Tweet
WHAT WILL PUTIN TELL SARGSYAN?
HAKOB BADALYAN
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/comments27017.html
Published: 12:30:37 - 02/08/2012
The information office of the president reports Serzh Sargsyan has
left for a short vacation today and will spend part of it abroad. He
will interrupt his holiday and leave for Russia for a working visit
to meet with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin on August 8.
The fact that Serzh Sargsyan will interrupt his holiday to leave for
Moscow means the Moscow visit is urgent otherwise why should Sargsyan
interrupt his holiday if he could postpone the visit till after the
vacation. The schedule of presidents is busy, especially that of the
Russian president but if Putin has decided to interrupt Sargsyan's
holiday means he has something urgent to tell him.
Moreover, maybe what he is going to tell is not even so important but
he wants to interrupt the holidays just in order to put psychological
pressure on Serzh Sargsyan and to show that Armenia is ready to rush
at Moscow's call. By interrupting his holiday and leaving for Moscow,
Sargsyan confirms Putin's "truth".
At the same time, Sargsyan cannot refuse to leave for Moscow since
the domestic situation in Armenia is not clear. Serzh Sargsyan enjoys
the support of the West but the latter, for example, refused the
promised money and delayed its allocation after the presidential
elections with the condition that the quality should be better and
reforms should be intensified.
Later, Armenia was rumored to ask for money from Russia. The government
has neither denied nor confirmed this information, saying the process
of requesting money from foreign countries is an ongoing process.
Serzh Sargsyan needs money to activate the economy and eliminate
threats of possible social revolt. The issue is not only the social
revolt. Merely, it is of vital importance for Serzh Sargsyan to show
social progress ahead of the elections, otherwise the current economic
policy and its sad outcome will just intensify nostalgia for Robert
Kocharyan's "double-digit growth".
In order to resist to all this, Serzh Sargsyan needs to find money
and ensure economic activation prior to the presidential elections,
or he needs to convince Moscow that it is possible to work with him and
there is no need to consider the option of Robert Kocharyan's return.
On the other hand, this may cause problems between Serzh Sargsyan and
the West. Earlier, the West used to have a mild approach to Armenia.
It is difficult to say whether their attitude has become tough but
it has evidently been clarified, and the limits of maneuvering for
Yerevan have been narrowed.
In this situation, Serzh Sargsyan needs to give loyalty guarantees
to Moscow at the same time satisfying the minimal expectations or
demands of the West relating to the dismantlement of the ruling system.
But the situation is complicated for him because this minimal
expectations will arouse doubts in Russia where they understand
that if at least one stone drops out of the ruling system, it will
collapse. Meanwhile, destruction of the system means collapse
of Moscow's supremacy in Armenia because it is based on the
criminal-oligarchic system.
No doubt, a difficult meeting is expecting Serzh Sargsyan in Moscow.
The interesting thing is that Serzh Sargsyan's visit was preceded by
visits of several Russian delegations to Armenia, namely the speaker
of two chambers of the Russian parliament, Russian president's envoy
on humanitarian issues, the foreign minister of Russia. Serzh Sargsyan
met the Russian PM Medvedev in London.
It is not ruled out that these delegations did not get the answers
to their questions in Yerevan so Putin decided to talk to Serzh
Sargsyan personally.
But at the same time, it is also possible that the meeting with Putin
is initiated by Armenia and through it Serzh Sargsyan is trying to
agree on domestic processes in Armenia for Moscow not to generate a
force-majeure situation in September. And perhaps, Putin agreed to
discuss these issues only after Russian delegations left Armenia with
satisfactory answers.
As to the West's possible response, the situation is relative here.
The West cannot be satisfied with Armenia's EU-West sentiment expressed
in the form of statements while de facto governance promotes Russia's
supremacy or at least does not try to weaken it and build a sovereign
state.
On the other hand, however, the Western policy has quite pragmatic
expressions in Armenia and is characterized by strategic and tactical
harmony, even if there is a formal opposition. The point is that
for strategic success, the West needs to tolerate Russia's tactical
success in Armenia. In this particular case they will, probably, attach
importance to the lack of danger coming from Russia's destructive
policy since otherwise not only the Western tactics but the strategy
also would be threatened.
After all, the West proceeds from the reality that it may lead a
strategic policy in the South Caucasus and may maneuver for its sake
while Russia's tactics has become a strategic goal. Here is a paradox
when Russia's tactical success works for the Western strategy.
