"... Was originally about protecting against foreign, not domestic aggression, but there is definitely a market for it!" - TLDR script writers know how to add just the right quantity of salt in their reporting!
@@ChasmChaos , 1) pictures only show CSTO force shooting, and not rioters shooting. This is just like the Hong Kong protest Western coverage, i.e. only shows police beating the rioters but NO rioters beating police or even setting an old man on fire! 2) Only quoting the Kazak president's words like using "lethal force" or "liquidate," to cast the president in a negative light. The guy is fighting violence on the streets, the way the US Capitol police killed the Jan. 6 rioters! 3) Mention not a word about Western influence of Color Revolution. What is happening in Kazak is a textbook US Regime Change. Just do a quick google search for "US regime change" and be prepared to have your eyes opened. From Arab Spring to Latin America, it's the same playbook. 4) A typical Western Mainstream Media would have a white guy trashing on Russia or China, (both hated by the US government), without providing any interviews or eye-witnesses accounts, except talking points from NGOs like "Human Rights Watch" or "Progressive Press" that are sponsored by National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which is just a white-washed arm of the CIA and controlled by the US government. They can basically say whatever they want and propagate any narrative for people to buy into.
A bit to clarify, 1) CSTO officially didn't participate in fighting against protestors. They protect military infrastructure. 2) Kazakhstan's government as you mentioned described protestors as foreign-trained agents so they pretended it's some sort of foreign attack hence mutual defense clause can be activated.
By asking the Russians ,kazakh president now has given the appearance of weakness. And once a autocrat has shown weakness he is dead. As simple as that.
@@ArendJanV Do note the usage of the words "officially" and "pretended" in the original comment. This person appears to real, rather than a "russian bot".
Probably one compelling reason why Russia intervened in Kazakhstan and not in Armenia and Kyrgyzstan is the possibility of protest spillover to Russia due to geographical proximity. Kazakhstan is also very much like Russia in its socio-economic structure, while Armenia and Kyrgyzstan are not.
i mean russia didint join armenia cause it was between nagorno karabah if azerbaijan actually set foot in actually armenias state land then russia would have joined in 100% . not even armenia recognized nagorno as a state neither did russia so there was no point for russia to attack azerbaijan and majbe make turkey declare on armenia and make a much bigger problem.russia still has allies besides armenia,azerbaijan is also somewhat of an ally of russia so russia must act as a dealer for does 2,2 work togeather
Not quite, Kazakhstan under Nazarbaev was trying to get away from Russia as much as they could, siting with China more and more, and Putin was losing his grip. These protests are exactly what he needs to make sure that Russia is still present in the region.
@@intrusivethoughtofthatonetime Kaspar meant that Kazakhstan and Russia are both personal authoritarian dictatorships, with similar strengths and weaknesses, while Armenia and Kyrgyzstan are both democracies. Very flawed ones, but still democracies
8:11 - I strongly disagree. The 4th article was actually worded out exactly like that to be used against domestic protesters. You can label anyone a "terrorist" and "an external force", and Tokaev uses these words exclusively when referring to the unrest to justify the use of force and involvement of CSTO.
@@allykid4720 So you are saying Kazakh police are under resourced to the point they are soft targets for rioters. That's incompetence from the authorities, borderline criminally negligent. Careful what you say!
TLDR is a typical fake news producer - as I see since several episodes. Actually I know 7 foreign languages giving me acces to real text of treatries and allowing me to watch Kazakh news, and such level of anti-humanitarian bias as TLDR makes I never heard in any language besides English.
@Erqĭn Məmbetjanuli 🇰🇿 Q̆iyat It's an interesting philosophical question whether it is moral or immoral to shoot at a corpse. As to the protests being hijacked by 'bandits' or 'terrorists', sadly it's a fact of life for all humanity. When peaceful protests get out of control, violence tends to occur, whether it is a BLM demo or the mob attacking the White House last year. And I find it rather amusing that lapsed Communists like the Kazakh leader conveniently forget that the Russian revolution would never have happened without outside help.
@@mykhaylovarvarin9078 Wasn't this the plan of Gorbachev for a liberalized USSR before de hardliners coup fucked everything, don't remember hearing that Yeltsin was a supporter of it
@@hadaward_dk Yeltsin wasn't a supporter of it, because he would have been leader of autonomous Russia, not the whole union or independent Russia. As soon as he understood that he, Kravchuk and Shuskevich (leaders of Ukraine and Belarus) are able to scheme a new union behind Gorbachev back in Belovezh, he immediately switced to it. Russia really pushed for common border guards and military command, customs and economic union, using CIS as a base. Kravchuk (and Ukrainian leadership as a whole) was more or less the only one, who pushed against it. That's actually the reason for a curious situation, Ukraine is officially a founding state of CIS, but it never was a full member of CIS
Hunger, is that enough? Kazakhs have a minimum wage of 60€ per month. 60€. With such a rich country, it seems quite a plausible outcome. Happened before way too many times, and hopefully it will continue to happen. Cruelty is letting your people starve so you can buy yachts for your friends.
@@nielswaldorf4009 Don't know if you got it right. 18 killed and 700+ injured were on the government, armed side. The civilian protesters did well. But it always could be better - like more of these scumbags from the govs got killed.
While I am not a politician, I would like to argue the following which you would concur is obvious. Russia is a great power - much greater than the surrounding countries - and therefore, the only relevant perspective on the CSTO is Russia's perspective. In fact Russia is in the CSTO not for the same reasons as the other members. Russia does not need defense help from the other members, but obviously wants to maintain military influence and a buffer zone against NATO, while the other members need Russia for defense and/or political stability. To conclude, I believe the CSTO is as efficient as it could realistically be, that is, as Russia wants it to be, and there is no other way. The other members have no choice but to live with it, and Russia will keep the discretion as to granting protection and handling neighborhood conflicts.
The cynic might argue that the US is to Nato as Russia is to CSTO. I'm not that cynic as I think Nato is essentially a defensive group for democracies, whereas Russia uses coercion to keep its 'friends' on side.
@@rogink I wouldn't call that cynisicm but objectivism. In the geopolitical scheme, I do not place a morality judgment on either side. So if you think that Russia is the agressor, consider this: Presently NATO has deployments in Poland which shares a border with Russia, but you don't see Russian deployments in Mexico. What Russia is doing in Ukraine is to prevent it from increasingly leaning towards the West and ultimately joining NATO, after it was once part of the Soviet Union.
@@julianoch I have no partiality to either side. The end of the USSR meant large numbers of people found themselves in a 'foreign' country. OK, so most of those were ethnic Russians cynically relocated to 'Russify' the locals. Of course it was wrong for Russia to takeover Crimea and eastern Ukraine but these areas should have been given the chance for some kind of independence or separation. Now I know USA uses its influence around the world to keep unpleasant regimes on board, but it also helps defend democratic countries from their neighbours - e.g. Taiwan, South Korea. I don't se Russia defending other countries from aggressors! And I'm not aware of any US politicians trying to claim part of Mexico (at least not in the last 150 years!).
@@rogink If Mexico elect a socialist government, I bet the US would occupy it over night and instate a new government. But that hypothesis is silly, because the CIA would have taken care of it way before, and it would never come to such extremes. In Ukraine, Russia is reacting to the new pro-europian government since the polulation of east Ukraine remain largely pro-russian. But hey, this conversation could go in many directions, so good talk, and we shall keep researching and learning from the actual experts out there.
Of all the possible pictures of CSTO forces in Kazakhstan you picked a picture of Khazak troops shooting in Almaty at least twice when adressing CSTO personal. Most amusing indeed.
