Tweet
ARMENIA RUMINATES OVER NATO MEMBERSHIP
By Ara Tadevosian in Yerevan for IWPR
Institute for War & Peace Reporting, UK
Nov 29 2006
Yerevan seeks to build better relations with Brussels, while not
offending Moscow.
Armenian politicians say that the issue of their country joining NATO
is currently not on the agenda - but they say so far less categorically
than just a few years ago. Relations with the North Atlantic alliance
are deepening and Moscow is no longer Yerevan's only strategic ally.
Armenian foreign minister Vardan Oskanian told the Rose Roth NATO
parliamentary conference in Yerevan last year that the alliance could
play an important role in providing security in the Caucasus. Defense
minister Serzh Sarkisian was more cautious but said that relations
with the USA and NATO as well as with Russia and Armenia's membership
of the Collective Security Pact of the Commonwealth of Independent
States (CIS) were the basis of its security.
"Basically last year was a breakthrough," Aris Ghazinian, an expert
with the Caucasus analytical centre in Yerevan, told IWPR. "Two
high-ranking officials made statements that from now on Armenia sees
two vectors when it comes to security issues."
Another leading official, the then parliamentary speaker Artur
Baghdasarian, went further in April this year when he told the German
newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine, "the future of Armenia is the EU
and NATO" and "Russia should not stand in our way towards Europe."
Two days later, President Robert Kocharian corrected his colleague,
saying that Armenia had no intention to join NATO. Baghdasarian
said that he viewed it as a long-term prospect. Not long afterwards,
he resigned and went into opposition.
Public opinion is also shifting in favor of NATO. An opinion poll
conducted in Armenia in August showed that 42 percent of Armenians
favored joining the alliance and the number of strong opponents was
a mere nine percent.
Last year, Armenia and NATO agreed an Individual Partnership Agreement,
or IPAP, under which they agreed to work together to forge a "Strategy
of National Security and a Military Doctrine." This is the basis for
a program of reform of the armed forces of Armenia up until 2015.
This irritated some politicians in Russia, which was presented with
a finished document, despite regarding itself as Armenia's chief
military ally - and the only country to have its troops stationed on
Armenian territory.
"Russia's attitude toward cooperation between Armenia and NATO is
one of jealousy," said Ghazinian. "In NATO, the South Caucasus is
perceived as a single whole, despite an individual approach to each
separate country. And the basic feeling of jealousy is linked to the
fact that NATO perceives the region as a single whole."
Under one of Armenia's commitments in IPAP, an Information Centre on
NATO opened its doors in Yerevan on 13 November. David Alaverdian,
who initiated the project, said that its aim was not for Armenia to
join NATO, but to inform Armenians about the alliance and the benefits
of cooperation with it.
"It is no secret that very many people in Armenia continue to perceive
NATO through the prism of the Cold War," Alaverdian told IWPR.
Many Armenian experts welcome the IPAP on the grounds that it demands
serious reforms of Armenia's armed forces.
"The IPAP foresees the forging of closer links between the army and
society and the introduction of a mechanism of public control over the
armed forces," said Tevan Poghosian, executive director of the Armenian
Atlantic Association. "As a result of these reforms, the Armenian army
will grow stronger as the public's trust in our armed forces grows."
Poghosian also noted that Azerbaijan - with whom Armenia is in dispute
over Nagorny Karabakh - had its own IPAP and reform program.
"Today we could say that a parallel process is taking place in
Armenia and Azerbaijan," he said. "I think that it will be extremely
beneficial for NATO to have a situation in which the armed forces
of Armenia and Azerbaijan become more predictable for the alliance
and will operate on the basis of similar standards. In the future,
it could provide the opportunity for collaboration between the armies
of Armenia and Azerbaijan, for example in dealing with the aftermath
of natural disasters."
However, the Armenian political elite is still treading a fine line
in its public comments over cooperation with NATO.
Last year, defense minister - and leading presidential contender in
2008 - Serzh Sarkisian said that Armenia's armed forces aspired to
reach "international standards" - a phrase that commentators suggested
was carefully chosen to avoid specific mention of NATO.
Sarkisian went out of his way this week to say that there should be
no contradiction between Armenia's membership of the Moscow-led CIS
Collective Security Pact and good relations with NATO.
"We should understand that military and political blocs are formed
for the sake of something, not in opposition to something," said
Sarkisian. He went on, "The agreement on the Collective Security
Pact was signed not against NATO, but to protect the security of the
countries that are part of it."
This message was repeated by Kurt Volker, the US principal deputy
assistant secretary for European and Eurasian affairs, in a recent
conversation with Armenian journalists.
Other politicians are worried about the implications of closer
relations with NATO, when Turkey, its historical foe, is a member of
the alliance.
"NATO cannot guarantee the security of Armenia, as long as Turkey is a
member of the alliance, with whom Armenia has no diplomatic relations,"
said former prime minister and defense minister Vazgen Manukian.
In any event, the tone of the conversation about Armenia and NATO
has changed, with NATO no longer being perceived as merely a hostile
bloc and relations with the alliance now being a subject of pragmatic
discussion.
Oskanian told IWPR that future plans with regard to NATO depended to
a large degree on developments in the rest of the Caucasus.
"It is quite possible that Georgia will really join NATO within the
next five or six years," he said. "Azerbaijan is not yet talking
about NATO membership. As for Armenia, processes are underway which
we can't stop. It's hard to say what the next step will be. I think
that a lot will depend on the time frame of Georgia joining NATO. In
any case there is still time."
