Tweet
IGOR MURADYAN: IN FUTURE ARMENIA WILL JOIN BOTH THE EU AND NATO
ArmInfo's interview with one of the leaders of the Karabakh Movement
in 1988, well-known analyst Igor Muradyan
by David Stepanyan
Wednesday, August 21, 15:25
What is the real content and background of talks on European and
Eurasian integration of Armenia? What do Euro-Atlatic community and
Russia expect from us?
The Euro-Atlantic community is in deep defense and is steadily
building a security belt around itself. This policy implies active
integration. This integration is based on security rather than economy
or communications. The United States are keen to see Europe secure
and is unanimous with it on most of regional issues - be it Turkey
or the conflict in the Middle East.
EU's Association with the Eastern Partnership member- states is a
political concept designed to bring the countries into the orbit of
the western policy.
But this is just an instrument, so, any further discussions on it are
just messing with people's heads. We should stop thinking about the
content. What we need to do is to try to become the EU's partner rather
than raw material appendage. There are three levels of co-existence in
the world: leaders, partners and sources of raw materials, and even
small countries can be partners. So, Armenia should start moving in
this direction, especially now that the western policy on the South
Caucasus is changing, and the Euro-Atlantic community is beginning to
regard the region as not just a service and transit area for operations
in Central Asia, Iran and Afghanistan but a partner against new threats
like Turkey. Yet 10 years ago I wrote in an item that unlike Armenia
and Georgia, Azerbaijan will never join the EU and NATO. It will exist
the way it used to exist till today, until there is oil and gas in
its subsurface... They asked me why, but I did not know the answer.
It seems you know the answer now...
There are several reasons of that. Azerbaijan scares any integration
very much, as in that case the ruling regime will disappear as it will
lose power...Aliyev is very much afraid of the geo-political mismatch.
Baku was given no specific promises, what will happen in case of the
military conflict.
Neither did Russia...
Russia, and, to be more precise, Turkey, that signed an illegitimate
treaty with Baku. And NATO closes eyes on that treaty. Turkey's
membership of NATO will be endangered if it defends Azerbaijan. So,
today we should consider principles rather than instruments of
integration. Europe is building a security system based on NATO,
and its partners that are not NATO members for the moment can become
ones in due time. Our problem is not that we lack logic or information
but that our society is unable to overcome certain phobias. We have
acquired really huge experience in the last 25 years but have learned
almost nothing from it.
You don't think that Russia is able to guarantee Armenia's security
at the given stage, do you? You think that NATO can do that.
No, I just think that Russia is no longer able to guarantee Armenia's
and Nagorno-Karabakh's security all alone. Following the interests
of its rulers, it is beginning to reckon with Turkey and Azerbaijan,
and this is very dangerous for Armenia.
To put it crudely, they may be bribed?
The Azeris have bought the Russians outright, and everybody will know
this soon. In addition to the $3bln's worth of arms already sold to
the Azeris, they in the Kremlin are planning to sell them weapons for
an amount of $4bln. Who will they use this weaponry against? NATO,
Iran? It will take the Iranians just a week to wipe the Azeris off
the map.
It is not in favor of Russia to see us in danger. What about the
notorious balance?
Sure. the Russians would not like to see us in danger. They are
doing this to keep us tied to them, to earn money and to improve
their relations with the Turks and the Azeris. Russia's trade with
Turkey amounts to $100bln. This is why it is ignoring our interests
and this is what may prove most dangerous for us.
Do you assume that one beautiful day Moscow may give Karabakh to
Azerbaijan and betray Armenia?
I am convinced that sooner or later the Russians may give Nagorno-
Karabakh to Azerbaijan so as to turn that country into their ally
and to prolong their influence in the region. They have always
regarded Nagorno-Karabakh's independence as something done against
their will and therefore temporary. The Karabakh Movement was one of
the key factors that ruined the USSR. They in the Kremlin have not
forgotten this.
Yes, but Azerbaijan is also under pressure of Russia and the West...
Well, there you are. If it were pro-Russian, there would be no such
question. Therefore, there are attempts to absorb it at any cost,
even at the cost of Karabakh. I have been explaining that for 30
years and will not give up.
Do you think that the Association Agreement with the EU will be
initialed in November?
Sure.
Is there any serious pressure of Russia upon Yerevan with a purpose
of preventing such a scenario?