After describing how savage jihadists beheaded police officers, this youtuber has the gall to cry about peaceful protesters. The protesters here drew first blood. On the first day you didn't see any of the cops or guardsmen armed with anything more than truncheons. They did not have authorization to use weapons, it was clear. Second day that authorization came. Coup plotters should not complain about initiating the escalation ladder and getting their just desserts.
@@tasbykekerey1203 Nope. CSTO forces didn't even engage the rioters. They took over government military bases so that Kazakh police and special forces could do their job.
unfortunately, if the CSTO wants to survive it seems like "all threats foreign and domestic" is going to have to become policy officially. the apple does not fall far from the tree.
If I had to blindly guess, I would say that the reason they were willing to intervene in Kazakhstan but not Kyrgyzstan or Armenia is because it was less controversial to the member states. I can guess that Uzbekistan might have difficulty responding to a call from Kyrgyzstan to come in and quell Uzbek-Kyrgyz violence, depending on the specifics of the conflict and of Kyrgyzstan's request, and I'd guess many countries, especially those 3 majority Turkic countries, would be reticent to enter a war against Azerbaijan on Armenia's side, when they all know the war was mostly about Azerbaijan taking back the land Armenia took in the 1990's (that they probably officially recognize is Azerbaijan's) to protect a country that they don't recognize and which still de facto exists (though smaller) even after the 2020 war (with Russian troops already keeping a corridor open between it and Armenia for transportation and communication). Quelling a popular uprising might seem equally controversial, but a lot of those countries do that sort of thing anyway, and the uprising seems at least to have been rather violent before any foreign intervention and they can all easily label it a "color revolution", and in any case, probably none of the governments had a reason to side with the protestors and they probably didn't see as a war they could get stuck in and make worse like they may have feared about the Kyrgyzstan and Nagorno-Karabakh/Artsakh conflicts.
Yes, but then Russia that flex muscle left, right, and center just lost to Turkey that is economically on its knees. For me as an eastern European it proves that pacts with Russia are not about safety or security but keeping a nationalistic theater.
@@drachenfels6782 That's another interesting point you don't quite bring up. I mentioned that intervening to protect Armenia's borders from Azerbajani troops could risk getting involved in a proper war with Azerbaijan, but I didn't mention that Azerbaijan is at least somewhat backed by Turkey, giving the Nagorno-Karabakh Wars something of the flavor of a Russia-Turkey proxy conflict. Nobody wants to get involved in a proxy conflict (or I guess lots of countries do, which is why they happen, but it would be smart not to, especially when you're not sure whose side you should be on).
Summary: All of these countries can agree on using military force to protect their governments from angry mobs, but they probably weren't all sure what side they should have been on in Kyrgyzstan and Armenia.
CSTO troops that came to Kazakhstan were too small compared to the Kazakhstan's own military and police force. One theory: The reason why this time CSTO came to 'help' is to show that Russia supports the new president of Kazakhstan, after he took the chance of revolts and removed Kazakhstan's ex-president and his relatives and allies from power.
They had no justification to intervene, that area wasn't recognised as Armenia by any country. I am sure they would have intervened if the war had gone into Armenia territory
Russia didn't "betray" Armenia, Russian troops protecred the recognized Armenian border and nothing else. Nagorno Karabach is Armenias problem, their treaty with Russia never included protecting Armenia from Azerbaijan.
@@njnikusha Totally agree, as a Turkish unfortunately I can say the samething for Turkey. Before Erdogan we were making good progress becoming more civilized but thanks to him, we went back to ottoman era
I'd like to clarify, NATO didn't have to convince the former members of Warsaw pact to join. We all couldn't join fast enough when the Soviets moved their troops out of our countries! Nobody wanted to get invaded by Russians again, and NATO is seen as a protection against that.
Seems counterintuitive that you guys wanted to be in alliance with Germany. Those guys also have a less than stellar record... On the same note: When was the last time Bulgaria was invaded by Russians?
@@billyfox6368 Best way to ensure you don't get invaded is to build economic ties. Inviting opposing force is the best way to be a target. Look at Finland, those guys got it right.
@@artirm1979 As a Finn it's hard to use us as a good measuring stick for what is right for others. Finland was terrified for the duration of the Cold War of USSR. We had been invaded by them at the beginning of World War 2 and the scars ran deep. Finland always has been scared of its erratic and authoritarian neighbour and for the longest time was compelled to align in between the West and the East, despite always being a Nordic and Western country. I would never recommend this approach to any other country who wasn't in the same situation. Putin with his mad talk about forbidding others from joining NATO is pushing Finland more towards NATO (especially after the invasion of Crimea). I personally would never want to join an organisation that literally committed crimes against peace (Afghanistan and Iraq in early 2000s). Still Putin's aggressive talk and Russia's invasion of Crimea is making most Finns more and more vary, and it is possible that at some point public opinion might tip towards the criminal institution that is NATO.
Nagorno-Karabakh legally is not a part of Armenia. Thus no grounds for CSTO involvement. In Kirgizia they never called for CSTO, because the agression was not foreign. So that's that.
Nobody was expecting Russian soldiers to fight in Artsakh. However, Russia breached its obligations under the Collective Security Treaty several times: first, it sold large amount of weaponry to Azerbaijan (article 1 of the Treaty says that Member states abstain from exercising actions directed against each other), and also, it remained silent while Azeris attacked the Armenian territory in 2021.
@@vadimnagano it cannot be a grey legal zone because the wording in the Treaty is exact enough, moreover that the text was drafted by Russian lawyers, so we have the case that Russia drafts the text of treaty and breaches it the next moment. Secondly, I missed the moment when Pashinyan enforced Russia to breach its obligations under the treaty. I understand that the Russian media tries to depict Pashinyan a Western agent, but in Armenia, many consider him to be extraordinarely pro-Russian.
@@vadimnagano Dear Vadim, I was referring to the Collective Security Treaty (1992), the preponderant fundamental text of the organization, but analogous regulations are set in the Charter, you should read it more carefully, if you are willing to do so, of course
Doesn't seem like a serious alliance. While NATO is dominated by the US, since the US spends as much on its military as the next 10 countries combined, it's not like its other members are toothless. 3 other NATO members are in those top 10 and could individually go head to head with anyone - including Russia - except the US and China. The CSTO, on the other hand, depends entirely on Russia to function. So it's not surprising that "propping up a dictator" is something they'd do, while defending Armenia isn't, since Russia can profit by "staying neutral" and selling arms to both sides of that conflict.
You're just convincing more and more Russians and their allies to side with China, an actual near peer rival that is more than capable of destroying western hegemony
@@jeanaiplu3840 I would not bet either way on the outcome a confrontation that only involved Germany and Russia, but none of their allies. A lot would depend on the military objective. I don't think Germany could invade mainland Russia, where Russia's force of numbers could wear them down, just as they have before. But conflicts outside of either country could go either way.
The Baltic States absolutely, yes. Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova? Yeah sure. The Central Asian republics such as Kazakhstan? Absolutely not, specially Kazakhstan. Kazakhstan didn’t want the USSR to end, Russia even left the union before them. Citizens of these republics who lived during Soviet times claim that their lives was much better back then. I don’t know enough about Armenia and Azerbaijan to comment but I’m assuming they weren’t very keen on being part of the union.
@@dinis8271 Ukraine and Georgia? “Terrorized hostages”? Seriously? Quoter of the Bolsheviks were Ukrainians, Ukraine was one of the first countries to join USSR. Half of warders in Gulag were Ukrainians. And isn’t the darkest period of USSR associated with the name of one Georgian, Stali…? Of cause he didn’t want his motherland to stay apart from Russia. And still attitude to Stalin on Georgia is the most positive among all post-soviet states. Don’t try to tell that ex-soviet countries were oppressed by Moscow. Soviet totalitarianism treated all the SSR’s in the same way. Those counties didn’t want to throw off the regime any more than Russia.
