Tweet
ARMENIA IMPORTANT FOR EURASIAN ECONOMIC UNION AND VICE VERSA - ARMEN ASHOTYAN
14:36 * 30.05.14
Vice-Chairman of the Republican Party of Armenia (RPA) Armen Ashotyan
rules out Armenia establishing a customs border with Nagorno-Karabakh
Republic (NKR) to join the Eurasian Economic Union.
He also said that Armenia's accession to the Eurasian Economic Union
does not at all depend on Azerbaijan.
Mr Ashotyan, do you consider the possibility of Armenia establishing
a customs border with Nagorno-Karabakh in order to join the Eurasian
Economic Union?
This option is not an option for any person residing and working in
Armenia, especially for ones engaged in politics. I cannot think of
a member of any political party that would discuss such an idea.
Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh are one territory. Yes, we have two
states, but they are one economic area, one cultural area and
defense area. Armenia has repeatedly stated it is the guarantor of
Nagorno-Karabakh's security.
What is the reason why the three presidents did not discuss Azerbaijani
President Ilham Aliyev's letter with Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan
in Astana, yesterday?
I do not think we have a right to such a statement of the question.
First, letters are private affairs. Secondly, I would not make such
a categorical statement. Thirdly, since I am for Armenia joining the
Eurasian Economic Union, I would like to withhold comments.
Azerbaijan's leadership is obviously envious of Armenia's accession
to the Eurasian Economic Union and is well aware of the consequences.
Moreover, the critics inside the country are well aware that,
if acceding to the Eurasian Economic Union were a bad choice,
Azerbaijan's leadership would be pleased to see how Armenia would
make the wrong geopolitical choice favored by the critics. The
Azerbaijani authorities' reaction is further evidence that they have
well calculated all the results - political, economic and military -
Armenia would get from acceding to the Eurasian Economic Union. And
they are doing their utmost to prevent it. They will fail, because
Armenia's accession does not depend on Azerbaijan. And I think
Armenia will join the Eurasian Economic Union within the deadline
fixed yesterday and become a full member from January 1, 2015.
Mr Ashotyan, would it be right if, for example, Georgia's president
addressed a letter to Serzh Sargsyan and ask him to perceive Russia
without Crimea?
I do not think it we need to comment on which presidents could address
letters to their counterparts in other states. I do not think that
yesterday's statements could prove impede the process of Armenia's
accession to the Eurasian Economic Union because Kazakhstan, Belarus
and Russia, have repeatedly emphasized their interest in Armenia. And
our constructive relations with different states are anchored in our
relations with Moscow. It is no secret that such unions normally have
the leading force. In the European Union, it is France and Germany. In
the case of the Eurasian Economic Union I like the fact of all the
partners being equal, without Russia's domination. Russia is ready
to discuss its partners' proposals.
Every state voiced its own interest, so why was no question raised
as to the interest of Armenia?
For me, it is absolutely natural to see the main countries speak of
de jure established trio. Once Armenia's membership process is over,
Armenia and other countries will natural talk of their interests.
Mr Ashotyan, what option will be the choice under the circumstances
to cover the interests of both Armenia and Azerbaijan? Perhaps, the
option that Russia relies on as a guideline in the weapons sale deal;
I mean supplying weapons to Armenia, its strategic ally, and selling
them to Azerbaijan, thus ensuring a guarantee of peace?
I will rephrase the question if you let me. For Armenia, the Eurasian
Union membership process is linked exclusively to Armenia's interests.
The Azerbaijani factor does naturally exist for the Eurasian Union
member states, so that factor is geopolitically wrong. So Armenia
obviously guides itself with its own approaches in the relationship
with the countries the Eurasian Union member states have problems with,
but it certainly respects the interests of its strategic ally.
Foreign policy is a very delicate category, so relying on extremes
or making implied assessments is wrong. As for Armenia's interests
in the weapons' sale, the arms race does really create concerns, in
addition to Azerbaijan's continuing purchase of a large quantity of
weapons from Russia. But it is obvious, at the same time, that Russia
is a political-military ally of Armenia, so if you let me make the
half-joking remark, this situation reminds me of the Brazilian national
[football] team whose slogan you know: "let them kick as many balls as
they can, and we will kick as many as we need". I think it is possible
to re-formulate theses approaches in the technical-military relations
with Russia to allow Azerbaijan to buy as many weapons as it can and
'help Armenia in the CSTO [Collective Security Treaty Organization]
frameworks as much as we need.'"
One finalizing question: you said the neighbor all the time makes
requests on most different occasions, so what am I supposed to do
with such a neighbor, after all?
I cannot give an answer instead of you, but of course, the moment
comes when you get tired of that neighbor and start avoiding it. But
there are neighbors who are important to you, because they have the
shield of light on their territory, for example, or the water line
passes through there.
I brought that example from the psychological point of view, and it
is clear to me how the president of Kazakhstan read out that part,
as though saying, 'I say, because I have been asked to'. It is obvious
that Kazakhstan has its own interests with Azerbaijan, and it is easily
understandable. Looking at the map, it clearly becomes obvious that
the same Kazakhstan could have a serious role in ensuring Europe's
energy independence provided it has common energy communications
with Azerbaijan. And we already have them. So it isn't possible to
ignore all this in politics. Hence, it is a factor on one scale of
the balance, with Armenia's importance for the Eurasian Union being on
the other scale, as a unique country. First, we are actually the only
South Caucasian country that has launched a process of Eurasian Union
membership. So if Armenia is not a member of the Eurasian Union, the
EU borders with the Eurasian Union will pass across North Caucasus
exclusively. Hence Armenia's membership opens for that union new
markets and new political military platforms, such as the Middle East,
Near Asia and the region which is adjacent to us.
The second unique feature is that Armenia is an exceptional country
which has an influential and organized diaspora whose influence
can also be of interest to the Eurasian Union member states. It is
obvious that Armenia, with its geopolitical embrace, is a bigger and
more serious country compared to the geographic area we occupy.
http://www.tert.am/en/news/2014/05/30/armen-ashotian/
14:36 * 30.05.14
Vice-Chairman of the Republican Party of Armenia (RPA) Armen Ashotyan
rules out Armenia establishing a customs border with Nagorno-Karabakh
Republic (NKR) to join the Eurasian Economic Union.
He also said that Armenia's accession to the Eurasian Economic Union
does not at all depend on Azerbaijan.
Mr Ashotyan, do you consider the possibility of Armenia establishing
a customs border with Nagorno-Karabakh in order to join the Eurasian
Economic Union?
This option is not an option for any person residing and working in
Armenia, especially for ones engaged in politics. I cannot think of
a member of any political party that would discuss such an idea.
Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh are one territory. Yes, we have two
states, but they are one economic area, one cultural area and
defense area. Armenia has repeatedly stated it is the guarantor of
Nagorno-Karabakh's security.
What is the reason why the three presidents did not discuss Azerbaijani
President Ilham Aliyev's letter with Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan
in Astana, yesterday?
I do not think we have a right to such a statement of the question.
First, letters are private affairs. Secondly, I would not make such
a categorical statement. Thirdly, since I am for Armenia joining the
Eurasian Economic Union, I would like to withhold comments.
Azerbaijan's leadership is obviously envious of Armenia's accession
to the Eurasian Economic Union and is well aware of the consequences.
Moreover, the critics inside the country are well aware that,
if acceding to the Eurasian Economic Union were a bad choice,
Azerbaijan's leadership would be pleased to see how Armenia would
make the wrong geopolitical choice favored by the critics. The
Azerbaijani authorities' reaction is further evidence that they have
well calculated all the results - political, economic and military -
Armenia would get from acceding to the Eurasian Economic Union. And
they are doing their utmost to prevent it. They will fail, because
Armenia's accession does not depend on Azerbaijan. And I think
Armenia will join the Eurasian Economic Union within the deadline
fixed yesterday and become a full member from January 1, 2015.
Mr Ashotyan, would it be right if, for example, Georgia's president
addressed a letter to Serzh Sargsyan and ask him to perceive Russia
without Crimea?
I do not think it we need to comment on which presidents could address
letters to their counterparts in other states. I do not think that
yesterday's statements could prove impede the process of Armenia's
accession to the Eurasian Economic Union because Kazakhstan, Belarus
and Russia, have repeatedly emphasized their interest in Armenia. And
our constructive relations with different states are anchored in our
relations with Moscow. It is no secret that such unions normally have
the leading force. In the European Union, it is France and Germany. In
the case of the Eurasian Economic Union I like the fact of all the
partners being equal, without Russia's domination. Russia is ready
to discuss its partners' proposals.
Every state voiced its own interest, so why was no question raised
as to the interest of Armenia?
For me, it is absolutely natural to see the main countries speak of
de jure established trio. Once Armenia's membership process is over,
Armenia and other countries will natural talk of their interests.
Mr Ashotyan, what option will be the choice under the circumstances
to cover the interests of both Armenia and Azerbaijan? Perhaps, the
option that Russia relies on as a guideline in the weapons sale deal;
I mean supplying weapons to Armenia, its strategic ally, and selling
them to Azerbaijan, thus ensuring a guarantee of peace?
I will rephrase the question if you let me. For Armenia, the Eurasian
Union membership process is linked exclusively to Armenia's interests.
The Azerbaijani factor does naturally exist for the Eurasian Union
member states, so that factor is geopolitically wrong. So Armenia
obviously guides itself with its own approaches in the relationship
with the countries the Eurasian Union member states have problems with,
but it certainly respects the interests of its strategic ally.
Foreign policy is a very delicate category, so relying on extremes
or making implied assessments is wrong. As for Armenia's interests
in the weapons' sale, the arms race does really create concerns, in
addition to Azerbaijan's continuing purchase of a large quantity of
weapons from Russia. But it is obvious, at the same time, that Russia
is a political-military ally of Armenia, so if you let me make the
half-joking remark, this situation reminds me of the Brazilian national
[football] team whose slogan you know: "let them kick as many balls as
they can, and we will kick as many as we need". I think it is possible
to re-formulate theses approaches in the technical-military relations
with Russia to allow Azerbaijan to buy as many weapons as it can and
'help Armenia in the CSTO [Collective Security Treaty Organization]
frameworks as much as we need.'"
One finalizing question: you said the neighbor all the time makes
requests on most different occasions, so what am I supposed to do
with such a neighbor, after all?
I cannot give an answer instead of you, but of course, the moment
comes when you get tired of that neighbor and start avoiding it. But
there are neighbors who are important to you, because they have the
shield of light on their territory, for example, or the water line
passes through there.
I brought that example from the psychological point of view, and it
is clear to me how the president of Kazakhstan read out that part,
as though saying, 'I say, because I have been asked to'. It is obvious
that Kazakhstan has its own interests with Azerbaijan, and it is easily
understandable. Looking at the map, it clearly becomes obvious that
the same Kazakhstan could have a serious role in ensuring Europe's
energy independence provided it has common energy communications
with Azerbaijan. And we already have them. So it isn't possible to
ignore all this in politics. Hence, it is a factor on one scale of
the balance, with Armenia's importance for the Eurasian Union being on
the other scale, as a unique country. First, we are actually the only
South Caucasian country that has launched a process of Eurasian Union
membership. So if Armenia is not a member of the Eurasian Union, the
EU borders with the Eurasian Union will pass across North Caucasus
exclusively. Hence Armenia's membership opens for that union new
markets and new political military platforms, such as the Middle East,
Near Asia and the region which is adjacent to us.
The second unique feature is that Armenia is an exceptional country
which has an influential and organized diaspora whose influence
can also be of interest to the Eurasian Union member states. It is
obvious that Armenia, with its geopolitical embrace, is a bigger and
more serious country compared to the geographic area we occupy.
http://www.tert.am/en/news/2014/05/30/armen-ashotian/