Alik Bakhshi
The South Caucasus Knot or World War
III
Armenia's aggression against Azerbaijan and the seizure of
20% of Azerbaijani territory, including Karabakh, with Moscow's support,
plunged the South Caucasus into a 30-year war that ended with Armenia's defeat.
However, since then, tensions in the region as a whole have become a coiled
spring, ready to escalate into a much larger-scale war at any moment. This
time, a clash of strategic and economic interests is looming, influencing the
international political climate.
Since ancient times, production and trade have been essential
attributes of human civilization, for which routes are crucial. For many
centuries, one such route was the Great Silk Road, linking China with the
Middle East and Europe. With China's decline, the Great Silk Road lost its
former significance. However, today, with China emerging as the leader in
global manufacturing, the Silk Road has been remembered as the shortest of all
possible routes. Furthermore, the delivery time for goods by land and rail is
significantly shorter than by sea across two oceans. China has proclaimed the
slogan "One Belt, One Road."
China's initiative to revive the Great Silk Road, which
essentially embodies the "One Belt, One Road" slogan, has not been
universally embraced. While the EU, Turkey, Azerbaijan, and Central Asian
countries supported the Chinese initiative, Russia, which considered itself a
potential partner in this project, found itself sidelined. Moscow lost the
South Caucasus after the collapse of the USSR, and with it, its influence on
the political situation in the region. True, an attempt was made in 2008 to
bring Georgia back into the imperial fold, but this failed. Armenia and Iran
have been the most cautious about this project, due to the inevitable change in
the strategic situation. The fact is that this route would pass through
Azerbaijan, Armenia, the Zangezur Corridor, and then Turkey. In this case,
Azerbaijan's Nakhchivan enclave, which shares a border with Turkey, would
automatically connect directly with Azerbaijan, thereby re-establishing
uninterrupted communication between Turkey and Azerbaijan, which Yerevan
believes threatens Armenia's security. The enmity between Armenians and Turks
since World War I, which Armenians wrongly call genocide, undoubtedly plays a
role here. But Armenia's even greater opposition to the revival of the Great
Silk Road stems from the fact that through it and the Zangezur Corridor,
without which the Chinese transport project would be impossible, all Turkic
countries would geographically emerge as a single, monolithic union. This would
result in the realization of a pan-Turkism similar to the pan-Germanism that
today makes a united Germany the richest and most powerful country in Europe.
For the same reason, Iran and Russia also do not want the Zangezur Corridor to
be transferred to the "One Belt, One Road" project.
We have reached a very important related issue: the
inevitable construction of oil and gas pipelines through the corridor, parallel
to the transport route. The EU is waiting for sufficient hydrocarbons from the
Caspian Basin countries to reach European consumers, bypassing Russia, which
naturally causes Moscow to panic and resent Azerbaijan, as a key transport and
energy hub. On the other hand, Moscow and Tehran must also consider the fact
that the North-South transport project, linking Russia with the Indian Ocean
countries, depends on Baku's consent.
I have an old article in which I foresaw the success and
challenges of Azerbaijan as a central transport and energy hub, which I will
quote below. Although changes have occurred 12 years later, the overall
political standoff, which under certain circumstances could have very serious
consequences, remains.
07.08.2025
Alik Bakhshi
Trans-Caspian
Gas Pipeline or World War III
The idea of creating a Greater Germany led to World
War II.
The idea of creating a "Greater
Armenia"...
Baku and Baku oil were one of the
Wehrmacht's main strategic areas during World War II. If successful, all Soviet
military equipment would instantly be reduced to useless scrap metal, while
Germany would receive a much-needed source of fuel. As it happens, 60 years
later, a tight knot of geopolitical problems is gradually tightening around
Baku. These problems extend far beyond regional ones and could instantly
escalate into a major regional war, potentially leading to World War III.
The nascent conflict stems from
Moscow's long-standing expansionist policy in the Caucasus, as well as the
easily predictable circumstances surrounding the inevitable economic
difficulties awaiting Russia if the Caspian states implement a project to extract
and deliver Caspian Basin hydrocarbons to Western Europe, bypassing Russia.
