Tweet
László Kemény: Hungarian professor: Armenia will manage `to keep a
foot in both worlds'
ArmInfo's interview with László Kemény, Professor of Political Science (Hungary)
by Marianna Lazarian
Saturday, October 19, 12:37
The ruling party of Armenia claims that the decision to access the
Customs Union stems from national security of Armenia. How much
grounded is that statement, given that Russia sells weapons to
Azerbaijan amid Kazakhstan's demands to immediately close the borders
with Nagorno Karabakh? What did really motivate Armenia to access the
CU?
The national security of all countries, including Armenia, is a
complicate system having its secrets and nuances that are not subject
to disclosure. I suppose that Armenia's decision was based on
long-term interests of your people. The geopolitical location of your
country, as well as the political, economic, military and other
developments around it should also be taken into account. It is
necessary to take into account also the social and economic situation
in the country, external factors, the attitude of external forces
towards Armenia, their possible pressure and the country's ability to
resist that pressure or use it in its favor. I could bring further
arguments to show how complicate was that decision, but the
responsibility for that decision is laid upon the leadership of
Armenia and the people will assess whether it was a right decision at
the next democratic elections.
As regards the sale of arms of Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan's pressure on
Nagorno Karabakh's `hot-button subject,' one can assess those actions
only taking into consideration all the aforementioned.
In Armenia's decision to access the Customs Union besides strategic
factors, there were also specific calculations and historical
experience of partnership with super powers. Now we observe a new
world order where every country is free to decide what integration
process is more beneficial for it, though some political forces still
force their vision of `cold war.' Armenia has decided that it is more
favorable for it to access Russia's Customs Union to establish ties
with the countries of that integration bloc.
What prospects will Armenia have in the Customs Union and will there
be any prospects at all? What impact will this decision have on the
republic? Experts say that by making this decision the republic has
once for all refused European integration. How much grounded is this
opinion? What has Armenia lost by refusing the Association Agreement?
When speaking of `Armenia's intention to join the Customs Union', one
should remember that Armenia has been negotiating with the
representatives of the Customs Union and the European Union for a long
time. In the meantime, Armenia also announced its intention to get
integrated into the Eurasian Union. The country has been participating
in the European Neighborhood Policy since 2004 and in the Eastern
Partnership program since 2009. Moreover, a public opinion poll
conducted in 2005 demonstrated that almost two-thirds of the country's
population would like to see Armenia in the European Union. In the
meantime, Armenia has close ties with Russia and it stated in both
2006 and 2010 that there was no alternative to those relations.
The process is rather complicated. In the course of time the
participants' approaches towards the two major integration projects
have changed. For instance, on 10 July 2013, Stefan Fule, European
Commissioner for Enlargement and European Neighbourhood Policy, said
in Yerevan that the European Union did not make Armenia choose between
the integration projects. Your issue
(http://www.arminfo.info/index.cfm?objectidš6E67A0-EA06-11E2-A9410EB7C0D21663)
said that Fule did not know whether Russia exerted pressure on Armenia
though he followed the news and was aware of a number of problems.
Fule thought that the signing of the Association Agreement would not
restrict Armenia's interaction with other countries. It would help
Armenia to strengthen its positions even more, he said. In the
meantime, the European Commissioner stressed that there should be
elementary compatibility between the two integration projects. He said
that the EU did not force its partners to restrict their relations
with Russia. He added that the EU would encourage the cooperation with
Russia in the fields that met Armenia's interests.
On 11 September, 2013, Fule pointed out that the member states of
Eastern Partnership could expand their cooperation with the Customs
Union, however, as observers only, since the Customs Union membership
was incompatible with Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area. A day
later he met with Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian and
stressed that the issue of initialing the Association Agreement was no
longer on the agenda given that on Sept 3 Armenian President Serzh
Sargsyan announced Armenia's decision to join the Customs Union and to
contribute to the formation of the Eurasian economic union.
