Russia's enemy countries

kvs wrote:

Nice comparison of Turdeau, the clown of Kanada, and Lukashenka the "tyrant" of Belarus.

franco wrote:

kvs wrote:

Nice comparison of Turdeau, the clown of Kanada, and Lukashenka the "tyrant" of Belarus.

Who was that fool on CBC saying that the Russians were behind the truckers? Canadian-Ukrainian?

Hole wrote:
Look who is leading the canadian truckers.

Turkey revives GUAM to reduce the role of Russia in the post-Soviet space

Ankara is ready to play its part in de-escalating relations between Moscow and Kiev, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said last week and invited Russian and Ukrainian Presidents Vladimir Putin and Vladimir Zelensky to visit him "to settle differences."

"Turkey is ready to act in any role to reduce tensions between Russia and Ukraine," said his spokesman Ibrahim Kalin. “And we are doing this as Turkey, as a friendly country to both Russia and Ukraine, but also as a NATO ally,” the representative of the Turkish president emphasized .

Excuse me, whose NATO ally? Russia or Ukraine? Unclear. How not very clear is Erdogan's insistent desire to reconcile Moscow and Kiev. Let me remind you that he made a similar statement last fall, proposing to hold a summit on Donbass with the participation of two leaders, to which Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov then replied that this was impossible, since Moscow was not a party to the conflict.

Both Kiev and Moscow welcomed Turkey's peacekeeping efforts, but hardly anyone in both capitals seriously believes in success, no matter where the meeting takes place and no matter who the mediator is. Erdogan himself hardly believes in this. But he needs to designate a presence in the region. And in general, the topic of the “Russian-Ukrainian war” is the most central one on the world agenda today, and it “must” be highlighted in it.

However, in Moscow, it seems that they are not only skeptical about the fact of negotiations with Kiev, but also doubt the sincerity of the Turkish leader's desire to help extinguish the conflict. Well, how could it be otherwise, when at every step he recalls the “occupation” of Crimea and sells strike weapons to Ukraine.

The other day, answering the question whether he believes in the beginning of the war, the Turkish leader said: “I don't think it's realistic. In order for Russia to take this step, it needs to reconsider the situation in the world and its own situation. Azerbaijani President Aliyev recently visited Ukraine. Now I will also talk to Ilham Bey. And of course, it will be necessary to talk about all this with Putin. Because this region can no longer tolerate wars. We need to completely eradicate wars in this region. “I will go in and seize these lands” - things will not move forward with such logic. For example, what did Russia do in Ukraine? She settled in the Crimea. As for Crimea, at every meeting with Mr. Putin, I always tell him that we are against the occupation of Crimea. Our Foreign Ministry also informs its colleagues about this. In other words, our policy in this regard is clear.”

Started for health, and ended for peace. With such an approach, it is hardly worth waiting for a breakthrough.

But here's what I'd like to draw your attention to. Erdogan recalled that recently Ilham Aliyev visited Kiev, after which he is going to talk with him. About what? And what does Aliyev have to do with it?

Let me remind you that during this visit, Kiev and Baku signed a number of documents, but most importantly, they agreed to create a transport corridor bypassing Russia, which will connect Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Moldova.

The question immediately arises: what will be transported along this corridor and where? When talking about transport corridors in Eurasia, arteries connecting Europe and China or Europe and India usually come to mind immediately. There are many options for a corridor from Beijing to Europe, and the simplest, shortest and cheapest of them is through the Russian Trans-Siberian Railway. Of course, the Trans-Siberian is not able to fully meet the needs of China, there are other options, for example, a corridor going through Kazakhstan and Russia. There is also an option - bypassing Russia - through Central Asia, the Caspian, Transcaucasia, Turkey. And what does Ukraine have to do with it?

Oh, yes, back in 2015, Ukraine, having lost the FTA with Russia, tried to integrate into the Trans- Caspian corridor by sending an experimental train from Odessa Ilyichevsk to China. This train was then lost somewhere in the steppes of Kazakhstan, it turned out that they simply did not pay for it. He eventually reached his destination, but with a huge delay. I believe that at that time all participants in the chain were clearly convinced that it is better not to deal with Ukraine. Yes, even if everything went smoothly for her, why waste time and money reloading goods from train to ship and back twice, when you can reload once or even send cargo only by land?

And here it is again! This route is unlikely to be of interest to China. As, however, and India, which has a completely land "North-South".

The only thing that comes to mind is that Azerbaijan, Georgia, Ukraine and Moldova decided to arrange some kind of "cabal". The main thing is to sound the sacred "bypassing Russia."

What do these countries have in common, besides the Soviet past? Yes, yes, firstly, this is the very past, which they call the period of “Soviet occupation” (in Azerbaijan, although they don’t rush about this topic, like their neighbors, the country’s accession to the USSR is called nothing more than the “occupation” of the ADR Soviet Russia). In the present, all of them are united by unresolved territorial conflicts. Azerbaijan has almost decided its own, but the other three republics have not. At the same time, all three consider their conflicts to be "Russian occupation."