Naturally, Moscow will make every effort, including military force, to maintain
its monopoly in this vital economic sector. However, its first attempt, in the
2008 war with Georgia, failed to achieve its goal. It failed to capture
Georgia, even though a tank column was already on the outskirts of Tbilisi. The
fact is that by taking Georgia, Moscow takes control of the existing
Baku-Ceyhan oil pipeline and eliminates any possibility of hydrocarbon exports
by the Caspian countries without going through Russia. Furthermore, a major
strategic gap—the continuity of the Moscow-Yerevan-Tehran axis—will be
eliminated. It's quite possible that Russia's military provocation in Georgia
was prompted by a powerful Armenian lobby, as Armenia's isolated position not
only hampers military cooperation between the Axis powers but also worsens
Armenia's already tragic economic situation.
The final episode of Russia's
perennial confrontation with Turkey culminated in the late 19th century with
the creation of a buffer zone on the established border, namely, in the
territory of the Yerevan Khanate of Azerbaijan, by expelling the local Turkic
population and resettling it en masse with Armenians from Turkey and Iran.
The Karabakh Khanate was settled
to a somewhat lesser extent by Armenians. It must be said that the Russians
could have just as easily settled this territory with Kurds, who, like
Armenians, inhabited a vast area of the
region, and here religious affiliation clearly played a major role. Russia saw
a secure colonization of the Caucasus, especially in light of the long war with
Shamil, in settling the territory with Christians. This is how the Kuban and
Terek Cossacks appeared in the North Caucasus and Armenians in Azerbaijan.
As traders and artisans, the
Armenians lived quite dispersedly across Turkey, Iran, and the Caucasus,
creating compact population centers in large cities. Thus, at the time of the
conquest of Georgia, Armenians constituted 60% of the population of Tbilisi.
Interestingly, in Yerevan, the future capital of the artificially created
Armenia, Armenians and Kurds each accounted for 5% of the population. In fact,
the Kurds had no less right to claim the same territory for "Greater
Kurdistan" than the Armenians for "Greater Armenia." This is
probably why, when Armenians, with Russian support, launched a bloody rebellion
in Turkey during World War I, the Kurds were also exterminated along with the
Turks.
Armenians weren't directly connected to the land, and
perhaps this is due to the lack of a state for this people before the arrival
of the Russians. I may be mistaken, but I'll nevertheless allow myself to
express some thoughts regarding the relationship between a people, their
mentality, and the state. People are fed by the land on which they live,
engaging in agriculture, but there are peoples, such as the Roma, for whom land
as such holds no value; the Roma have a different way of existence. Armenians
are excellent artisans, traders, financiers, and, frankly, organizers of mafia
structures. They are traditionally dispersed throughout the cities and, for the
most part, have no direct connection to the land. This is evidenced by the
catastrophic state of agriculture in Armenia, or rather its complete absence,
despite the fact that it resulted from the seizure of significant Azerbaijani
territory suitable for agriculture. Having freed themselves from colonial
dependence, peoples gained free access to their land, and agriculture was the
first thing to develop. For example, Azerbaijan, Armenia's neighbor, not only
provides for itself but also exports agricultural products to Russia, with
Armenia being the only exception in this regard. Following ethnic cleansing,
Armenia lost its Azerbaijani farmers entirely and barely makes ends meet thanks
to the strong Armenian diaspora. As a result, the Yerevan Khanate, once
populated by Russian Armenians, is becoming deserted, the population leaving
the artificially created country for a prosperous life, spreading among other
peoples in accordance with their mentality. Well, they can't make their own
shoes! For example, in Baku, all the shoemakers were Armenian. This is
confirmed by the well-known fact that all the Azerbaijani refugees from Armenia
ended up in Azerbaijan, while all the Armenian refugees ended up anywhere,
including California, but not in Armenia. This, I repeat, is, in my opinion,
the reason why the Armenian people did not have their own state. And if, hypothetically,
the Armenian Nazis succeeded in creating a "Greater Armenia from sea to
sea," there would be no one to live in it.