On October 8, Edward Nalbandian, Foreign Minister of Armenia, had a
meeting in Brussels with Catherine Ashton, the EU High Representative
for Foreign Affairs. Minister Nalbandian underlined that Armenia
wished to move forward the partnership with the EU in all possible
directions relying on those achievements and progress which were
jointly made in recent years in Armenia-EU relationships. High
Representative Catherine Ashton noted that the EU wished to continue
the development of comprehensive cooperation with Armenia in all
areas, which could be compatible with the decision of Armenia to join
the Customs Union
(http://www.mfa.am/en/press-releases/item/2013/10/08/eu_hight/).
The impression is that Armenia will be able `to keep a foot in both
worlds' and create a similar development prospect for other countries
as well.
What should Armenia expect from the Eastern Partnership Summit in
Vilnius? Will EU offer Armenia a new format of cooperation?
The Eastern Partnership has undergone various changes since its
establishment. Its initial goal announced in 2008 was to develop
integration processes of the EU and the partner countries: Ukraine,
Moldova, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia and Belarus. The situation has
changed after the Constituent Meeting in Prague on 7 May 2009 when a
new joint declaration was adopted to boost the political and economic
integration between the EU and the EaP countries. However, the
political and economic impact on these countries has not been fully
justified.
The prior component of EU's new initiative is the energy component,
particularly, energy supply to Europe alternative to Russia's
deliveries. Another evident goal is to break Russia's geopolitical
influence in Eastern Europe and strengthen the EU's positions there.
Some Russian experts still think that the EU intends to finally
disintegrate the post-Soviet area via the Eastern Partnership project
and bring the CIS countries out of Russia's influence.
Actually, none of the six countries is able to fulfill the EU's
requirements. Ukraine is closer to the EU partnership more than
others, but it has faced an impassable barrier - "Timoshenko case."
Ukraine will be able to overcome these obstacles only if it fulfills
the EU's requirements, which have not been coordinated with the
Ukrainian public yet. As for Armenia, it is out of the question.
Thank you, Mr. Kemény.
http://www.arminfo.am/index.cfm?objectid§CDC900-3899-11E3-A45A0EB7C0D21663
foot in both worlds'
ArmInfo's interview with László Kemény, Professor of Political Science (Hungary)
by Marianna Lazarian
Saturday, October 19, 12:37
The ruling party of Armenia claims that the decision to access the
Customs Union stems from national security of Armenia. How much
grounded is that statement, given that Russia sells weapons to
Azerbaijan amid Kazakhstan's demands to immediately close the borders
with Nagorno Karabakh? What did really motivate Armenia to access the
CU?
The national security of all countries, including Armenia, is a
complicate system having its secrets and nuances that are not subject
to disclosure. I suppose that Armenia's decision was based on
long-term interests of your people. The geopolitical location of your
country, as well as the political, economic, military and other
developments around it should also be taken into account. It is
necessary to take into account also the social and economic situation
in the country, external factors, the attitude of external forces
towards Armenia, their possible pressure and the country's ability to
resist that pressure or use it in its favor. I could bring further
arguments to show how complicate was that decision, but the
responsibility for that decision is laid upon the leadership of
Armenia and the people will assess whether it was a right decision at
the next democratic elections.
As regards the sale of arms of Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan's pressure on
Nagorno Karabakh's `hot-button subject,' one can assess those actions
only taking into consideration all the aforementioned.
In Armenia's decision to access the Customs Union besides strategic
factors, there were also specific calculations and historical
experience of partnership with super powers. Now we observe a new
world order where every country is free to decide what integration
process is more beneficial for it, though some political forces still
force their vision of `cold war.' Armenia has decided that it is more
favorable for it to access Russia's Customs Union to establish ties
with the countries of that integration bloc.
What prospects will Armenia have in the Customs Union and will there
be any prospects at all? What impact will this decision have on the
republic? Experts say that by making this decision the republic has
once for all refused European integration. How much grounded is this
opinion? What has Armenia lost by refusing the Association Agreement?