@@bachelor3846 the Soviet union purge all of the Bolsheviks, Stalin sign a nonaggression pact with the germans, Fascism was never hated by communists because it was too new at the time before 1941. they hated imperialism and colonialism, and the N@zis overthrown Monarchies. So both the Soviets and N@zis aided communists in Vichy France against the West before 1941. this was all documented in the Berlin diaries. if Ukrainians are bolsheviks this explains why he distrust them in the 1930s. Even in Stalin death bed he purge all jewish doctors out of paranoia.
@@bachelor3846 Join? As if countries had referendums to join USSR lol. ALL of the republics were occupied by the red army, including eastern block countries just a bit later.
This rather looks like a Eurasian version of the "Condor Plan", which was a pact among some South American dictatorships to crack down on local dissidents (mostly socialist/communist) and for this matter was very effective, but it didn't have any use for the event of an external war, as proven during the Falklands War.
Russian Serbian relations are a bit too much exaggerated politically, Serbia tries to balance between EU and Russia, it isn’t a Russian satellite either (the way Belarus is for exemple)
About Armenia and NK region... NK region is in Azerbaijan, it is self proclaimed independant state and not a part of Armenia. There was no reason for CSTO to react when Azerbaijan and NK vent to war, Armenia wasn't attacked. And why should CSTO react in ethnic unrest, it's not a foren agresion? In Kazakhstan there was elements of foreign involvement in those protests, you had armed protesters who was well organized, they attacked police stations, army instalations, airports, tv stations etc, that is not hapenning on regular protests (violent or otherwise) against government. Unfortunately there is new geopolitical and proxy war among big powers right now and we ordinary people are screwed.
Nobody was expecting Russian soldiers to fight in Artsakh. However, Russia breached its obligations under the Collective Security Treaty several times: first, it sold large amount of weaponry to Azerbaijan (article 1 of the Treaty says that Member states abstain from exercising actions directed against each other), and also, it remained silent while Azeris attacked the Armenian territory in 2021.
CSTO members couldn't allow foreign military presence on their soil without collective CSTO approval, but the US did establish an airforce base in Kyrgyzstan 1 YEAR before that organization was formed and kept it until 2014. Did that circumvent CSTO approval?
@@dismas8884 Armenia has not joined NATO. It does have an "individual partership action plan" with NATO, but so does Kazakhstan, which is clearly part of the CSTO. Every single CSTO country is part of the "partnership for peace" along with NATO. Armenia has nothing else to do with NATO as far as I know, and is still very close to Russia, having gotten armed by Russia during it's war with Azerbaijan and having Russian peace-keepers protect transportation corridor to Artsakh. Maybe you confused it with Georgia, which also hasn't joined NATO, but at least has actively tried, and NATO told them they could join* in 2008, right before Russia invaded on behalf of their breakaway states^, and is an "enhanced opportunity partner". *They said they could join at a meeting, but it was vague and Georgia didn't become an officual candidate or get a "membership action plan" or anything, I don't think. ^I should point out that Abkhazia and South Ossetia have never actually been controlled by Georgia's post-Soviet government, so it's not like Russia created a problem that wasn't there before, as I think is oftem assumed. This was an obstical to NATO membership even before Russia came in and fought a war at the border and started occupying the breakaway regions to protect them from Georgia ever being able to tahe them back.
To be clear, Azerbaijan launched the offensive military campaign within its internationally recognised borders to regain its control over Nagorno-Karabakh, so there was no direct threat to Armenia and its territory. At least this was how Putin interpreted the situation. Azerbaijan btw is not a member of CSTO even though it’s a post-Soviet country and still maintains good relations with Russia (unlike Georgia or Ukraine).
Yes, but then after the war Azerbaijani soldiers came into Armenia proper (not Nagorno-Karabakh) and, to this day, they keep the nearby villages under fire. CSTO did nothing and Armenia was too weak to start another war so 🤷🏻♂️ By the way, Armenia has a separate defence treaty with Russia and that wasn’t respected either. Fun fact: when the war was over, Belarus and Kazakhstan (both CSTO nations) congratulated Azerbaijan.
As if "internationally recognised borders" ever meant something to russia, it was just a continent excuse for that particular situation they weren't ready for.
@@arsenhakobyan00 I am against anything that might be easily understood as provocation. I think Azerbaijani side like to stir the pot and get what they can during the negotiations (such as land corridor in Zangezur etc.)
Looks like it is a way for one big country do not lose yet another ally due to a people getting smarter and starting to recognise local unfair authorities.
thats what i said armenia couldint really call on csto for help when there wasint a signle country to recgonise negorno as armenia so there was no reason to come join to fight for something that no one no even armenia could uphold as its own territory.
The Armenian government claimed that there were incursions to Armenia proper in the immediate aftermath of the war (apparently Azeri soldiers went a few miles inside the border and looted a few villages)
@@redbull1826 the fact that the youtuber didn't mention that was a lil misleading lol. And blaming it on rissa and csto. It mostly the same with nato unless a country is attacked first nato will not joine a war.
in my best ooinion, CSTO has to enlarge the membership by taking in iran, afghanistan, mongolia dan north korea. later on china and india could be inside the CSTO to. by doing so, CSTO could balance the 29 member NATO.
Get your head out of the year 2017. It's 2024 and NATO is 32 nations strong. As for India joining a military alliance with North Korea? And China?! Modi may have some questionable policies but he would never.
Inaccurate maps happen all the time. If I drank a shot of schnapps every time I saw a map where Denmark's Jutland was depicted as part of Germany, I'd be an alcoholic.
Russia switched from Visa to Chinese Union pay. I can see the rest of the CSTO following suit. Possibly Iran, North Korea, some states in Latin America like Cuba and Venezuela.
Islamic radicals versus an autocratic government. Two different forms of oppressive institutions fighting for dominance. It really doesn't matter who wins.
Except there was no known Islamic radicals in Kazakhstan -- surveys put it as secular as Portugal or Poland and above Romania and Brazil (niether of which is known for militant radicals), during the protests there was no mentions of Islam whatsoever, and it's extrelemly murky what's happened after the internet was shut down. But so far no losungs or symbolic of Islam was used.
with enemies like this, you want the conflict to be as long as even one of them stands. Total victory for the people of that country would be if the last autocrat and last islamist die while stabbing each other.
If you can't record in the studio, I don't think keeping the side bar on the left makes a lot of sense. Just animate the whole video, then. Anyway, good video nonetheless.
CSTO didn't intervene in Armenia because Armenia invaded nagorno karabakh before. It was their particular problem, as to say. Their pact is for mutual defense of consolidated borders. I like TLDR but unfortunately they're extremely biased.
Poland, Czechoslovakia and USSR were more than happy to form Warsaw Pact to defend from Germany and USA, and in 1992 Poland was calling to preserve the Pact
@@krakendragonslayer1909 You do not know History. Poland was enemies with Russia always. Russia invaded them in 1939 and 1945. They fought in 1919-1920 The Czechs had a uprising against USSR occupation in 1968. As soon as the USSR fell in 1990 most of the warsaw pact countries dropped communism in days and later Joined the EU and Nato.
@@Crashed131963 1. Russia didn't invade Poland in '39 and '45, - In 1945 it was Soviet Union with Army commanded by a Polish guy, mr. Rokossowski. - In 1939 Polish government signed a treatry with Soviets (none of those Soviets were Russian) allowing them to enter Poland if Germans defeat Polish army, and Polish army was ordered to cooperate with Soviets or to disarm pacefully. 2. Why you mess those two things: decommunization and Warsaw Pact? Poland 1986-1991 was the main supporter of preservance of the Warsaw Pact as it can be easily seen from documents and memories of Polish ministry mr. Krzysztof Skubiszewski.
