Tweet
ANDRANIK TEVANYAN: POLITICAL EXPERT: ARMENIA SHOULD NEITHER SIGN THE ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT WITH THE EU NOR JOIN THE CUSTOMS UNION
ArmInfo's Interview with Andranik Tevanyan, Head of the Political
Economy Research Center
by Alexander Avanesov
Friday, August 2, 09:22
In November 2013 Armenia is going to initial an Association Agreement
with the European Union in Vilnius. How reasonable is it to initial
the Agreement given the fact that it might deteriorate the relations
with Russia?
The thing is that Armenia lacks debates on the Association Agreement
with the European Union. The authorities make no official statements
at all and if they do, the statements are mutually exclusive, because
they consider it possible signing both the EU Association Agreement and
an agreement on accession to the Customs Union. The most interesting
thing is that the whole process is actually secret, no one is shown
the document, which is negotiated on by the EU and Armenia.
Furthermore, the ruling coalition in Armenia has not made any
statements either. The authorities want to conduct an artificial
PR campaign based on the fact that the country allegedly has both
pro-Western and pro-Russian forces. I think this is a wrong approach,
not least because Armenia should have pro-Armenian forces that must
represent the people's interests. As regards Europe, it does not wait
for Armenia, Ukraine, Moldova or Georgia, and it is quite logical
because all the four states have local conflicts and unresolved
problems. Moldova has the Transdniestr problem, Ukraine cannot choose
between pro-Western and pro-Russian orientations, Georgia faces the
problem of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and Armenia has the problem
of Karabakh. To include such states in its structure means to put an
end to the European Union itself. The preparation of the Association
Agreement with the EU was accelerated when Russia expressed its
intention to create a Customs Union. Thus, the EU wants to have a
buffer zone directed against expansion of Russia's influence. But
it is not the most important thing to us. Yerevan should give high
priority to the issue of Armenia's security. Armenia is known to be
a member of the CSTO, and the security system of the state depends on
Russia. We have no alternative and no one offers us an alternative. In
this context, one should take into account the security of Karabakh
and Armenia and at the same time reform the economic, political and
legal systems in line with European standards, for these standards
give us a chance to develop. Certainly, we need European integration,
but one should not confuse it with accession to the EU, not least
because the EU does not wait for us.
You have mentioned reforms complying with European standards. Do you
believe in such a possibility?
Over the past 5 years all of us have made sure that the authorities
of Armenia are incompetent, they cannot and do not want to conduct
any reforms. The reforms of the authorities aim to concentrate
the financial flows in their hands. In this situation reforms run
counter to the philosophy of Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan and
his entourage. I call this system a system of one oligarch. They
direct their force against oligarchs the way Bolsheviks directed their
force against kulaks. In fact, they are oligarchs themselves. Those
considered being oligarchs lack political levers, they can be big
capitalists or semi-criminal authorities, but one must not call
them oligarchs. The neo-bolshevist approach "let's take away the
oligarchs' property and give it to the people" leads to a more
vulgar system headed by one person. It is like an Armenian version
of "Turkmenbashism". But unlike Turkmenistan or Azerbaijan, Armenia
has no opportunity to use such a system due to the lack of primary
resources. To have an Armenian "Turkmenbashi" will be worth a lot, and
we are already paying for it. The migration process of the last five
years is the price for centralization of the political and economic
systems, where all the gates are closed. People have no chances to
earn money and this leads to migration.
But Europeans are interested in signing of the Agreement... They even
speak of a 3-4 bln EUR payoff...
Yes, you are right. A question arises - why do Europeans promise money
to the Armenian authorities for? They initially promised 1.5 bln EUR.
Following Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan's statements on Armenia's
possible signing both the Association Agreement and an agreement
on accession to the Customs Union, Europeans doubled the promised
amount of loans. Europe finances nobody just for fun. There's no such
thing as a free lunch. Europe is interested in this project first of
all because it may create a buffer zone and exclude Russia from the
projects in Armenia. Furthermore, the EU is interested in free and
safe movement of the Caspian energy resources (oil and gas) to the
European market, bypassing the Russian monopolies. Azerbaijan states
that the price of this issue is Karabakh and even the major part
of Armenia. Europeans need a stable Caucasus and its name does not
matter - United Armenia, United Azerbaijan or some other name. They
point out the importance of settlement of the Karabakh conflict,
which means concessions by Armenia. In addition, Turkey is NATO's
operator in the region. Even during the period of football diplomacy,
Western diplomats were interested in the settlement of the problem,
which implied opening of borders with Turkey. Meanwhile, Ankara says
that the price of open borders is the return of Karabakh to Azerbaijan.
