Interesting point. Armenia is fiercely Pro-Russian and Azerbaijan are Pro – Western. On the basis of logic bare realpolitical interest that in the view of the quilted jackets rules the world, the West needs to sink in Azerbaijan.
In fact, the position of the West (including the US) most Pro-Armenian, though not unconditionally. This position boils down to three main points:
- the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan;
- peaceful resolution of the problem;
- self-determination of Nagorno-Karabakh (but within the borders of Azerbaijan, and if not, then according to the agreement, Azerbaijan).
Of the three points, one in favor of Azerbaijan, the other two actually leads to conservation (best Armenians) the status quo, preventing Azerbaijan’s revenge, and recognizing the independence of Nagorno-Karabakh and the presence of his own legal rights and interests. The reason is that, from the point of view of legal stalemate situation.
The fact that Nagorno-Karabakh is quite a subject of self-determination and that the removal of it by force of arms will be accompanied by a humanitarian catastrophe, that is, crimes against humanity, it is obvious.
On the other hand, I’m afraid to create a precedent, affecting the sacred cow of the inviolability of borders – then whatever Putin says: why can Karabakh, and Crimea not? (Putin has forced them to bite your elbows Kosovo for their adventures). Hence the conclusion: to maintain the status quo and avoid sudden movements.
Source: Paul Shechtman / Facebook
Posted with personal permission of the author