed, and some kind of sunk costs fallacy delaying the surrender.

    At least, Pashinyan made the correct choice in the end.

    Problems for Armenia are the last 25 years of loss of relative power in comparison to Azerbaijan. I’m not sure how much we should blame the last two years in which Pashinyan was Prime Minister.

  89. @Dmitry

    This is what I was thinking. I have many friends who have relatives in Yerevan. They said that many people who noticed Azerbaijani drone footage and tried to get government officials to surrender after week 2. From that point, keeping the original Soviet era oblast while surrendering everything else would have been ideal. Instead, Pashinyan chose the worst of both and decided to incompetently prolong the war while claiming to be closer to victory. Understandably, Armenians are pissed.

  90. @TheTotallyAnonymous

    The modern Greek state has expanded its area by 3 times since its establishment. Even as late as the end WWII, Greece was handed the Greek-populated Dodecanese Islands by Italy. Judicious alliances helped in most of these cases. Of course, there have been some mistakes along the way.

  91. Peskov and Lavrov have DENIED that the Turks will have any peacekeeping role in NK:

    https://armenpress.am/eng/news/1034484.html

    https://ria.ru/20201112/mirotvortsy-1584260513.html (in Russian)

    • Thanks: AltanBakshi
    • Replies: @Mikhail
  92. Mikhail says: • Website
    @NorthAndSouth

    There has been some contradictory statements made on that.

    Upon further review, the Turks will apparently not be involved in the predominately Armenian inhabited area of internationally recognized Azeri territory.

    That very point doesn’t prevent sovereign Azerbaijan from having Turkish forces deployed in another part of Azerbaijan where Armenians aren’t dominate.

    Related:

    https://www.unz.com/tsaker/understanding-the-outcome-of-the-war-for-nagorno-karabakh/

  93. songbird says:
    @4Dchessmaster

    Can you elaborate? I don’t quite get what you are implying.

    Well, I don’t know how many troops and what hardware are involved. Whether it is a significant force, or just a token one – something that maybe wouldn’t be able to defend itself against a full-on assault, but would discourage attack by virtue of its flag. But, whatever it is, it is bound to cost something to barrack those troops abroad. Granted, it isn’t Iraq, and Russia isn’t the US (US spends some crazy amount per soldier, like $1 million in some cases) But I’d be surprised if the total, for five years, was <$100 million. But maybe, it is less than that, if you subtract the cost of keeping them in Russia.

    It's hard to see it as a direct or long-term benefit to Russia, and not some sort of charity. Russia is probably a country that could use some domestic investment. Armenia doesn't seem especially Russian-aligned. Unlike Belarusians, Armenians are a different ethnic group, and I don't think either side harbors visions of national integration.

    • Replies: @4Dchessmaster
    , @Dmitry
  94. @songbird

    I think Armenia will go back to being more Russia aligned after this defeat caused by a naively Pro-Western government. As far as honouring the deal, I don’t see why Turkey would not abide by the terms. It got more than it expected, and causing more trouble would force Russia to back Armenia since it would seem like Turkey is unreliable.

  95. Dmitry says:
    @songbird

    There are elements of the elite in Armenia which are very Russia-aligned, and who benefited from the previous government – but these are the oligarch power structure of the last decades.

    In the previous government, oligarchs became wealthy by their political connections, and Armenia’s economy had one of the highest corruption levels in the world.

    Pashinyan was promising to displace the oligarchs and reduce the corruption. Pashinyan’s domestic policy, had seemed quite successful, and this was the source of his popularity with the ordinary citizens.

    Armenia has a similar process as Ukraine, where oligarch clans control the economy and democracy, for their own interests. These power structures then become associated in the public mind with Russia.

    In the postsoviet countries, generally the democracy results in this kind of mediocre situation.

    Russia, and not some sort of charity. Russia is probably a country that could use some domestic investment.

    Largest US embassy in the world, is the one they have constructed in Armenia. Why would the Americans build their largest embassy in the world, in one of the smallest and poorest countries in the world? There is such a “Great Game” between Great Powers in the Caucasus, with USA trying to gain some access to the region.

    Whether the power projection of Great Powers, becomes charity (as they try to present it) or self-interest, is something which becomes confusing to the Great Powers themselves, particularly in the late stages of an Empire.

    There is also additional confusion introduced when rival powers are both doing it between each other.

    In the early stage of the British Empire, there was an obvious economic benefit to their power projections. By the later stage, British Empire was costing more than it was benefiting for the English people domestically. There was something similar which was confusing to Trump about the American power projection by the early 21st century (in reference to Iraq – “Why didn’t we steal their oil?”)

    And in Russia, there is also such a stage in the power projection, where it is not quite clear in anyone’s mind whether the purpose is self-interest, or whether the power projection is a kind of humanitarian project that provides prestige of power to politicians, in opposition to those of rival Great Powers.