Azerbaijan and Ukraine have been cooperating in the field of “fighting separatism” for several years, in particular, they had an agreement to allow only those goods from Nagorno-Karabakh and Donbass that are licensed by official Baku and Kiev to enter the territory of the partner country.

But in fact, the contacts of the former Soviet republics, which have a clear anti-Russian orientation, began long before that. Back in 1997, the GUAM association (Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Moldova) was created - an integration project aimed at integration with the West as opposed to integration with Russia. Note, long before the color revolutions in Georgia, Ukraine and Moldova. At that time, Georgia and Azerbaijan were even members of the CSTO. But the vector has already emerged. And the process was controlled by the same West, which at that time was not yet in a state of political confrontation with Russia, but sought to weaken it as much as possible, first of all, removing the post-Soviet states from energy dependence on Moscow by creating energy transportation routes bypassing Russia.

Among them was the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline, opened in 2006 and designed to drive Azerbaijani and Kazakh oil to Europe not through Novorossiysk, as before, but through Turkey. A year later, the operation of the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum gas pipeline began. At the same time, a gas pipeline was conceived from Iran, and then Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan to the EU countries "Nabucco", the main goal of which was to free Europe from gas dependence on Russia. The anti-Russian political orientation of the project was not hidden.

True, Nabucco remained unrealized. But part of it from Baku to Europe was embodied in the Southern Gas Corridor (TAP-TANAP).

What is interesting: 15 years ago, these projects were actively supported and promoted by the United States - of course, for political reasons. But today, the main interested party and beneficiary (both in politics and in the economy) is Turkey, which seeks to lock in all the gas flows leading to Southern Europe.

Speaking of Nabucco. One of the stumbling blocks for connecting the gas capacities of Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan was the dispute over the field, which was called "Kyapaz" in Baku, and "Serdar" in Ashgabat. Things almost came to a break in diplomatic relations. And last year, the parties unexpectedly agree after almost 30 years of dispute.

And who was the mediator? By a "strange coincidence" this happened immediately after the end of the Second Karabakh War, as a result of which Ankara claims to receive access to the Caspian Sea. Today we can talk about the actual revival of "Nabucco" under the leadership of Turkey. And not only him. The transport corridor discussed by Aliyev with Zelensky is also very similar to Turkey's project, the purpose of which is to entangle the region with its infrastructure web.

Yes, the GUAM project turned out to be unviable and practically died, although a certain surge of interest in it was observed after the coup in Ukraine in 2014. Today, against the background of the aggravation of the situation around Ukraine and the return to power of anti-Russian forces in Moldova, a new surge may begin. You only need a driver. And this role, apparently, can perfectly play, and Turkey is not averse to playing. It is through this prism that its “peacekeeping” impulses in Ukraine should be viewed. Through it, the desire to restore relations with Yerevan that unexpectedly seized Ankara. Ankara seeks to close on itself not only energy flows, but also the political processes of the region. Those that are not controlled or weakly controlled by Russia.

Obviously, Turkey considers the reanimated GUAM as an attempt to balance Russia's influence in the region in its favor, or even completely nullify it. And, obviously, after the events in Kazakhstan, its activity will increase. There has already been talk again about the need to create "Turan" as a military alliance. But Erdogan clearly has a broader view - he does not intend to limit himself to the Turkic republics. And he may not be alone in this.

According to Ukrainian political scientist Konstantin Bondarenko, Great Britain is hatching plans for a large-scale change in Europe, for which it is actively using Turkey. London, in his opinion, is trying to form the London-Ankara axis, on which Poland, Ukraine, Moldova, and, in the future, the Baltic countries can be strung.

It is hard to disagree, given that this “axis” is historically established since the time of the Great Game, and with the arrival of the former ambassador to Turkey, Richard Moore, to the post of head of MI6, it became clear that Britain would increasingly use the hands of the Turks to get into political processes in Central Asia, Transcaucasia and, as we see, not only.

Recently, the UK Geostrategy Council published a geopolitical map, which formed a triple axis between London, Warsaw and Kiev. Now add the Baku-Tbilisi-Kiev-Kishinev axis to the same map. What do we see around Russia? Scissors. Or ticks.

Of course, Turkey cannot be called only a weapon in the hands of the British. Erdogan is very ambitious and he wants to play his own role, he has his own interests. But these interests, when they concern the post-Soviet space, clearly run counter to Russian ones.

In recent days, rumors have been actively circulating in the Armenian media about the possibility of withdrawing the Russian military base from Gyumri if Armenia and Turkey establish diplomatic relations and the border between the countries is opened. In Yerevan, the rumors are denied. But isn't that what London, Washington, and, of course, Ankara would like very much?

https://www.ritmeurasia.org/news--2022-02-03--turcija-vozrozhdaet-guam-dlja-snizhenija-roli-rossii-na-postsovetskom-prostranstve-58458?utm_source=politobzor.net