Tweet
WILL THE WEST GO FOR ADVENTURISM ON NK?
November 22 2013
Former Defense Minister, Lieutenant-General Vagharshak Harutyunyan
does not rule out this option - Two days ago, after two years break,
the next meeting of the Presidents Sargsyan and Aliyev was held.
During a two-year break, militaristic statements were sufficiently
articulated from the lips of the President of Azerbaijan, border
incidents happened, people died. The last meeting, which the
President of Armenia described as "normal", was again followed by an
incident around Tavush Province. On the one hand, it seems, to ensure
continuity of the negotiation process, on the other hand, Azerbaijan is
maintaining its military rhetoric. How to understand this? How topical
is the risk of resuming hostilities? - Assessing the current situation,
we should understand that these are two processes, which have their own
goals. In terms of negotiations, it is clear: presidential elections
are over, and the Minsk Group co-chair countries, naturally, are
trying to form new approaches. Negotiations are always better than
wars. As for the incidents, we also need to understand what objectives
the actions in Armenian-Azerbaijani border pursue. It is obvious that
Azerbaijan has adopted a strategy that is aimed at forming resumption
of military threat, at creating atmosphere of fear and instability
in Armenia and in Karabakh, thus promoting the migration. Azerbaijan
clearly realizes that today it does not have the military potential,
which will enable to resuming the war and ending it with victory,
or achieving the goals set forth. As for the armor that they acquire,
it's a small part of the military and political balance. Armenia and
Karabakh have stronger positions in the sense that resumption of the
war from military and political point of view does not generate from
the interests of Turkey, the West, and Russia.
In fact, Russia has unequivocally stated about it: Lavrov - from the
UN platform, Putin and Medvedev have told that they would not allow
the resumption of hostilities, and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
settlement by force. - In this new situation, when Armenia is prepared
for accession into the Customs Union, what are the potential threats to
our country in the Karabakh front? - There is no threat for resumption
of war militarily. More precisely, this probability is not growing,
on the contrary, it is decreasing. Because, if we pay attention to the
statements raised in Azerbaijan, Russia's position interferes them
to win the war. At this point, when Armenia becomes a CU member, it
further aggravates their fears. It is possible to use Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict settlement as a lever to influence Armenia not to join the
CU and not to be in deeper integration with Russia.
Such an option is possible, but it will not have any impact on the
policy chosen by Armenia. - You mean by the West? - Yes. - In the
process of joining the Customs Union, the authorities were constantly
pushing the issue of Armenia and Karabakh security forward. In
your opinion, by joining the CU, does Armenia solve the problem
of security of Armenian states? - In general, there is a wrong idea
about the Customs Union. The membership to the CU is a whole process,
the first phase of which is signing of a free trade are agreement, the
membership to Eurasian Union is the final point of the CU membership.
Tajikistan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan have submitted an application
to join the CU and have announced that they have a positive attitude
towards it. In other words, CU current and future members are the CSTO
member states. The economy should not be separated from the security.
It would be wrong to say that we only pursue an economic benefit. If
an economic area is formed, it must first ensure its security. If
security is not provided, then there could be no word about the
development. So, these are correlated, they are natural questions,
and Armenia entering into the CU, solves both economic and serious
security issues. - With respect to CU membership, there were a lot of
criticism on economic aspect, because the European market is freer,
rich and attractive in all ways. Weren't the prospects on Armenia's
development in Europe wider? - You know, if we consider the issue from
the perspective of which market is more developed, then, of course,
the European. This is an axiom, there is nothing to discuss here. But,
as to what this market gives Armenia, that's another matter, and here
is the confusion. When judgments are made about Europe, they talk
about how developed is the Europe, how rich, but they never ask what
Europe has given to us, what Russia has given, and what CU will give.