    This week, the news that “Russia has allocated more than $ 1 billion in aid to Syria. The money will rebuild infrastructure, industry, and religious sites.” https://lenta.ru/news/2020/11/11/a_billion/

    From self-interest, this is difficult to justify (many Russian cities would benefit from the investment of an additional $1 billion of aid from the federal government) giving $1 billion of aid to Syria to rebuild their infrastructure, industry and mosques.

    However, there is an additional international prestige for Russia to be the first country to rebuild Syria, while the rest of the world is somehow defeated there. Is this “Great Game” a charity project or self-interest? (The two things have become too confused to separate by this stage in the leaders of the Great Powers).

    • Agree: Ano4, AP
  96. g2k says:
    @Dmitry

    Most of they territory lost was undisputedly Azerbaijani and depopulated, ruined; look at YouTube footage of Agdam. All of those districts go to Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan gets to occupy the bits of katabakh it took by force, Shusha/i was the big gain here, though before the first war it was mainly Azerbaijani, I think about 4k people will be displaced. If you look at AP’s map above, you’ll see that they went straight for that town and signed the deal onnce they took it, they didn’t take that much of krabakh proper. My interpretation of what happens there is that the Russian forces essentially replace the Armenian ones, but life, for the civilians remaining, can continue. Not sure what will happen with civilian government. That’s not an awful deal given how crushing the defeat was.

    It’s a massive humiliation for Armenia though, the outcome of the first war formed a key part of their national identity and allowed them some self-respect. They’re also in serious danger of a civil war as Pashinyan seems more sticky than he appeared a few days ago.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  97. songbird says:
    @Dmitry

    I thought the US embassy in Iraq was the biggest. I don’t have any hard figures, but I lifted this from Quora because I thought it was interesting, if true. (I had no idea about the embassy in Yerevan – quite remarkable)

    The largest US Embassy is the one in Baghdad in Iraq, which is five times larger than the second largest one, which surprisingly, is in Yerevan in Armenia, the third largest one being in Beijing, China, while the fourth largest one is the one in Port-au-Prince in Haiti.

    The US Embassy in Islamabad is also one of the largest in the world, while the one in London is the largest in Western Europe.

    If true, it is tremendously bizarre that the US would have a bigger embassy in Haiti than Russia. I suppose Russia probably limits the size of the embassy to prevent spying, but, if the one in Haiti is bigger, it is still worrying, even if that is the case.

  98. @Dmitry

    The US Embassy in Iraq is the largest Embassy in the World
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embassy_of_the_United_States,_Baghdad

    At 104 acres (42 ha), it is the largest and most expensive embassy in the world, and is nearly as large as Vatican City.[2] The embassy complex is about five times the size of the U.S. Embassy in Yerevan, which is the second largest U.S. diplomatic mission abroad, and over ten times the size of the U.S. Embassy in Beijing, which is the third largest U.S. diplomatic mission abroad.[3]

    <

    b>The Embassy of the United States of America to Armenia (Armenian: Հայաստանում ԱՄՆ-ի դեսպանատուն) is located adjacent to Lake Yerevan along the Yerevan-Etchmiadzin highway. The site occupies an area of 90,469 square meters (22 acres), and was the largest US Embassy in the world by area when it was completed in 2005

    It was completed in 2005 under a “pro Russian” Armenian Government. You have to ask: why did they grant the Americans permission ?

    In the early stage of the British Empire, there was an obvious economic benefit to their power projections. By the later stage, British Empire was costing more than it was benefiting for the English people domestically.

    This has been covered comprehensively by Corelli Barnett in his Pride and Fall trilogy.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlli_Barnett
    In the interwar period, only Malaya and Ceylon made money for Britain. New Zealand broke even. Canada had left the sterling zone, so was not involved . All the rest were a burden. As Barnett says, the interwar period was the time Britain should have got rid of its Asian Empire, even Malaya. After WWI, Malaya was very vulnerable to Japanese sea power, so not easily defencible.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  99. AlexT says:
    @Mr. XYZ

    The Armenians were better off as a part of Russia. Their existence was assured.

  100. Yevardian says:
    @Dmitry

    Pashinyan was promising to displace the oligarchs and reduce the corruption. Pashinyan’s domestic policy, had seemed quite successful, and this was the source of his popularity with the ordinary citizens.

    Armenia has a similar process as Ukraine, where oligarch clans control the economy and democracy, for their own interests. These power structures then become associated in the public mind with Russia.

    Yes, exactly, this shouldn’t be hard to figure out. ‘Colour Revolutions’ have only occured when the government is already highly unpopular, what a coincidence. Russia still has Soviet-mentality when it comes to PR and international relations, it does itself no favours.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  101. Dmitry says:
    @g2k

    Russian forces essentially replace the Armenian

    Although it was a polite way in which Armenia has surrendered all of Nagorno Karabakh, de facto and de jure.