The practice of seizing Azerbaijani lands to create an
artificial Armenia continued under Soviet rule. Thus, in 1920, Moscow
transferred the Zangezur region of Azerbaijan to Armenia. Karabakh was then
granted the status of an autonomous region, and the small village of Khankendi
(meaning "khan's village") near Shusha, the capital of the Karabakh
Khanate, was renamed Stepanakert in honor of Stepan Shaumyan, one of the 26
Baku commissars and a participant in the horrific 1918 massacre perpetrated by
the Dashnaks in Baku. As a rule, the alienation of lands was accompanied by the
displacement of the Turkic population, followed by the destruction of
historical architectural monuments. For example, in the center of Yerevan, not
a trace remains of the fortress wall or the magnificent khan's palace and
mosque.
While the
Yerevan Khanate was 90% Azerbaijani Turkic, and 10% of the population was
equally divided between Armenians and Kurds, today Armenia is arguably the most
mono-ethnic state in the world. A very recent example of ethnic cleansing is
the seizure of Azerbaijani territory in the Karabakh War, accompanied by the
physical extermination of the local population. Not a single Azerbaijani
remained in the entire territory of Azerbaijan occupied by Armenia. A very
important fact should be noted here: the active participation of Soviet Army
units on the Armenian side (the 366th Motorized Rifle Regiment in the attack on
Khojaly), in addition to the transfer of heavy weapons, including artillery,
tanks, and armored personnel carriers, to Armenian militants. The tragedy of
Khojaly and Aghdam (a completely destroyed city) is the very essence of
genocide, so to speak, the final chord of the enlightened 20th century – the
bloodiest in the history of civilization.
Nineteen years have passed since the ceasefire
agreement was signed, yet a political solution to the Karabakh conflict has
still not been found, primarily due to Russia's fault, which essentially
supports Armenia's aggressive policies, maintaining a military base there and
thereby maintaining its military presence in the region. At any moment, in
order to eliminate Azerbaijan as its main competitor for hydrocarbon sales, the
Kremlin could give the go-ahead to Armenian Nazis eager to continue seizing territory
for a "Greater Armenia."
Among the global rabble gathered around Putin's
Russia, the Tehran obscurantists and Armenian Nazis occupy especially honorable
positions as strategic allies. Modern Iran, unlike Armenia, is perhaps Russia's
only fully-fledged and self-sufficient ally today. Shared political and
economic goals in the region are bringing Moscow and Tehran closer together,
and their alliance is directed against the Turkic countries of the Caspian
Basin, primarily Azerbaijan, as a key participant in all projects transporting
hydrocarbons to the West. While Moscow views Azerbaijan as a potentially
dangerous competitor threatening to undermine Russia's monopoly on the
hydrocarbon market, which could lead to economic disaster, Iran has even more
reason to fear its northern neighbor.
Having gained independence after nearly 200 years of
colonial rule under the Russian Empire, Northern Azerbaijan gained the
opportunity to independently manage its wealth. Having chosen a democratic path
and rejected Iran's initial attempts to bring its northern neighbour into the
fold of religion by establishing religious schools in Baku and inviting young
people to free education in Iranian madrassas (to its credit, this initiative
did not evoke much enthusiasm among either the Azerbaijani people or the
authorities), Azerbaijan is now demonstrating a high rate of development, and
not just economically. Positive changes have affected literally every area,
including all manner of international events. How could Azerbaijan, while still
part of the USSR, participate in the Eurovision Song Contest and win prizes?
Freedom has made it possible to open Azerbaijan to the world.
Modern Baku is a sparkling pearl on the shores of the
Caspian Sea, a metropolis whose appearance is literally permeated with the
spirit of East and West, a wonderful example of multiculturalism, which Tel
Aviv's self-interested interests deliberately see as a threat, predicting that
Europe will be thwarted by Eastern penetration. Baku is a city in which there
is not a hint of the antagonism between civilizations so carefully cultivated
by the ayatollahs in Tehran. Incidentally, speaking of Israel and Iran, Azerbaijan
could become the country through which Israel and Iran will settle their
differences.
