‘This is not good’: Alexey Leonkov on CIA Deputy Head David Cohen’s visit to Armenia

Speaking with Alpha News, Russian military analyst Alexey Leonkov commented on the possible reasons and consequences of the visit of the deputy director of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to Armenia.

“First of all, he arrived for a specific consultation or to get information about what is happening now in Armenia. It is clear that, most likely, his advisory capabilities of using those forces that are in Armenia under the guise of guarding the US embassy and so on are to provide assistance to the authorities so that these protests do not end in a result that the United States does not need,” Leonkov said.

According to the expert, the United States is interested in preserving the current regime in Armenia and wants to retain the power of Armenia’s Prime Minister with all its might.

“When such a big figure from the CIA arrives, it does not lead to anything good. Perhaps recommendations will be given for certain actions, maybe with the use of non-lethal weapons or something else, and maybe even the supply of the type of weapon that disperses demonstrations. The Americans have such weapons. They have sound, light effects. They have been successfully used in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The reaction to the supply of this kind of equipment to the Armenian police can be quite quick. That is, they can deliver quickly. Or maybe there will be consultations on the further steps that the Pashinyan government should take to speed up the process of Armenia’s separation from Russia and rapid integration by the forces of the collective West,” he said.

Referring to the format of the US official’s visit to Armenia, Alexey Leonkov noted that personal presence is a guarantee of confidentiality in important talks; therefore, alternative negotiation tools are not suitable.

“When the owner’s representative arrives, he usually informs contractors what actions they must take or not. No open sources of information, mail, or telephone communications, even if protected, are trusted. Because if these recommendations fail, the blame lies with the contractor. If successful, maybe the owner will reward them,” Leonkov concluded.