    In terms of de facto – Russia is the power on ground in Stepanakert and Martuni. However, in this new agreement, Russian power is dependent on Azerbaijan who surround the access points and highland on both sides. So the military control is somehow divided between Russian and Azerbaijan.

    In terms of de jure – Russia says that (today), all Nagorno Karabakh is Azerbaijan.

    It seems like it is possible that Armenian civilians there might now self-govern to some extent – although with a limited kind of Bantustan’s sovereignty.

    I imagine that a lot of the population in Stepanakert will voluntarily emigrate, if they can sell their apartments at an acceptable price.

    As new Azerbaijanis are not flowing in, it might be difficult for Armenians in Stepanakert to find anyone who wants to buy their apartments. So older civilians might be financially tied to their properties there, unable to sell them even if they want to emigrate to Armenia.

    massive humiliation for Armenia though, the outcome of the first war formed a key part of their national identity and allowed them some self-respect

    This kind of self-respect, based on a previous but now obsolete past situation, which results in overestimating of your military abilities, or underestimation of the opponent – is not a useful one though, and Armenia should not regret the loss of such a self-respect. It wasn’t useful for them, but created a trap for a future defeat.

  102. Dmitry says:
    @Verymuchalive

    Japan’s Empire also had a similar situation, with accelerated timeline, in relation to their territories like Taiwan.

    Japanese Empire was building more ambitious and modern infrastructure in Taiwan, than in mainland Japan.

    Japan wanted to present Taiwan as a showcase of Japanese magnanimity and generosity. As a result, resources which could have benefited Japan, were invested in constructing grand and expensive buildings and train stations in Taiwan.

    In the British Empire example, we can see how for example, how Queen Victoria built her most expensive and beautiful train station not in England, but in – India.

    So the Victoria station, that England built in India – is far more impressive than anything they built in England.

    And in 1996 the Indians have renamed it “CST station” instead of its real name of “Victoria station”. So this is a lost investment for England even from the point of view of Queen Victoria’s long-term prestige.

    • Replies: @Verymuchalive
  103. Dmitry says:
    @Yevardian

    From Russia’s external policy’s point of the view, the important thing that benefits Russia in these countries requires degree of control (or if not control, then at least a sympathetic relation) between governments. At worst, such countries can be when the governments are friendly and aligned, at least a buffer zone against enemies.

    If we look at the most internally successful (except demographically) postsoviet countries, they would be: Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. However, these are hostile governments, in the NATO and EU. So internal success of a postsoviet country, is not a sufficient condition for a good outcome from the point of view of Russian power projection.

    On the other hand, if the country’s government is friendly and controlled, but excessively unsuccessful or corrupt, and alienates its own population – then it can result in internal political instability, and even coup like in Ukraine (that provides easy opportunities for a NATO victory).

    The more secure positions seem to be where a country is threatened by an external enemy, and has to view Russia as its protector. Conveniently, Armenia is forced to this by Azerbaijan. But in different scale, Kazakhstan will likely be forced to continue with Russia in the future, as they feel increasingly endangered by China (in the sense China is creating subtle and accumulative losses of sovereignty in Central Asian states).

  104. @Dmitry

    So the Victoria station, that England built in India – is far more impressive than anything they built in England.

    Firstly, it was not England, but the British Empire – Scots, Welsh , Irish as well as English. Indeed, in parts of the Empire – Canada, Hong Kong, parts of Africa etc – Scots influence was much more important than English or others.
    Secondly, there were were lots of very impressive Victorian railway stations not only in Britain but throughout the British Empire. Victoria Station Bombay was not far more impressive than these. It was merely an impressive railway station amongst many impressive railway stations. Nor was it the most expensive. Far from it, Indian labour has always been cheap.

    It was completed in 1887. India, then, was still making money for Britain, so it wasn’t a wasted investment. That was to change in the early 20th Century.
    Re the name change. Hindi nationalists changed Bombay to Mumbai. However, it is still the Bombay Stock Exchange and the Bombay High Court. I’m sure many residents still call it Victoria Station.

    Finally, India is still very backward as regards infrastructure. Indeed, many authorities believe this will prevent full industrialisation. The fact that a major city like Bombay has to rely on a Victorian relic as its main railway station is very informative. In Britain and elsewhere, historic stations have been erased or very much altered. As a result, very few large historic stations remain intact.

    I hope that’s made things clearer.

    • Replies: @Verymuchalive
  105. @Verymuchalive

    The greatest crime against good taste was the demolition of Euston Station in the 1960s. It featured an Arch 70 ft high ( 21.3 m ) , 123 ft ( 37.5 ) to the apex of the pediment. The greatest Doric columns ever built. The interior was just as astonishing.
    So, no. Victoria Station, Bombay was not far more impressive.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euston_Arch

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Anonymous comments are not allowed. If you are new to my work, *start here* / help me create more content by *donating*.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Anatoly Karlin Comments via RSS