Independent and successful secular Northern
Azerbaijan, with a population of 9 million, is a thorn in the side of Tehran's
obscurantists, for it is a good example of what independence and democracy can
give a people. This circumstance is particularly troubling for Iran, with its
35 million Turks in Southern Azerbaijan and their natural desire to unite into
a single state. Add to this Iran's claims to the Caspian's oil and gas wealth,
and the emergence of a Moscow-Yerevan-Tehran strategic axis becomes clear. The
Evil Empire, deprived of all its allies, or rather vassals, has found nothing
better to do than nurture a monster like itself, which is about to begin waving
its nuclear baton over the world like the Soviet Union. But above all, Iran
poses a threat to neighboring Muslim countries, and all of Tehran's rhetoric
about the unfortunate Palestinians is merely cleverly deployed propaganda to
gain authority in the Islamic world, in the hope that other Muslim countries
will follow Iran's Islamic revolution.
Here, it's worth pointing out a circumstance that
exposes the Islamic clerics' ideological hypocrisy: namely, that while pursuing
political goals, they, along with Christian Russia and Armenia, are essentially
adversaries of their fellow Shiites from Azerbaijan. This openly hostile
attitude of the religious regime toward a people with whom Iran has had
historical ties for centuries illustrates the mendacity of the pious
Tehranites. While harking back to the Quran to intoxicate, first and foremost,
the devout Iranian people, they are in fact guided by purely practical gains,
relegating the seemingly most important thing—Islam—to the background.
Armenia plays an active role in the
Moscow-Yerevan-Tehran strategic axis. (1) Moscow benefits from maintaining the
simmering Karabakh conflict, so that at any moment it can give the go-ahead to
the Armenian Dashnaks, who have tasted blood, eager to continue their
aggression against the people of Azerbaijan. The primary goal of the Armenian
Nazis is to wipe Northern Azerbaijan off the face of the earth by exterminating
the Azerbaijani people. It is precisely through the physical elimination of
Azerbaijanis, and in no other way, as has already been accomplished in the
Azerbaijani territory occupied by Moscow as a result of the Karabakh War, that
a "Greater Armenia" can be created. Like a rabid dog unleashed,
Armenian militants will rush into the plains of Azerbaijan to reduce Baku and
Ganja to ruins and present the world with a fait accompli.
However, Turkey opposes these plans, having already
thwarted the Dashnaks in 1918 by sending an army to save the Azerbaijani people
from complete extermination in an unprecedented massacre. During the Karabakh
War, Turkey could not provide assistance to Azerbaijan because the war was
fought within the Soviet Union, and any action by Turkey would have been
considered external interference. This time, in the event of an Armenian attack
on Azerbaijan, the situation is fundamentally different. Understanding that
Turkey will not stand aside, Armenian propaganda has recently begun to actively
exploit the lie of genocide in the hopes of deceiving the public, portraying
Turkey as a pariah of the international community, and orchestrating various
international sanctions, including military ones, if Turkey assists Azerbaijan
in the event of a resumption of the Karabakh conflict.
Here we come to the answer to the question of why
Armenia so desperately needs Turkey to recognize the Armenian Genocide,
especially 100 years later, and what lies behind the persistence with which
Armenian propaganda spreads the genocide lie. Everything becomes clear when we
recall the goal of the Armenian Nazis—a "Greater Armenia" from sea to
sea, which entails the seizure of Northern Azerbaijan. Judging by the Armenian
Nazis' undisguised plans to wipe the state of Azerbaijan off the political map,
they want to neutralize Turkey by tying its hands with genocide recognition,
and deal with Azerbaijan without Turkey's intervention. Then, having gained
access to the riches of the Caspian Sea, Armenia, with the support of the
all-powerful Armenian lobby, will lay claims to Turkey itself.
The only thing the Ottoman Empire can be accused of,
with a great deal of exaggeration, is the disarmament and deportation of
Armenians from the frontline, where they committed a vicious massacre of the
unarmed population. I mean vicious, for the Armenians rebelled not against the
regular army but suddenly and mercilessly began slaughtering civilians. On the
other hand, what else could the authorities have done to secure the rear in
anticipation of the advancing Russian army? To the credit of the Turkish leadership,
the army did not take any repressive measures during the deportation. One can't
help but recall the deportation of Japanese from San Francisco and their
isolation on an island after Japan's surprise attack on Pearl Harbor.