@@Crashed131963 And about 1918-1922 when there was a war of Poles+Ukrainians against Czechoslovakia+Soviets+Lithuania... A typical Polish person (like me) had 3 great grandfathers fighting on Polish side and one fighting on the Soviet side. Same in 1939-1945, a typical Polish person (like me) has: - 1 great-grandfather fighting for Home Army (nationalists), - 1 fighting for Peoples Army (comunists), - 1 sent to German doomcamp, - 1 who was hiding for the whole war, because he wanted to survive.
@@Birdylockso let him, we have to tighten our belt a bit, but nord stream and co are only running at 7% capacity anyways, we can survive the other 7%... just more incentive for renewables...
@@Kg_243 , it just goes to show that geopolitical conflicts help NO one. This Cold War mentality needs to stop where each country is suspicious of another. Sure...easier said than done.
Should just arrest everyone in the German SPD for corruption and viewing Gazprom as their retirement plan instead. If they weren't this corrupt the political imperative to close down perfectly functioning nuclear power plants would not have been there, and they wouldn't be dependent on foreign gas either
Well they made a mistake while writing the article instead of writing "protecting the regime against the protesters" they wrote protecting each other against foreign powers"
So we got a Defensive Alliance that is not Defending each other unless the Risk to their own Security is non Existant. No Offense Intended. But where I come from an Alliance would have been considered Broken if a Call to Arms was refused. The current Action of this ""Alliance" is not really meaningful and wont really change anything to be Honest. After all. The other Members can Intervene here without any Risk to their own Country. Effectively it costs them nothing to Intervene. This is just not going to Convince anyone that in case of an Actual Attack where their Country is at Actual Risk they would Intervene. And them having Refused Twice to Intervene at even lower Risk Conflicts effectively tells me that they wont. TLDR. This Alliance is not even a Toothless Papertiger. Its a Cardboard Cutout of a Toothless Papertiger....
What's with the static panel on the left? This is an obviously underhanded attempt to market the brand. Please just stick to reading the news off a script.
300-500 million Kazakh people were killed due to Russian imperialism, they want to assimilate us. We wish one day Turan Union will be established! 🇹🇷🇦🇿🇹🇲🇺🇿🇰🇬🇰🇿
"... Was originally about protecting against foreign, not domestic aggression, but there is definitely a market for it!" - TLDR script writers know how to add just the right quantity of salt in their reporting!
Just the right pinch of propaganda.
Just the right pinch of bias reporting.
@@Birdylockso how was this biased? Please provide details.
@@Birdylockso A sprinkle of bullshit
@@ChasmChaos , 1) pictures only show CSTO force shooting, and not rioters shooting. This is just like the Hong Kong protest Western coverage, i.e. only shows police beating the rioters but NO rioters beating police or even setting an old man on fire!
2) Only quoting the Kazak president's words like using "lethal force" or "liquidate," to cast the president in a negative light. The guy is fighting violence on the streets, the way the US Capitol police killed the Jan. 6 rioters!
3) Mention not a word about Western influence of Color Revolution. What is happening in Kazak is a textbook US Regime Change. Just do a quick google search for "US regime change" and be prepared to have your eyes opened. From Arab Spring to Latin America, it's the same playbook.
4) A typical Western Mainstream Media would have a white guy trashing on Russia or China, (both hated by the US government), without providing any interviews or eye-witnesses accounts, except talking points from NGOs like "Human Rights Watch" or "Progressive Press" that are sponsored by National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which is just a white-washed arm of the CIA and controlled by the US government. They can basically say whatever they want and propagate any narrative for people to buy into.
A bit to clarify,
1) CSTO officially didn't participate in fighting against protestors. They protect military infrastructure.
2) Kazakhstan's government as you mentioned described protestors as foreign-trained agents so they pretended it's some sort of foreign attack hence mutual defense clause can be activated.
Ok kgb employee
By asking the Russians ,kazakh president now has given the appearance of weakness. And once a autocrat has shown weakness he is dead. As simple as that.
@@ArendJanV ok cia employee(it sounds just as stupid)
@@ArendJanV Do note the usage of the words "officially" and "pretended" in the original comment. This person appears to real, rather than a "russian bot".
@@ArendJanV well that’s a stupid comment
Probably one compelling reason why Russia intervened in Kazakhstan and not in Armenia and Kyrgyzstan is the possibility of protest spillover to Russia due to geographical proximity. Kazakhstan is also very much like Russia in its socio-economic structure, while Armenia and Kyrgyzstan are not.
Also, in the case of Armenia, Nagorno-Karabagh is not in armenia and Putin states, we are ready to defend armenia if war is within its territory
i mean russia didint join armenia cause it was between nagorno karabah if azerbaijan actually set foot in actually armenias state land then russia would have joined in 100% . not even armenia recognized nagorno as a state neither did russia so there was no point for russia to attack azerbaijan and majbe make turkey declare on armenia and make a much bigger problem.russia still has allies besides armenia,azerbaijan is also somewhat of an ally of russia so russia must act as a dealer for does 2,2 work togeather
Not quite, Kazakhstan under Nazarbaev was trying to get away from Russia as much as they could, siting with China more and more, and Putin was losing his grip. These protests are exactly what he needs to make sure that Russia is still present in the region.
As they especially do not want a democratic uprising on thier boarder.
@@intrusivethoughtofthatonetime Kaspar meant that Kazakhstan and Russia are both personal authoritarian dictatorships, with similar strengths and weaknesses, while Armenia and Kyrgyzstan are both democracies. Very flawed ones, but still democracies
Guess you could say that the CSTO were ....
... Putin the protesters in their place. 🥁
🤣
Too soon.
you win
Dark humour is the best
Id love to see more comments like this on TLDR videos, less of the overly political, propoganda bots, or other kinda of bots
8:11 - I strongly disagree. The 4th article was actually worded out exactly like that to be used against domestic protesters. You can label anyone a "terrorist" and "an external force", and Tokaev uses these words exclusively when referring to the unrest to justify the use of force and involvement of CSTO.
@@OkarinHououinKyouma yes, happens all over the place in former USSR
@@allykid4720 So you are saying Kazakh police are under resourced to the point they are soft targets for rioters. That's incompetence from the authorities, borderline criminally negligent. Careful what you say!
@@allykid4720
They were armed with gun…
TLDR is a typical fake news producer - as I see since several episodes.
Actually I know 7 foreign languages giving me acces to real text of treatries and allowing me to watch Kazakh news,
and such level of anti-humanitarian bias as TLDR makes I never heard in any language besides English.
@Erqĭn Məmbetjanuli 🇰🇿 Q̆iyat It's an interesting philosophical question whether it is moral or immoral to shoot at a corpse.
As to the protests being hijacked by 'bandits' or 'terrorists', sadly it's a fact of life for all humanity. When peaceful protests get out of control, violence tends to occur, whether it is a BLM demo or the mob attacking the White House last year. And I find it rather amusing that lapsed Communists like the Kazakh leader conveniently forget that the Russian revolution would never have happened without outside help.
Basically, the real version of DC’s Legion of Doom…no real loyalty.
Darn comic fat
No real loyalty… yeah that one aged like some fine wine
I think, you should also cover commonwealth of independent nations
Commonwealth of Independent States*** CIS not CIN
Well, it had kinda interesting history, with Yeltsin trying to create a USSR 2.0 out of it, but now it's a pretty pointless organization
@@mykhaylovarvarin9078 Wasn't this the plan of Gorbachev for a liberalized USSR before de hardliners coup fucked everything, don't remember hearing that Yeltsin was a supporter of it
@@hadaward_dk Yeltsin wasn't a supporter of it, because he would have been leader of autonomous Russia, not the whole union or independent Russia. As soon as he understood that he, Kravchuk and Shuskevich (leaders of Ukraine and Belarus) are able to scheme a new union behind Gorbachev back in Belovezh, he immediately switced to it. Russia really pushed for common border guards and military command, customs and economic union, using CIS as a base. Kravchuk (and Ukrainian leadership as a whole) was more or less the only one, who pushed against it. That's actually the reason for a curious situation, Ukraine is officially a founding state of CIS, but it never was a full member of CIS
Former Warsaw pact countries didn't take much persuasion from NATO to join after their traumatic history like 1956 Czechoslovakia or 1968 Hungary.
you mixed the dates mate! 1956 was the hungarian revolution and 1968 was the chezchoslovak revolution!
Swap the two
Traumatic experience for those axis countries who did warcrimes on soviet soil lol.
In bulgaria and romania we didnt want to join
Or Georgia and Moldova 1992
3:51 TL:DR bangs his desk.
-Mom I want NATO
-No son, we have NATO at home
NATO at home:
Warsaw Pact From Walmart
Putin is LARP'ing really hard in Hoi4 right now
Apparently, Putin is choosing if he will puppet Ukraine or annex after he finish the focus tree.
18 killed 700+ injured 1 with the head cut off? Not enough for the answer to these barbarian acts of cruelty.
Hunger, is that enough? Kazakhs have a minimum wage of 60€ per month. 60€. With such a rich country, it seems quite a plausible outcome. Happened before way too many times, and hopefully it will continue to happen. Cruelty is letting your people starve so you can buy yachts for your friends.
@@nielswaldorf4009 Don't know if you got it right. 18 killed and 700+ injured were on the government, armed side. The civilian protesters did well. But it always could be better - like more of these scumbags from the govs got killed.
@@HanSolo__ Sorry, I misread, my fault.
It’s a method of old KGB, don’t get fooled
While I am not a politician, I would like to argue the following which you would concur is obvious. Russia is a great power - much greater than the surrounding countries - and therefore, the only relevant perspective on the CSTO is Russia's perspective. In fact Russia is in the CSTO not for the same reasons as the other members. Russia does not need defense help from the other members, but obviously wants to maintain military influence and a buffer zone against NATO, while the other members need Russia for defense and/or political stability. To conclude, I believe the CSTO is as efficient as it could realistically be, that is, as Russia wants it to be, and there is no other way. The other members have no choice but to live with it, and Russia will keep the discretion as to granting protection and handling neighborhood conflicts.
The cynic might argue that the US is to Nato as Russia is to CSTO. I'm not that cynic as I think Nato is essentially a defensive group for democracies, whereas Russia uses coercion to keep its 'friends' on side.
@@rogink I wouldn't call that cynisicm but objectivism. In the geopolitical scheme, I do not place a morality judgment on either side. So if you think that Russia is the agressor, consider this: Presently NATO has deployments in Poland which shares a border with Russia, but you don't see Russian deployments in Mexico. What Russia is doing in Ukraine is to prevent it from increasingly leaning towards the West and ultimately joining NATO, after it was once part of the Soviet Union.
@@rogink yeah yeah, remember the Monroe doctrine and you'll realize how hypocritical the U.S is.
@@julianoch I have no partiality to either side. The end of the USSR meant large numbers of people found themselves in a 'foreign' country. OK, so most of those were ethnic Russians cynically relocated to 'Russify' the locals. Of course it was wrong for Russia to takeover Crimea and eastern Ukraine but these areas should have been given the chance for some kind of independence or separation.
Now I know USA uses its influence around the world to keep unpleasant regimes on board, but it also helps defend democratic countries from their neighbours - e.g. Taiwan, South Korea. I don't se Russia defending other countries from aggressors! And I'm not aware of any US politicians trying to claim part of Mexico (at least not in the last 150 years!).
@@rogink If Mexico elect a socialist government, I bet the US would occupy it over night and instate a new government. But that hypothesis is silly, because the CIA would have taken care of it way before, and it would never come to such extremes.
In Ukraine, Russia is reacting to the new pro-europian government since the polulation of east Ukraine remain largely pro-russian.
But hey, this conversation could go in many directions, so good talk, and we shall keep researching and learning from the actual experts out there.
CSTO did a great fast and professional job in Kazakhstan 🇰🇿. Great video
Because it’s a plan of Putin
Of all the possible pictures of CSTO forces in Kazakhstan you picked a picture of Khazak troops shooting in Almaty at least twice when adressing CSTO personal. Most amusing indeed.
After describing how savage jihadists beheaded police officers, this youtuber has the gall to cry about peaceful protesters.
The protesters here drew first blood. On the first day you didn't see any of the cops or guardsmen armed with anything more than truncheons. They did not have authorization to use weapons, it was clear. Second day that authorization came.
Coup plotters should not complain about initiating the escalation ladder and getting their just desserts.
Putin sent Buriat snipers to kill 200 Kazakh people, it’s the same deal
@@tasbykekerey1203 Nope. CSTO forces didn't even engage the rioters. They took over government military bases so that Kazakh police and special forces could do their job.
Can we have NATO?
PUTIN: We have nato at home.
Nato at home: CSTO
LMAOOOO🤣🤣🤣🤣 Underrated comment
unfortunately, if the CSTO wants to survive it seems like "all threats foreign and domestic" is going to have to become policy officially. the apple does not fall far from the tree.
Damn, I can feel the air quotes whenever "Peacekeeping " is mentioned
If I had to blindly guess, I would say that the reason they were willing to intervene in Kazakhstan but not Kyrgyzstan or Armenia is because it was less controversial to the member states. I can guess that Uzbekistan might have difficulty responding to a call from Kyrgyzstan to come in and quell Uzbek-Kyrgyz violence, depending on the specifics of the conflict and of Kyrgyzstan's request, and I'd guess many countries, especially those 3 majority Turkic countries, would be reticent to enter a war against Azerbaijan on Armenia's side, when they all know the war was mostly about Azerbaijan taking back the land Armenia took in the 1990's (that they probably officially recognize is Azerbaijan's) to protect a country that they don't recognize and which still de facto exists (though smaller) even after the 2020 war (with Russian troops already keeping a corridor open between it and Armenia for transportation and communication). Quelling a popular uprising might seem equally controversial, but a lot of those countries do that sort of thing anyway, and the uprising seems at least to have been rather violent before any foreign intervention and they can all easily label it a "color revolution", and in any case, probably none of the governments had a reason to side with the protestors and they probably didn't see as a war they could get stuck in and make worse like they may have feared about the Kyrgyzstan and Nagorno-Karabakh/Artsakh conflicts.
Very good analysis.
Yes, but then Russia that flex muscle left, right, and center just lost to Turkey that is economically on its knees. For me as an eastern European it proves that pacts with Russia are not about safety or security but keeping a nationalistic theater.
@@drachenfels6782 That's another interesting point you don't quite bring up. I mentioned that intervening to protect Armenia's borders from Azerbajani troops could risk getting involved in a proper war with Azerbaijan, but I didn't mention that Azerbaijan is at least somewhat backed by Turkey, giving the Nagorno-Karabakh Wars something of the flavor of a Russia-Turkey proxy conflict. Nobody wants to get involved in a proxy conflict (or I guess lots of countries do, which is why they happen, but it would be smart not to, especially when you're not sure whose side you should be on).
Summary: All of these countries can agree on using military force to protect their governments from angry mobs, but they probably weren't all sure what side they should have been on in Kyrgyzstan and Armenia.
I wouldn't call any nation that was in the Warsaw pact an 'ally'. Satellites don't act freely, calling them allies is a bit problematic in my opinion.
A good explainer. Well done!
CSTO troops that came to Kazakhstan were too small compared to the Kazakhstan's own military and police force.
