Tweet
Democracy of the South Caucasus countries is an inevitable process
2010-10-29 17:54:00
ArmInfo News Agency's interview with Armenian parliamentarian from
Heritage Party faction Vardan Khachatryan
Mr.Khachatryan, the CoE Forum For the Future of Democracy has recently
been held in Armenia. How do you assess the efficiency of such
measures from the viewpoint of establishment of democracy in our
country?
I think such forums in the country that has entered the
democratization path give a fresh impetus to the given process. In
addition, the forum agenda mostly included issues related to reforms
in such an important sphere as the legal system. Democracy in any
country is known to have 3 important cornerstones: independent legal
system, independent financial sources in the state, and media freedom.
It would be wrong to say that everything is alright in our country.
Certainly some steps re being taken, but I don't think these steps are
enough. The point is that the West's focused attention to the ongoing
processes in our region, particularly, connected with Iran's nuclear
program and Turkey's curtseys towards the Islamic world, creates
additional premises for intensive `development of democracy in the
region'. It is another question whether it is good or bad, but I
believe democratization is an inevitable process.
Won't this attention of the international community hinder further
development of Armenian-Iranian cooperation?
For the international community a region's predictability implies its
controllability and transparency. The same is true for Iran's nuclear
program. On the other hand, we should respect Iran's sovereign right
to develop its own programs and to cooperate with its neighbors. So,
the
pressure on Iran cannot curb Armenian-Iranian relations. In addition,
one shouldn't forget that Iran is one of the world's greatest gas and
oil powers and it has a very small foreign debt. Its key rival in the
region, Turkey, has much worse parameters.
How much possible is the compatibility of the European integration
policy with the increasing influence of Russia in Armenia?
I think Armenia's European integration policy cannot be a
counter-balance to its cooperation with Moscow. There is no sense in
such confrontation. Today Russia has a very serious influence in the
South Caucasus and this influence will keep growing. The point is that
today Russia's key rivals are relatively weak due to the problems of
Iraq, Afghanistan and the very tense situation in Pakistan. Today the
West does not need conflict with Russia. The time of orange
revolutions has passed and there will hardly be anti-Russian alliances
like GUAM.
Is the policy of our country's leadership adequate to the specified
realities? Does Yerevan maintain the balance?
Armenia's friendship with Russia does not imply enmity with the West.
Fortunately, no such radical turns are expected. In any case, the
Armenian authorities should be prudent as any deviation may lead to
serious geo-political cataclysms.
Turkey speaks of its willingness to normalize relations with Armenia
more often. How much sincere are these statements?
I have no grounds to believe Ankara. Moreover, Armenia should actively
gain strengthening of the international community's pressure on
Turkey. The policy with respect to Ankara should be tough. Ankara has
roughly violated the provisions fixed in Zurich Protocols. The
normalization process has reached a deadlock for such violations, as
Turkey was linking ratification of the documents with the Karabakh
conflict settlement in every possible way though the text contained
not a single hint at any interdependence of these problems. Now it is
more than impudence to speak of willingness to continue the process.
Such policy does not inspire confidence. Actually, Ankara may sign the
document and then refuse to implement the provisions fixed in it. And
it is somewhat illogical and senseless to trust such an unpredictable
and unreliable partner.
And still, are there any secret talks as such?
I believe there are certain latent contacts between Yerevan and
Ankara. And this is a regular phenomenon, as the countries having a
common state border cannot be fully isolated from each other. But I
think that Yerevan should exert pressure on Ankara to make the latter
implement the commitments it assumed. It is ridiculous to sign the
protocol on normalization of relations and then state unwillingness to
start a dialogue due to some reasons not fixed in the protocols.
Taking into account these circumstances, it would be naive to flirt
with Turkey.
Was the `football diplomacy' the result of Armenia's naivety?
Armenia's steps in the negotiations cannot be condemned at least. To
be honest, actually the Turkey-Azerbaijan inseparable alliance
directed against our country has become obvious thanks to the
negotiations process. I think this will increase our policy's
prudence.
