Tweet
WHAT SERZH SARGSYAN WILL BRING ALONG FROM FRANCE
HAKOB BADALYAN
http://www.lragir.am/index.php/eng/0/comments/view/28036
Comments - Tuesday, 13 November 2012, 11:45
Serzh Sargsyan's visit to France is interesting for something which
was expected less of all. Radio Liberty informs that after the meeting
with Serzh Sargsyan the French President Hollande stated that they
discussed issues relating to Iran and he is hopeful the president of
Armenia will pass the message.
In fact, in the meeting with the French president messages are passed
to Armenia which it is supposed to pass to Iran. In other words,
for the first time an international authoritative statement reports
that Armenia is a channel of communication between the West and Iran.
This circumstance goes without saying but it is officially stated
for the first time.
Can this be defined as a status of mediator? Perhaps it would be
more appropriate to use the word courier or herald because mediation
denotes a little more serious role, generation of ideas and proposals
that the mediator offers to both sides.
In this case, Serzh Sargsyan is asked to say something to Iran. In
addition, Radio Liberty informs, Hollande hopes that Serzh Sargsyan
will take the message. In other words, there is even some doubt that
Serzh Sargsyan will pass the message. Armenia has been given a task,
and they hope it will be fulfilled successfully.
It is not ruled out that the first success will be followed by many
more other tasks but this is far from being mediation because mediation
is first of all initiative and the last initiative of Armenia was in
June 2008 when Serzh Sargsyan announced in Moscow about his intention
to invite Gul to watch football in Yerevan.
Certainly, of course, Armenia should try to carry out the task of
passing messages properly. After all, the role of a herald is not bad,
at least better than no role. Diplomatic improvisation is possible
in this status as well, gradually using it for one's own prospects.
This improvisation will be for Serzh Sargsyan's prospect indeed and
will have nothing to do with Armenia's prospects as a subject of
international politics.
However, beyond Serzh Sargsyan's personal needs the fact that the West
has decided to voice the role of a herald for Armenia is interesting
itself. It underlines the role of Armenia in the region in the context
of a key international issue. Armenia is exposed to risks because
Yerevan is publicly involved in the stream of the Iranian issue or
at least gets closer to it.
Plunging into this process or opposing it would be two extremities. It
is clear though that the delegated role must be accepted and it
must be played vigorously because by revealing the connecting role
of Armenia in the Iranian issue the West enlarges the boundary of
the regional game and opens up an alternative to Armenia engaged in
solely Russian games.
However, Iran is just a means because it is crisp and clear that the
West will settle the issue without any mediator. The problem is the
new schemes of regional relations, the new structure, the new map of
political relations. It is a valuable alternative to the Armenian
government which would be a crime to waste for domestic political
purposes. On the contrary, Armenia is faced with a vital need to
build capacity for more efficient use of new foreign opportunities
by means of fast changes in domestic life.
From: Baghdasarian
HAKOB BADALYAN
http://www.lragir.am/index.php/eng/0/comments/view/28036
Comments - Tuesday, 13 November 2012, 11:45
Serzh Sargsyan's visit to France is interesting for something which
was expected less of all. Radio Liberty informs that after the meeting
with Serzh Sargsyan the French President Hollande stated that they
discussed issues relating to Iran and he is hopeful the president of
Armenia will pass the message.
In fact, in the meeting with the French president messages are passed
to Armenia which it is supposed to pass to Iran. In other words,
for the first time an international authoritative statement reports
that Armenia is a channel of communication between the West and Iran.
This circumstance goes without saying but it is officially stated
for the first time.
Can this be defined as a status of mediator? Perhaps it would be
more appropriate to use the word courier or herald because mediation
denotes a little more serious role, generation of ideas and proposals
that the mediator offers to both sides.
In this case, Serzh Sargsyan is asked to say something to Iran. In
addition, Radio Liberty informs, Hollande hopes that Serzh Sargsyan
will take the message. In other words, there is even some doubt that
Serzh Sargsyan will pass the message. Armenia has been given a task,
and they hope it will be fulfilled successfully.
It is not ruled out that the first success will be followed by many
more other tasks but this is far from being mediation because mediation
is first of all initiative and the last initiative of Armenia was in
June 2008 when Serzh Sargsyan announced in Moscow about his intention
to invite Gul to watch football in Yerevan.
Certainly, of course, Armenia should try to carry out the task of
passing messages properly. After all, the role of a herald is not bad,
at least better than no role. Diplomatic improvisation is possible
in this status as well, gradually using it for one's own prospects.
This improvisation will be for Serzh Sargsyan's prospect indeed and
will have nothing to do with Armenia's prospects as a subject of
international politics.
However, beyond Serzh Sargsyan's personal needs the fact that the West
has decided to voice the role of a herald for Armenia is interesting
itself. It underlines the role of Armenia in the region in the context
of a key international issue. Armenia is exposed to risks because
Yerevan is publicly involved in the stream of the Iranian issue or
at least gets closer to it.
Plunging into this process or opposing it would be two extremities. It
is clear though that the delegated role must be accepted and it
must be played vigorously because by revealing the connecting role
of Armenia in the Iranian issue the West enlarges the boundary of
the regional game and opens up an alternative to Armenia engaged in
solely Russian games.
However, Iran is just a means because it is crisp and clear that the
West will settle the issue without any mediator. The problem is the
new schemes of regional relations, the new structure, the new map of
political relations. It is a valuable alternative to the Armenian
government which would be a crime to waste for domestic political
purposes. On the contrary, Armenia is faced with a vital need to
build capacity for more efficient use of new foreign opportunities
by means of fast changes in domestic life.
From: Baghdasarian