Defeat of anti-Westerners in the Karabakh war

Recently, there has been an increase in anti-Western rhetoric in our society. The main complaint is the attitude of the West towards the Armenians of the Azerbaijani conflict. Critics believe that the West supported the Armenians and is not interested in a fair settlement. The refusal of the ambassadors of the MG co-chair countries to travel to Shusha, the EU assistance to Armenia amounting 2.6 billion euros strengthened the position of anti-Westerners.

In my opinion, this is a purely emotional approach. It is worth more carefully to delve into the essence of the issue, and then the weakness of the argumentation is immediately felt.

We will try to refute the main theses of anti-Westerners. Let us start from the very beginning. During the occupation of our lands, the UN adopted four resolutions. All resolutions reflected our position. They required the Armenian side to liberate the occupied territories without any preconditions. Three of the five permanent members of the Security Council are from the West. As we know, these countries have veto power. Without their approval, these resolutions would not have been adopted. That is, the documents which we appealed to the international community and demanded execution were adopted with the help of Western countries. Subsequently, the EU, in its resolutions on this issue, supported our territorial integrity.

The strongest anti-Western thesis is the 907 Amendment, but it has not been performed since January 2002. In January 1996, the US Congress passed the so-called "Wilson Amendment". The amendment, named after Democratic Congressman Charles Wilson, gave the US President the authority to provide direct assistance to Azerbaijan should he conclude that there is insufficient assistance provided through non-governmental organizations. This amendment effectively neutralized the effect of the 907 amendment, which never managed to cut us off from American aid. Under the Freedom Support Act in 1992-2005, the United States allocated $ 600 million (http: //www.fpc.state.gove/)to Azerbaijan.

Some of these funds were provided by the Pentagon and were of military importance. Over the past 20 years, Azerbaijan received more military assistance ($ 419 million) than Armenia ($ 212 million).

It should be noted that the Congress also adopted the 504 amendment prohibiting aid to the countries that occupied the territories of the newly independent countries. Armenia was covered by this amendment.

There is an opinion that the West could apply sanctions against Armenia, as against the Russian Federation because of the Crimea, and this could force Armenia to abandon its occupation policy. The Armenian economy is tied to the Russian Federation and Iran. There are no significant exports to other countries. This country is very weak economically. In fact, there is no object for the application of sanctions. The use of sanctions would ignore the Russian Federation and Iran - the main economic partners of Armenia. Then the effectiveness of such actions would be zero.

Another strongest anti-Western thesis is that the West sided with Armenia during the 44-day war. But no supporting facts are given. The West does not hide that it sympathized with Armenia. Since they have known each other for a long time, the Armenians are part of their society (diaspora) and they are Christians. Nothing more. The West did not provide military or other assistance to Armenia during the war. Usual statements were made, calls for a cessation of hostilities, which were ignored by us without consequences. All French efforts to organize general Western pressure on us to end the war were unsuccessful. In other words, the collective West actually supported us in changing the status quo and, thus, remained faithful to its resolutions that recognized our territorial integrity.

During the war, the Georgians refused to allow military supplies to Armenia. Georgia is an associate member of the EU and a candidate for the main US allies outside NATO. We dare to assume that without the consent and guarantee of the United States, the Georgians would hardly have made such a decision.

We received modern weapons from Israel. It is considered part of Western civilization and is a strategic partner of the United States. Therefore, if the Americans wanted to be able to safely cut off this supply channel. Trump was Israel's greatest friend and could stop the supply of weapons overnight, but he did not do it. Great Britain prevented the adoption of the anti-Azerbaijani resolution submitted by France to the UN. Its acceptance meant the end of the war.

It must be understood that the liberation of the occupied lands meets the interests of the West, as it reduces the dependence on the Russian Federation, both Armenia and us. Therefore, the West did not prevent the continuation of hostilities, and at the same time was able to keep Armenia in its orbit.

Our main ally, Turkey, is a product of the Western model and a member of NATO. The Turkish army is strong not only due to better training of personnel, but also by equipping advanced models of Western weapons. Phantoms, which were supposed to take effect in the event of the intervention of a third country, are produced in Turkey under an American license.

During the war, the NATO Secretary General made several statements supporting Turkish action on this issue. Naturally, the Russian Federation considered these factors when it remained neutral.

Our economy is based on oil contracts, where Western companies play the leading roles. Thanks to this contract, we managed to become financially independent and be able to purchase advanced weapons. It is worth noting that these contracts are also a safety cushion for us.

We have constantly argued that the keys to the Karabakh problem are in the Kremlin. Then how reasonable was it to demand from the West a solution to this issue. The attitude of the West to such conflicts is the same in Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine - confirmation of the fact of occupation and solution of the issue through negotiations. The West is not going to fight instead of Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine. As we have seen, the issue cannot be resolved without war.

Help was provided to Armenia after our victory. The aim of the assistance is to integrate the Armenian society into the western space, which also meets our interests. Some fear that an economically strong Armenia could become revanchist. This is not in the interests of the West and they are unlikely to encourage such a policy. Rather, they will immediately stop help and adjust the policy using the methods available to them. They have a lot of experience in this business. For example, they did not allow Germany to become revanchist after the Marshal Plan. On the other hand, the West is not interested in seeing the fruits of their labor being bombed out by drones. To carry out revenge, one must possess Western weapons. Since the Russians have shown their unsuitability. The West is unlikely to sell weapons to Armenia. To do this, it is necessary to leave the CSTO, which is not possible in the near future.

Naturally, there are moments in Western policy that do not suit us. This should not become a reason for slowing down the integration processes with the West. Here, as an example, it is appropriate to recall the rapprochement between China and the United States. In 1972, when Nixon began the process of rapprochement with China, Beijing did not demand instant recognition of Taiwan as part of China. They left this problem for later and started rapprochement. As a result, today China, both economically and politically, shares the first places in the world with the Americans.