Nagorno-Karabakh between Turkey, China and USA / News / News agency Inforos
Rate it
Nagorno-Karabakh between Turkey, China and USA

The Caucasian confrontation has encapsulateв geopolitical intrigues concerning the entire Eurasian space

Nagorno-Karabakh between Turkey, China and USA

A new aggravation of relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan, as well as the Nagorno-Karabakh bloodshed, with Turkey's direct participation in all of this, have been caught in the middle of geopolitical intrigues, perhaps more than ever. The tragic South Caucasus events concern states, coalitions and other international players that seem quite out of touch with them.

Consider China, for instance, whose diplomacy regarding the Karabakh fighting is pretty succinct. On September 28, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin expressed hope that the warring parties will display composure and restraint? managing to erode differences through political means, and that ensuring regional peace and stability meets the interests of all those involved, including Armenia and Azerbaijan. A rather sufficient statement for a state that is geographically far removed from the clashes' epicenter. Maybe too disengaged for a global power, given that even minor third-rate countries are routinely taken on by such events that are none of their business at all.

In fact, Beijing is presumably following the Karabakh events much more closely and actively, aware of its connection with its national interests. To understand this connection, think of Iran.

The Islamic Republic, which is directly adjacent to the battle zone, has been in a strategic partnership with Armenia for a long time. The Armenian-Iranian geopolitical "team" acts as a competitor and counterweight to the Israeli-Azerbaijani team (even now, despite the extremely conflict-ridden relationship with Turkey on almost all the other issues, the Israelis have actually supported the Turkish-Azerbaijani aggression). At the same time, Iran is consistently engaged in strengthening relations with China. In the summer, the news broke that the two countries were preparing a comprehensive cooperation agreement to make them each other's closest allies in the economic, fuel and energy, and military-strategic spheres. The agreement even caused a certain split within the Iranian elite – some of its prominent representatives, including former President Ahmadinejad, started talking about their homeland' upcoming colonization by China.

The perpetually antagonistic US Democratic and Republican parties have a certain shared understanding of how to behave in relations with Turkey and China: Turkey must be reined in, and China must be shown its honorable second place in the world hierarchy. However, they have a different goal-setting and methods of "taming the shrew" – whether it will happen for the US sake as a selfish, self-sufficient empire (Trump project) or as a globalization carrier (Democrats' project). But at this point in history, it is beneficial for both the Democrats and the Republicans to disembowel and discredit Turkey as an aggressor, creating huge problems in the underbelly of China's strategic ally (Trump cannot stand Iran himself). We won't certainly equate "profitable" with "stage-managing the conflict single-handedly". The root cause of the current escalation is Erdogan's irrepressible imperial ambitions and Aliyev's revenge-seeking inclination. But it would be reckless to take the American elite off the answer to the "cui prodest" question.

Moreover, damage is also inflicted to the Turkish-Chinese relations, which, according to American Middle East experts, should have been strengthened following the first wave of COVID-19. Besides, one of the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative's corridors passing through Azerbaijan and Turkey is also jeopardized.

We can also consider the unrest in Kyrgyzstan, where Chinese influence has been steadily growing, in terms of China's wounded interests and ambitions. Primarily caused by internal contradictions and a split between the elites of the country's north and south, it cannot be called a western-inspired "color revolution". But the street "infantry" that was first to join the "battle" precisely involved the activists of pro-western parties associated with Soros' globalist structures. One shouldn't disregard the Turkish-Islamic factor amplifying across the Kyrgyz spaces. Thanks to the unrest, former national leader Almazbek Atambayev known for certain pro-Turkish sympathies, was released from prison. A while back, it was Turkey he paid his first visit to in the presidential capacity to address the parliament in Turkish, saying, among other things, that although located far away from Turkey, Kyrgyzstan considers that country a guiding light, a way-showing mother country. This is how the interests of China, Turkey and the United States have once again intertwined and collided.

Add comment

Сообщите об орфографической ошибке

Выделенный текст слишком длинный.