Thus, one can say that, as a matter of fact, the so-called
self-motivated policy is nothing but a self-motivated cession of
the Armenian state's interests. The power is like a weathercock, the
daily exchange changes; so do the views and statements. Meanwhile,
the West offers no security system to us. By the Association Agreement
the Europeans want to exclude Russia from all projects, including the
economic ones. The military and strategic partner eventually starts
thinking of its own interests in the region and it results in the
sale of a big lot of Russian military hardware to Azerbaijan. Even
the Russian President's intention to visit Iran and Azerbaijan
without paying a visit to Armenia speaks volumes. This is a message
to Armenia's authorities. If anyone thinks that the West will help us
in case of resumption of war with Azerbaijan, let them have another
read of Ilf and Petrov. The West will never do that. It could have
supported pro-Western Georgia during its armed confrontation with
Russia. Saakashvili's adventurism has led to the fact that Georgia
has forever lost Abkhazia and South Ossetia both de facto and de jure.
If we behave like Georgia, we will lose more than Karabakh, which
is not only a part of Armenia, but also the guarantor of Armenia's
security.
The integration process should be Western values-oriented and at
the same time focus on maintaining close relations with Russia. "If
we lose Russia, we will find ourselves in direct confrontation with
Turkey and Azerbaijan and in indirect confrontation with Russia.
Azerbaijan understands this perfectly; therefore, it decided
not to sign any Association Agreement and to focus its efforts on
strengthening relations with Moscow. Baku's goal is clear - to gain
at least a neutral position of Russia in case of a war with Armenia.
Yerevan also should realize it. In the meantime, the authorities
are stimulating anti-Russian sentiments and support the anti-Russian
experts and analysts. In pursuit of the 3 bln EUR, the authorities
forget that about 2 bln USD private transfers come to Armenia every
year. But these funds are transferred to households, which spend
them on their needs. And the West will give the funds directly to
the authorities, which is much more profitable. It is possible to
take the money from the households by means of a price boost or an
exchange rate game, i.e. it is a long process. It is much easier to
get the money directly. But how the money will be spent remains a big
question. All of us know how the authorities use the loans. The loans
disappear and nobody knows who spends them and how. As a result,
Armenia experiences offshore scandals. The authorities spend the
funds as they wish, and the public does not control them.
So, do we need the Association Agreement or not?
I think that Armenia should neither sign the Association Agreement nor
join the Customs Union. First of all, we should focus on the problems
inside in the country. The matter concerns the need to change the
power. Only after that we should start strengthening our relations
with both Russia and the EU.
http://www.arminfo.am/index.cfm?objectid=7A6A31E0-FB33-11E2-80CA0EB7C0D21663
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
ArmInfo's Interview with Andranik Tevanyan, Head of the Political
Economy Research Center
by Alexander Avanesov
Friday, August 2, 09:22
In November 2013 Armenia is going to initial an Association Agreement
with the European Union in Vilnius. How reasonable is it to initial
the Agreement given the fact that it might deteriorate the relations
with Russia?
The thing is that Armenia lacks debates on the Association Agreement
with the European Union. The authorities make no official statements
at all and if they do, the statements are mutually exclusive, because
they consider it possible signing both the EU Association Agreement and
an agreement on accession to the Customs Union. The most interesting
thing is that the whole process is actually secret, no one is shown
the document, which is negotiated on by the EU and Armenia.
Furthermore, the ruling coalition in Armenia has not made any
statements either. The authorities want to conduct an artificial
PR campaign based on the fact that the country allegedly has both
pro-Western and pro-Russian forces. I think this is a wrong approach,
not least because Armenia should have pro-Armenian forces that must
represent the people's interests. As regards Europe, it does not wait
for Armenia, Ukraine, Moldova or Georgia, and it is quite logical
because all the four states have local conflicts and unresolved
problems. Moldova has the Transdniestr problem, Ukraine cannot choose
between pro-Western and pro-Russian orientations, Georgia faces the
problem of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and Armenia has the problem
of Karabakh. To include such states in its structure means to put an
end to the European Union itself. The preparation of the Association
Agreement with the EU was accelerated when Russia expressed its
intention to create a Customs Union. Thus, the EU wants to have a
buffer zone directed against expansion of Russia's influence. But
it is not the most important thing to us. Yerevan should give high
priority to the issue of Armenia's security. Armenia is known to be
a member of the CSTO, and the security system of the state depends on
Russia. We have no alternative and no one offers us an alternative. In
this context, one should take into account the security of Karabakh
and Armenia and at the same time reform the economic, political and
legal systems in line with European standards, for these standards
give us a chance to develop. Certainly, we need European integration,
but one should not confuse it with accession to the EU, not least
because the EU does not wait for us.
You have mentioned reforms complying with European standards. Do you
believe in such a possibility?