There is pressure, but Moscow does not know what levers to use for
that. They still count on creation of an atmosphere of mental affection
and fluctuation in Armenia. Just for this reason, discussion of this
topic stopped in Armenia, but they still go on discussing that.
Evidently, Association of Armenia with the EU hinders Moscow. Why?
The Association of Armenia with the EU hinders Moscow very much,
as Yerevan will start playing foreign games and become a member of
a foreign programme. Armenia is a CSTO member, at the same time,
it has practically a NATO base at its territory.
Do you mean the Armenian peace-making brigade under NATO?
Sure. The Russians are afraid not of what Armenia will start doing,
but of what they (NATO) will start doing with Armenia. So, to become
a partner, Armenia has to take part in different strategies. Armenia
still has two functions: to balance forces in the Caucasus, breaking
of which the Western community will not allow, and participation in
suppressing of Turkey. The second function is hard and dangerous,
but there is no other way out.
Several years ago I said about the beginning of the West's policy on
blockading and isolation of Turkey. Armenia is among the participants
in this blockade. By the way, Syria is also among them, and it has not
been ruined just for this reason. What will happen to Syria? It will
find itself under Saudi Arabia and Turkey, which is not beneficial to
the West, as after that Syria will blaze a trail for Turkey towards
the Middle East, which the Turks will never leave. At present, they
seem to understand that and are trying to correct the situation.
Let's talk about the balance of forces in the South Caucasus, which
the West so much cares for...
The balance of forces in the South Caucasus the way the Russians
see it is that Armenia has as much weaponry as Azerbaijan does, but
Armenia wants something more and is wondering where it can get that
something. The West will give us exactly as much as Russia will keep
from us. So, the balance will not change. But if we go deeper into
the West's strategies, we may get more, and the balance will turn to
our advantage. The Russians are afraid of any alternatives to them
in the Caucasus. They are well aware that they are no longer able
to guarantee the region's security alone. And as always they are
faced with the need to concede something to Turkey. And as always,
they will do it at Armenia's expense.
The Turks and the Russians had real talks on Nagorno-Karbakh, with the
former offering to stop the Baku-Akhalkalaki- Kars railway project if
the latter guaranteed the return of at least three districts around
Nagorno-Karabakh. "They also suggested that they might call back some
of their agents in the North Caucasus if the Armenian troops withdrew
from Nagorno-Karabakh.
Why did the talks fail?
The talks failed simply because the Russians were unable to do it.
That's exactly why in 2008, following the Moscow meeting of presidents
Medvedev, Aliyev and Sargsyan, the Armenian authorities intensified
their integration talks with NATO.
Could you bring at least one agreement between Ankara and Moscow in
prejudice of Armenia after 1991?
Russia and Turkey have an agreement to block Armenia's integration
into NATO. The Turks keep complaining to NATO that the Armenians have
occupied Azerbaijan's territories and each time NATO replies that
it is not a arena for such discussions. France and Greece stood up
for Armenia for several times. But it was the United States who set
Turkey down by asking it if it wanted to see Russia weak.
Will Armenia become EU's partner or will remain its raw material
appendage?
Even if we want, it will be very hard for Armenia to become a raw
material, It depends not so much on economy than on the fact if
Armenia is an educated and cultural state. Will the republic have
battle-worthy armed forces? The definition of the country between the
raw material and the partner is made just in this context. There is
no doubt that Armenia will join the EU as well as NATO. So, we have
to conduct our future policy just stemming from such a prospect.
Armenia seems not to be invited there so much...
Today Armenia seems not to be invited there so much. But tomorrow
they will invite Armenia and the latter will undoubtedly join these
organizations and at the same time will remain Russia's partner. NATO
and EU need partners. Today the alliance refuses to receive new
members, but it has been drawing out new formats of relations with new
partners. IPAP will soon become an instrument of the true cooperation.
Sweden is not NATO member either, but it takes part in NATO operations
more than Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and Slovakia
taken together. Practically, Sweden is an unofficial member of NATO.
And Armenia will take part in IPAP by all its forces, and when we
have shortage of forces, they will give them to us. This is the logic.