By Ashot Safaryan, 29 October 2010. ArmInfo
From: A. Papazian
2010-10-29 17:54:00
ArmInfo News Agency's interview with Armenian parliamentarian from
Heritage Party faction Vardan Khachatryan
Mr.Khachatryan, the CoE Forum For the Future of Democracy has recently
been held in Armenia. How do you assess the efficiency of such
measures from the viewpoint of establishment of democracy in our
country?
I think such forums in the country that has entered the
democratization path give a fresh impetus to the given process. In
addition, the forum agenda mostly included issues related to reforms
in such an important sphere as the legal system. Democracy in any
country is known to have 3 important cornerstones: independent legal
system, independent financial sources in the state, and media freedom.
It would be wrong to say that everything is alright in our country.
Certainly some steps re being taken, but I don't think these steps are
enough. The point is that the West's focused attention to the ongoing
processes in our region, particularly, connected with Iran's nuclear
program and Turkey's curtseys towards the Islamic world, creates
additional premises for intensive `development of democracy in the
region'. It is another question whether it is good or bad, but I
believe democratization is an inevitable process.
Won't this attention of the international community hinder further
development of Armenian-Iranian cooperation?
For the international community a region's predictability implies its
controllability and transparency. The same is true for Iran's nuclear
program. On the other hand, we should respect Iran's sovereign right
to develop its own programs and to cooperate with its neighbors. So,
the
pressure on Iran cannot curb Armenian-Iranian relations. In addition,
one shouldn't forget that Iran is one of the world's greatest gas and
oil powers and it has a very small foreign debt. Its key rival in the
region, Turkey, has much worse parameters.
How much possible is the compatibility of the European integration
policy with the increasing influence of Russia in Armenia?
I think Armenia's European integration policy cannot be a
counter-balance to its cooperation with Moscow. There is no sense in
such confrontation. Today Russia has a very serious influence in the
South Caucasus and this influence will keep growing. The point is that
today Russia's key rivals are relatively weak due to the problems of
Iraq, Afghanistan and the very tense situation in Pakistan. Today the
West does not need conflict with Russia. The time of orange
revolutions has passed and there will hardly be anti-Russian alliances
like GUAM.
Is the policy of our country's leadership adequate to the specified
realities? Does Yerevan maintain the balance?
Armenia's friendship with Russia does not imply enmity with the West.
Fortunately, no such radical turns are expected. In any case, the
Armenian authorities should be prudent as any deviation may lead to
serious geo-political cataclysms.
Turkey speaks of its willingness to normalize relations with Armenia
more often. How much sincere are these statements?
I have no grounds to believe Ankara. Moreover, Armenia should actively
gain strengthening of the international community's pressure on
Turkey. The policy with respect to Ankara should be tough. Ankara has
roughly violated the provisions fixed in Zurich Protocols. The
normalization process has reached a deadlock for such violations, as
Turkey was linking ratification of the documents with the Karabakh
conflict settlement in every possible way though the text contained
not a single hint at any interdependence of these problems. Now it is
more than impudence to speak of willingness to continue the process.
Such policy does not inspire confidence. Actually, Ankara may sign the
document and then refuse to implement the provisions fixed in it. And
it is somewhat illogical and senseless to trust such an unpredictable
and unreliable partner.
And still, are there any secret talks as such?
I believe there are certain latent contacts between Yerevan and
Ankara. And this is a regular phenomenon, as the countries having a
common state border cannot be fully isolated from each other. But I
think that Yerevan should exert pressure on Ankara to make the latter
implement the commitments it assumed. It is ridiculous to sign the
protocol on normalization of relations and then state unwillingness to
start a dialogue due to some reasons not fixed in the protocols.
Taking into account these circumstances, it would be naive to flirt
with Turkey.
Was the `football diplomacy' the result of Armenia's naivety?
Armenia's steps in the negotiations cannot be condemned at least. To
be honest, actually the Turkey-Azerbaijan inseparable alliance
directed against our country has become obvious thanks to the
negotiations process. I think this will increase our policy's
prudence.
By Ashot Safaryan, 29 October 2010. ArmInfo
From: A. Papazian