Turkiye sees an opportunity to turbocharge its rise as a Eurasian Great Power along Russia’s entire southern periphery in ways that autonomously align with American grand strategic interests.
Aliyev probably isn’t looking to blow up his ties with Moscow outright, he’s invested too much in that relationship to casually toss it, but he also sees the shifting balance and wants to keep his options open.
If Turkiye can push deeper into Central Asia, riding the momentum of the OTS and Washington’s possible strategic pivot, then why wouldn’t Baku explore that lane? Especially if it comes with subtle American blessings and a chance to nudge Armenia into a more pliable role.
The Yekaterinburg incident might’ve just been the spark they needed. Not planned, maybe, but useful. Russia’s hands are tied elsewhere, and that vacuum creates space.
Thank you Andrew for the really excellent article, which explains such a complex situation for Armenia and Azerbaijan, and Middle East power games in general. A great analisis!
One thing remains a mistery to me in this Middle East web: given the unbreakable alliance US/Israel, the part seemingly played by Israel in so many conspiracies against Russia, the connection between Israel and the neocon movement that wants to destroy Russia, how can Putin and the Russian deep state still consider Israel a friendly or even just neutral force? I do not doubt the evidence from all your research on this topic, but exactly because I believe it, how can Russia be at proxy war with the US and at the same time trust its strictest ally Israel and be in good terms with it? How does it make sense?
Or is it fear of Israel, of its connections within Russia, or even of its nuclear weapons? That story from Pepe Escobar about a nuclear attack by Israel blocked by Russia sounded unreal, but then if he was fed this story to publish, why was it, was it just for fun or was it a message from whom to whom?
Complicated situation. Israel, Syria and Iran (and most of the Gulf) are all apprehensive re Turkey, but it will be difficult to forge a coalition. Just not to forget - there was actually a similar coalition of sorts against Turkey at the start of WW1, but it fell apart after WW1 ended.
And it is that kind of person who pulled Russia from national bankruptcy to a reasonable prosperity. Not rich, but prospering. If you want to build a Russian hegemony with everybody coming to kiss hands, yeah, Putin is not the right kind of leader. Putin is special because he does not put that much value into "face" or "pride", but rather focuses on the real benefit of every policy, and long-term benefit if possible.
No, no, no Sir, there were not the same times. Russia worked under radars. West despited Russia, thought it was forever down and Poutine worked in shadow
There were then no hostility against Russia.
When in 2011, about Syria, Russia suddenly spoke loud against West and for the first time, with China, it sparked hostility. Terrible hostility. Then USA sparked Maïdan to separate Ukraine.
When Russia took Crimea back, it was cold war.
When Russia survived the terrible sanctions in 2022-23 and ridiculed western weapons, it was war. Really war.
The fine people which gave prosperity and power to Russia were people of peace. Now, it's time of war.
And it is a total war. At the end, no deal. Just submission, victory ou death for everyone.
When Russia fought Georgia for South Ossetia, the war between Russia and the West had already started. But even if Russia did not fight that war or did not support Syria, Western pressure would come just the same. The same can be said about US-China relationship. As long as China remains sweat-shop for the American masters, there would be no problem in the US-China relationship.
The bad relationships between Russia and the Baltic nations have lasted for hundreds, if not a thousand, years. As long as the USSR broke up and Russia does not plan to reclaim those areas, Russian immigrants into those three nations will suffer. I don't see any other way. No amount of diplomatic effort can change that. So are the situations for other former USSR members, just with different historical mix and twists. Syria is different because it was a geopolitical move without Russian cultural/ethnical connection. Syria had been a USSR client state, and Russia wants to keep this old client alive. I don't see Yeltsin or Medvedev solving the problem any better.
But of course, I know too few of Russian political figures. So maybe there had been better political leader than Putin. Alas they did not win the power struggle. Policy wise, As long as Russia is militarily or economically strong, the Western pressure will come.
Slavic residents in the Baltic's are not immigrants, they were colonizers sent by Stalin and others to "anchor" the "disloyal" Balts into the USSR, which occupied them against their will after WW2. Humans used as pawns to break the local demographics and be a useful excuse for intervention.
Yes. Hence I see that there is no way for the Baltics nations to reach peaceful compromise with Russia. To follow the old nation-state spirit, then these Russians have to be relocated. In the Baltics, it is somewhat easier to solve the problem because of the total headcount is low. When Ireland went independent and the Northern Ireland was split off, it is much more difficult as the involved population movement was much larger. However, Ukraine was one major source of the Russian "tribe", hence at a different position in the conflict context versus the Baltic nations (old germanic tribes). I don't see Putin using the same approach to deal with the problem of Russians in the Baltic areas. But that is just my thinking, no proof.
To keep the nation-state spirit, then one state, one religion, one language, one sovereignty. In reality, that is fairly difficult in many parts of Europe.
There was a period in the ancient Chinese history somewhat similar to today's EU versus Russia. At the time, China did not have a unified language or written scripts. Intermingling was much less than today's Europe. All the smaller nations that tried to hit above their league all got wiped out very early. China was unified through extreme brute force; the extent of brutality was rare even by Chinese standards. If the EU wants a "win" over Russia, they have to become one, a single nation rather than a union of nations. If not, then there are other approaches to coexist with Russia without losing dignity.
This looks bad. I hope I am wrong.
Aliyev probably isn’t looking to blow up his ties with Moscow outright, he’s invested too much in that relationship to casually toss it, but he also sees the shifting balance and wants to keep his options open.
If Turkiye can push deeper into Central Asia, riding the momentum of the OTS and Washington’s possible strategic pivot, then why wouldn’t Baku explore that lane? Especially if it comes with subtle American blessings and a chance to nudge Armenia into a more pliable role.