HAKOB BADALYAN
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/comments27017.html
Published: 12:30:37 - 02/08/2012
The information office of the president reports Serzh Sargsyan has
left for a short vacation today and will spend part of it abroad. He
will interrupt his holiday and leave for Russia for a working visit
to meet with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin on August 8.
The fact that Serzh Sargsyan will interrupt his holiday to leave for
Moscow means the Moscow visit is urgent otherwise why should Sargsyan
interrupt his holiday if he could postpone the visit till after the
vacation. The schedule of presidents is busy, especially that of the
Russian president but if Putin has decided to interrupt Sargsyan's
holiday means he has something urgent to tell him.
Moreover, maybe what he is going to tell is not even so important but
he wants to interrupt the holidays just in order to put psychological
pressure on Serzh Sargsyan and to show that Armenia is ready to rush
at Moscow's call. By interrupting his holiday and leaving for Moscow,
Sargsyan confirms Putin's "truth".
At the same time, Sargsyan cannot refuse to leave for Moscow since
the domestic situation in Armenia is not clear. Serzh Sargsyan enjoys
the support of the West but the latter, for example, refused the
promised money and delayed its allocation after the presidential
elections with the condition that the quality should be better and
reforms should be intensified.
Later, Armenia was rumored to ask for money from Russia. The government
has neither denied nor confirmed this information, saying the process
of requesting money from foreign countries is an ongoing process.
Serzh Sargsyan needs money to activate the economy and eliminate
threats of possible social revolt. The issue is not only the social
revolt. Merely, it is of vital importance for Serzh Sargsyan to show
social progress ahead of the elections, otherwise the current economic
policy and its sad outcome will just intensify nostalgia for Robert
Kocharyan's "double-digit growth".
In order to resist to all this, Serzh Sargsyan needs to find money
and ensure economic activation prior to the presidential elections,
or he needs to convince Moscow that it is possible to work with him and
there is no need to consider the option of Robert Kocharyan's return.
On the other hand, this may cause problems between Serzh Sargsyan and
the West. Earlier, the West used to have a mild approach to Armenia.
It is difficult to say whether their attitude has become tough but
it has evidently been clarified, and the limits of maneuvering for
Yerevan have been narrowed.
In this situation, Serzh Sargsyan needs to give loyalty guarantees
to Moscow at the same time satisfying the minimal expectations or
demands of the West relating to the dismantlement of the ruling system.
But the situation is complicated for him because this minimal
expectations will arouse doubts in Russia where they understand
that if at least one stone drops out of the ruling system, it will
collapse. Meanwhile, destruction of the system means collapse
of Moscow's supremacy in Armenia because it is based on the
criminal-oligarchic system.
No doubt, a difficult meeting is expecting Serzh Sargsyan in Moscow.
The interesting thing is that Serzh Sargsyan's visit was preceded by
visits of several Russian delegations to Armenia, namely the speaker
of two chambers of the Russian parliament, Russian president's envoy
on humanitarian issues, the foreign minister of Russia. Serzh Sargsyan
met the Russian PM Medvedev in London.
It is not ruled out that these delegations did not get the answers
to their questions in Yerevan so Putin decided to talk to Serzh
Sargsyan personally.
But at the same time, it is also possible that the meeting with Putin
is initiated by Armenia and through it Serzh Sargsyan is trying to
agree on domestic processes in Armenia for Moscow not to generate a
force-majeure situation in September. And perhaps, Putin agreed to
discuss these issues only after Russian delegations left Armenia with
satisfactory answers.
As to the West's possible response, the situation is relative here.
The West cannot be satisfied with Armenia's EU-West sentiment expressed
in the form of statements while de facto governance promotes Russia's
supremacy or at least does not try to weaken it and build a sovereign
state.
On the other hand, however, the Western policy has quite pragmatic
expressions in Armenia and is characterized by strategic and tactical
harmony, even if there is a formal opposition. The point is that
for strategic success, the West needs to tolerate Russia's tactical
success in Armenia. In this particular case they will, probably, attach
importance to the lack of danger coming from Russia's destructive
policy since otherwise not only the Western tactics but the strategy
also would be threatened.
After all, the West proceeds from the reality that it may lead a
strategic policy in the South Caucasus and may maneuver for its sake
while Russia's tactics has become a strategic goal. Here is a paradox
when Russia's tactical success works for the Western strategy.