Over the past 5 years all of us have made sure that the authorities
of Armenia are incompetent, they cannot and do not want to conduct
any reforms. The reforms of the authorities aim to concentrate
the financial flows in their hands. In this situation reforms run
counter to the philosophy of Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan and
his entourage. I call this system a system of one oligarch. They
direct their force against oligarchs the way Bolsheviks directed their
force against kulaks. In fact, they are oligarchs themselves. Those
considered being oligarchs lack political levers, they can be big
capitalists or semi-criminal authorities, but one must not call
them oligarchs. The neo-bolshevist approach "let's take away the
oligarchs' property and give it to the people" leads to a more
vulgar system headed by one person. It is like an Armenian version
of "Turkmenbashism". But unlike Turkmenistan or Azerbaijan, Armenia
has no opportunity to use such a system due to the lack of primary
resources. To have an Armenian "Turkmenbashi" will be worth a lot, and
we are already paying for it. The migration process of the last five
years is the price for centralization of the political and economic
systems, where all the gates are closed. People have no chances to
earn money and this leads to migration.
But Europeans are interested in signing of the Agreement... They even
speak of a 3-4 bln EUR payoff...
Yes, you are right. A question arises - why do Europeans promise money
to the Armenian authorities for? They initially promised 1.5 bln EUR.
Following Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan's statements on Armenia's
possible signing both the Association Agreement and an agreement
on accession to the Customs Union, Europeans doubled the promised
amount of loans. Europe finances nobody just for fun. There's no such
thing as a free lunch. Europe is interested in this project first of
all because it may create a buffer zone and exclude Russia from the
projects in Armenia. Furthermore, the EU is interested in free and
safe movement of the Caspian energy resources (oil and gas) to the
European market, bypassing the Russian monopolies. Azerbaijan states
that the price of this issue is Karabakh and even the major part
of Armenia. Europeans need a stable Caucasus and its name does not
matter - United Armenia, United Azerbaijan or some other name. They
point out the importance of settlement of the Karabakh conflict,
which means concessions by Armenia. In addition, Turkey is NATO's
operator in the region. Even during the period of football diplomacy,
Western diplomats were interested in the settlement of the problem,
which implied opening of borders with Turkey. Meanwhile, Ankara says
that the price of open borders is the return of Karabakh to Azerbaijan.
Thus, one can say that, as a matter of fact, the so-called
self-motivated policy is nothing but a self-motivated cession of
the Armenian state's interests. The power is like a weathercock, the
daily exchange changes; so do the views and statements. Meanwhile,
the West offers no security system to us. By the Association Agreement
the Europeans want to exclude Russia from all projects, including the
economic ones. The military and strategic partner eventually starts
thinking of its own interests in the region and it results in the
sale of a big lot of Russian military hardware to Azerbaijan. Even
the Russian President's intention to visit Iran and Azerbaijan
without paying a visit to Armenia speaks volumes. This is a message
to Armenia's authorities. If anyone thinks that the West will help us
in case of resumption of war with Azerbaijan, let them have another
read of Ilf and Petrov. The West will never do that. It could have
supported pro-Western Georgia during its armed confrontation with
Russia. Saakashvili's adventurism has led to the fact that Georgia
has forever lost Abkhazia and South Ossetia both de facto and de jure.
If we behave like Georgia, we will lose more than Karabakh, which
is not only a part of Armenia, but also the guarantor of Armenia's
security.
The integration process should be Western values-oriented and at
the same time focus on maintaining close relations with Russia. "If
we lose Russia, we will find ourselves in direct confrontation with
Turkey and Azerbaijan and in indirect confrontation with Russia.
Azerbaijan understands this perfectly; therefore, it decided
not to sign any Association Agreement and to focus its efforts on
strengthening relations with Moscow. Baku's goal is clear - to gain
at least a neutral position of Russia in case of a war with Armenia.
Yerevan also should realize it. In the meantime, the authorities
are stimulating anti-Russian sentiments and support the anti-Russian
experts and analysts. In pursuit of the 3 bln EUR, the authorities
forget that about 2 bln USD private transfers come to Armenia every
year. But these funds are transferred to households, which spend
them on their needs. And the West will give the funds directly to
the authorities, which is much more profitable. It is possible to
take the money from the households by means of a price boost or an
exchange rate game, i.e. it is a long process. It is much easier to
get the money directly. But how the money will be spent remains a big
question. All of us know how the authorities use the loans. The loans
disappear and nobody knows who spends them and how. As a result,
Armenia experiences offshore scandals. The authorities spend the
funds as they wish, and the public does not control them.
So, do we need the Association Agreement or not?
I think that Armenia should neither sign the Association Agreement nor
join the Customs Union. First of all, we should focus on the problems
inside in the country. The matter concerns the need to change the
power. Only after that we should start strengthening our relations
with both Russia and the EU.
http://www.arminfo.am/index.cfm?objectid=7A6A31E0-FB33-11E2-80CA0EB7C0D21663
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress