Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Armenia May No Longer Follow U.S. Lead On Some Issues After Aid Cut-

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Armenia May No Longer Follow U.S. Lead On Some Issues After Aid Cut-

    ARMENIA MAY NO LONGER FOLLOW U.S. LEAD ON SOME ISSUES AFTER AID CUT-OFF
    By Harut Sassounian

    NT
    15:45 - 16.06.2009

    For more than a year, Armenia's leaders have been operating under the
    false impression that accommodating Washington on some issues would
    provide economic and political benefits, shield them from accusations
    of democratic shortcomings, and convince the West not to support
    their domestic opponents.

    Based on such wishful thinking, the Armenian government made repeated
    efforts to please the United States. For example, last year, when
    Marie Yovanovitch was nominated by Pres. Bush to become the next
    Ambassador to Armenia, State Department officials asked Armenia to use
    its contacts in Washington in order to facilitate her confirmation by
    the U.S. Senate. They feared that she would suffer the same fate as
    her predecessor, Richard Hoagland, whose nomination had been blocked
    by the Senate at the urging of the Armenian-American community. The
    Armenian government obliged, probably hoping that the new Ambassador
    and the United States would reciprocate by showing goodwill towards
    Yerevan on certain critical issues.

    Another issue on which Armenia went to great lengths to accommodate
    Washington was engaging in negotiations with its historic arch-enemy
    Turkey in order to open the border and establish diplomatic
    relations. While Yerevan believed that doing so was also in its own
    best interest, U.S. officials were the driving force behind these
    negotiations, particularly after it became apparent that the Turkish
    government had no interest in carrying out honest discussions with
    Armenia and no intention of opening the border. Both Turkey and the
    United States benefited greatly from the false impression created by
    these negotiations. Turkey managed to undermine Pres.

    Obama's campaign pledge to recognize the Armenian Genocide on April
    24. In return, Washington was able to secure Turkey's commitment
    to support U.S. policies in Afghanistan, Iraq and the Arab-Israeli
    conflict.

    Armenia, on the other hand, received no tangible benefits. In fact,
    its repeated optimistic pronouncements regarding the progress of the
    negotiations helped both Turkey and the United States to look good
    in the eyes of the world. Besides not gaining anything, the Armenian
    government jeopardized the support of its powerful Diaspora and large
    segments of its own population. Furthermore, the ARF -- one of the
    four parties constituting the Armenian government -- left the ruling
    coalition following a joint public announcement by Armenia and Turkey
    on the eve of April 24. Pres.

    Obama cited the supposed progress made in Armenian-Turkish negotiations
    in his April 24 statement in order to avoid making an explicit
    reference to the Armenian Genocide.

    It is now clear to the Armenian government that Washington had no
    intention of accommodating Armenia either on economic and political
    matters or on its democratic shortcomings. The amount of foreign aid
    recently proposed by the Obama Administration for Armenia is 38%
    less than last year's. Another U.S. aid program, provided by the
    Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), was reduced by almost one
    third -- million -- citing the country's failure to comply with its
    eligibility criteria. The MCC bases its aid decision on 16 different
    indicators which recipient countries are committed to uphold.

    It is distressing that such standards have to be imposed on Armenia
    by a foreign country. Raising the living standards of the population
    is in the Armenian people's own interest. It is the obligation of
    the Armenian government to make such improvements, without waiting
    to do so, under the threat of losing foreign aid.

    The most immediate impact of the cancellation of the MCC's rural
    road program will be felt by Armenia's destitute farmers who need an
    improved infrastructure to grow, transport and sell their produce.

    It is not known what direction Armenia's leaders will follow as
    a result of the above setbacks. Will they strive to improve their
    compliance with the MCC criteria or will they completely give up on
    that program?

    This latest development may have far reaching and unintended
    consequences beyond Armenia's farmers. Armenia's leaders may conclude
    that catering to the U.S. is going to neither provide a cover for
    the regime's sh ortcomings in the area of democratic governance nor
    result in any tangible benefits to the country in terms of opening
    the border with Turkey.

    The negotiations with Turkey, already stalled due to unacceptable
    pre-conditions advanced by Ankara, may now be completely disrupted.

    The Armenian government may formally abandon its nominal policy of
    complementarity between east and west and rely more heavily than ever
    before on Russia and Iran.

    Finally, it is unfortunate that the MCC decision comes on the eve
    of Amb. Yovanovitch's first trip to Armenian communities in the
    United States, later this month. During her visit, she is likely to
    encounter public resentment that the U.S. government is practicing a
    double-standard by lowering proposed foreign aid levels to Armenia
    and increasing those of Azerbaijan which enjoys huge oil revenues
    and is in no need of U.S. handouts. There is also a double-standard
    vis-a-vis Georgia, as the latter remains the recipient of MCC aid
    despite its lack of compliance with several MCC criteria.

    Amb. Yovanovitch may also face criticism from large segments of the
    Armenian-American community, given Pres. Obama's failure to keep
    his campaign promise to recognize the Armenian Genocide. This is not
    the Ambassador's fault. However, given the fact that she represents
    the United States, she will automatically become the target of all
    criticism directed at the Obama Administration.
Working...
X