| Meltha Magazine Online |
 |
|
Article
Page | Review
page
| Photo
Album Page | Links
| Contact
Me
| Archives
Meltha 2000, No 10 pages 17-20 |
The Russian
press ("Nezavi.')imaya Gazette", 1st July, 1998) published an
article of a well- known American diplomat, the representative of the State
Department in the CIS states Mr. Steven Sestanovich. In his quite voluminous
article Mr. Sestanovich portrayed the cooperation of the USA and Russia in
brightest rainbow colors and estimated the positions of both countries in the
question of Near East problems solving as identical. It was quite clear: the
American diplomat tries to convince the Russian public, that the USA and Russia
should play the same game, that Russia is interested to support the USA position
since that position is mutually acceptable and mutually advantageous.
In connection with this article Dr. S. Osipov proposed a different point
of view. But his article, entitled "Russia and the Near East", was
published in the same newspaper only on the 18th December 1998
(under the subject heading "Polemic'). It should be reminded that the
article appeared only when the USA and their allies began to bomb the cities and
villages of Serbia. When it has become quite clear that the USA with the aid of
NATO acting .from a position of double standard, try to establish their
undivided leadership and to dictate their terms in all regions of world The "Human
aid" has shown that the imperial ambitions and tactical moves of the USA by
the end of the 2Oth century do not differ .from the ambitions and moves of the
British empire by the end of the 19th century. With the only difference that the
tragic history is repeated as a tragic farce.
We offer to our readers the article of Dr. S. Osipov published in the "Nezavisimaya
Gazette "
and his post scriptum from the present-day positions.
Russia
and the Near East
By
Dr. Sargis Osipov
The positive as a whole point of view of an American diplomat Mr. Steven
Sestanovich (article "The diplomacy of sharp elbows is gone into the
past") to my regret does not arouse any delight, since it does not herald
any changes in the Near East policy of the USA.
The author tries to persuade Moscow that its interests coincide with the
Washington ' s ones. The solution of the Near East problem Mr. S. Sestanovich is
seeing from the standpoint of his predecessors at the times of cold war: the
weapons should be delivered to Israel but should not to the odious Syrian
regime. And he says nothing about immense weapons deliveries to the same odious
regimes in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, etc. And all this at the time when in Saudi
Arabia, in contrast with Syria, the religious intolerance reached an
unprecedented level of obscurantism, without a parallel even in the most dark
periods of the Middle Ages.
The Near East always was a stumbling-block at the times of revision of
The historically formed relations of the Soviet Union with the Near East were fully subordinated to the interests of the two world systems struggle. Therefore the Soviet Union was forced to support marginal, but military and politically wear regimes serving as bridge-head for the Soviet influence not only on the Near East region but also on the whole of the East. This allowed to some degree to block the "Silk Way" to the West.
The
Russian Holy Trinity Cathedral in Jerusalem
After the termination of the cold war and the disintegration of the socialist
camp the world political map changed radically. Under the existing instability
Russia comes to firm confidence in the rightness of the foreign policy
priorities of the USSR (maybe in order that at least in that way to recover a
part of the former stability). In order not to be fully removed from the
political play in the Near East by the USA- Israel tandem, Russia satisfies its
regional
It is worth to take notice that at the end of 19th century the Orthodox missions of the monarchical Russia to a certain extent annoyed Persia and Ottoman Empire (because around these missions was concentrated a strong anti-Islamic movement). But at the end of 20th century Islamic missioners as if had their revenge .. upon the democratic Russia in return.
At the existing correlation of forces it 5..i would be naive to think
that Russia and the USA could equally influence the Near East situation and
accordingly equally to derive dividends. ~
But it is conceived still more important that the Near East being the cradle of
the three great religions, today blazes in. the fire of antagonism of the two
from them. Islam and Judaism. The third force which always
counterbalanced this equilateral triangle of holiness is absent.
The initiatives of Laurence the Arabian and Winston Churchill until now, remains
a "standard" of .the Near East policy. The artificial creation of
Arabian states confederation separated by the
Not without the efforts of the West on the Near East disappeared the third force
Anybody hardly remembers the East Christians today. Only seldom one mentions of
Maronites, Monophysites, or quite exotic sounding Arabians-Christians. The
confessional self-names are passed off as ethnonims and ethnonims are
transformed into neologisms, corresponding to the political demands of one or
another regime.
The East Christianity arose on the abundant ground of Aramaic-speaking
population of Mesopotamia. It kept its autonomy under the most cruel rulers
including Abdul Gamid regime using the status of "millet" i.e. of a
religious community. The Assyrian people and ethnic related peoples. retained
their language, writing, culture and national traditions. These ethnic related
peoples formerly together formed the Great Assyrian Empire and thanks to our
savior they rose from ashes. Since then their essence began to be determined not
by the ethnic, but by the confessional belonging. So were arisen Nestorians,
Jacobites, Maronites, Syro-Chaldeans, though all they originated from the single
Holy Apostolic Catholic Church of East..
Present-day Russian politicians should realize that the situation on the Near
East (formed since the times of Laurence and Churchill) can be changed only by
means of rehabilitation of full and equal with other rights of East Christians.
The frontal antagonism of two forces on the Near East must be transformed into
the equilateral triangle of forces. III this triangle each of the sides will be
compelled to seek an ally among the other two. Such a threefold unity will
become the base of peace and cooperation and will permit Russia to carry on its
own independent. policy.
p
.s. For the last year the situation formed in the world politics because of
the events in Yugoslavia has led to radical changes in the interrelations of
many countries including the Near East ones. The new political doctrine of the
USA that proclaimed almost the whole world a zone of vital interests of only one
country, has revealed the essence and the true goals of the Great Powers
covering their expansive trends with the peacemaking and humane slogans. Over
again the Balkan states became an experimental proving ground. But this time the
experiment is characterized by the complete ignoring of the world public opinion
and of the authority of UNO.
In Russia the "young reformers" (Gaydar, Choobice, Nemtsov) unleashed
an unprecedented robbery of the national property and reduced their own country
to a critical state verging towards a civil war and complete disintegration of
the country. At the same time the "young reformers" in the West
(Clinton, Blare) try to establish the same principles on a world scale and to
place the whole world under the command of a handful of western oligarchs who
regard their "democratic world outlook" as an absolute truth. Most of
the sober- minded politicians in the world are convinced that the humane ideas
of the Great Powers are illusory. In reality they pursue their own mercenary
purposes and ignore the interests of small states and small nations. For
example, Washington plays the Kurd card in such a manner that the destiny of
this nation scattered throughout many countries depends upon the specific
interests of the USA 'in the country in question. It is decided not the Kurd
problem but the
As a brilliant tactical move
should be recognized the first steps of the Israel premier Mr. Ehood Barack. He
refused to make the traditional first visit to his strategic partner in
Washington D.C. Instead of this Barack made a series of blitz-visits to his
nearest neighbors: to the Egypt president Mobarack, to the Palestinian leader
Arafat, to the young Jordanian king Abdallah and to the Turkey president
Demireel. Only after that premier Barack left for
The economic interests
of the Great Powers determine their behavior and their inter-allied commitments
towards the more weak allies and strategic partners. About this one can judge by
striking episode from the memoirs of the Israel ex-premier M-me Golda Meir.
After the "Trial Day" war in October 1973 Golda Meir spoke to a forum
of the Socialist International and sharply blamed the behavior of all the
European states (in majority of which socialists came to power) for their
refusal to grant permission to American aircraft for refueling at European
air-fields during their mission to Israel. In reply all Europeans together kept
silence. One of members of Israel delegation remarked upon this silence:
"Of course, they cannot speak. Their throats are choked up with oil!"
It seems the Western civilized countries persuade all other that equal rights would not be given, they would be won. And as a rule by means of power methods. From the position of these countries we, Assyrians, can yet "support" in equal degree both from the USA or Russia and from Iraq or Israel.