Tweet
TOP AZERBAIJANI OFFICIAL PREDICTS ECONOMIC CRISIS FOR ARMENIA THIS YEAR
news.az
Aug 1, 2011
Azerbaijan
News.Az reprints from Trend an interview with Elnur Aslanov, head of
the Presidential Administration's political analysis & information
department.
What can you say about the economic situation in Armenia?
Both the political and economic situation in Armenia can be described
in a single word - deteriorating. It has gone beyond the stagnation
in which Armenia has been mired for the past decade. Add to this the
country's worsening demographic and socioeconomic statistics.
According to Forbes, Armenia today is the second worst economy in
the world. The country has over 50% growth in prices, while the
correlation of debt and GDP in 2011 will be up $3.9 billion, or over
44%. All the same, this figure is growing constantly, since imports
which make the basis of the Armenian economy, lead to a debt increase
by exceeding exports. Industrial growth in Armenia in the past decade
is at a disastrous level and does not exceed 5%.
Though the country fully depends on external donations from both the
diaspora and different programs of financial aid, the real unemployment
level exceeds 30%. It is largely connected to emigration, since due to
the mass outflow of Armenian citizens, the country sees an increase
in the number of elderly people and today Armenia is considered an
aging country by current standards. The demographic crisis in Armenia
is also largely connected with the drop in the birth rate which is
clearly tied to the low living conditions and deep economic problems.
According to Armenia's national statistical service, the birth rate
in 2010 was 1.38 when mere reproduction needs 2.11. The growth in the
Armenian population is 13,000 to 14,000 people per year. Considering
the negative balance of migration, which was 23,000 people in 2008,
25,000 in 2009 and 29,800 people in 2010, the demographic regression
in Armenia is more than obvious.
The economic and political complexities are shown by a poll of
senior schoolchildren held by the Armenian affiliate of the Czech
organization People in Need and the UN office in Armenia as part of
the program "Growing regulation of migration flows in Armenia". It
showed that 70% of young people are willing to leave Armenia and
move abroad. In this situation, with respect to official statistics,
the population of Armenia will drop to 2,330,000 people by 2050. But
these figures refer only to official statistics, to which official
propaganda refers. Meanwhile, real indicators show that by 2050 the
country will have no more than one million people.
Naturally, the Armenian leadership can use any figures to try to
prove the opposite, but the birth rate in Armenian families, where
it has become a luxury to have a second child, is a clear example of
the real regression of the Armenian state.
Thus, 2011 will become a year of numerous problems for Armenia as it
is moving towards default. Inflation is not controlled at all in the
country and, despite its official rhetoric, it will be double-digit in
2011 and much higher than the 9.4% inflation rate registered in 2010.
All that's clear is that Armenia as a state is experiencing the most
difficult period when it needs to take effective and constructive
steps. The Armenian leadership should understand that it is not the
narrow-minded interests of the ruling elite but the needs of Armenian
society that depend on them. What Armenian leaders are doing today
against their people is a crime and history and future generations
will condemn them.
Has the economic situation had any effect on domestic politics
in Armenia?
Armenia as a state has a number of specific features which distinguish
it from the other countries. First of all, the Armenian political
stage has organizations that have more members outside Armenia than in
Armenia itself. Such political movements as Dashnaktsutyun, Heritage
and Ramkavar Azatakan enjoy more support among the Armenian diaspora
than in Armenia itself, while their presence in parliament is for
decoration, a so-called gesture of the ruling group.
The ruling coalition consists of the party of officials that easily
change their leaders. This is how it was after the unexpected death
of former Prime Minister Andranik Margaryan and again after Robert
Kocharyan's departure. That is, current president Serzh Sargsyan
cannot rely on the ruling coalition of faceless parties without ideas
and conscience.
On the other hand, the political space of Armenia, like its economy,
is filled with semi-criminal oligarchs who aim to preserve their
stability and the status of monopolist in any sphere as well as to
influence the political elite through their political presence. It
is this group that today controls the few profitable spheres of the
Armenian economy, though a glimpse at their areas of activity shows
the primitiveness of their business.
The World Bank and other influential international financial
structures, even the former US ambassador to Armenia, Marie
Yovanovitch, acknowledged the presence of oligopoly in Armenia.
Recent events have shown changes in relations between government and
opposition in Armenia. In your view, what is the reason behind this?
It should be noted that Serzh Sargsyan's odd indulgence towards
the opposition, in the face of first President Levon Ter-Petrosyan,
over the last six months is not random. For three years after the
elections Serzh Sargsyan attached no importance to the Armenian
National Congress and ignored its demands, because he did not feel
under threat from within his own team.
