Tweet
EURASIAN UNION MAY BECOME A SERIOUS THREAT TO REHABILITATION OF THE POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC SYSTEM IN ARMENIA
by Ashot Safaryan
arminfo
Friday, September 7, 18:13
ArmInfo's interview with Arthur Ghazinyan, Head of the Center for
European Studies, Yerevan State Univeristy
Mr. Ghazinyan, what is you assessment of the European integration
policy of Armenia? Are there any rapprochement trends, considering
the current negotiations for the Association Agreement and the Deep
and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement?
Rapprochement with the EU may lead to development of the domestic
reform models. We must chose a model: the closed political
economic system characteristic to Russia, Belarus or Kazakhstan,
the monopoly system or the open system with competitive economy and
without domination in the market i.e. all the elements of liberal
economy in the EU member-states. It would be perfect if Armenia
could preserve the current peculiar 'status-quo' simultaneously
developing cooperation with both Moscow and Brussels. But, such
scenario is impossible. Armenia has got an opportunity to apply the
western model of development by joining the EU Eastern Partnership
Project in May 2009. It would be a serious mistake for Armenia to
deviate from the launched pro-Western course. As for the DCFTA, is
provides for facilitation of trade process, transboundary cooperation,
customs clearance on preferential terms etc. All these reforms require
internal reforms, first of all.
May Moscow's idea of Eurasian Union become an obstacle to that
liberation?
Surely, the Eurasian Union is a serious threat to rehabilitation
of the political and economic system of Armenia. Russian President
Vladimir Putin's idea of the Eurasian Union is aimed at regional
integration. Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan have already achieved
certain success in the given dimension by creating the Customs Union.
For Armenia, if it is offered to join the project that is widely
discussed by experts and politicians, the Eurasian Union implies
specific isolation in the South Caucasus. I doubt very much that
Azerbaijan will support the idea of the Eurasian Union. I rule out
Tbilisi's joining it. In such situation, they use Armenia's economic
blockade by Azerbaijan and Turkey and make it seek 'shelter' in
Moscow, in the systems of military and economic security offered by
the Kremlin.
Should Armenia learn the experience of Georgia that has achieved
economic and political successes due to rapprochement with the West,
but has lost Abkhazia and South Ossetia after the August War of 2008?
Georgia actually lost control of those two countries after the collapse
of the Soviet Union, and the August War 2008 just confirmed that loss
de-jure. At the same time, Georgia has got rid of a sore, which made
it possible for the entire organism to live and develop.
Russia annexed those territories, which is not favorable to it. It
would be more reasonable for Moscow to leave the conflict unresolved
in order to come out as an arbiter at any moment and use the conflict
for its purposes. Occupying and recognizing the two countries Moscow
lost its levers of influence on Georgia.
Bringing the example of Georgia many experts, sure, hint at a danger
of losing Karabakh in case of pro- Western orientation. However,
I think that Azerbaijan is not ready and will hardly ever dare to
launch military actions against pro-western Armenia and Karabvakh,
as it has huge western oil and gas economic capital and is not sure
in its success in that war.
Any attempt to withdraw from the peace talks and unleash war will
create real grounds for the USA and EU to recognize independence
of Nagorno Karabakh on the basis of incompatibility of two nations
forced to co-exist within one state. Such scenario has already been
observed in Kosovo when Serbia decided to response to military force
against the Kosovo Albans. Azerbaijan must realize and, I think,
they have already understood that the West will now allow a new war
and violence in the South Caucasus.
Do you think that Armenia could preserve the current peculiar
'status-quo' simultaneously developing cooperation with both Moscow
and Brussels?
I would be ideal, but such scenario is impossible. We have been trying
to wage the notorious complementary policy for over 20 years.
Now, the terms are being toughened and we are reluctant to make a
choice. And these terms are toughened by Moscow, first of all.
Brussels went on specific constructive cooperation offering funds,
assistance in protection of the intellectual property rights, adoption
of sanitary and phytosanitary measures, standardization procedures,
certification, metrology, accreditation. In the case of the Eurasian
Union, I expect no such assistance, for instance, in upgrade of
food security.
What do you think of the future of the big enterprises operating on
the Russian capital in Armenia in case if the above negotiations with
the EU are successfully completed?
If Russian companies in Armenia can work in the conditions of the
western management and in full line with legislation, if they have
such a management system that meets new requirements, there will be
no problem of their further activity in case of successful ending of
talks with EU and serious economic reforms.
Russian capital has been also presented at the European market and has
no problem there. In case of successful ending of talks with the EU,
using of new standards and effective reforms in Armenia, the situation
will radically change. I mean reduction of corruption risks and, as
a result, improvement of administration. One must not be scared that
Russia will start sabotage against Armenia, as here it owns strategic
facilities. Armenia has got enough levers and means not to let it.
