2024-04-20 04:40:23
Author: Elchin Alioglu
Source: Trend
The consequences of the results of the meeting between US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan in Brussels on April 5 are already becoming a reality.
At the same time, Armenia will receive aid of an unprecedented variety, volume and name in the history of relations between the CIS states and the West.
The West denies that it will provide a large amount of military and technical support to the Armenians.
The press service of the US State Department said that the statement of the official Washington regarding the photo of the document published in the press, which reflected the issues of providing extensive military support to Armenia at the US-European Union-Armenia tripartite meeting held in Brussels on April 5, is quite interesting.
“This document is purely disinformation, security issues were not on the agenda. We would like to direct your attention to the press release we adopted together with the European Union and Armenia at the end of the tripartite meeting held in Brussels on April 5.
At the Brussels meeting held together with the European Union and Armenia, the focus is only on the economic stability of Armenia, which is trying to diversify trade partnerships and solve its humanitarian needs, as well as supporting ongoing reforms in Armenia in areas such as democracy and the rule of law,” the State Department’s press service said in response.
It should be noted that a photo of one of the documents related to the US-European Union-Armenia tripartite meeting held in Brussels was released yesterday. As can be seen from that photo, which caused widespread concern among the Azerbaijani public, contrary to the statements made earlier about the tripartite meeting, that document reflects the broad military support of both the United States and the European Union to Armenia.
The reaction of Washington is similar to the complete revelation of the incident regarding the recall of the French ambassador to Baku, Anne Boyo, to Paris “for consultations”.
French President Emmanuel Macron’s decision was made without consultations with the European Union and the United States, without studying the positions.
The reason is simple: France intends to use all the means and opportunities to become the main geopolitical actor, monopolistic actor in the South Caucasus and, in this way, shape the West’s policy and strategy in the region on its own.
For some reason, Emmanuel Macron thinks that his plans will be supported by the United States, the European Union, and especially Germany, which recently shares Paris’s policy in our region.
However, Macron will repeat the defeat he suffered in his strategic plans in several regions of the world, this time in the South Caucasus. Realizing that Paris’s intensive policy in the region has already degenerated to the level of hysteria, Brussels and Washington prefer backroom diplomacy in order to avoid very dangerous consequences. There is no doubt that Berlin will choose the same tactic.
The statement of the United States State Department about the document signed in Brussels “is disinformation” cannot be evaluated as an honest approach to the ongoing processes.
The fact that Teri Hakala, the special representative of the European Union for the countries of Central Asia, is on an official visit to Baku and held talks with the country’s leadership indicates Brussels’ intention to act cautiously in its policy in the South Caucasus.
Brussels understands that on the eve of the European Union-Central Asia summit, it is an undesirable scenario for relations with official Baku to go on a cooling path.
The reality is that without the most active participation of Azerbaijan, interaction and large-scale partnership of Central Asia and the South Caucasus with the European Union and the West is impossible.
There are three options for the current and prospective directions of logistics routes from Central Asia: the territory of Russia, Azerbaijan and Iran.
The Russian option is absolutely unacceptable for the West: the transformation of the military operations in Ukraine into an open, harsh and merciless confrontation between Russia and the West makes the possibility of choosing “northern” routes out of the question.
The United States and Israel unequivocally reject even the hints about Iran’s direction. If we remember the recent mutual strikes between Israel and Iran, the mentioned scenario gives an illusory effect.
Thus, the only option is for the routes to pass through the territory of Azerbaijan, and the European Union, adhering to the policy of pragmatism, strives for the development of relations with Baku.
At the same time, Washington and Brussels realize that Paris-Baku relations have cooled precisely as a result of France’s destructive, emotional and illogical policy. Calling the French ambassador in Baku to Paris will in no way cause extreme tension and dangerous risks in the relations between the West and Azerbaijan.
On the contrary, Baku can start building its mutual relations and partnership with the West without the participation of France. This will cause the Macron administration to be overshadowed in Central Asia-South Caucasus-European Union transit projects in general.
As for the State Department’s “disinformation” statement, it’s an expected reaction and nothing surprising.
Until now, the official Washington has tried to disavow open questions with concrete evidence about the decisions it has made, the documents it has signed, and the policy it has pursued, precisely by stubbornly denying the undeniable facts.
Despite persistent denials from Washington, Paris and Brussels, secret discussions between the United States, the European Union and Armenia regarding military and technical assistance to Yerevan began in December of last year.
The issue was discussed when a large delegation of the United States was in Armenia. Discussions continued later in Washington.
Before the US-European Union-Armenia meeting held in Brussels on April 5, intensive consultations were held between Washington, Brussels and Yerevan.
Paris also took an active part in the discussions. Taking into account the serious concern of the official Baku, ABH and the European Union decided not to disclose the nuances related to military-technical assistance in the discussions.
The West is currently intending to turn the remnants of the Armenian army into armed forces with a high offensive potential and quickly arm Yerevan. Officially, it is said that the main and almost the only goal of this strategy is the intention to reduce Russia’s influence in the South Caucasus.
It is also emphasized that conditions have been set before Yerevan, the withdrawal of Russia’s 102nd military base in Gyumri, and Armenia’s departure from the CIS Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) are “necessary nuances”.
Strengthening military-technical cooperation with Armenia within the framework of the Brussels deal, actually arming Armenians, is busy creating new causes of tension in our Western region.