Tweet
ALEXANDER KRYLOV: SUCCESSFULLY COMBINED CUSTOMS UNION MEMBERSHIP AND CERTAIN FORM OF COOPERATION WITH THE EU WOULD BE A GOOD EXAMPLE FOR EUROPE
ArmInfo's Interview with Alexander Krylov, Doctor of Historical
Sciences, President of the Scholarly Society of Caucasus Studies,
leading research associate of the Center for Problems of Development
and Modernization at the Institute of World Economy and International
Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
by David Stepanyan
ARMINFO Tuesday, October 1, 23:12
Despite its desire to access the Customs Union that contradicts the
DCFTA - a component of the Association Agreement with the EU - Yerevan
will try to sign a document on a special, lower status of Armenia in
the relations with the EU at the upcoming Eastern Partnership Summit
in Vilnius. How much possible is it?
I haven't got the impression that Armenia was offered an 'upgraded
status' in the relations with the EU before 3 September. Now, it is
offered a 'lower' one. The agreement on Armenia's Association with
the EU seems to be symbolic and shows its aspiration for civilized
and democratic Europe. Nothing practical has been observed so far. It
would be good if the citizens of Armenia received an opportunity of
visa free traveling to the EU and then a similar regime were introduced
also for Russia and other post-Soviet countries.
Establishment of a single European space would give new opportunities
for settling the problems on the continent. Unfortunately, new and new
borders are emerging in Europe and there is no progress in continental
integration. Such trends on the continent do not allow Armenia to
combine cooperation with Europe and the Customs Union membership.
After the Armenian President had taken the decision on Armenia's
accession to the Customs Union, a number of Russian analysts and
experts started to say that Armenia's membership of the Customs Union
will be followed by recognition of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic at
least by the member states of the Customs Union - Russia, Belarus and
Kazakhstan. In the meantime, they state that Azerbaijan can avoid such
a scenario only if it joins the Eurasian integration process. Would
you explain the prospects of such pressure on Baku?
Mass media comment on the last integration events as a result of
pressure by the EU and Russia upon these or those countries, for
instance, Armenia and Ukraine. Basically, everything is not so simple.
Actually, two integration unions are being formed which have their own
game rules within the unions as well as regarding the external world.
Nobody can make Armenia or Ukraine join the Customs Union or EU, as
they are independent states, and they themselves choose what to join.
When politicians or experts say that joining any project will have
certain consequences and even losses, it is watched like a pressure,
threats and even "arm-twisting". Actually, these are just predictions
called to show consequences of these or those steps. It is clear that
Ukraine's integration in the EU will change the nature of its relations
with the Customs Union member-states much, first of all in the economic
sense. However, it is not clear yet what Europe offers the countries
which have been invited to join the Association Agreement. The same may
be said about Russia and its Eurasian Union and Customs Union projects
too. But here potential members of these unions have an opportunity
of becoming fully-fledged members and developing almost all the game
rules themselves. As for the EU, the situation is different here,
there is still no word about the fully-fledged membership and equal
partnership. We may ride the long European pine together with the
countries of North Africa, Turkey and small Balkan counties. It is
clear that both roads will not be embraved with roses and potential
members of any integration projects will be forced to always prove
their substantiality.
Azerbaijan does its best to evade integration into any military and
political unions. CanTurkey alone ensure Azerbaijan's security?
The vulnerability of Azerbaijan's position is conditioned by the fact
that this country is not a member of any collective security structure,
such as NATO, SCO, CSTO. Even the contracts with a NATO member-state
Turkey do not guarantee Azerbaijan support in case of potential
conflicts. For instance, after the bellicose statements from Baku,
representatives of Ankara have repeatedly made it clear that they
are against resumption of the war in Nagorno-Karabakh and that in
case of the war resumption, Baku cannot hang hat on Turkey's support.
At the same time, it is necessary to take into consideration the factor
that such statements were made in the conditions of the military
parity of the confronting parties, and a problem, what Turkey will
do in case of changing of the geo-political situation still remains
unsettled. Even against the background of permanent growth of the
army by Azerbaijan, it is obvious that only by its own means and
even with a help of Turkey Baku will hardly be able to neutralize
all potential threats from the south. Meanwhile, threats may appear
in the near future in the context of development of the Big Middle
East located to the south of Azerbaijan.
What are the prospects of Russia's policy for establishing the Eurasian
Union in the post-Soviet territory by means of economic and political
pressure on the post-Soviet countries given that no other methods
are observed?
I cannot agree with the question formulation. The West asks for a
certain response from the post-Soviet states about the future direction
of their development and the nature of their future relations with
Russia. Various options are watched and their possible consequences
are discussed. They openly say that the game rules at the post-soviet
territory will change soon depending on the choice made by the former
Soviet republics. If to speak about pressure, it is the pressure
of their own responsibility for their own choice. I cannot say that
the prospects of setting up of the Eurasian Union or Customs Union
are clear and cloudless, and all their members will be happy and
rich. The same may be said about the European Union as well with
all its problems and local disagreements. Any choice has positive
and negative sides and one should take them into account when making
a choice in favor of the European or Eurasian Union. However, it is
necessary to emphasize that the situation of such a choice cannot be
normal. Moreover, that was not Moscow that initiated in Europe the
"either - or" policy.
The frozen Armenian-Turkish protocols still remain on the agenda of
the two countries' parliaments. What geopolitical realities might
necessitate the restart of the Armenian-Turkish dialogue?
Azerbaijan's position was just an excuse for the failure of Armenia's
football diplomacy. Besides the Nagorno-Karabakh problem, Armenia and
Turkey have a complex of problems related to the genocide of 1915. All
this was left beyond the football diplomacy, so, no surprise it ended
in such a way. The Armenian-Turkish dialogue will be restarted only
given the wish of both sides and their mutual commitment to show a
complex approach to bilateral problems.
From: Baghdasarian
ArmInfo's Interview with Alexander Krylov, Doctor of Historical
Sciences, President of the Scholarly Society of Caucasus Studies,
leading research associate of the Center for Problems of Development
and Modernization at the Institute of World Economy and International
Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
by David Stepanyan
ARMINFO Tuesday, October 1, 23:12
Despite its desire to access the Customs Union that contradicts the
DCFTA - a component of the Association Agreement with the EU - Yerevan
will try to sign a document on a special, lower status of Armenia in
the relations with the EU at the upcoming Eastern Partnership Summit
in Vilnius. How much possible is it?
I haven't got the impression that Armenia was offered an 'upgraded
status' in the relations with the EU before 3 September. Now, it is
offered a 'lower' one. The agreement on Armenia's Association with
the EU seems to be symbolic and shows its aspiration for civilized
and democratic Europe. Nothing practical has been observed so far. It
would be good if the citizens of Armenia received an opportunity of
visa free traveling to the EU and then a similar regime were introduced
also for Russia and other post-Soviet countries.
Establishment of a single European space would give new opportunities
for settling the problems on the continent. Unfortunately, new and new
borders are emerging in Europe and there is no progress in continental
integration. Such trends on the continent do not allow Armenia to
combine cooperation with Europe and the Customs Union membership.
After the Armenian President had taken the decision on Armenia's
accession to the Customs Union, a number of Russian analysts and
experts started to say that Armenia's membership of the Customs Union
will be followed by recognition of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic at
least by the member states of the Customs Union - Russia, Belarus and
Kazakhstan. In the meantime, they state that Azerbaijan can avoid such
a scenario only if it joins the Eurasian integration process. Would
you explain the prospects of such pressure on Baku?
Mass media comment on the last integration events as a result of
pressure by the EU and Russia upon these or those countries, for
instance, Armenia and Ukraine. Basically, everything is not so simple.
Actually, two integration unions are being formed which have their own
game rules within the unions as well as regarding the external world.
Nobody can make Armenia or Ukraine join the Customs Union or EU, as
they are independent states, and they themselves choose what to join.
When politicians or experts say that joining any project will have
certain consequences and even losses, it is watched like a pressure,
threats and even "arm-twisting". Actually, these are just predictions
called to show consequences of these or those steps. It is clear that
Ukraine's integration in the EU will change the nature of its relations
with the Customs Union member-states much, first of all in the economic
sense. However, it is not clear yet what Europe offers the countries
which have been invited to join the Association Agreement. The same may
be said about Russia and its Eurasian Union and Customs Union projects
too. But here potential members of these unions have an opportunity
of becoming fully-fledged members and developing almost all the game
rules themselves. As for the EU, the situation is different here,
there is still no word about the fully-fledged membership and equal
partnership. We may ride the long European pine together with the
countries of North Africa, Turkey and small Balkan counties. It is
clear that both roads will not be embraved with roses and potential
members of any integration projects will be forced to always prove
their substantiality.
Azerbaijan does its best to evade integration into any military and
political unions. CanTurkey alone ensure Azerbaijan's security?
The vulnerability of Azerbaijan's position is conditioned by the fact
that this country is not a member of any collective security structure,
such as NATO, SCO, CSTO. Even the contracts with a NATO member-state
Turkey do not guarantee Azerbaijan support in case of potential
conflicts. For instance, after the bellicose statements from Baku,
representatives of Ankara have repeatedly made it clear that they
are against resumption of the war in Nagorno-Karabakh and that in
case of the war resumption, Baku cannot hang hat on Turkey's support.
At the same time, it is necessary to take into consideration the factor
that such statements were made in the conditions of the military
parity of the confronting parties, and a problem, what Turkey will
do in case of changing of the geo-political situation still remains
unsettled. Even against the background of permanent growth of the
army by Azerbaijan, it is obvious that only by its own means and
even with a help of Turkey Baku will hardly be able to neutralize
all potential threats from the south. Meanwhile, threats may appear
in the near future in the context of development of the Big Middle
East located to the south of Azerbaijan.
What are the prospects of Russia's policy for establishing the Eurasian
Union in the post-Soviet territory by means of economic and political
pressure on the post-Soviet countries given that no other methods
are observed?
I cannot agree with the question formulation. The West asks for a
certain response from the post-Soviet states about the future direction
of their development and the nature of their future relations with
Russia. Various options are watched and their possible consequences
are discussed. They openly say that the game rules at the post-soviet
territory will change soon depending on the choice made by the former
Soviet republics. If to speak about pressure, it is the pressure
of their own responsibility for their own choice. I cannot say that
the prospects of setting up of the Eurasian Union or Customs Union
are clear and cloudless, and all their members will be happy and
rich. The same may be said about the European Union as well with
all its problems and local disagreements. Any choice has positive
and negative sides and one should take them into account when making
a choice in favor of the European or Eurasian Union. However, it is
necessary to emphasize that the situation of such a choice cannot be
normal. Moreover, that was not Moscow that initiated in Europe the
"either - or" policy.
The frozen Armenian-Turkish protocols still remain on the agenda of
the two countries' parliaments. What geopolitical realities might
necessitate the restart of the Armenian-Turkish dialogue?
Azerbaijan's position was just an excuse for the failure of Armenia's
football diplomacy. Besides the Nagorno-Karabakh problem, Armenia and
Turkey have a complex of problems related to the genocide of 1915. All
this was left beyond the football diplomacy, so, no surprise it ended
in such a way. The Armenian-Turkish dialogue will be restarted only
given the wish of both sides and their mutual commitment to show a
complex approach to bilateral problems.
From: Baghdasarian