One should not forget that about 80% of capital in Armenia is the
Russian capital, which is politically motivated and seriously limits
attraction of the Western capital to the Armenian economy. Because of
the way of its formation the Russian capital is not ready to work at
the legal field within the frames of the law. It has serious management
problems. All this supposes growth of corruption risks. It is no secret
that the present economic system of Russia is fully corrupted and the
Russian capital has been working in Armenia using the same vicious
traditions. The availability of the western capital, that passed a
rather serious way of formation and development for 150-200 years,
will bring the western judicial companies which prefer to protect
economic interests only in court basing on legislation...There is
a problem of business environment improvement and diversification
of the general system in Armenia. We remember what was happening at
the Internet services market of Armenia before the Orange company
coming. The presence of one European company in our country radically
changed the entire telecommunications market. The same may and should
happen in all the rest spheres of the Armenian economy.
Western politicians often said that they would like to cooperate
with the South Caucasus region like an integrated whole. However,
many experts criticize the West for drifting away from its own
positions from time to time in the context of the energy projects,
in particular, Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline...
The above mentioned energy project is an American but not a European
one. The EU said earlier it does not want to take part in this project
because of its discriminating nature, as in fact Armenia was forced
out of it.
What about Nabucco, which will not involve Armenia either?
It is naive to speak about fulfillment of the project that costs 15
bln EUR, in the conditions when the Karabakh conflict has not been
settled and when there is no stability in the region. Nabucco has
no problem linked with financing or gas supply. The only problem
is a threat of the new war in the region. The pipeline cannot go
around Nagornyy Karabakh and Armenia, as the route through these two
Armenian republics is very much beneficial. Moreover, the Europeans
do not want to force Armenia out of the regional programmes. The
more isolated Armenia because of the Karabakh conflict, the less
possible its participation in big programmes. In such conditions
Yerevan has nothing else to do than to run into Moscow's arms. As
for the Russians, they want just this, encouraging and stimulating
the regional isolation of our country and offering an idea of the
EurAsian Union. Moreover, unsettlement of the Karabakh conflict is
a result of the fixed balance in our region. Any changing of the
balance of forces towards this or that geo-political pole will lead
to settlement of conflicts in the region. This will create favorable
conditions for fulfillment of geo-political and economic programmes,
which will involve all the countries of the South Caucasus.
The CSTO CRRF exercises scheduled for early September were postponed
simultaneously with the mass media reports on NATO Secretary General's
visit to Armenia. Are there any links between those two events?
I think that Rasmussen's visit to Armenia in the period of the
exercises speaks volumes. The West has no intention to stay aside
the processes in the South Caucasus, including in the security sphere.
Given today's situation in the Middle East, the political crisis in
Syria, the Iranian problem, the northern border with Iran is very
important for the West and NATO, particularly. I thin that NATO
Secretary General's visit to Armenia aims to verify all these issues.
by Ashot Safaryan
arminfo
Friday, September 7, 18:13
ArmInfo's interview with Arthur Ghazinyan, Head of the Center for
European Studies, Yerevan State Univeristy
Mr. Ghazinyan, what is you assessment of the European integration
policy of Armenia? Are there any rapprochement trends, considering
the current negotiations for the Association Agreement and the Deep
and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement?
Rapprochement with the EU may lead to development of the domestic
reform models. We must chose a model: the closed political
economic system characteristic to Russia, Belarus or Kazakhstan,
the monopoly system or the open system with competitive economy and
without domination in the market i.e. all the elements of liberal
economy in the EU member-states. It would be perfect if Armenia
could preserve the current peculiar 'status-quo' simultaneously
developing cooperation with both Moscow and Brussels. But, such
scenario is impossible. Armenia has got an opportunity to apply the
western model of development by joining the EU Eastern Partnership
Project in May 2009. It would be a serious mistake for Armenia to
deviate from the launched pro-Western course. As for the DCFTA, is
provides for facilitation of trade process, transboundary cooperation,
customs clearance on preferential terms etc. All these reforms require
internal reforms, first of all.
May Moscow's idea of Eurasian Union become an obstacle to that
liberation?
Surely, the Eurasian Union is a serious threat to rehabilitation
of the political and economic system of Armenia. Russian President
Vladimir Putin's idea of the Eurasian Union is aimed at regional
integration. Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan have already achieved
certain success in the given dimension by creating the Customs Union.
For Armenia, if it is offered to join the project that is widely
discussed by experts and politicians, the Eurasian Union implies
specific isolation in the South Caucasus. I doubt very much that
Azerbaijan will support the idea of the Eurasian Union. I rule out
Tbilisi's joining it. In such situation, they use Armenia's economic
blockade by Azerbaijan and Turkey and make it seek 'shelter' in
Moscow, in the systems of military and economic security offered by
the Kremlin.
Should Armenia learn the experience of Georgia that has achieved
economic and political successes due to rapprochement with the West,
but has lost Abkhazia and South Ossetia after the August War of 2008?
Georgia actually lost control of those two countries after the collapse
of the Soviet Union, and the August War 2008 just confirmed that loss
de-jure. At the same time, Georgia has got rid of a sore, which made
it possible for the entire organism to live and develop.
