A few days later of after discussions on the international level the developments that took place on the 12th of January 2015 in Armenian city of Gyumri, where 102nd military base of Russian Armed Forces is located, are no longer regarded by anyone as an event of purely criminal nature. It is increasingly frequently, especially on the part of Armenian opposition and liberal pro-western powers, that calls emerge to make the whole world (but Armenian authorities before anyone else) review quite a number of matters of a more conceptual nature, than a murder, even this cynical and this absurd.
On the 12th of January a serviceman of the Russian Armed Forces Valieriy Piermiakov who was serving on the premises of the Russian military base located in the Armenian city of Gyumri broke into a house in this city in the dead of night and committed a glaring murder there, shooting six people and mortally wounding a baby of six months old.
One cannot but agree that an event like this is one out of the common run and to a certain extent unpredictable, but it is also virtually impossible to agree that the manner in which Russia is used to behave in the territory of almost any other state has not influenced in one or another way the possibility of commitment of such single (for the time being) crime. There is no smoke without fire. So we should look into where this fire comes from more thoroughly.
The event that took place in Gyumri with participation of a Russian serviceman no way can be named coincidental or accidental and there are several reasons for that.
Firstly, this event proves that the system of military authority is totally rotten in the Russian Army and it seems to me that this is not just about the system in the 102 military base. Second reason is of a far bigger scale and far more conceptual. The name of this reason is impunity, manifested in different situations and scales.
The fact that Russian servicemen behave like that is in fact the reflection of how Russia behaves as a state and there is literally no exaggeration in saying this. Frivolity, impunity and permissiveness -this is how both the Russian behavior towards other states and reasons that led to possibility of commitment of the mentioned crime can simultaneously be characterized. However, whereas the latter situation notwithstanding the number of existing hazy details is more or less clear, this is not what can be said about the first one.
Suffice it to put several questions and try to answer them to understand that Russia dares to behave in the very same manner in which its individual servicemen dare to behave – not to obey anyone, impose its will on others and repress in the utmost violent way anyone who does not consent to accept the two previous points.
The most striking example of what has been said before can be the conditions on which the Russian 102 nd military base is located in the territory of Armenia. Russia does not pay a single rouble for deploying its military base on the Armenian territory. Moreover, during the entire post-Soviet period of Armenian history numerous land strips and items of immovable property have been turned over under the Russian jurisdiction for the needs of the base. Public utilities are provided by the Armenian party continuously and gratis. Does not these seem as purely Armenian problems? Even though it does Russia does not care about that since in its vision Armenia (as any other country making part of the Russian sphere of influence) is nothing more than Moscow’s satellite.
By the way, what touches upon Russian military bases, the history of them goes well beyond Armenia. It is interesting to analyze where and on which conditions Russia has its military bases. The post-Soviet space territories, where Russian military bases are located include South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Transnistria, newly occupied Crimea (i.e. territories that have already experienced what so-called “Russian identity policy”, more resembling a very special form of jihad, is), Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan (post-soviet territory the de-facto independent existence of which is not what Russia thinks is possible and which is yet to experience the enlightenment of the “Russian identity policy” idea ). It is very plausible that these bases may become a very good instrument for coercion to make the mentioned states obey the idea of the “Russian identity policy” just as such coercion took place in Crimea in the previous year or just like it happened in Transnistria back in 90s. Also there are newly cooked treaties with Cuba, Vietnam and a treaty on military cooperation with Iran, signed a few days ago -these are traditional partners of the Soviet Union and at the same time outcasts from the western democratic part of the ideologically divided world. Generally, given the location of bases it is quite obvious for which imperial ambitions and for carrying out which “fraternal” plans Russia puts its military personnel and equipment in the territory of other states. And the manner in which Russia dares to behave (again, as a state as a whole and through the behavior of its individual servicemen, which can be a very striking example) is just another clue of how definite and aggressive plans and interests Russia has.
In the light of all mentioned above another thing is yet worth mentioning. Russian authorities frequently blame the West of either hypocrisy (as when it touched upon Syria) or excessive liberalism, provoking terrorism (as in the case of the recent scandal around the Paris magazine “Charlie Hebdo”). At the same time Russia itself displays an utmost cynical hypocrisy as it disseminates terrorism in many states of post-soviet space, supporting it financially and by providing military equipment, displaying an intolerable neglect of international law. Suffice it to mention how much military equipment is present in the Donbas region or who is responsible according to the results of numerous examinations and investigations for the crash of the Malaysian Airlines Boeing hit last summer over the Donbas. Yet another example of disseminating terrorism is the situation with Valieriy
Piermiakov. However, this is not where the story ends. On the 20 th of January in the south of France five citizens of Russia, Chechens by origins, who were preparing terrorist attacks (presumably, not only in France) were arrested. Notwithstanding the fact that in the recent days populous strikes against insulting prophet Mohammed (an example of which was the penultimate issue of “Charlie Hebdo”) raged in Chechnya , no single Russian organ seems to have been able or even to have attempted to prevent emerging similar plans in the heads of Russian citizens. At the same time, Russian Embassy in Paris denies even the very fact of being informed of the incident, which would not have happened if Russian authorities had nothing to do with the plans of those five Chechens. Otherwise, what would prevent Russia from respecting international law and investigating the situation publicly?
Russia’s behavior and its attitude toward its “fraternal” nations, on which such behavior is based is quite definite but unfortunately many “fraternal” nations either fail to see or do not want to believe the reality of threats hanging over them, even observing results of such “family friendship” in other areas. That is why the issue is how many families among the “fraternal” nations still have to perish being brutally shot or stabbed by the uncontrollable Russian terror to make these nations understand who is worth being friends with and who is mortally dangerous to have any relations with.
Facebook Comments