Incidentally, unlike Armenians in Turkey, the deported Japanese-Americans
didn't even give any pretext for any demonstrations in support of Japan. The
Turkish authorities didn't have an island at hand to deport hostile Armenians
to. The tragedy occurred because the deported Armenians found themselves among
Turks and Kurds who had previously fled the Armenian pogroms. The spontaneous
reprisals of the common people against the Armenian rebels, who used the
corpses of tortured Muslims to fill wells in villages so that those who survived
would never even consider returning, can hardly be considered genocide, as the
Armenian Nazis from the Dashnaktsutyun would have it.
The real culprits of the tragedy of the Turkish
Armenians are the Dashnaks with their chimerical idea of a "Greater Armenia,"
analogous to the German Nazis, who dreamed of a "Greater Germany"—the
main perpetrators of the catastrophe, primarily of the German people, and the
organizers of the genocide of Jews and Roma.
In an attempt to deflect blame, the Dashnaks, taking
advantage of the chaos during the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the
subsequent, decisive war for the Turkish people's existence, began fabricating
false documents to accuse the authorities of orchestrating the extermination of
Armenians. Indeed, despite all the chaos that accompanied the empire's
collapse, not a single government circular, order, or memo was found to
initiate the prosecution of those convicted of planning genocide. The case of
the 144 main perpetrators of the genocide, arrested by the British in 1919 on
Armenian tip-off and held in a Malta prison, is particularly telling. The
trial, which began in 1920, was forced to drop all charges due to the lack of a
single document proving their guilt, even though the entire imperial archive
was in British hands and all defendants were still alive. Incidentally, the
main incriminating document, Andonian's book "Talaat Pasha's
Telegrams," in which Andonian collected dozens of supposedly incriminating
documents of the genocide, was found to be a crude forgery.
Returning to the similar issue of the Jewish genocide,
as is well known, the Nuremberg Trials declared the Nazi Party and the SS to be
criminal organizations, and all perpetrators were sentenced to death. The case
was closed there; no one intended to try the entire German people, unlike the
Armenians, who are seeking to have the Turkish people condemn themselves for
the Armenian genocide, despite the Maltese court's decision on the matter.
Having completely failed to legally accuse Turkey of
genocide, the Armenians not only continued to fabricate forgeries but also
launched a global propaganda campaign in the hopes of deceiving the public and
turning not just individuals but the entire Turkish nation against the wall. It
should be noted that this propaganda was accompanied by global terror against
the citizens of modern Turkey, unrelated to the genocide. The question arises:
why, after all, doesn't Armenia file a complaint with The Hague Tribunal or the
International Court of Justice? The answer is simple. The problem is that
during the trial, the Armenians could easily turn from accusers to defendants.
Incidentally, if we forget for a moment who started the Pacific War, America
can also be accused of genocide against the Japanese, since American atomic
bombs were dropped not on purely military targets, but on the densely populated
cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, resulting in the deaths of approximately
500,000 Japanese. The death toll of Armenians in Turkey is approximately
300,000 (a figure that has since risen to 1.5 million is clearly inflated by
Armenians). But the Japanese, unlike the Armenians, have the good sense not to
broach the subject of genocide. There are sufficient documents, including the
charter of the Dashnaktsutyun party, to accuse the Dashnaks of ethnic cleansing
in Turkey in 1915 and Azerbaijan in 1918. Wasn't it genocide when, in 1918, in
Kokand (Turkestan), a city far removed from "Greater Armenia," the
local Armenian diaspora, led by the Dashnaks, completely slaughtered the local
population in a bloody three-day rebellion, leaving no exception for women or
children.