One theory: The reason why this time CSTO came to 'help' is to show that Russia supports the new president of Kazakhstan, after he took the chance of revolts and removed Kazakhstan's ex-president and his relatives and allies from power.
I am still amazed how russia just left Armenia alone against Turkey and Azerbaijan
CSTO deployment is more so that Russia doesn’t look further like a land-hungry giant, especially considering they have troops at Ukraine’s border.
Talking about CSTO's 800 military bases deployed all around the world, yes.
Other than Russia, CSTO troop contribution from other countries are marginal. For instance, armenia provided only 70.
@@allykid4720 CSTO will soon have that, once Russia reoccupy all former Soviet states.
@@abhyudaysarkar5012
That's only your speculations, meanwhile the existence of 800 military bases is reality. That fact doesn't bother you somehow.
Armenia is tiny and far away of course they can't provide more.
when you order your NATO from Wish
They betrayed Armenia and proved themselves to be weak
They simply didn't have the guts to intervene against Azerbaijan backed by Turkey.
They had no justification to intervene, that area wasn't recognised as Armenia by any country. I am sure they would have intervened if the war had gone into Armenia territory
Russia didn't "betray" Armenia, Russian troops protecred the recognized Armenian border and nothing else. Nagorno Karabach is Armenias problem, their treaty with Russia never included protecting Armenia from Azerbaijan.
Not really the war never went to Armenia or Azerbaijan proper just few shots here and there. The fighting was over disputed land outside of Armenia
@@abhyudaysarkar5012 turkey is in nato, so it's difficult
Armed ethnic protestors: I sleep
Soliders attacking territory: I sleep
Unarmed protestors wanting reform: LETSSS FUCKING GOOOOOO
Unarmed protestors resisting well-trained and equipped police force? You kidding?
Unarmed protestors conquering 7 police stations, military base and airfield?!
How!?
Russia invades Georgia and Ukraine.
Russia: Well, we are not foreigners.
There is no peace where Russia steps in. Barbarians to very core
@@njnikusha Totally agree, as a Turkish unfortunately I can say the samething for Turkey. Before Erdogan we were making good progress becoming more civilized but thanks to him, we went back to ottoman era
@@Rikimkigsck Im rly sad to hear that. All the best best Georgia
poor man's NATO
I'd like to clarify, NATO didn't have to convince the former members of Warsaw pact to join.
We all couldn't join fast enough when the Soviets moved their troops out of our countries!
Nobody wanted to get invaded by Russians again, and NATO is seen as a protection against that.
Seems counterintuitive that you guys wanted to be in alliance with Germany. Those guys also have a less than stellar record... On the same note: When was the last time Bulgaria was invaded by Russians?
@@artirm1979 I don't think that it's based on record. It's based on prediction of future.
@@billyfox6368 Best way to ensure you don't get invaded is to build economic ties. Inviting opposing force is the best way to be a target. Look at Finland, those guys got it right.
@@artirm1979 As a Finn it's hard to use us as a good measuring stick for what is right for others. Finland was terrified for the duration of the Cold War of USSR. We had been invaded by them at the beginning of World War 2 and the scars ran deep. Finland always has been scared of its erratic and authoritarian neighbour and for the longest time was compelled to align in between the West and the East, despite always being a Nordic and Western country.
I would never recommend this approach to any other country who wasn't in the same situation.
Putin with his mad talk about forbidding others from joining NATO is pushing Finland more towards NATO (especially after the invasion of Crimea). I personally would never want to join an organisation that literally committed crimes against peace (Afghanistan and Iraq in early 2000s).
Still Putin's aggressive talk and Russia's invasion of Crimea is making most Finns more and more vary, and it is possible that at some point public opinion might tip towards the criminal institution that is NATO.
@@lookingforsomething As a Ukrainian, I can say that in our country, there is a big divide between the west and east (Ukrainians and Russians)
I wouldn't say NATO "persuaded" the former Warzaw pact countries to join.
nothing works better on that than Russia itself
After 1956 Czechoslovakia and 1968 Hungary, it didn't take much persuasion to join NATO.
@@abhyudaysarkar5012 you swapped dates :))
Actually NATO threatned Poland to join NATO, or end up divided like Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia.
@@krakendragonslayer1909 lol. Any proof?
The combination GDP of CSTO can’t reach top 10 in the world. This organization can be ignored
Nagorno-Karabakh legally is not a part of Armenia. Thus no grounds for CSTO involvement. In Kirgizia they never called for CSTO, because the agression was not foreign. So that's that.
Nobody was expecting Russian soldiers to fight in Artsakh. However, Russia breached its obligations under the Collective Security Treaty several times: first, it sold large amount of weaponry to Azerbaijan (article 1 of the Treaty says that Member states abstain from exercising actions directed against each other), and also, it remained silent while Azeris attacked the Armenian territory in 2021.
@@artyomkosyan7142 It's a grey legal zone. Pashinyan was the cause. Didn't play the ball with Russia before.
@@vadimnagano it cannot be a grey legal zone because the wording in the Treaty is exact enough, moreover that the text was drafted by Russian lawyers, so we have the case that Russia drafts the text of treaty and breaches it the next moment.
Secondly, I missed the moment when Pashinyan enforced Russia to breach its obligations under the treaty. I understand that the Russian media tries to depict Pashinyan a Western agent, but in Armenia, many consider him to be extraordinarely pro-Russian.
@@artyomkosyan7142 I've read Charter of the CSTO. No grounds for your allegations whatsoever. Kindly explain yourself.
@@vadimnagano Dear Vadim, I was referring to the Collective Security Treaty (1992), the preponderant fundamental text of the organization, but analogous regulations are set in the Charter, you should read it more carefully, if you are willing to do so, of course
CSTO is an acronym for Countries Subjected to Totalitarianism and Oligarchy.
Good luck. Let us know how that goes for ya....
Surprisingly Tokayev got the public's respect back. He is one of the only actually intelligent politicians over here.
Doesn't seem like a serious alliance. While NATO is dominated by the US, since the US spends as much on its military as the next 10 countries combined, it's not like its other members are toothless. 3 other NATO members are in those top 10 and could individually go head to head with anyone - including Russia - except the US and China.
The CSTO, on the other hand, depends entirely on Russia to function. So it's not surprising that "propping up a dictator" is something they'd do, while defending Armenia isn't, since Russia can profit by "staying neutral" and selling arms to both sides of that conflict.
You're just convincing more and more Russians and their allies to side with China, an actual near peer rival that is more than capable of destroying western hegemony
do you mean that Germany could confront Russia militarily on its own?
@@jeanaiplu3840 I would not bet either way on the outcome a confrontation that only involved Germany and Russia, but none of their allies. A lot would depend on the military objective. I don't think Germany could invade mainland Russia, where Russia's force of numbers could wear them down, just as they have before. But conflicts outside of either country could go either way.
Without US nuclear arsenal none of the NATO members would even risk angering Russia or China
CSTO = Can't Stand The Oxident
"Former Allies" is a pretty strong, and misleading statement. Try "Subjugated Puppet States" instead. Read up on the Prague Spring in 1968.
Warsaw Pact >>> CSTO
Too bad CSTO didn't expand as Nato did, They could have gotten China, Mongolia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, North Korea, and Maybe Iran
Something tells me the CSTO was never about defense but instead about offense and interal security... It's probably all the autocracs in it.
Well, it was formed before the states turned autocratic, so it might have have had stronger ideals in the 90s.
"Soviet Union former allies" - "Terrorized hostages" are the words you're looking for ;)
The Baltic States absolutely, yes. Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova? Yeah sure. The Central Asian republics such as Kazakhstan? Absolutely not, specially Kazakhstan. Kazakhstan didn’t want the USSR to end, Russia even left the union before them. Citizens of these republics who lived during Soviet times claim that their lives was much better back then.
I don’t know enough about Armenia and Azerbaijan to comment but I’m assuming they weren’t very keen on being part of the union.
@@dinis8271 He's talking about the Eastern block, not SSRs.
@@dinis8271 Ukraine and Georgia? “Terrorized hostages”? Seriously?
Quoter of the Bolsheviks were Ukrainians, Ukraine was one of the first countries to join USSR. Half of warders in Gulag were Ukrainians.
And isn’t the darkest period of USSR associated with the name of one Georgian, Stali…? Of cause he didn’t want his motherland to stay apart from Russia. And still attitude to Stalin on Georgia is the most positive among all post-soviet states.
Don’t try to tell that ex-soviet countries were oppressed by Moscow. Soviet totalitarianism treated all the SSR’s in the same way. Those counties didn’t want to throw off the regime any more than Russia.
@@bachelor3846 the Soviet union purge all of the Bolsheviks, Stalin sign a nonaggression pact with the germans, Fascism was never hated by communists because it was too new at the time before 1941. they hated imperialism and colonialism, and the N@zis overthrown Monarchies. So both the Soviets and N@zis aided communists in Vichy France against the West before 1941. this was all documented in the Berlin diaries. if Ukrainians are bolsheviks this explains why he distrust them in the 1930s. Even in Stalin death bed he purge all jewish doctors out of paranoia.
@@bachelor3846 Join? As if countries had referendums to join USSR lol.
ALL of the republics were occupied by the red army, including eastern block countries just a bit later.
This rather looks like a Eurasian version of the "Condor Plan", which was a pact among some South American dictatorships to crack down on local dissidents (mostly socialist/communist) and for this matter was very effective, but it didn't have any use for the event of an external war, as proven during the Falklands War.
Fun fact: Russia solved the coup attempt in 3 days.
Can we get more videos explaining the alliances and treaties between countries around the world?
Welp guess the csto means nothing
It's interesting that the Uzbeks aren't in the CSTO.
IS this possibly the new Warsaw Pact?
Yes
@@ogacid3547 Nice. Why don't they get an anthem?
@@3333sweetie still getting members :)
@@ConstantineofRome What new members?
Aaaaaannnnnd its falling apart
Ohh we 🇦🇲🇦🇲🇦🇲 with 🇪🇺🇦🇲 and 🇺🇲🇦🇲 ❤😞😭
U.S: " Bye Bye Afghanistan, it's nice knowing you."
Afghanistan: "Well I'll join the CSTO, you traitor."
Serbia has Left the chat
Russian Serbian relations are a bit too much exaggerated politically, Serbia tries to balance between EU and Russia, it isn’t a Russian satellite either (the way Belarus is for exemple)
Why "protesters" cut heads?
I just 24 hours ago heard from Aljazeera that there were 5000 imprisoned
About Armenia and NK region... NK region is in Azerbaijan, it is self proclaimed independant state and not a part of Armenia. There was no reason for CSTO to react when Azerbaijan and NK vent to war, Armenia wasn't attacked. And why should CSTO react in ethnic unrest, it's not a foren agresion?
In Kazakhstan there was elements of foreign involvement in those protests, you had armed protesters who was well organized, they attacked police stations, army instalations, airports, tv stations etc, that is not hapenning on regular protests (violent or otherwise) against government.
Unfortunately there is new geopolitical and proxy war among big powers right now and we ordinary people are screwed.
Nobody was expecting Russian soldiers to fight in Artsakh. However, Russia breached its obligations under the Collective Security Treaty several times: first, it sold large amount of weaponry to Azerbaijan (article 1 of the Treaty says that Member states abstain from exercising actions directed against each other), and also, it remained silent while Azeris attacked the Armenian territory in 2021.
*The CSTO* is a successor organization to *The Warsaw Pact.*
(At least the closest there is. The only other to consider is *The Union State.)*
CSTO members couldn't allow foreign military presence on their soil without collective CSTO approval, but the US did establish an airforce base in Kyrgyzstan 1 YEAR before that organization was formed and kept it until 2014. Did that circumvent CSTO approval?
armenia joined nato which means armenia broken csto rule. therefore assistance for armenia was forfieted.
You said it yourself the base was founded 1 year prior to founding of CSTO.
@@dismas8884 Armenia has not joined NATO. It does have an "individual partership action plan" with NATO, but so does Kazakhstan, which is clearly part of the CSTO. Every single CSTO country is part of the "partnership for peace" along with NATO. Armenia has nothing else to do with NATO as far as I know, and is still very close to Russia, having gotten armed by Russia during it's war with Azerbaijan and having Russian peace-keepers protect transportation corridor to Artsakh.
Maybe you confused it with Georgia, which also hasn't joined NATO, but at least has actively tried, and NATO told them they could join* in 2008, right before Russia invaded on behalf of their breakaway states^, and is an "enhanced opportunity partner".
*They said they could join at a meeting, but it was vague and Georgia didn't become an officual candidate or get a "membership action plan" or anything, I don't think.
^I should point out that Abkhazia and South Ossetia have never actually been controlled by Georgia's post-Soviet government, so it's not like Russia created a problem that wasn't there before, as I think is oftem assumed. This was an obstical to NATO membership even before Russia came in and fought a war at the border and started occupying the breakaway regions to protect them from Georgia ever being able to tahe them back.
To be clear, Azerbaijan launched the offensive military campaign within its internationally recognised borders to regain its control over Nagorno-Karabakh, so there was no direct threat to Armenia and its territory. At least this was how Putin interpreted the situation. Azerbaijan btw is not a member of CSTO even though it’s a post-Soviet country and still maintains good relations with Russia (unlike Georgia or Ukraine).
Yes, but then after the war Azerbaijani soldiers came into Armenia proper (not Nagorno-Karabakh) and, to this day, they keep the nearby villages under fire.
CSTO did nothing and Armenia was too weak to start another war so 🤷🏻♂️
By the way, Armenia has a separate defence treaty with Russia and that wasn’t respected either.
Fun fact: when the war was over, Belarus and Kazakhstan (both CSTO nations) congratulated Azerbaijan.
As if "internationally recognised borders" ever meant something to russia, it was just a continent excuse for that particular situation they weren't ready for.
@@arsenhakobyan00 I am against anything that might be easily understood as provocation. I think Azerbaijani side like to stir the pot and get what they can during the negotiations (such as land corridor in Zangezur etc.)
@@kaanaslan3003 exactly
After they took some part of nagorno karabakh they entered syunik region and even captured some places
you should make a video about the eurasian economic union.
Looks like it is a way for one big country do not lose yet another ally due to a people getting smarter and starting to recognise local unfair authorities.
Do you really think there is no external involvement ? Seriously !
If I have a nickel for everytime someone naming a security alliance with a Treaty Organization which is not a lot but it's weird it happened twice
Knowing CSTO peacekeeper will go back in 13 January, seems like CSTO has done a good job.
I’d love to see a video on Mercosur from this channel 😁
But armenia wasn't really attacked not at least in the territory of armenia so csto can't really get involved.
thats what i said armenia couldint really call on csto for help when there wasint a signle country to recgonise negorno as armenia so there was no reason to come join to fight for something that no one no even armenia could uphold as its own territory.
The Armenian government claimed that there were incursions to Armenia proper in the immediate aftermath of the war (apparently Azeri soldiers went a few miles inside the border and looted a few villages)
@@redbull1826 the fact that the youtuber didn't mention that was a lil misleading lol. And blaming it on rissa and csto. It mostly the same with nato unless a country is attacked first nato will not joine a war.
in my best ooinion, CSTO has to enlarge the membership by taking in iran, afghanistan, mongolia dan north korea. later on china and india could be inside the CSTO to. by doing so, CSTO could balance the 29 member NATO.
