Tweet
YEREVAN ACCUSED EU OF TRADING KARABAKH
On September 12 the EU Commissioner Fule will visit Yerevan. During
his previous visit he advised the Armenian government to publish the
text of the Association Agreement.
The text was not published but yesterday the Armenian government
indirectly accused the EU of an anti-Armenian approach to Karabakh. In
an effort to justify the unexpected wish of Armenia to join the Customs
Union, the deputy minister of foreign affairs Shavarsh Kocharyan said
this union does not suppose a border between Armenia and Karabakh.
In fact, Kocharyan says the text of the Association Agreement
stipulates a border. Is it true? Stefan Fule may clarify on this
during his visit to Yerevan. Or the text may be pushed by the time
of his visit.
What does a border between Armenia and Karabakh imply? Did the EU
offer association of Armenia without Karabakh? Did the EU propose
opening regional communications and, in return for that, as Ahmed
Davutoglu said, "return at least one territory to Azerbaijan"? Or
did the EU propose freezing the Karabakh issue?
The European officials confess that the EU dealt little with the
Karabakh issue and therefore Armenia preferred the Customs Union. The
EU officials promise to enhance their participation in the Karabakh
talks. In fact, soon these talks may not be needed at all.
Yesterday the executive board of the Republican Party voted
unanimously for joining the Customs Union. The ARF announced that if
this membership is determined by the security of Armenia and NKR,
it is justified. For the time being, the EU has not explained its
approach to Karabakh but the decision will be justified.
However, the Armenian authorities should also give clear explanations
on what membership to the Customs Union will bring to the security
of Armenia and Karabakh. Does this mean that Russia and other members
of the CU will recognize Karabakh as part of Armenia? Does this mean
that Kazakhstan will trade with Karabakh as part of Armenia? Does
this mean that Russia will deploy its troops in Karabakh along its
current border?
Throughout history Armenians perceived Russia as a safeguard against
Turks. However, after every act of "salvation" the Russians fed
Armenians to Azerbaijanis and Turks. Evidence to this is West Armenia,
Nakhidjevan, Karabakh. This time Russia is again perceived as the
only salvation.
What will the destiny of Karabakh be which the Russians have once
"saved" and presented successfully to Azerbaijan and which Armenia
has been able to return without the Russians?
Or will the Russians pursue their imperial ambitions and the Treaty
of Gulistan and annex Karabakh altogether?
Naira Hayrumyan 12:13 07/09/2013 Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/30835
On September 12 the EU Commissioner Fule will visit Yerevan. During
his previous visit he advised the Armenian government to publish the
text of the Association Agreement.
The text was not published but yesterday the Armenian government
indirectly accused the EU of an anti-Armenian approach to Karabakh. In
an effort to justify the unexpected wish of Armenia to join the Customs
Union, the deputy minister of foreign affairs Shavarsh Kocharyan said
this union does not suppose a border between Armenia and Karabakh.
In fact, Kocharyan says the text of the Association Agreement
stipulates a border. Is it true? Stefan Fule may clarify on this
during his visit to Yerevan. Or the text may be pushed by the time
of his visit.
What does a border between Armenia and Karabakh imply? Did the EU
offer association of Armenia without Karabakh? Did the EU propose
opening regional communications and, in return for that, as Ahmed
Davutoglu said, "return at least one territory to Azerbaijan"? Or
did the EU propose freezing the Karabakh issue?
The European officials confess that the EU dealt little with the
Karabakh issue and therefore Armenia preferred the Customs Union. The
EU officials promise to enhance their participation in the Karabakh
talks. In fact, soon these talks may not be needed at all.
Yesterday the executive board of the Republican Party voted
unanimously for joining the Customs Union. The ARF announced that if
this membership is determined by the security of Armenia and NKR,
it is justified. For the time being, the EU has not explained its
approach to Karabakh but the decision will be justified.
However, the Armenian authorities should also give clear explanations
on what membership to the Customs Union will bring to the security
of Armenia and Karabakh. Does this mean that Russia and other members
of the CU will recognize Karabakh as part of Armenia? Does this mean
that Kazakhstan will trade with Karabakh as part of Armenia? Does
this mean that Russia will deploy its troops in Karabakh along its
current border?
Throughout history Armenians perceived Russia as a safeguard against
Turks. However, after every act of "salvation" the Russians fed
Armenians to Azerbaijanis and Turks. Evidence to this is West Armenia,
Nakhidjevan, Karabakh. This time Russia is again perceived as the
only salvation.
What will the destiny of Karabakh be which the Russians have once
"saved" and presented successfully to Azerbaijan and which Armenia
has been able to return without the Russians?
Or will the Russians pursue their imperial ambitions and the Treaty
of Gulistan and annex Karabakh altogether?
Naira Hayrumyan 12:13 07/09/2013 Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/30835