Unlike Armenia and Georgia, Azerbaijan will never join the EU and
NATO. It will exist the way it used to exist till today, until there
is oil and gas in its subsurface...
http://www.arminfo.am/index.cfm?objectid=5B4695D0-0A54-11E3-8AC50EB7C0D21663
ArmInfo's interview with one of the leaders of the Karabakh Movement
in 1988, well-known analyst Igor Muradyan
by David Stepanyan
Wednesday, August 21, 15:25
What is the real content and background of talks on European and
Eurasian integration of Armenia? What do Euro-Atlatic community and
Russia expect from us?
The Euro-Atlantic community is in deep defense and is steadily
building a security belt around itself. This policy implies active
integration. This integration is based on security rather than economy
or communications. The United States are keen to see Europe secure
and is unanimous with it on most of regional issues - be it Turkey
or the conflict in the Middle East.
EU's Association with the Eastern Partnership member- states is a
political concept designed to bring the countries into the orbit of
the western policy.
But this is just an instrument, so, any further discussions on it are
just messing with people's heads. We should stop thinking about the
content. What we need to do is to try to become the EU's partner rather
than raw material appendage. There are three levels of co-existence in
the world: leaders, partners and sources of raw materials, and even
small countries can be partners. So, Armenia should start moving in
this direction, especially now that the western policy on the South
Caucasus is changing, and the Euro-Atlantic community is beginning to
regard the region as not just a service and transit area for operations
in Central Asia, Iran and Afghanistan but a partner against new threats
like Turkey. Yet 10 years ago I wrote in an item that unlike Armenia
and Georgia, Azerbaijan will never join the EU and NATO. It will exist
the way it used to exist till today, until there is oil and gas in
its subsurface... They asked me why, but I did not know the answer.
It seems you know the answer now...
There are several reasons of that. Azerbaijan scares any integration
very much, as in that case the ruling regime will disappear as it will
lose power...Aliyev is very much afraid of the geo-political mismatch.
Baku was given no specific promises, what will happen in case of the
military conflict.
Neither did Russia...
Russia, and, to be more precise, Turkey, that signed an illegitimate
treaty with Baku. And NATO closes eyes on that treaty. Turkey's
membership of NATO will be endangered if it defends Azerbaijan. So,
today we should consider principles rather than instruments of
integration. Europe is building a security system based on NATO,
and its partners that are not NATO members for the moment can become
ones in due time. Our problem is not that we lack logic or information
but that our society is unable to overcome certain phobias. We have
acquired really huge experience in the last 25 years but have learned
almost nothing from it.
You don't think that Russia is able to guarantee Armenia's security
at the given stage, do you? You think that NATO can do that.
No, I just think that Russia is no longer able to guarantee Armenia's
and Nagorno-Karabakh's security all alone. Following the interests
of its rulers, it is beginning to reckon with Turkey and Azerbaijan,
and this is very dangerous for Armenia.
To put it crudely, they may be bribed?
The Azeris have bought the Russians outright, and everybody will know
this soon. In addition to the $3bln's worth of arms already sold to
the Azeris, they in the Kremlin are planning to sell them weapons for
an amount of $4bln. Who will they use this weaponry against? NATO,
Iran? It will take the Iranians just a week to wipe the Azeris off
the map.
It is not in favor of Russia to see us in danger. What about the
notorious balance?
Sure. the Russians would not like to see us in danger. They are
doing this to keep us tied to them, to earn money and to improve
their relations with the Turks and the Azeris. Russia's trade with
Turkey amounts to $100bln. This is why it is ignoring our interests
and this is what may prove most dangerous for us.
Do you assume that one beautiful day Moscow may give Karabakh to
Azerbaijan and betray Armenia?
I am convinced that sooner or later the Russians may give Nagorno-
Karabakh to Azerbaijan so as to turn that country into their ally
and to prolong their influence in the region. They have always
regarded Nagorno-Karabakh's independence as something done against
their will and therefore temporary. The Karabakh Movement was one of
the key factors that ruined the USSR. They in the Kremlin have not
forgotten this.
Yes, but Azerbaijan is also under pressure of Russia and the West...
Well, there you are. If it were pro-Russian, there would be no such
question. Therefore, there are attempts to absorb it at any cost,
even at the cost of Karabakh. I have been explaining that for 30
years and will not give up.
Do you think that the Association Agreement with the EU will be
initialed in November?
Sure.
Is there any serious pressure of Russia upon Yerevan with a purpose
of preventing such a scenario?
There is pressure, but Moscow does not know what levers to use for
that. They still count on creation of an atmosphere of mental affection
and fluctuation in Armenia. Just for this reason, discussion of this
topic stopped in Armenia, but they still go on discussing that.
Evidently, Association of Armenia with the EU hinders Moscow. Why?
The Association of Armenia with the EU hinders Moscow very much,
as Yerevan will start playing foreign games and become a member of
a foreign programme. Armenia is a CSTO member, at the same time,
it has practically a NATO base at its territory.
Do you mean the Armenian peace-making brigade under NATO?
Sure. The Russians are afraid not of what Armenia will start doing,
but of what they (NATO) will start doing with Armenia. So, to become
a partner, Armenia has to take part in different strategies. Armenia
still has two functions: to balance forces in the Caucasus, breaking
of which the Western community will not allow, and participation in
suppressing of Turkey. The second function is hard and dangerous,
but there is no other way out.
Several years ago I said about the beginning of the West's policy on
blockading and isolation of Turkey. Armenia is among the participants
in this blockade. By the way, Syria is also among them, and it has not
been ruined just for this reason. What will happen to Syria? It will
find itself under Saudi Arabia and Turkey, which is not beneficial to
the West, as after that Syria will blaze a trail for Turkey towards
the Middle East, which the Turks will never leave. At present, they
seem to understand that and are trying to correct the situation.
Let's talk about the balance of forces in the South Caucasus, which
the West so much cares for...
The balance of forces in the South Caucasus the way the Russians
see it is that Armenia has as much weaponry as Azerbaijan does, but
Armenia wants something more and is wondering where it can get that
something. The West will give us exactly as much as Russia will keep
from us. So, the balance will not change. But if we go deeper into
the West's strategies, we may get more, and the balance will turn to
our advantage. The Russians are afraid of any alternatives to them
in the Caucasus. They are well aware that they are no longer able
to guarantee the region's security alone. And as always they are
faced with the need to concede something to Turkey. And as always,
they will do it at Armenia's expense.
The Turks and the Russians had real talks on Nagorno-Karbakh, with the
former offering to stop the Baku-Akhalkalaki- Kars railway project if
the latter guaranteed the return of at least three districts around
Nagorno-Karabakh. "They also suggested that they might call back some
of their agents in the North Caucasus if the Armenian troops withdrew
from Nagorno-Karabakh.
Why did the talks fail?
The talks failed simply because the Russians were unable to do it.
That's exactly why in 2008, following the Moscow meeting of presidents
Medvedev, Aliyev and Sargsyan, the Armenian authorities intensified
their integration talks with NATO.
Could you bring at least one agreement between Ankara and Moscow in
prejudice of Armenia after 1991?
Russia and Turkey have an agreement to block Armenia's integration
into NATO. The Turks keep complaining to NATO that the Armenians have
occupied Azerbaijan's territories and each time NATO replies that
it is not a arena for such discussions. France and Greece stood up
for Armenia for several times. But it was the United States who set
Turkey down by asking it if it wanted to see Russia weak.
Will Armenia become EU's partner or will remain its raw material
appendage?
Even if we want, it will be very hard for Armenia to become a raw
material, It depends not so much on economy than on the fact if
Armenia is an educated and cultural state. Will the republic have
battle-worthy armed forces? The definition of the country between the
raw material and the partner is made just in this context. There is
no doubt that Armenia will join the EU as well as NATO. So, we have
to conduct our future policy just stemming from such a prospect.
Armenia seems not to be invited there so much...
Today Armenia seems not to be invited there so much. But tomorrow
they will invite Armenia and the latter will undoubtedly join these
organizations and at the same time will remain Russia's partner. NATO
and EU need partners. Today the alliance refuses to receive new
members, but it has been drawing out new formats of relations with new
partners. IPAP will soon become an instrument of the true cooperation.
Sweden is not NATO member either, but it takes part in NATO operations
more than Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and Slovakia
taken together. Practically, Sweden is an unofficial member of NATO.
And Armenia will take part in IPAP by all its forces, and when we
have shortage of forces, they will give them to us. This is the logic.
Unlike Armenia and Georgia, Azerbaijan will never join the EU and
NATO. It will exist the way it used to exist till today, until there
is oil and gas in its subsurface...
http://www.arminfo.am/index.cfm?objectid=5B4695D0-0A54-11E3-8AC50EB7C0D21663