Russia annexed those territories, which is not favorable to it. It
would be more reasonable for Moscow to leave the conflict unresolved
in order to come out as an arbiter at any moment and use the conflict
for its purposes. Occupying and recognizing the two countries Moscow
lost its levers of influence on Georgia.
Bringing the example of Georgia many experts, sure, hint at a danger
of losing Karabakh in case of pro- Western orientation. However,
I think that Azerbaijan is not ready and will hardly ever dare to
launch military actions against pro-western Armenia and Karabvakh,
as it has huge western oil and gas economic capital and is not sure
in its success in that war.
Any attempt to withdraw from the peace talks and unleash war will
create real grounds for the USA and EU to recognize independence
of Nagorno Karabakh on the basis of incompatibility of two nations
forced to co-exist within one state. Such scenario has already been
observed in Kosovo when Serbia decided to response to military force
against the Kosovo Albans. Azerbaijan must realize and, I think,
they have already understood that the West will now allow a new war
and violence in the South Caucasus.
Do you think that Armenia could preserve the current peculiar
'status-quo' simultaneously developing cooperation with both Moscow
and Brussels?
I would be ideal, but such scenario is impossible. We have been trying
to wage the notorious complementary policy for over 20 years.
Now, the terms are being toughened and we are reluctant to make a
choice. And these terms are toughened by Moscow, first of all.
Brussels went on specific constructive cooperation offering funds,
assistance in protection of the intellectual property rights, adoption
of sanitary and phytosanitary measures, standardization procedures,
certification, metrology, accreditation. In the case of the Eurasian
Union, I expect no such assistance, for instance, in upgrade of
food security.
What do you think of the future of the big enterprises operating on
the Russian capital in Armenia in case if the above negotiations with
the EU are successfully completed?
If Russian companies in Armenia can work in the conditions of the
western management and in full line with legislation, if they have
such a management system that meets new requirements, there will be
no problem of their further activity in case of successful ending of
talks with EU and serious economic reforms.
Russian capital has been also presented at the European market and has
no problem there. In case of successful ending of talks with the EU,
using of new standards and effective reforms in Armenia, the situation
will radically change. I mean reduction of corruption risks and, as
a result, improvement of administration. One must not be scared that
Russia will start sabotage against Armenia, as here it owns strategic
facilities. Armenia has got enough levers and means not to let it.
One should not forget that about 80% of capital in Armenia is the
Russian capital, which is politically motivated and seriously limits
attraction of the Western capital to the Armenian economy. Because of
the way of its formation the Russian capital is not ready to work at
the legal field within the frames of the law. It has serious management
problems. All this supposes growth of corruption risks. It is no secret
that the present economic system of Russia is fully corrupted and the
Russian capital has been working in Armenia using the same vicious
traditions. The availability of the western capital, that passed a
rather serious way of formation and development for 150-200 years,
will bring the western judicial companies which prefer to protect
economic interests only in court basing on legislation...There is
a problem of business environment improvement and diversification
of the general system in Armenia. We remember what was happening at
the Internet services market of Armenia before the Orange company
coming. The presence of one European company in our country radically
changed the entire telecommunications market. The same may and should
happen in all the rest spheres of the Armenian economy.
Western politicians often said that they would like to cooperate
with the South Caucasus region like an integrated whole. However,
many experts criticize the West for drifting away from its own
positions from time to time in the context of the energy projects,
in particular, Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline...
The above mentioned energy project is an American but not a European
one. The EU said earlier it does not want to take part in this project
because of its discriminating nature, as in fact Armenia was forced
out of it.
What about Nabucco, which will not involve Armenia either?
It is naive to speak about fulfillment of the project that costs 15
bln EUR, in the conditions when the Karabakh conflict has not been
settled and when there is no stability in the region. Nabucco has
no problem linked with financing or gas supply. The only problem
is a threat of the new war in the region. The pipeline cannot go
around Nagornyy Karabakh and Armenia, as the route through these two
Armenian republics is very much beneficial. Moreover, the Europeans
do not want to force Armenia out of the regional programmes. The
more isolated Armenia because of the Karabakh conflict, the less
possible its participation in big programmes. In such conditions
Yerevan has nothing else to do than to run into Moscow's arms. As
for the Russians, they want just this, encouraging and stimulating
the regional isolation of our country and offering an idea of the
EurAsian Union. Moreover, unsettlement of the Karabakh conflict is
a result of the fixed balance in our region. Any changing of the
balance of forces towards this or that geo-political pole will lead
to settlement of conflicts in the region. This will create favorable
conditions for fulfillment of geo-political and economic programmes,
which will involve all the countries of the South Caucasus.
The CSTO CRRF exercises scheduled for early September were postponed
simultaneously with the mass media reports on NATO Secretary General's
visit to Armenia. Are there any links between those two events?
I think that Rasmussen's visit to Armenia in the period of the
exercises speaks volumes. The West has no intention to stay aside
the processes in the South Caucasus, including in the security sphere.
Given today's situation in the Middle East, the political crisis in
Syria, the Iranian problem, the northern border with Iran is very
important for the West and NATO, particularly. I thin that NATO
Secretary General's visit to Armenia aims to verify all these issues.