Tweet
ARMENIA: EXTERNAL CHALLENGES AS A RESULT OF INTERNAL PROBLEMS
Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
Sept 22 2014
22 September 2014 - 9:03am
Susanna Petrosyan, Yerevan. Exclusively for Vestnik Kavkaza
The starting point for many of Armenia's problems today were the
events of March 1, 2008, which became a continuation of presidential
elections. It is interesting that some Russian media resources
attempted to present it as if some Western countries were plotting
the next "orange revolution" to take place in Armenia and bring the
opposition to power. These misconceptions were proven wrong when
memos of the United States Embassy in Yerevan were published by
the Wikileaks website and it turned out that the Americans in fact
supported the government, not the opposition.
Clashes between police and peaceful protesters on Liberty Square,
and later clashes between police and opposition protesters around
the monument to Alexander Myasnikian, in which 10 people were killed
and more than 200 injured, marked a distinctive dividing line between
the public and the opposition.
Six and a half years ago, representatives of the government hastened
to assure Armenian society that the page of March 1 had been turned.
However, their statement was premature, since the people guilty of
the events which took place on March 1 have not been found yet. All
attempts by the opposition to prompt a fair investigation into the
events by Western institutions and especially by the Council of
Europe were unsuccessful. Meanwhile, according to the logic of what
is happening in the world, a "March 1" might happen any time now.
The March events had a significant impact on the political situation
in Armenia. Over time, the former allies of the ruling Republican
Party of Armenia (RPA), the Prosperous Armenia Party (PAP) and
Dashnaktsutiun (ARF), as well as the Rule of Law party have done
everything to distance themselves from the authorities.
The March events also remained relevant in the context of foreign
policy. As a result of the March 1 events, the Armenian government,
which is barely legitimate, proved to be extremely vulnerable in the
face of external players.
In particular, the United States, one of the most important goals of
which in the South Caucasus is Armenian-Turkish relations, exploited
the vulnerability of the Armenian authorities and of President
Serzh Sargsyan, putting pressure on them to sign the Armenian-Turkish
protocols in October 2009, which caused an uproar in Armenia and among
the Armenian Diaspora. Armenian society and the Diaspora consider it
unacceptable to establish a joint commission on the study of history,
which was provided by the agreements. By signing these documents,
the Armenian authorities gave their permission for the Turkish side
to discuss the 1915 genocide.
Although the protocols have not yet been ratified by the legislatures
of both countries and the process has been frozen, the protocols do
exist and have been signed by the Armenian authorities. The plan of
the United States was to weaken the influence of Russia in Armenia
and in the region as a whole by the protocols.
Another important indicator of the influence of internal problems on
Armenia's foreign policy was Yerevan's indecisiveness in choosing
its direction of development. The vulnerability of the authorities
dictated a whimsical position in terms of a geopolitical vector. Thus,
Yerevan had been flirting for 3 years with the West and the EU "Eastern
Partnership" program before it turned 180 degrees in the direction
of Russia. On September 3 last year Sargsyan announced that Armenia
was going to join the Customs Union. There is no direct evidence that
Moscow pressured Yerevan, but it is clear that its powerful neighbor
helped Yerevan to "clarify" its own position.
A decision about Armenia's membership in the Eurasian Economic Union
will be taken on October 10. So far, it is unclear what will happen
to this process. Armenia's accession to the Customs Union and the EEU
is delayed by controversies between the members of these associations.
Meanwhile, only the Heritage party is openly against Armenia joining
the EEU. Other parties generally support this move.
Armenian society remains indifferent to the question of Armenia's
accession to the EEU or any other entity. The question of Armenia's
geopolitical choice seems insignificant against the background of
the socio-economic problems faced by the vast majority of Armenian
citizens, high migration rates and 35% poverty. Independent protests
against the country's accession to the EEU gather only up to 50 people
and generally find no support in society.
http://vestnikkavkaza.net/analysis/politics/60250.html
Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
Sept 22 2014
22 September 2014 - 9:03am
Susanna Petrosyan, Yerevan. Exclusively for Vestnik Kavkaza
The starting point for many of Armenia's problems today were the
events of March 1, 2008, which became a continuation of presidential
elections. It is interesting that some Russian media resources
attempted to present it as if some Western countries were plotting
the next "orange revolution" to take place in Armenia and bring the
opposition to power. These misconceptions were proven wrong when
memos of the United States Embassy in Yerevan were published by
the Wikileaks website and it turned out that the Americans in fact
supported the government, not the opposition.
Clashes between police and peaceful protesters on Liberty Square,
and later clashes between police and opposition protesters around
the monument to Alexander Myasnikian, in which 10 people were killed
and more than 200 injured, marked a distinctive dividing line between
the public and the opposition.
Six and a half years ago, representatives of the government hastened
to assure Armenian society that the page of March 1 had been turned.
However, their statement was premature, since the people guilty of
the events which took place on March 1 have not been found yet. All
attempts by the opposition to prompt a fair investigation into the
events by Western institutions and especially by the Council of
Europe were unsuccessful. Meanwhile, according to the logic of what
is happening in the world, a "March 1" might happen any time now.
The March events had a significant impact on the political situation
in Armenia. Over time, the former allies of the ruling Republican
Party of Armenia (RPA), the Prosperous Armenia Party (PAP) and
Dashnaktsutiun (ARF), as well as the Rule of Law party have done
everything to distance themselves from the authorities.
The March events also remained relevant in the context of foreign
policy. As a result of the March 1 events, the Armenian government,
which is barely legitimate, proved to be extremely vulnerable in the
face of external players.
In particular, the United States, one of the most important goals of
which in the South Caucasus is Armenian-Turkish relations, exploited
the vulnerability of the Armenian authorities and of President
Serzh Sargsyan, putting pressure on them to sign the Armenian-Turkish
protocols in October 2009, which caused an uproar in Armenia and among
the Armenian Diaspora. Armenian society and the Diaspora consider it
unacceptable to establish a joint commission on the study of history,
which was provided by the agreements. By signing these documents,
the Armenian authorities gave their permission for the Turkish side
to discuss the 1915 genocide.
Although the protocols have not yet been ratified by the legislatures
of both countries and the process has been frozen, the protocols do
exist and have been signed by the Armenian authorities. The plan of
the United States was to weaken the influence of Russia in Armenia
and in the region as a whole by the protocols.
Another important indicator of the influence of internal problems on
Armenia's foreign policy was Yerevan's indecisiveness in choosing
its direction of development. The vulnerability of the authorities
dictated a whimsical position in terms of a geopolitical vector. Thus,
Yerevan had been flirting for 3 years with the West and the EU "Eastern
Partnership" program before it turned 180 degrees in the direction
of Russia. On September 3 last year Sargsyan announced that Armenia
was going to join the Customs Union. There is no direct evidence that
Moscow pressured Yerevan, but it is clear that its powerful neighbor
helped Yerevan to "clarify" its own position.
A decision about Armenia's membership in the Eurasian Economic Union
will be taken on October 10. So far, it is unclear what will happen
to this process. Armenia's accession to the Customs Union and the EEU
is delayed by controversies between the members of these associations.
Meanwhile, only the Heritage party is openly against Armenia joining
the EEU. Other parties generally support this move.
Armenian society remains indifferent to the question of Armenia's
accession to the EEU or any other entity. The question of Armenia's
geopolitical choice seems insignificant against the background of
the socio-economic problems faced by the vast majority of Armenian
citizens, high migration rates and 35% poverty. Independent protests
against the country's accession to the EEU gather only up to 50 people
and generally find no support in society.
http://vestnikkavkaza.net/analysis/politics/60250.html