These are very different platforms, in the sense that when we
are talking about the CU, it's a specific organization with clear
agreements and economic output. Nothing prevents us to go to the EU
market as a member of the CU. Armenia is a member of the World Trade
Organization. Europe put the question, either EU or CU. Eventually,
today, Armenia also agreed to sign the Association Agreement, but
Europe says, no. This is in political aspect. Economically, what CU
and EU gives to Armenia are incomparable. I will answer the question
related to economic interests by estimates of the Polish ambassador.
He said that if Armenia had signed the Association Agreement and
the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area agreement, then in a few
years Armenia would have received an income of $ 150 million. Only
the price of gas, which is formed today, decreasing by 30 percent,
enables Armenia to save $ 150 million a year. Not to speak about that
Armenian products will have free access to the Customs Union market,
where our products are competitive. Today, Armenia can export very
few products to the European market, which will be competitive. For
example, Armenian grapes, apricots, and so on, if they are sold at
the CU market without the customs duties, then they will be more
competitive, as the Georgian and Azerbaijani ones are going to be
more expensive.
The same is true of other products. Armenia will definite receive
advantages, and it would be apparent. In the case of accession to CU,
Armenia must join 19 agreements and ratify 65 other acts, one of them
is related to gas and other energy carriers, which would be sold to CU
members without any taxes and customs duties. The status of Armenian
migrants in social and other issues are almost equal to the status of
Russian citizens: only the employment contract enable the person to
move freely, social assistances are given to families, children are
able to get education and so on. One of senior European officials,
answering the question of what Armenia will export to Europe, what
it will import and what it will gain, answered that Armenia will
export textile, import agricultural products. It's just ridiculous,
and after all that to talk about what Armenia gets in the EU or CU
is obvious and pointless. It is not always to go to the powerful and
rich side provides necessary effect. Let me bring an example, in 1992,
during the years of war in Karabakh, Azerbaijan and Georgia chose
the direction to the powerful and wealthy west, Armenia went towards
broken, weak Russia. As a result, Armenia won the war, rebuilt its
economy, reopened the nuclear plant with the help of Russia and was
able to overcome the consequences of war. Interviewed by
Nelly Grigoryan
Read more at: http://en.aravot.am/2013/11/22/162678/
November 22 2013
Former Defense Minister, Lieutenant-General Vagharshak Harutyunyan
does not rule out this option - Two days ago, after two years break,
the next meeting of the Presidents Sargsyan and Aliyev was held.
During a two-year break, militaristic statements were sufficiently
articulated from the lips of the President of Azerbaijan, border
incidents happened, people died. The last meeting, which the
President of Armenia described as "normal", was again followed by an
incident around Tavush Province. On the one hand, it seems, to ensure
continuity of the negotiation process, on the other hand, Azerbaijan is
maintaining its military rhetoric. How to understand this? How topical
is the risk of resuming hostilities? - Assessing the current situation,
we should understand that these are two processes, which have their own
goals. In terms of negotiations, it is clear: presidential elections
are over, and the Minsk Group co-chair countries, naturally, are
trying to form new approaches. Negotiations are always better than
wars. As for the incidents, we also need to understand what objectives
the actions in Armenian-Azerbaijani border pursue. It is obvious that
Azerbaijan has adopted a strategy that is aimed at forming resumption
of military threat, at creating atmosphere of fear and instability
in Armenia and in Karabakh, thus promoting the migration. Azerbaijan
clearly realizes that today it does not have the military potential,
which will enable to resuming the war and ending it with victory,
or achieving the goals set forth. As for the armor that they acquire,
it's a small part of the military and political balance. Armenia and
Karabakh have stronger positions in the sense that resumption of the
war from military and political point of view does not generate from
the interests of Turkey, the West, and Russia.
In fact, Russia has unequivocally stated about it: Lavrov - from the
UN platform, Putin and Medvedev have told that they would not allow
the resumption of hostilities, and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
settlement by force. - In this new situation, when Armenia is prepared
for accession into the Customs Union, what are the potential threats to
our country in the Karabakh front? - There is no threat for resumption
of war militarily. More precisely, this probability is not growing,
on the contrary, it is decreasing. Because, if we pay attention to the
statements raised in Azerbaijan, Russia's position interferes them
to win the war. At this point, when Armenia becomes a CU member, it
further aggravates their fears. It is possible to use Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict settlement as a lever to influence Armenia not to join the
CU and not to be in deeper integration with Russia.
Such an option is possible, but it will not have any impact on the
policy chosen by Armenia. - You mean by the West? - Yes. - In the
process of joining the Customs Union, the authorities were constantly
pushing the issue of Armenia and Karabakh security forward. In
your opinion, by joining the CU, does Armenia solve the problem
of security of Armenian states? - In general, there is a wrong idea
about the Customs Union. The membership to the CU is a whole process,
the first phase of which is signing of a free trade are agreement, the
membership to Eurasian Union is the final point of the CU membership.
Tajikistan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan have submitted an application
to join the CU and have announced that they have a positive attitude
towards it. In other words, CU current and future members are the CSTO
member states. The economy should not be separated from the security.
It would be wrong to say that we only pursue an economic benefit. If
an economic area is formed, it must first ensure its security. If
security is not provided, then there could be no word about the
development. So, these are correlated, they are natural questions,
and Armenia entering into the CU, solves both economic and serious
security issues. - With respect to CU membership, there were a lot of
criticism on economic aspect, because the European market is freer,
rich and attractive in all ways. Weren't the prospects on Armenia's
development in Europe wider? - You know, if we consider the issue from
the perspective of which market is more developed, then, of course,
the European. This is an axiom, there is nothing to discuss here. But,
as to what this market gives Armenia, that's another matter, and here
is the confusion. When judgments are made about Europe, they talk
about how developed is the Europe, how rich, but they never ask what
Europe has given to us, what Russia has given, and what CU will give.
These are very different platforms, in the sense that when we
are talking about the CU, it's a specific organization with clear
agreements and economic output. Nothing prevents us to go to the EU
market as a member of the CU. Armenia is a member of the World Trade
Organization. Europe put the question, either EU or CU. Eventually,
today, Armenia also agreed to sign the Association Agreement, but
Europe says, no. This is in political aspect. Economically, what CU
and EU gives to Armenia are incomparable. I will answer the question
related to economic interests by estimates of the Polish ambassador.
He said that if Armenia had signed the Association Agreement and
the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area agreement, then in a few
years Armenia would have received an income of $ 150 million. Only
the price of gas, which is formed today, decreasing by 30 percent,
enables Armenia to save $ 150 million a year. Not to speak about that
Armenian products will have free access to the Customs Union market,
where our products are competitive. Today, Armenia can export very
few products to the European market, which will be competitive. For
example, Armenian grapes, apricots, and so on, if they are sold at
the CU market without the customs duties, then they will be more
competitive, as the Georgian and Azerbaijani ones are going to be
more expensive.
The same is true of other products. Armenia will definite receive
advantages, and it would be apparent. In the case of accession to CU,
Armenia must join 19 agreements and ratify 65 other acts, one of them
is related to gas and other energy carriers, which would be sold to CU
members without any taxes and customs duties. The status of Armenian
migrants in social and other issues are almost equal to the status of
Russian citizens: only the employment contract enable the person to
move freely, social assistances are given to families, children are
able to get education and so on. One of senior European officials,
answering the question of what Armenia will export to Europe, what
it will import and what it will gain, answered that Armenia will
export textile, import agricultural products. It's just ridiculous,
and after all that to talk about what Armenia gets in the EU or CU
is obvious and pointless. It is not always to go to the powerful and
rich side provides necessary effect. Let me bring an example, in 1992,
during the years of war in Karabakh, Azerbaijan and Georgia chose
the direction to the powerful and wealthy west, Armenia went towards
broken, weak Russia. As a result, Armenia won the war, rebuilt its
economy, reopened the nuclear plant with the help of Russia and was
able to overcome the consequences of war. Interviewed by
Nelly Grigoryan
Read more at: http://en.aravot.am/2013/11/22/162678/