After the theatrical "football diplomacy", the signing of the
Zurich protocols on the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations,
Sargsyan, who was one of the thugs in Karabakh who staged a crackdown
on protesters, killing 10 citizens of Armenia, had a desire to change
the West's attitude to himself.
With this in mind, three years later Serzh Sargsyan started a new show,
a "dialogue with the Armenian National Congress". The purpose of this
"soap opera", as it is called in Armenia itself, is to give mutual
assistance in the ousting of political rivals - Robert Kocharyan, the
Heritage party and Dashnaksutyun. The duplicity of both the authorities
and opposition bloc against their own people was met with the same
hostility by the opposition leaders of the Armenian National Congress.
I think the creation of a new political formation of Free Democrats
on basis of pro-Western politicians, people from the Congress, will
create a new political atmosphere of geopolitical confrontation in
the next parliamentary elections.
However, delaying the process of dialogue demonstrates that the current
political leadership of Armenia uses this process to compensate for
popular discontent and the threat of a "velvet revolution".
Serzh Sargsyan's recent irresponsible statement containing territorial
threats to Turkey and unjustified war rhetoric against Azerbaijan
is intended to create "the image of an enemy" in Armenia, the last
resort of the opportunism that has ruled Armenia since 2008.
The foreign policy of Armenia, which spoils relations with its
neighbours, also plays a role...
In its relations with its neighbours Armenia has become a country
that pursues the policy "Everything for me, nothing for others". The
strange thing is that it shows such an attitude not only to Azerbaijan,
whose territory it has occupied and with which it is at war, but also
to the countries that are vital to it.
Overall, the senseless and inconsistent approach of the Armenian
leadership is a sign of agitation in the minds of the political elite
of this country. Sargsyan's call to young people to make territorial
claims on Turkey is a signal to all the neighbouring countries about
its aggressive nature and a clear demonstration of how the Armenian
leadership sees its country now and in the future - laying claim to the
territory of its neighbours and, therefore, capable of starting a new
conflict at any time to suit its domestic and foreign policy ambitions.
One gets the impression that the Armenian political elite failed to
fully appreciate the historical chance which resulted in the creation
of Armenian statehood in the Caucasus.
As a result, today Armenia has blocked itself off geopolitically. The
lack of neighbourly relations with a number of regional states,
permanent territorial claims against neighbours and attempts to
turn religious issues into bargaining chips make Armenia not only
the vulnerable link in the South Caucasus region, but also the most
likely factor to destabilize the region.
Trend
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
news.az
Aug 1, 2011
Azerbaijan
News.Az reprints from Trend an interview with Elnur Aslanov, head of
the Presidential Administration's political analysis & information
department.
What can you say about the economic situation in Armenia?
Both the political and economic situation in Armenia can be described
in a single word - deteriorating. It has gone beyond the stagnation
in which Armenia has been mired for the past decade. Add to this the
country's worsening demographic and socioeconomic statistics.
According to Forbes, Armenia today is the second worst economy in
the world. The country has over 50% growth in prices, while the
correlation of debt and GDP in 2011 will be up $3.9 billion, or over
44%. All the same, this figure is growing constantly, since imports
which make the basis of the Armenian economy, lead to a debt increase
by exceeding exports. Industrial growth in Armenia in the past decade
is at a disastrous level and does not exceed 5%.
Though the country fully depends on external donations from both the
diaspora and different programs of financial aid, the real unemployment
level exceeds 30%. It is largely connected to emigration, since due to
the mass outflow of Armenian citizens, the country sees an increase
in the number of elderly people and today Armenia is considered an
aging country by current standards. The demographic crisis in Armenia
is also largely connected with the drop in the birth rate which is
clearly tied to the low living conditions and deep economic problems.
According to Armenia's national statistical service, the birth rate
in 2010 was 1.38 when mere reproduction needs 2.11. The growth in the
Armenian population is 13,000 to 14,000 people per year. Considering
the negative balance of migration, which was 23,000 people in 2008,
25,000 in 2009 and 29,800 people in 2010, the demographic regression
in Armenia is more than obvious.
The economic and political complexities are shown by a poll of
senior schoolchildren held by the Armenian affiliate of the Czech
organization People in Need and the UN office in Armenia as part of
the program "Growing regulation of migration flows in Armenia". It
showed that 70% of young people are willing to leave Armenia and
move abroad. In this situation, with respect to official statistics,
the population of Armenia will drop to 2,330,000 people by 2050. But
these figures refer only to official statistics, to which official
propaganda refers. Meanwhile, real indicators show that by 2050 the
country will have no more than one million people.
Naturally, the Armenian leadership can use any figures to try to
prove the opposite, but the birth rate in Armenian families, where
it has become a luxury to have a second child, is a clear example of
the real regression of the Armenian state.