By Ara Tadevosian in Yerevan for IWPR
Institute for War & Peace Reporting, UK
Nov 29 2006
Yerevan seeks to build better relations with Brussels, while not
offending Moscow.
Armenian politicians say that the issue of their country joining NATO
is currently not on the agenda - but they say so far less categorically
than just a few years ago. Relations with the North Atlantic alliance
are deepening and Moscow is no longer Yerevan's only strategic ally.
Armenian foreign minister Vardan Oskanian told the Rose Roth NATO
parliamentary conference in Yerevan last year that the alliance could
play an important role in providing security in the Caucasus. Defense
minister Serzh Sarkisian was more cautious but said that relations
with the USA and NATO as well as with Russia and Armenia's membership
of the Collective Security Pact of the Commonwealth of Independent
States (CIS) were the basis of its security.
"Basically last year was a breakthrough," Aris Ghazinian, an expert
with the Caucasus analytical centre in Yerevan, told IWPR. "Two
high-ranking officials made statements that from now on Armenia sees
two vectors when it comes to security issues."
Another leading official, the then parliamentary speaker Artur
Baghdasarian, went further in April this year when he told the German
newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine, "the future of Armenia is the EU
and NATO" and "Russia should not stand in our way towards Europe."
Two days later, President Robert Kocharian corrected his colleague,
saying that Armenia had no intention to join NATO. Baghdasarian
said that he viewed it as a long-term prospect. Not long afterwards,
he resigned and went into opposition.
Public opinion is also shifting in favor of NATO. An opinion poll
conducted in Armenia in August showed that 42 percent of Armenians
favored joining the alliance and the number of strong opponents was
a mere nine percent.
Last year, Armenia and NATO agreed an Individual Partnership Agreement,
or IPAP, under which they agreed to work together to forge a "Strategy
of National Security and a Military Doctrine." This is the basis for
a program of reform of the armed forces of Armenia up until 2015.
This irritated some politicians in Russia, which was presented with
a finished document, despite regarding itself as Armenia's chief
military ally - and the only country to have its troops stationed on
Armenian territory.
"Russia's attitude toward cooperation between Armenia and NATO is
one of jealousy," said Ghazinian. "In NATO, the South Caucasus is
perceived as a single whole, despite an individual approach to each
separate country. And the basic feeling of jealousy is linked to the
fact that NATO perceives the region as a single whole."
Under one of Armenia's commitments in IPAP, an Information Centre on
NATO opened its doors in Yerevan on 13 November. David Alaverdian,
who initiated the project, said that its aim was not for Armenia to
join NATO, but to inform Armenians about the alliance and the benefits
of cooperation with it.
"It is no secret that very many people in Armenia continue to perceive
NATO through the prism of the Cold War," Alaverdian told IWPR.
Many Armenian experts welcome the IPAP on the grounds that it demands
serious reforms of Armenia's armed forces.
"The IPAP foresees the forging of closer links between the army and
society and the introduction of a mechanism of public control over the
armed forces," said Tevan Poghosian, executive director of the Armenian
Atlantic Association. "As a result of these reforms, the Armenian army
will grow stronger as the public's trust in our armed forces grows."
Poghosian also noted that Azerbaijan - with whom Armenia is in dispute
over Nagorny Karabakh - had its own IPAP and reform program.
"Today we could say that a parallel process is taking place in
Armenia and Azerbaijan," he said. "I think that it will be extremely
beneficial for NATO to have a situation in which the armed forces
of Armenia and Azerbaijan become more predictable for the alliance
and will operate on the basis of similar standards. In the future,
it could provide the opportunity for collaboration between the armies
of Armenia and Azerbaijan, for example in dealing with the aftermath
of natural disasters."
However, the Armenian political elite is still treading a fine line
in its public comments over cooperation with NATO.
Last year, defense minister - and leading presidential contender in
2008 - Serzh Sarkisian said that Armenia's armed forces aspired to
reach "international standards" - a phrase that commentators suggested
was carefully chosen to avoid specific mention of NATO.
Sarkisian went out of his way this week to say that there should be
no contradiction between Armenia's membership of the Moscow-led CIS
Collective Security Pact and good relations with NATO.
"We should understand that military and political blocs are formed
for the sake of something, not in opposition to something," said
Sarkisian. He went on, "The agreement on the Collective Security
Pact was signed not against NATO, but to protect the security of the
countries that are part of it."
This message was repeated by Kurt Volker, the US principal deputy
assistant secretary for European and Eurasian affairs, in a recent
conversation with Armenian journalists.
Other politicians are worried about the implications of closer
relations with NATO, when Turkey, its historical foe, is a member of
the alliance.
"NATO cannot guarantee the security of Armenia, as long as Turkey is a
member of the alliance, with whom Armenia has no diplomatic relations,"
said former prime minister and defense minister Vazgen Manukian.
In any event, the tone of the conversation about Armenia and NATO
has changed, with NATO no longer being perceived as merely a hostile
bloc and relations with the alliance now being a subject of pragmatic
discussion.
Oskanian told IWPR that future plans with regard to NATO depended to
a large degree on developments in the rest of the Caucasus.
"It is quite possible that Georgia will really join NATO within the
next five or six years," he said. "Azerbaijan is not yet talking
about NATO membership. As for Armenia, processes are underway which
we can't stop. It's hard to say what the next step will be. I think
that a lot will depend on the time frame of Georgia joining NATO. In
any case there is still time."