Get your head out of the year 2017. It's 2024 and NATO is 32 nations strong.
As for India joining a military alliance with North Korea? And China?! Modi may have some questionable policies but he would never.
At 8:19, I noticed that Crimea and Kaliningrad are both not colored red lol
Inaccurate maps happen all the time.
If I drank a shot of schnapps every time I saw a map where Denmark's Jutland was depicted as part of Germany, I'd be an alcoholic.
I prefer audio only.
CSTO the addition of Pakistan, Syria, and Iran?
Russia switched from Visa to Chinese Union pay. I can see the rest of the CSTO following suit. Possibly Iran, North Korea, some states in Latin America like Cuba and Venezuela.
CSTO is so powerful that it couldnt defend Armenia from the Azerbaijani invasion
I watched the vid. But I fail to understand why have Hungary marked on your tumbnail…
Hungary is not marked on the thumbnail, if you are speaking about the similar green, white and red flag, it is the flag of Tajikistan
@@JPL454 If so, my bad, and thank you for correcting me.
I'm surprised Uzbekistan isn't a member of CSTO.
Start a podcast please
Because of the economic crisis and the rate of unemployment, now is the best time to invest and make money 💯
Cry`pto is the new gold
Stocks are good but Crypto is better
I have also been trading with him, profits are secured and over a 100 percent return on investment
My first Investment with Expert David Mark has earned me profits of over $24,320 us dollars and ever since then he has been delivering
he's obviously the best i invested 2000 USD with him and in 9 days i made a profit of 9102 USD
Islamic radicals versus an autocratic government. Two different forms of oppressive institutions fighting for dominance. It really doesn't matter who wins.
Except there was no known Islamic radicals in Kazakhstan -- surveys put it as secular as Portugal or Poland and above Romania and Brazil (niether of which is known for militant radicals), during the protests there was no mentions of Islam whatsoever, and it's extrelemly murky what's happened after the internet was shut down. But so far no losungs or symbolic of Islam was used.
with enemies like this, you want the conflict to be as long as even one of them stands.
Total victory for the people of that country would be if the last autocrat and last islamist die while stabbing each other.
"islamic radicals" is a boogeyman for secular society like Kazakhstan
If you can't record in the studio, I don't think keeping the side bar on the left makes a lot of sense. Just animate the whole video, then.
Anyway, good video nonetheless.
C'mon, not Hungry, but HUNGARY.
Sounds like the"Voice of America". Struggling for objectivity and balance
"Peacekeeping" ✌ -_- ✌
CSTO didn't intervene in Armenia because Armenia invaded nagorno karabakh before. It was their particular problem, as to say. Their pact is for mutual defense of consolidated borders. I like TLDR but unfortunately they're extremely biased.
Armenians never invaded Nagorno Karabagh they were always in that region from ancient times....
We didn't invade stalin gived it to azeris
Warsaw Pact war far from a voluntary organization.
Look how many sided to the west once the USSR fell.
Poland, Czechoslovakia and USSR were more than happy to form Warsaw Pact to defend from Germany and USA, and in 1992 Poland was calling to preserve the Pact
@@krakendragonslayer1909 You do not know History.
Poland was enemies with Russia always.
Russia invaded them in 1939 and 1945.
They fought in 1919-1920
The Czechs had a uprising against USSR occupation in 1968.
As soon as the USSR fell in 1990 most of the warsaw pact countries dropped communism in days and later Joined the EU and Nato.
@@Crashed131963
1. Russia didn't invade Poland in '39 and '45,
- In 1945 it was Soviet Union with Army commanded by a Polish guy, mr. Rokossowski.
- In 1939 Polish government signed a treatry with Soviets (none of those Soviets were Russian) allowing them to enter Poland if Germans defeat Polish army, and Polish army was ordered to cooperate with Soviets or to disarm pacefully.
2. Why you mess those two things: decommunization and Warsaw Pact? Poland 1986-1991 was the main supporter of preservance of the Warsaw Pact as it can be easily seen from documents and memories of Polish ministry mr. Krzysztof Skubiszewski.
@@Crashed131963 And about 1918-1922 when there was a war of Poles+Ukrainians against Czechoslovakia+Soviets+Lithuania...
A typical Polish person (like me) had 3 great grandfathers fighting on Polish side and one fighting on the Soviet side.
Same in 1939-1945, a typical Polish person (like me) has:
- 1 great-grandfather fighting for Home Army (nationalists),
- 1 fighting for Peoples Army (comunists),
- 1 sent to German doomcamp,
- 1 who was hiding for the whole war, because he wanted to survive.
@@Crashed131963 nato is not voluntary 1 million protested when they forced uk to join and invade iraq
The NATO of the East.
Except that NATO is going East without a care in the world.
I love how the EU is already threatening Russia with sanctions for sending troops to kazakhstan...
Russia can just turn off the gas to "cool" Europe down.😂
@@Birdylockso let him, we have to tighten our belt a bit, but nord stream and co are only running at 7% capacity anyways, we can survive the other 7%... just more incentive for renewables...
@@Birdylockso they already did this to Germany at the beginning on 2022. The gas prices here in Germany are extremely high
@@Kg_243 , it just goes to show that geopolitical conflicts help NO one. This Cold War mentality needs to stop where each country is suspicious of another. Sure...easier said than done.
Should just arrest everyone in the German SPD for corruption and viewing Gazprom as their retirement plan instead. If they weren't this corrupt the political imperative to close down perfectly functioning nuclear power plants would not have been there, and they wouldn't be dependent on foreign gas either
I just dont believe that the main reason for the protest turning violent is due to high gas price like i think theres more to this.
What do you prefer more? NATO or CSTO? Like the option that you like the most.
NATO
CSTO
i am from slovakia so we are in NATO but i dont like a NATO for what they did in serbia so cSTO
@@sopkogamesstudio Do you like Russia for what they did in Ukraine, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Moldova, Syria, Dagestan, Khabarovsk etc?
@@pontius_official well they still didi less then U.S
Csto has base just 60km from our border..
Well they made a mistake while writing the article instead of writing "protecting the regime against the protesters" they wrote protecting each other against foreign powers"
Armenia has left the alliance.
That acronym is two letters short of Costco
Costco is disgusting. Only been there once, never again
So we got a Defensive Alliance that is not Defending each other unless the Risk to their own Security is non Existant.
No Offense Intended. But where I come from an Alliance would have been considered Broken if a Call to Arms was refused.
The current Action of this ""Alliance" is not really meaningful and wont really change anything to be Honest.
After all. The other Members can Intervene here without any Risk to their own Country. Effectively it costs them nothing to Intervene.
This is just not going to Convince anyone that in case of an Actual Attack where their Country is at Actual Risk they would Intervene.
And them having Refused Twice to Intervene at even lower Risk Conflicts effectively tells me that they wont.
TLDR. This Alliance is not even a Toothless Papertiger. Its a Cardboard Cutout of a Toothless Papertiger....
2:20 - The Soviet Union s till exists?
It doesn't
@@olsenfernandes3634 Someone should tell the writers :)
@@Phil_AKA_ThundyUK They meant that none of the republics of the USSR became NATO members
What's with the static panel on the left? This is an obviously underhanded attempt to market the brand. Please just stick to reading the news off a script.
Can you do a video about Omicron?
Self defense & balance
BORAT
Hii i love this video news.
300-500 million Kazakh people were killed due to Russian imperialism, they want to assimilate us. We wish one day Turan Union will be established! 🇹🇷🇦🇿🇹🇲🇺🇿🇰🇬🇰🇿
🤡
Will the war stop if Ukraine joins CSTO?
Probably
-Soviet- Russian troops putting down the Kazakh Spring