The Yekaterinburg incident might’ve just been the spark they needed. Not planned, maybe, but useful. Russia’s hands are tied elsewhere, and that vacuum creates space.
Thank you Andrew for the really excellent article, which explains such a complex situation for Armenia and Azerbaijan, and Middle East power games in general. A great analisis!
One thing remains a mistery to me in this Middle East web: given the unbreakable alliance US/Israel, the part seemingly played by Israel in so many conspiracies against Russia, the connection between Israel and the neocon movement that wants to destroy Russia, how can Putin and the Russian deep state still consider Israel a friendly or even just neutral force? I do not doubt the evidence from all your research on this topic, but exactly because I believe it, how can Russia be at proxy war with the US and at the same time trust its strictest ally Israel and be in good terms with it? How does it make sense?
Or is it fear of Israel, of its connections within Russia, or even of its nuclear weapons? That story from Pepe Escobar about a nuclear attack by Israel blocked by Russia sounded unreal, but then if he was fed this story to publish, why was it, was it just for fun or was it a message from whom to whom?
Complicated situation. Israel, Syria and Iran (and most of the Gulf) are all apprehensive re Turkey, but it will be difficult to forge a coalition. Just not to forget - there was actually a similar coalition of sorts against Turkey at the start of WW1, but it fell apart after WW1 ended.
So
Turkey plays against Russia when it wants and pees on its boots.
Pakistan do the same
Azerbaijan seems to plays the same.
In Iran, there's a whole bunch of punks which like to do the same.
Same thing for India.
Kazakhstan says "fuck you"...with a grin.
China rubbing its hand.
And there are "pragmatics " which rule Kremlin....
And it is that kind of person who pulled Russia from national bankruptcy to a reasonable prosperity. Not rich, but prospering. If you want to build a Russian hegemony with everybody coming to kiss hands, yeah, Putin is not the right kind of leader. Putin is special because he does not put that much value into "face" or "pride", but rather focuses on the real benefit of every policy, and long-term benefit if possible.
No, no, no Sir, there were not the same times. Russia worked under radars. West despited Russia, thought it was forever down and Poutine worked in shadow
There were then no hostility against Russia.
When in 2011, about Syria, Russia suddenly spoke loud against West and for the first time, with China, it sparked hostility. Terrible hostility. Then USA sparked Maïdan to separate Ukraine.
When Russia took Crimea back, it was cold war.
When Russia survived the terrible sanctions in 2022-23 and ridiculed western weapons, it was war. Really war.
The fine people which gave prosperity and power to Russia were people of peace. Now, it's time of war.
And it is a total war. At the end, no deal. Just submission, victory ou death for everyone.
When Russia fought Georgia for South Ossetia, the war between Russia and the West had already started. But even if Russia did not fight that war or did not support Syria, Western pressure would come just the same. The same can be said about US-China relationship. As long as China remains sweat-shop for the American masters, there would be no problem in the US-China relationship.
The past and past achievements do not matter, only "what can you do for me now or in the foreseeable future?"
A similar but different take would be: as long as a country is willing to serve as vassals for a hegemony, there will be no problem, only peace.
Sure, but they were not alone for that. You forget the others
Duh, the United States and its Turkish buttboi will do whatever they can to weaken Russia. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.
Keep the eyes on the prize. De-escalate the tension. Invest in infra-structure and economic development in Russia's Central Asia area.
With the same success than in Baltes countries, Ukraine, Armenia, Georgia, Kazakhstan and some others????
I don't speak proudness and vanity.
The bad relationships between Russia and the Baltic nations have lasted for hundreds, if not a thousand, years. As long as the USSR broke up and Russia does not plan to reclaim those areas, Russian immigrants into those three nations will suffer. I don't see any other way. No amount of diplomatic effort can change that. So are the situations for other former USSR members, just with different historical mix and twists. Syria is different because it was a geopolitical move without Russian cultural/ethnical connection. Syria had been a USSR client state, and Russia wants to keep this old client alive. I don't see Yeltsin or Medvedev solving the problem any better.
But of course, I know too few of Russian political figures. So maybe there had been better political leader than Putin. Alas they did not win the power struggle. Policy wise, As long as Russia is militarily or economically strong, the Western pressure will come.
Slavic residents in the Baltic's are not immigrants, they were colonizers sent by Stalin and others to "anchor" the "disloyal" Balts into the USSR, which occupied them against their will after WW2. Humans used as pawns to break the local demographics and be a useful excuse for intervention.
Yes. Hence I see that there is no way for the Baltics nations to reach peaceful compromise with Russia. To follow the old nation-state spirit, then these Russians have to be relocated. In the Baltics, it is somewhat easier to solve the problem because of the total headcount is low. When Ireland went independent and the Northern Ireland was split off, it is much more difficult as the involved population movement was much larger. However, Ukraine was one major source of the Russian "tribe", hence at a different position in the conflict context versus the Baltic nations (old germanic tribes). I don't see Putin using the same approach to deal with the problem of Russians in the Baltic areas. But that is just my thinking, no proof.
To keep the nation-state spirit, then one state, one religion, one language, one sovereignty. In reality, that is fairly difficult in many parts of Europe.
There was a period in the ancient Chinese history somewhat similar to today's EU versus Russia. At the time, China did not have a unified language or written scripts. Intermingling was much less than today's Europe. All the smaller nations that tried to hit above their league all got wiped out very early. China was unified through extreme brute force; the extent of brutality was rare even by Chinese standards. If the EU wants a "win" over Russia, they have to become one, a single nation rather than a union of nations. If not, then there are other approaches to coexist with Russia without losing dignity.
Obviously it can only mean one thing; all Turks and Americans must die.