Tweet
CIS ISN'T THE "RIGHT WAY" IGOR MURADYAN
Lragir.am News
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/politics23216.html
11:13:32 - 05/09/2011
In Dushanbe, a CIS Regular Summit took place in September which marked
the CIS anniversary, so there is a reason to assess the activities
and the situation of the aforementioned organization.
We have to say that besides CIS there have been other attempts to
create other organizations in the post-soviet space involving different
countries, first of all, GUAM (Organization for Democracy and Economic
Development) and CSTO (Collective Security Treaty Organization), which
have had no success. GUAM lived long, while CSTO still has conceptual
and political problems. Had the Soviet Union lacked similar problems,
possibly, it would not have collapsed, and one should not expect a
more or less cohesive organization from countries which have such
diverse goals, social and political lives, religion and culture.
In Dushanbe, the presidents of CIS member states found themselves
in a tight loop, which made it clear that they declare either the
disbandment of the organization, or, at best, the creation of a new
interstate club on "the ruins of the past illusions". In any case,
the participation of such large countries as Ukraine, Uzbekistan and
Belarus in the CIS is disputed, while Azerbaijan is no longer there.
Nevertheless, Armenia has used its membership to the CIS to full,
or as much as possible. In this case, Armenia established the most
correct relations were with the countries of the Central Asia, which
were disinterested in the political problems and conflicts in the South
Caucasus. Smooth and friendly relations with Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan had a great importance for Armenia. Relations
with Georgia have been for a long time on the brink of a foul, and,
apparently, the nature of these relationships has been preserved.
Armenia's relations with three eastern Slavic states have always
been quite problematic. Ukraine and Belarus (apparently very jealous
of Israel and Turkey) have become important suppliers of arms to
Azerbaijan, knowing that this state has officially declared its
intention to start a war with Armenia.
The main "guarantor of security" and "strategic partner" of Armenia -
Russia - after long and painful deliberation, also started supplying
modern weapons to Azerbaijan, and President Dmitry Medvedev signed a
new fundamental treaty with Turkey on a "sacramental" day for Armenia -
March 16.
Under these circumstances, Armenia is threatened to be caught under
the ruins of a totally inefficient structure the CIS has always been.
Armenia is interested in less formal but proactive intergovernmental
organizations, such as the Customs Union, which has a vision to
transform into a Common Economic Space, as well as the Collective
Security Treaty Organization with the problematic nature of this
military unit. In other words, we are talking about a Eurasian project
or a Eurasian bloc of countries which can be implemented through
involvement of mainly Eurasian states with which either Ukraine or
most countries of Central Asia have nothing to do.
The Eurasian project is the most realistic once that one can imagine,
at least in the foreseeable future. Russia will have to limit its
foreign political ambitions but instead it will find more clear
and defendable boundaries and space. I must say that the modern
advocates of the Eurasian project consciously accept dishonesty in
terms of determining the borders of Eurasia and the essence of the
concept. Russia should not fear becoming an Asian power, having lost
its influence in Ukraine and Belarus, if it consistently builds a
Eurasian strategy with the "objectively-conditioned" partners, and
not farfetched ones, as it has happened so far.
The South Caucasus has nothing to do with Eurasia; it does not fit
into this space and political interests of a possible alliance in
any angle. For Armenia, however, Eurasia is a different but not
alien idea and purpose. Time has clearly demonstrated that the idea
of intensive care of post-Soviet space does not correspond to the
interests of Armenia and is very dangerous for it. Of all the possible
doctrines that Moscow may initiate, Eurasianism is the most acceptable
for Armenia.
As to the CIS, Armenia should not support organizations which, one way
or another, can be used to push on it. However, each organization must
have a powerful partner which could block the efforts of opponents and
enemies, like Iran, being in the Organization of Islamic Conference,
acts as a partner of Armenia. Sooner or later, the CIS, should it
develop, will become a tool for pressure on Armenia, so the CIS is
on the "right way".
