Tweet
When It's Too Late Or Who Betrays
Member of Parliament Vahan Hovhannisyan states regarding our relations
with the EU and Russia on Yerkir Media TV `we did everything we could'
to replace the `both' approach with the dangerous `either ... or'.
In Armenia they continue intentionally or unintentionally to distort
the issues relating to the Association Agreement with the EU. It is
not clear who needs this in domestic affairs because the segment
called political forces meets with Stefan Fule behind closed doors and
speaks to the society only when it is too late.
There is more clarity on who needs the `either...or' approach outside
the borders of Armenia: they are Russia, Turkey, Azerbaijan, generally
everyone who is worried about the sovereignty of Armenia and close
relations with the Euro-Atlantic community thanks to which Armenia can
enhance its security potential even under the present illegitimate and
incompetent government.
A lot of people would say that Europe was the first to speak about the
`either...or' approach. Recently, the president of Poland put forth the
issue before Serzh Sargsyan.
Distortion starts here because nobody states, for example, that Stefan
Fule states that the EU is not likely to block the Armenian-Russian
relations. On the contrary, the EU is willing to help Armenia make
these relations more effective. Nobody states that the U.K. Ambassador
says the deep relations between Russia and Armenia are a great
opportunity for Europe which can use Armenia as a bridge for different
relations with Russia.
Distortion is that the `either ... or' approach is shifted from a
specific issue, the Association Agreement and DCFTA, to a more general
issue of Armenia-West and Armenia-Russia relations. Europe states it
has no claims to Armenia's relations with Russia, but as to legal
status, Armenia cannot play in two teams at the same time, and join
the Customs Union and associate with Europe. So, there is a matter of
distinct choice for Armenia, there is a matter of decision.
When it is projected on the Armenia-West and Armenia-Russia relations
and is presented as a choice between Russia and the West, the
situation gets complicated and dangerous. Is there anyone in Armenia
who needs such complications? If not, why is nobody in Armenia trying
to explain the situation and block political manipulations by foreign
stakeholders.
Armenia has not violated any agreement with Russia and the so-called
members of CSTO bloc when they violate ethics of partnership and
military and political interests.
Certainly, in this case they need to generalize the very specific
`either ... or' to indicate that their violations are the answer to the
`betrayal' of Armenia. Modest Kolerov says, for example, that Russian
supply of arms to Azerbaijan is its answer to the relations between
Armenia and the EU. Could it be that the relations between Armenia and
the EU are the answer to strategic relations built between Azerbaijan
and Russia for over a decade? First Russia signed a strategic
agreement with Azerbaijan, then went on to sell arms to Azerbaijan.
Then it saw that its advocates based in Armenia are more orthodox than
Patriarch Cyril and launched their supply. First they sold C300, then
offensive weapons.
Given the evolution of the Russian-Azerbaijani strategic partnership,
isn't the process of association of Armenia with the EU just a
moderate reaction to it?
Armenia did not charge a fee for the Russian military bases, Armenia
did not demand to withdraw them from its territory, Armenia even
ratified the CSTO agreement on refraining from infrastructure projects
with third countries without the consent of the CSTO members when the
CSTO member states Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan are in strategic
relations with Azerbaijan which threatens Armenia with war and
destruction. Armenia signed a Memorandum of Cooperation with the
Eurasian Economic College, is ready to do the same with the Customs
Union, Armenia signed the CIS Free Trade Agreement.
Now can anyone accuse Armenia of betraying Russia? Now can anyone say
that Armenia has no right to join the EU system of common economic
rules proceeding from its interests and pursuing additional guarantees
of economic and political security?
So, whose approach is `either...or', the EU's or Moscow's?
James Hakobyan
16:01 13/07/2013
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/30455
Member of Parliament Vahan Hovhannisyan states regarding our relations
with the EU and Russia on Yerkir Media TV `we did everything we could'
to replace the `both' approach with the dangerous `either ... or'.
In Armenia they continue intentionally or unintentionally to distort
the issues relating to the Association Agreement with the EU. It is
not clear who needs this in domestic affairs because the segment
called political forces meets with Stefan Fule behind closed doors and
speaks to the society only when it is too late.
There is more clarity on who needs the `either...or' approach outside
the borders of Armenia: they are Russia, Turkey, Azerbaijan, generally
everyone who is worried about the sovereignty of Armenia and close
relations with the Euro-Atlantic community thanks to which Armenia can
enhance its security potential even under the present illegitimate and
incompetent government.
A lot of people would say that Europe was the first to speak about the
`either...or' approach. Recently, the president of Poland put forth the
issue before Serzh Sargsyan.
Distortion starts here because nobody states, for example, that Stefan
Fule states that the EU is not likely to block the Armenian-Russian
relations. On the contrary, the EU is willing to help Armenia make
these relations more effective. Nobody states that the U.K. Ambassador
says the deep relations between Russia and Armenia are a great
opportunity for Europe which can use Armenia as a bridge for different
relations with Russia.
Distortion is that the `either ... or' approach is shifted from a
specific issue, the Association Agreement and DCFTA, to a more general
issue of Armenia-West and Armenia-Russia relations. Europe states it
has no claims to Armenia's relations with Russia, but as to legal
status, Armenia cannot play in two teams at the same time, and join
the Customs Union and associate with Europe. So, there is a matter of
distinct choice for Armenia, there is a matter of decision.
When it is projected on the Armenia-West and Armenia-Russia relations
and is presented as a choice between Russia and the West, the
situation gets complicated and dangerous. Is there anyone in Armenia
who needs such complications? If not, why is nobody in Armenia trying
to explain the situation and block political manipulations by foreign
stakeholders.
Armenia has not violated any agreement with Russia and the so-called
members of CSTO bloc when they violate ethics of partnership and
military and political interests.
Certainly, in this case they need to generalize the very specific
`either ... or' to indicate that their violations are the answer to the
`betrayal' of Armenia. Modest Kolerov says, for example, that Russian
supply of arms to Azerbaijan is its answer to the relations between
Armenia and the EU. Could it be that the relations between Armenia and
the EU are the answer to strategic relations built between Azerbaijan
and Russia for over a decade? First Russia signed a strategic
agreement with Azerbaijan, then went on to sell arms to Azerbaijan.
Then it saw that its advocates based in Armenia are more orthodox than
Patriarch Cyril and launched their supply. First they sold C300, then
offensive weapons.
Given the evolution of the Russian-Azerbaijani strategic partnership,
isn't the process of association of Armenia with the EU just a
moderate reaction to it?
Armenia did not charge a fee for the Russian military bases, Armenia
did not demand to withdraw them from its territory, Armenia even
ratified the CSTO agreement on refraining from infrastructure projects
with third countries without the consent of the CSTO members when the
CSTO member states Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan are in strategic
relations with Azerbaijan which threatens Armenia with war and
destruction. Armenia signed a Memorandum of Cooperation with the
Eurasian Economic College, is ready to do the same with the Customs
Union, Armenia signed the CIS Free Trade Agreement.
Now can anyone accuse Armenia of betraying Russia? Now can anyone say
that Armenia has no right to join the EU system of common economic
rules proceeding from its interests and pursuing additional guarantees
of economic and political security?
So, whose approach is `either...or', the EU's or Moscow's?
James Hakobyan
16:01 13/07/2013
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/30455