Thus, 2011 will become a year of numerous problems for Armenia as it
is moving towards default. Inflation is not controlled at all in the
country and, despite its official rhetoric, it will be double-digit in
2011 and much higher than the 9.4% inflation rate registered in 2010.
All that's clear is that Armenia as a state is experiencing the most
difficult period when it needs to take effective and constructive
steps. The Armenian leadership should understand that it is not the
narrow-minded interests of the ruling elite but the needs of Armenian
society that depend on them. What Armenian leaders are doing today
against their people is a crime and history and future generations
will condemn them.
Has the economic situation had any effect on domestic politics
in Armenia?
Armenia as a state has a number of specific features which distinguish
it from the other countries. First of all, the Armenian political
stage has organizations that have more members outside Armenia than in
Armenia itself. Such political movements as Dashnaktsutyun, Heritage
and Ramkavar Azatakan enjoy more support among the Armenian diaspora
than in Armenia itself, while their presence in parliament is for
decoration, a so-called gesture of the ruling group.
The ruling coalition consists of the party of officials that easily
change their leaders. This is how it was after the unexpected death
of former Prime Minister Andranik Margaryan and again after Robert
Kocharyan's departure. That is, current president Serzh Sargsyan
cannot rely on the ruling coalition of faceless parties without ideas
and conscience.
On the other hand, the political space of Armenia, like its economy,
is filled with semi-criminal oligarchs who aim to preserve their
stability and the status of monopolist in any sphere as well as to
influence the political elite through their political presence. It
is this group that today controls the few profitable spheres of the
Armenian economy, though a glimpse at their areas of activity shows
the primitiveness of their business.
The World Bank and other influential international financial
structures, even the former US ambassador to Armenia, Marie
Yovanovitch, acknowledged the presence of oligopoly in Armenia.
Recent events have shown changes in relations between government and
opposition in Armenia. In your view, what is the reason behind this?
It should be noted that Serzh Sargsyan's odd indulgence towards
the opposition, in the face of first President Levon Ter-Petrosyan,
over the last six months is not random. For three years after the
elections Serzh Sargsyan attached no importance to the Armenian
National Congress and ignored its demands, because he did not feel
under threat from within his own team.
After the theatrical "football diplomacy", the signing of the
Zurich protocols on the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations,
Sargsyan, who was one of the thugs in Karabakh who staged a crackdown
on protesters, killing 10 citizens of Armenia, had a desire to change
the West's attitude to himself.
With this in mind, three years later Serzh Sargsyan started a new show,
a "dialogue with the Armenian National Congress". The purpose of this
"soap opera", as it is called in Armenia itself, is to give mutual
assistance in the ousting of political rivals - Robert Kocharyan, the
Heritage party and Dashnaksutyun. The duplicity of both the authorities
and opposition bloc against their own people was met with the same
hostility by the opposition leaders of the Armenian National Congress.
I think the creation of a new political formation of Free Democrats
on basis of pro-Western politicians, people from the Congress, will
create a new political atmosphere of geopolitical confrontation in
the next parliamentary elections.
However, delaying the process of dialogue demonstrates that the current
political leadership of Armenia uses this process to compensate for
popular discontent and the threat of a "velvet revolution".
Serzh Sargsyan's recent irresponsible statement containing territorial
threats to Turkey and unjustified war rhetoric against Azerbaijan
is intended to create "the image of an enemy" in Armenia, the last
resort of the opportunism that has ruled Armenia since 2008.
The foreign policy of Armenia, which spoils relations with its
neighbours, also plays a role...
In its relations with its neighbours Armenia has become a country
that pursues the policy "Everything for me, nothing for others". The
strange thing is that it shows such an attitude not only to Azerbaijan,
whose territory it has occupied and with which it is at war, but also
to the countries that are vital to it.
Overall, the senseless and inconsistent approach of the Armenian
leadership is a sign of agitation in the minds of the political elite
of this country. Sargsyan's call to young people to make territorial
claims on Turkey is a signal to all the neighbouring countries about
its aggressive nature and a clear demonstration of how the Armenian
leadership sees its country now and in the future - laying claim to the
territory of its neighbours and, therefore, capable of starting a new
conflict at any time to suit its domestic and foreign policy ambitions.
One gets the impression that the Armenian political elite failed to
fully appreciate the historical chance which resulted in the creation
of Armenian statehood in the Caucasus.
As a result, today Armenia has blocked itself off geopolitically. The
lack of neighbourly relations with a number of regional states,
permanent territorial claims against neighbours and attempts to
turn religious issues into bargaining chips make Armenia not only
the vulnerable link in the South Caucasus region, but also the most
likely factor to destabilize the region.
Trend
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress