Tweet
IT IS NECESSARY TO REALIZE ARMENIA’S VALUE AND IMPORTANCE FOR RUSSIA
[ Part 2.2: "Attached Text" ]
March 23 2015
Interview with expert of the Armenian Center for Democracy, Security
and Development Marta Ayvazyan
- Riga is going to host the EU summit in May. The European officials
mention that we need to have realistic expectations of the Riga
Summit. How do you explain the Europeans’ recent activeness
and increased interest towards our country?
- First and foremost, the Europeans and generally, the Western
countries’ concern and attention to the developments in our
region have been increased. And this has taken place in the implication
of the Islamic extremism and currently ongoing developments in the
relations of the West-Russia, the West-Iran, Russia-Turkey and the
South Caucasus countries, particularly the spread out of activities of
the “Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant” and many other
factors. The EU, based on its political, economic, energy and military
security interests, is continually seeking to peace and security in
the South Caucasus and ensuring the possibility for sustainable and
integrated economic development in the region. From this point of view,
Armenia’s interests unambiguously coincide with the interests
of the EU. Russia, whose position in the international platform has
considerably weakened in the last year, naturally, is also guided
by its own interests, but, unfortunately, without having any other
way to preserve and strengthen its presence and influence in our
region, it operates based on the principle of instability, corrupt,
and therefore, manageable government support, the existing conflicts,
and in our case, preservation of NK conflict and escalation of tension
and incitement of hostilities, as appropriate. To achieve its goals
in our region, Russia uses Armenia, which serving Russia’s
geopolitical interests has turned into a source of instability and
also possible military threat in the South Caucasus. In my opinion, the
growth of tension on the borders with Armenia, in the Nagorno-Karabakh
frontline, the sharp increase in the number of incidents in recent
years should be considered in this implication.
All of this, as well as Russia’s aggressive intervention and
role in the Ukrainian crisis, Crimea’s annexation to Russia
are causes for Europeans’ concern and some activation in our
region and, in particular, in Armenia. The EU, whom Armenia in fact
deceived by making a sharp turn to the EaEU, and whose policy is based
on long-term policy planning, however, has never turned its back to
Armenia. In the current situation and led guided by the principle of
its involvement policy, the EU considers it necessary and possible to
continue the political as well as economic cooperation and signing of
an appropriate document with Armenia. At the same time, formulation of
“realistic expectations” is remarkable, which perhaps is
a reference to the Russian factor and from this perspective contains
certain restrictions and expressed lack of confidence in RA government
authorities and other political forces current operating in Armenia.
- Armenia would prefer that Russia does not sell weapons to Azerbaijan,
mentioned Foreign Minister of Armenia Edward Nalbandian recently in
his interview to Slovenian daily newspaper.
What will be the consequences for the expression of this level of
attitude by official Yerevan? How can Armenia achieve results on this
issue? What kind of work is necessary to conduct in this direction?
- I do not think that such expression of the attitude may have
consequences, moreover, the mentioned interview as a whole excludes
any practical continuation and even to some extent it shows dominance
of Russia’s interests over Armenia’s interests. Moreover,
interpreting the content of ally’s notion in a very unique way,
it once again confirms that Armenia or better to say, Armenia’s
current government authorities will no way dispute Russia’s
actions under the present conditions, regardless of their nature,
motives and possible consequences for Armenia. Generally, selling
weapons to Azerbaijan is only one episode of Russia’s attitude to
Armenia and the entire picture of the policy led. Even the most recent
examples are many and refer to a variety of fields, ranging from the
sale of weapons and contrary to our national interest, the membership
to the EaEU up to shooting of the Avetisyan family members carried
out by a soldier or soldiers of the Russian military base in Gyumri,
and in particular, the flagrant violation of its international treaty
obligations by Russia with regard to the investigation of the case. And
the main problem is first and foremost among us, our inability to
protect our interests. While, Armenia has a range of leverages
and opportunities to influence Russia in different dimensions,
bilateral and international partnership frameworks and to protect
its interests. These levers are available in political, economic and
military cooperation spheres with favorable conditions for Armenia,
ranging from import of gas from Iran, review of financial terms for the
military base deployment in Gyumri, and intensifying the international
cooperation with other states for ensuring military, particularly,
border security, raising the issue of international obligations
commitment by Russia towards Armenia at the international instances
up to withdrawal from the EaEU membership. No matter what, I consider
the change of the format of our southern border, in particular, the
protection of the international airport a necessary step. How can
one totally trust the borders and generally the security provision
to someone, who has never been a reliable partner and for whom, the
source of the threat to your security is historically more important
and valuable than you? However, all of this will be possible only
through repeatedly voiced systemic changes, in the case of formation
of a government and equivalent opposition not intertwined by corruption
schemes and private interests with Russia’s power and oligarchic
system legitimate in Armenia. It is also a necessary condition to
ultimately realize Armenia’s value and importance for Russia,
not to overestimate Russia’s importance for Armenia and to
instill this awareness in our society.
- Former Foreign Minister of Armenia Vartan Oskanian recently
had left a post on his Facebook, telling that he had received an
invitation to speak at the event organized in one of the Diaspora
Armenian communities marking the centennial of the Armenian Genocide,
but the Embassy to Armenia had objected to his participation.
“I must say that this is absolutely incomprehensible and
unacceptable. I am sorry for this kind of fainthearted behavior,”
said he. You and your colleagues were deprived of the employment
at MFA for the statement about lawful holding of presidential
elections in 2008 during the tenure of Oskanian as a Minister of
Foreign Affairs. How do you feel about this and other statements by
“democratic” Oskanian in recent years?
- For me, there is no fundamental difference between Vartan Oskanian
and, let’s say, the same Gagik Tsarukyan, both of them, each
in his own realm and within the scope of his abilities, are a mean
or a tool serving the interests of other players or forces. Suffice
it to recall the enthusiasm that Oskanian was displaying to support
the actions of the authorities who had organized the March 1, 2008
slaughter, instead expecting to take over the post of the prime
minister of Armenia, which, however, did not become a reality so
forth. Hence, I no way treat the statements made by Oskanian in recent
years, nor his actions. And what comes to others’ fainthearted
behavior,” then Oskanian’s this kind of assessment is
worthy of only irony.
- What do you think, what happened in the political arena on February
12 after Serzh Sargsyan’s famous speech? Can the events following
this speech, the PAP dissolution, be considered a surprise?
- PAP dissolution, more precisely, Gagik Tsarukyan’s overthrow
was not a surprise, as well as the pending reduction of the PAP
membership, which is the logical continuation of Tsarukyan’s
fall. What happened to Armenia’s political arena was that the
plan for implementing a bourgeois-democratic revolution through
this “Armenia-origin force”, which on the one hand
is practically aimed at nullifying the strong and true opposition
movements formed in Armenia in 2008, which in its turn was obviously
dictated by Moscow, and on the other hand, basically, was mainly due
to Serzh Sargsyan-Robert Kocharyan competition to gain the trust and
support of Moscow, ended, or, rather to say, served for its purpose
and exhausted itself. What agreements the key role-players achieved
in the meantime under what influence will become apparent over the
time. However, as a result, a quite strong ruling pyramid headed
by Serge Sargsyan is left in nowadays Armenia’s political
arena, which is based on personal economic interests, is dependent
on the Russia’s government authorities, is totally unbalanced
by adequate opposition force, thereby is vulnerable and contains
numerous risks for Armenia.
Emma GABRIELYAN
Read more at: http://en.aravot.am/2015/03/23/169382/
[ Part 2.2: "Attached Text" ]
March 23 2015
Interview with expert of the Armenian Center for Democracy, Security
and Development Marta Ayvazyan
- Riga is going to host the EU summit in May. The European officials
mention that we need to have realistic expectations of the Riga
Summit. How do you explain the Europeans’ recent activeness
and increased interest towards our country?
- First and foremost, the Europeans and generally, the Western
countries’ concern and attention to the developments in our
region have been increased. And this has taken place in the implication
of the Islamic extremism and currently ongoing developments in the
relations of the West-Russia, the West-Iran, Russia-Turkey and the
South Caucasus countries, particularly the spread out of activities of
the “Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant” and many other
factors. The EU, based on its political, economic, energy and military
security interests, is continually seeking to peace and security in
the South Caucasus and ensuring the possibility for sustainable and
integrated economic development in the region. From this point of view,
Armenia’s interests unambiguously coincide with the interests
of the EU. Russia, whose position in the international platform has
considerably weakened in the last year, naturally, is also guided
by its own interests, but, unfortunately, without having any other
way to preserve and strengthen its presence and influence in our
region, it operates based on the principle of instability, corrupt,
and therefore, manageable government support, the existing conflicts,
and in our case, preservation of NK conflict and escalation of tension
and incitement of hostilities, as appropriate. To achieve its goals
in our region, Russia uses Armenia, which serving Russia’s
geopolitical interests has turned into a source of instability and
also possible military threat in the South Caucasus. In my opinion, the
growth of tension on the borders with Armenia, in the Nagorno-Karabakh
frontline, the sharp increase in the number of incidents in recent
years should be considered in this implication.
All of this, as well as Russia’s aggressive intervention and
role in the Ukrainian crisis, Crimea’s annexation to Russia
are causes for Europeans’ concern and some activation in our
region and, in particular, in Armenia. The EU, whom Armenia in fact
deceived by making a sharp turn to the EaEU, and whose policy is based
on long-term policy planning, however, has never turned its back to
Armenia. In the current situation and led guided by the principle of
its involvement policy, the EU considers it necessary and possible to
continue the political as well as economic cooperation and signing of
an appropriate document with Armenia. At the same time, formulation of
“realistic expectations” is remarkable, which perhaps is
a reference to the Russian factor and from this perspective contains
certain restrictions and expressed lack of confidence in RA government
authorities and other political forces current operating in Armenia.
- Armenia would prefer that Russia does not sell weapons to Azerbaijan,
mentioned Foreign Minister of Armenia Edward Nalbandian recently in
his interview to Slovenian daily newspaper.
What will be the consequences for the expression of this level of
attitude by official Yerevan? How can Armenia achieve results on this
issue? What kind of work is necessary to conduct in this direction?
- I do not think that such expression of the attitude may have
consequences, moreover, the mentioned interview as a whole excludes
any practical continuation and even to some extent it shows dominance
of Russia’s interests over Armenia’s interests. Moreover,
interpreting the content of ally’s notion in a very unique way,
it once again confirms that Armenia or better to say, Armenia’s
current government authorities will no way dispute Russia’s
actions under the present conditions, regardless of their nature,
motives and possible consequences for Armenia. Generally, selling
weapons to Azerbaijan is only one episode of Russia’s attitude to
Armenia and the entire picture of the policy led. Even the most recent
examples are many and refer to a variety of fields, ranging from the
sale of weapons and contrary to our national interest, the membership
to the EaEU up to shooting of the Avetisyan family members carried
out by a soldier or soldiers of the Russian military base in Gyumri,
and in particular, the flagrant violation of its international treaty
obligations by Russia with regard to the investigation of the case. And
the main problem is first and foremost among us, our inability to
protect our interests. While, Armenia has a range of leverages
and opportunities to influence Russia in different dimensions,
bilateral and international partnership frameworks and to protect
its interests. These levers are available in political, economic and
military cooperation spheres with favorable conditions for Armenia,
ranging from import of gas from Iran, review of financial terms for the
military base deployment in Gyumri, and intensifying the international
cooperation with other states for ensuring military, particularly,
border security, raising the issue of international obligations
commitment by Russia towards Armenia at the international instances
up to withdrawal from the EaEU membership. No matter what, I consider
the change of the format of our southern border, in particular, the
protection of the international airport a necessary step. How can
one totally trust the borders and generally the security provision
to someone, who has never been a reliable partner and for whom, the
source of the threat to your security is historically more important
and valuable than you? However, all of this will be possible only
through repeatedly voiced systemic changes, in the case of formation
of a government and equivalent opposition not intertwined by corruption
schemes and private interests with Russia’s power and oligarchic
system legitimate in Armenia. It is also a necessary condition to
ultimately realize Armenia’s value and importance for Russia,
not to overestimate Russia’s importance for Armenia and to
instill this awareness in our society.
- Former Foreign Minister of Armenia Vartan Oskanian recently
had left a post on his Facebook, telling that he had received an
invitation to speak at the event organized in one of the Diaspora
Armenian communities marking the centennial of the Armenian Genocide,
but the Embassy to Armenia had objected to his participation.
“I must say that this is absolutely incomprehensible and
unacceptable. I am sorry for this kind of fainthearted behavior,”
said he. You and your colleagues were deprived of the employment
at MFA for the statement about lawful holding of presidential
elections in 2008 during the tenure of Oskanian as a Minister of
Foreign Affairs. How do you feel about this and other statements by
“democratic” Oskanian in recent years?
- For me, there is no fundamental difference between Vartan Oskanian
and, let’s say, the same Gagik Tsarukyan, both of them, each
in his own realm and within the scope of his abilities, are a mean
or a tool serving the interests of other players or forces. Suffice
it to recall the enthusiasm that Oskanian was displaying to support
the actions of the authorities who had organized the March 1, 2008
slaughter, instead expecting to take over the post of the prime
minister of Armenia, which, however, did not become a reality so
forth. Hence, I no way treat the statements made by Oskanian in recent
years, nor his actions. And what comes to others’ fainthearted
behavior,” then Oskanian’s this kind of assessment is
worthy of only irony.
- What do you think, what happened in the political arena on February
12 after Serzh Sargsyan’s famous speech? Can the events following
this speech, the PAP dissolution, be considered a surprise?
- PAP dissolution, more precisely, Gagik Tsarukyan’s overthrow
was not a surprise, as well as the pending reduction of the PAP
membership, which is the logical continuation of Tsarukyan’s
fall. What happened to Armenia’s political arena was that the
plan for implementing a bourgeois-democratic revolution through
this “Armenia-origin force”, which on the one hand
is practically aimed at nullifying the strong and true opposition
movements formed in Armenia in 2008, which in its turn was obviously
dictated by Moscow, and on the other hand, basically, was mainly due
to Serzh Sargsyan-Robert Kocharyan competition to gain the trust and
support of Moscow, ended, or, rather to say, served for its purpose
and exhausted itself. What agreements the key role-players achieved
in the meantime under what influence will become apparent over the
time. However, as a result, a quite strong ruling pyramid headed
by Serge Sargsyan is left in nowadays Armenia’s political
arena, which is based on personal economic interests, is dependent
on the Russia’s government authorities, is totally unbalanced
by adequate opposition force, thereby is vulnerable and contains
numerous risks for Armenia.
Emma GABRIELYAN
Read more at: http://en.aravot.am/2015/03/23/169382/