When speaking of `Armenia's intention to join the Customs Union', one
should remember that Armenia has been negotiating with the
representatives of the Customs Union and the European Union for a long
time. In the meantime, Armenia also announced its intention to get
integrated into the Eurasian Union. The country has been participating
in the European Neighborhood Policy since 2004 and in the Eastern
Partnership program since 2009. Moreover, a public opinion poll
conducted in 2005 demonstrated that almost two-thirds of the country's
population would like to see Armenia in the European Union. In the
meantime, Armenia has close ties with Russia and it stated in both
2006 and 2010 that there was no alternative to those relations.
The process is rather complicated. In the course of time the
participants' approaches towards the two major integration projects
have changed. For instance, on 10 July 2013, Stefan Fule, European
Commissioner for Enlargement and European Neighbourhood Policy, said
in Yerevan that the European Union did not make Armenia choose between
the integration projects. Your issue
(http://www.arminfo.info/index.cfm?objectidš6E67A0-EA06-11E2-A9410EB7C0D21663)
said that Fule did not know whether Russia exerted pressure on Armenia
though he followed the news and was aware of a number of problems.
Fule thought that the signing of the Association Agreement would not
restrict Armenia's interaction with other countries. It would help
Armenia to strengthen its positions even more, he said. In the
meantime, the European Commissioner stressed that there should be
elementary compatibility between the two integration projects. He said
that the EU did not force its partners to restrict their relations
with Russia. He added that the EU would encourage the cooperation with
Russia in the fields that met Armenia's interests.
On 11 September, 2013, Fule pointed out that the member states of
Eastern Partnership could expand their cooperation with the Customs
Union, however, as observers only, since the Customs Union membership
was incompatible with Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area. A day
later he met with Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian and
stressed that the issue of initialing the Association Agreement was no
longer on the agenda given that on Sept 3 Armenian President Serzh
Sargsyan announced Armenia's decision to join the Customs Union and to
contribute to the formation of the Eurasian economic union.
On October 8, Edward Nalbandian, Foreign Minister of Armenia, had a
meeting in Brussels with Catherine Ashton, the EU High Representative
for Foreign Affairs. Minister Nalbandian underlined that Armenia
wished to move forward the partnership with the EU in all possible
directions relying on those achievements and progress which were
jointly made in recent years in Armenia-EU relationships. High
Representative Catherine Ashton noted that the EU wished to continue
the development of comprehensive cooperation with Armenia in all
areas, which could be compatible with the decision of Armenia to join
the Customs Union
(http://www.mfa.am/en/press-releases/item/2013/10/08/eu_hight/).
The impression is that Armenia will be able `to keep a foot in both
worlds' and create a similar development prospect for other countries
as well.
What should Armenia expect from the Eastern Partnership Summit in
Vilnius? Will EU offer Armenia a new format of cooperation?
The Eastern Partnership has undergone various changes since its
establishment. Its initial goal announced in 2008 was to develop
integration processes of the EU and the partner countries: Ukraine,
Moldova, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia and Belarus. The situation has
changed after the Constituent Meeting in Prague on 7 May 2009 when a
new joint declaration was adopted to boost the political and economic
integration between the EU and the EaP countries. However, the
political and economic impact on these countries has not been fully
justified.
The prior component of EU's new initiative is the energy component,
particularly, energy supply to Europe alternative to Russia's
deliveries. Another evident goal is to break Russia's geopolitical
influence in Eastern Europe and strengthen the EU's positions there.
Some Russian experts still think that the EU intends to finally
disintegrate the post-Soviet area via the Eastern Partnership project
and bring the CIS countries out of Russia's influence.
Actually, none of the six countries is able to fulfill the EU's
requirements. Ukraine is closer to the EU partnership more than
others, but it has faced an impassable barrier - "Timoshenko case."
Ukraine will be able to overcome these obstacles only if it fulfills
the EU's requirements, which have not been coordinated with the
Ukrainian public yet. As for Armenia, it is out of the question.
Thank you, Mr. Kemény.
http://www.arminfo.am/index.cfm?objectid§CDC900-3899-11E3-A45A0EB7C0D21663