Tweet
ARE ARMENIAN DIPLOMATS ENTERPRISING?
http://www.a1plus.am/en/politics/2011/09/01/sergey-manasaryan
08:42 pm | September 01, 2011
Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergey Manasaryan gave an interview
to "A1+".
"A1+": How would you assess the readiness and efforts of Armenia's
diplomatic corpus? :
Sergey Manasaryan: If we speak of that, we must take into account
the fact that we didn't have a diplomatic corpus twenty years
ago. Of course, the situation has changed because we are seeing a new
generation of educated and experienced diplomats and we finally have
a diplomatic school that we created through combined efforts. That
was a serious step. I took part in the exams and can say that the
youth are at a rather high level. Today, we have diplomats speaking
more than one language and I see a good future.
"A1+": Can you tell us the percentage of diplomats that have vocational
education?
S. M.: It's hard to say, but it's not right to speak of vocational
education. If we used to speak of those who graduated from MSIIA
(Moscow State Institute of International Affairs-ed.) during the
Soviet era, it would be a little wrong to speak of vocational education
since most of the best diplomats hadn't graduated from that institute.
"A1+": There is a tradition that the RA President's or the RA Foreign
Minister's press speakers move on to diplomatic service after their
dismissal. Let us recall Dzyunik Aghajanyan, Vahe Gabrielyan, Ashot
Kocharyan and Ara Papyan.
S. M.: Perhaps we could say the opposite. The diplomats commissioned
to the presidential apparatus continue to work as diplomats. Vahe
Gabrielyan and Ashot Kocharyan are diplomats at the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs.
"A1+": Mr. Manasaryan, the granting of a juridical status to national
churches in Georgia raised a big wave of protest among Armenians. What
is the official Yerevan doing to resist that?
S. M.: It is all a little exaggerated. Of course, there are people who
look at the matter differently. According to the Georgian church's
official explanations (it didn't only refer to Armenian churches),
what happened was the result of the rather high-level relations between
the countries and the presidents. Yes, that step led to a big wave
of protest among Armenians, but I don't think it is serious and that
it will be ongoing.
"A1+": Are you assuring that Georgian-Armenians and Armenians in
Javakhk are not in danger?
S. M.: No, there is no and won't be any danger because I hope that
Georgia is treating the matter as seriously as Armenia is, and nobody
needs further tension.
"A1+": You have been working at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
since 1996. How would you assess Armenia's current policy? There is
an opinion that Armenia is passive. Do you think Armenia's Ministry
of Foreign Affairs is passive or enterprising?
S. M.: Armenia's foreign policy now has many vectors. I wouldn't
say it is passive. Leading a policy in quite a lot of directions is
enterprising. In many cases, we try to criticize and not notice the
many achievements. I would like to bring up the failure of Azerbaijan's
latest initiative as an example. It was a victory. If joint efforts
weren't made, we wouldn't have achieved such a result.
The current state of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is like no other
in the past.
"A1+": In what sense?
S. M.: In the sense that the international community accepts Armenia's
position.
"A1+": Perhaps Armenia is the one accepting the international
community's position.
S. M.: No, let's remember that about six years ago, everyone said
the issue of territorial integrity should have been taken out of the
proposed document. Who recalls that now? Now they say everything is
equivalent and they can't be separated. Isn't that a victory?
"A1+": Wasn't Armenia imposed to sign the Turkey-Armenia Protocols?
S. M.: No, who could have imposed?
"A1+": Super powers.
S. M.: I don't think so. Armenia could have given an evaluation from
different angles, but I don't think it was imposed. Those Protocols
are in Armenia's interests. We will have an open border and an open
road. Turkey showed the world that it isn't ready or tolerant, but
I think the opening of the Armenian-Turkish border is a matter of time.
Interview by Diana Markosyan
http://www.a1plus.am/en/politics/2011/09/01/sergey-manasaryan
08:42 pm | September 01, 2011
Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergey Manasaryan gave an interview
to "A1+".
"A1+": How would you assess the readiness and efforts of Armenia's
diplomatic corpus? :
Sergey Manasaryan: If we speak of that, we must take into account
the fact that we didn't have a diplomatic corpus twenty years
ago. Of course, the situation has changed because we are seeing a new
generation of educated and experienced diplomats and we finally have
a diplomatic school that we created through combined efforts. That
was a serious step. I took part in the exams and can say that the
youth are at a rather high level. Today, we have diplomats speaking
more than one language and I see a good future.
"A1+": Can you tell us the percentage of diplomats that have vocational
education?
S. M.: It's hard to say, but it's not right to speak of vocational
education. If we used to speak of those who graduated from MSIIA
(Moscow State Institute of International Affairs-ed.) during the
Soviet era, it would be a little wrong to speak of vocational education
since most of the best diplomats hadn't graduated from that institute.
"A1+": There is a tradition that the RA President's or the RA Foreign
Minister's press speakers move on to diplomatic service after their
dismissal. Let us recall Dzyunik Aghajanyan, Vahe Gabrielyan, Ashot
Kocharyan and Ara Papyan.
S. M.: Perhaps we could say the opposite. The diplomats commissioned
to the presidential apparatus continue to work as diplomats. Vahe
Gabrielyan and Ashot Kocharyan are diplomats at the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs.
"A1+": Mr. Manasaryan, the granting of a juridical status to national
churches in Georgia raised a big wave of protest among Armenians. What
is the official Yerevan doing to resist that?
S. M.: It is all a little exaggerated. Of course, there are people who
look at the matter differently. According to the Georgian church's
official explanations (it didn't only refer to Armenian churches),
what happened was the result of the rather high-level relations between
the countries and the presidents. Yes, that step led to a big wave
of protest among Armenians, but I don't think it is serious and that
it will be ongoing.
"A1+": Are you assuring that Georgian-Armenians and Armenians in
Javakhk are not in danger?
S. M.: No, there is no and won't be any danger because I hope that
Georgia is treating the matter as seriously as Armenia is, and nobody
needs further tension.
"A1+": You have been working at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
since 1996. How would you assess Armenia's current policy? There is
an opinion that Armenia is passive. Do you think Armenia's Ministry
of Foreign Affairs is passive or enterprising?
S. M.: Armenia's foreign policy now has many vectors. I wouldn't
say it is passive. Leading a policy in quite a lot of directions is
enterprising. In many cases, we try to criticize and not notice the
many achievements. I would like to bring up the failure of Azerbaijan's
latest initiative as an example. It was a victory. If joint efforts
weren't made, we wouldn't have achieved such a result.
The current state of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is like no other
in the past.
"A1+": In what sense?
S. M.: In the sense that the international community accepts Armenia's
position.
"A1+": Perhaps Armenia is the one accepting the international
community's position.
S. M.: No, let's remember that about six years ago, everyone said
the issue of territorial integrity should have been taken out of the
proposed document. Who recalls that now? Now they say everything is
equivalent and they can't be separated. Isn't that a victory?
"A1+": Wasn't Armenia imposed to sign the Turkey-Armenia Protocols?
S. M.: No, who could have imposed?
"A1+": Super powers.
S. M.: I don't think so. Armenia could have given an evaluation from
different angles, but I don't think it was imposed. Those Protocols
are in Armenia's interests. We will have an open border and an open
road. Turkey showed the world that it isn't ready or tolerant, but
I think the opening of the Armenian-Turkish border is a matter of time.
Interview by Diana Markosyan