The Nazi essence of the Dashnaks, combined with the
treachery of the Armenian diaspora, has resurfaced in Karabakh after a long
period of silence. It should be noted that all these ethnic atrocities occurred
with Moscow's support. Even now, Moscow can unleash the bloodthirsty Armenian
Dashnaks at any moment, driven to savage fury by Azerbaijan's successes
compared to Armenia's plight. Russia has adequately equipped its only ally in
the Caucasus with modern weaponry, including S-300 anti-aircraft missiles and
Iskander-M missiles, capable of delivering a precise and powerful strike deep
in the rear. The presence of a Russian military base on its territory is of
significant military and strategic importance, ensuring Armenia's superiority
in the event of a renewed Karabakh war. To speak of Armenia's isolation is not
entirely accurate. Firstly, Armenia borders friendly Iran, and secondly, if war
breaks out, Azerbaijan, surrounded by enemies on three sides, would find itself
isolated. There's no point in talking about a common border with Georgia, as
Georgia's position in this case is completely identical. From the Caspian side,
Azerbaijan is easily blockaded by the significantly superior naval forces of
Russia and Iran. It's no wonder these countries have been increasing their
military presence in the Caspian in recent years, deploying frigates and
missile boats, presumably to protect the Caspian's ecology, which they see as a
threat posed by the construction of the Trans-Caspian Gas Pipeline between
Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan. Meanwhile, Moscow has shown little concern for the
Caspian's ecology over decades of ruthless oil exploitation, which has turned
Baku Bay into a fuel oil septic tank. It seems the Kremlin hypocrites still
care little about the environmental state of the Baltic Sea, along which the
Nord Stream pipeline runs, but they are willing to fight for the Caspian's
ecology, far from their shores.
Thus, the political and economic problems, as well as
the ambitions of three states aggressive in the region, are resolved by the
loss of independence, or even the complete disappearance of Azerbaijan from the
political map. The only question is when this will happen—that is, when
Armenia, with Russia's permission, unleashes a war. It must also be taken into
account that Yerevan could independently provoke a war to seize its moment of
military superiority. Clearly, Turkey cannot afford to remain on the sidelines,
and a clash with Russia is inevitable. This inevitably raises the question of
how quickly NATO can react. If we imagine the West abandoning Turkey and
Azerbaijan, then the next in line would be the former Soviet colonies in
Central Asia, and of course, Georgia. In short, Moscow will have no choice but
to satisfy the request of the peoples of these countries, through the unanimous
expression of their free will, to reunite with Russia. And the West will
experience a Second Cold War.
Such a scenario is entirely possible, given the West's
well-known impotence. American presidents are more often those who are good
business managers and economists, such as Franklin Roosevelt, who relied more
on Uncle Joe (Stalin) than on Winston Churchill in politics, which led to major
problems after World War II. It seems the West needs a new "Fulton
Speech" to sober up. How many times can we keep stepping on the same rake?
One cannot help but recall the Eastern proverb: "Giving milk to a snake is
like storing poison in it." The political amateur Bush Jr.'s "Friend
Putin" will yet show the world the grin of a revived Evil Empire. This is
confirmed by "Friend Putin's" defense of the Syrian dictator, who is
"wiping out" his own people, just as Putin "wiped out" the
Chechens. Yet back then, the West silently watched Putin's massacre of the
Chechen people. Is there a fundamental difference in this example?
The world was very lucky in World War II that the
aggressors, Germany and Russia (2), who started it, locked in mortal combat;
otherwise, the political map would be completely different today. But is it
worthwhile to roll the dice, hoping for luck, and calmly watch as the Kremlin's
pseudo-democrats nurture an evil empire, keeping the Nazis of "Greater
Armenia" on a leash, ready for aggression, and protecting the Tehran
obscurantists reaching for the atomic baton?
1. 1.Armenia and
the Moscow-Tehran Axis. https://alikbahshi.livejournal.com/91608.html
https://alikbahshi.blogspot.com/2026/09/armenia-and-moscow-tehran-axis.html
2. 2. Stalin's fatal mistake that saved the world.
https://alikbahshi.livejournal.com/20036.html
https://alikbahshi.blogspot.com/2026/06/stalins-fatal-mistake-that-saved-world.html
9.06 2013.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий