"Seperatist-leader Vardanyan is plundering Azerbaijan's natural resources" Aleksandr Kobrinsky in touch with Caliber.Az

The fact that the current protests of Azerbaijani activists on the Shusha-Khankendi section of the road are taking place on the territory of Azerbaijan and not Armenia is a strong argument for Baku. Such an opinion was expressed by Aleksandr Kobrinsky, a doctor of historical sciences and Director of the Agency for Ethno-National Strategies while answering questions from Caliber.Az related to the situation on the Lachin road and fake Armenian propaganda about its “blockade”.

According to Aleksandr Kobrinsky, the Lachin road is intended for, among others, humanitarian purposes but the question is what exactly is being transported along the road.

“There are data and facts confirming that the current, de-facto leadership of the self-proclaimed separatist entity in the person of Vardanyan exports gold out of Karabakh, which, if we call things by their proper names, is the plundering of natural resources of Azerbaijan. To put it mildly, the dissatisfaction of the Azerbaijani side with this situation is completely understandable and logical. Another fact is that the declaration of 10 November 2020 included the establishment of the Zangazur corridor, but no real progress has been made to date. The paradox is that Armenia, preventing the unlocking of the Zangazur corridor, is also deprived itself of its own benefit”, said Kobrinsky.

“Armenia, however, has chosen a different path: it has started to build bio-laboratories of the USA [which, by the way, threaten Azerbaijan as a neighboring country], has the largest American embassy among the entire post-Soviet area on its territory and even managed to hold trainings and seminars for the Russian radical opposition. Armenia tries to flirt with its partners in the West while also demanding that Moscow participate in highly questionable operations in order to put Russia and Azerbaijan against each other. Meanwhile, the ambivalent policy of Yerevan will ultimately not lead to anything good for itself and the negotiation process as a whole.

I have repeatedly said that relations with both states of the South Caucasus are important for Russia, although, from my point of view, Azerbaijan behaves much more correctly, respectfully and reliably toward Russia, which is not the same case with Armenia. At the same time, Armenia harbours some illusions about the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), counting on the support of Russia and other member countries of the bloc. Does Armenia have the right to hope for the CSTO’s help if it keeps looking towards the US and Europe? Rather not. I will explain why. The CSTO can intervene when there are some extraordinary situations on the territory of the CSTO member country, but in this case the events on the Lachin road, as I said, are unfolding on the territory of Azerbaijan. The desire to do something by proxy, while remaining inconsistent in its steps and actions - this is Armenia’s policy.

In order to make peace with Azerbaijan, it is the civil society in Armenia that must understand and recognize its vision for the future. The presence of opposing forces in Armenia did not allow them to reap more benefits from the whole situation, when both Baku and Moscow offered certain arrangements for their part. Armenia is not able to see and predict its future, it is not able to see several steps ahead and it has no clear strategic planning.

Russian society has great sympathy for Azerbaijan to date, and I also sympathize with Azerbaijanis and try to be extremely objective about the side that is actually right. And in this case, Azerbaijan is objectively right”, Kobrinsky continued, saying that Karabakh is Azerbaijan.

The Russian political scientist further expressed his opinion about the EU mission in Armenia.

“The EU does not have any autonomy at the present and this must be clearly understood. The EU is most likely, metaphorically speaking, a pioneer of Washington. Well, the pioneers follow the instructions, follow the lines outlined by their senior comrades - the communists. In this case, the communists being the Anglo-Saxons, the pioneers are the EU. The probability that the EU mission will contribute to the pacification of the situation and settlement of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict is extremely small. Given that the mission is led by Anglo-Saxons, there is no doubt that it was designed to foment and incite conflict. The longer it stays in Armenia, the worse it is for that South Caucasus country. This mission is necessary so that the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict does not subside on the border with Russia. The aim is to divert Moscow’s attention from the Ukrainian issue. For this, the ideal option would be to unleash the conflict in the South Caucasus, so that Russia would be drawn into it. Azerbaijan should therefore forecast such a scenario. It is likely that the EU will unleash a conflict on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border, including pitching Russia against Türkiye.

I am more than sure that a similar scenario is being prepared in Central Asia for next year. All these processes can be traced back to the global affirmation of Anglo-Saxon rule in the world. The main question is whether it will be preserved in the future or not. All other processes are details. I am referring to the Russian-Ukrainian, Armenian-Azerbaijani conflicts, and even conflicts in Africa need to be considered in tandem, without neglecting the huge number of Soviet tanks there. The Americans are making efforts to have several African countries hand over these tanks to Ukraine, but so far only Morocco has agreed to this. I believe that the peace treaty between Baku and Yerevan is being delayed due to the participation of those Western countries that Armenia attracts in all these“, Kobrinsky summed up, not excluding that a peace document could be signed in the foreseeable future.