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Lragir.am News
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/politics23216.html
11:13:32 - 05/09/2011
In Dushanbe, a CIS Regular Summit took place in September which marked
the CIS anniversary, so there is a reason to assess the activities
and the situation of the aforementioned organization.
We have to say that besides CIS there have been other attempts to
create other organizations in the post-soviet space involving different
countries, first of all, GUAM (Organization for Democracy and Economic
Development) and CSTO (Collective Security Treaty Organization), which
have had no success. GUAM lived long, while CSTO still has conceptual
and political problems. Had the Soviet Union lacked similar problems,
possibly, it would not have collapsed, and one should not expect a
more or less cohesive organization from countries which have such
diverse goals, social and political lives, religion and culture.
In Dushanbe, the presidents of CIS member states found themselves
in a tight loop, which made it clear that they declare either the
disbandment of the organization, or, at best, the creation of a new
interstate club on "the ruins of the past illusions". In any case,
the participation of such large countries as Ukraine, Uzbekistan and
Belarus in the CIS is disputed, while Azerbaijan is no longer there.
Nevertheless, Armenia has used its membership to the CIS to full,
or as much as possible. In this case, Armenia established the most
correct relations were with the countries of the Central Asia, which
were disinterested in the political problems and conflicts in the South
Caucasus. Smooth and friendly relations with Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan had a great importance for Armenia. Relations
with Georgia have been for a long time on the brink of a foul, and,
apparently, the nature of these relationships has been preserved.
Armenia's relations with three eastern Slavic states have always
been quite problematic. Ukraine and Belarus (apparently very jealous
of Israel and Turkey) have become important suppliers of arms to
Azerbaijan, knowing that this state has officially declared its
intention to start a war with Armenia.
The main "guarantor of security" and "strategic partner" of Armenia -
Russia - after long and painful deliberation, also started supplying
modern weapons to Azerbaijan, and President Dmitry Medvedev signed a
new fundamental treaty with Turkey on a "sacramental" day for Armenia -
March 16.
Under these circumstances, Armenia is threatened to be caught under
the ruins of a totally inefficient structure the CIS has always been.
Armenia is interested in less formal but proactive intergovernmental
organizations, such as the Customs Union, which has a vision to
transform into a Common Economic Space, as well as the Collective
Security Treaty Organization with the problematic nature of this
military unit. In other words, we are talking about a Eurasian project
or a Eurasian bloc of countries which can be implemented through
involvement of mainly Eurasian states with which either Ukraine or
most countries of Central Asia have nothing to do.
The Eurasian project is the most realistic once that one can imagine,
at least in the foreseeable future. Russia will have to limit its
foreign political ambitions but instead it will find more clear
and defendable boundaries and space. I must say that the modern
advocates of the Eurasian project consciously accept dishonesty in
terms of determining the borders of Eurasia and the essence of the
concept. Russia should not fear becoming an Asian power, having lost
its influence in Ukraine and Belarus, if it consistently builds a
Eurasian strategy with the "objectively-conditioned" partners, and
not farfetched ones, as it has happened so far.
The South Caucasus has nothing to do with Eurasia; it does not fit
into this space and political interests of a possible alliance in
any angle. For Armenia, however, Eurasia is a different but not
alien idea and purpose. Time has clearly demonstrated that the idea
of intensive care of post-Soviet space does not correspond to the
interests of Armenia and is very dangerous for it. Of all the possible
doctrines that Moscow may initiate, Eurasianism is the most acceptable
for Armenia.
As to the CIS, Armenia should not support organizations which, one way
or another, can be used to push on it. However, each organization must
have a powerful partner which could block the efforts of opponents and
enemies, like Iran, being in the Organization of Islamic Conference,
acts as a partner of Armenia. Sooner or later, the CIS, should it
develop, will become a tool for pressure on Armenia, so the CIS is
on the "right way".
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress