The South Caucasus seen from Brussels: betwixt pressure and good marks
Article published in 30/09/2005 Issue
Caucaz
By Anne-Marie MOURADIAN in Brussels
Translated by Michèle-Ann OKOLOTOWICZ
The European Union is getting ready to negotiate action plans with each of the South Caucasus republics, which will allow it to implement its new neighbourhood policy in the region. [...].
The idea of the future action plans can be summarised in a nutshell: treat each country on its own merits, by “rewarding” those that progress the most rapidly. [...]. “If in five years’ time we observe that the partner country has progressed well, we can move on to a form of closer partnership”, Brussels explains. [...].
[...]
Georgia
Today, Georgia is at the top of the charts of the South Caucasus republics. The EU’s presence there is also the most visible. [...]. Moreover, Georgia is the only country to have benefited from an international donors’ conference, held in Brussels.
[...]
[...] Brussels has observed a positive evolution and a manifest desire among its leaders to fight corruption, clean up the State apparatus and public accounts, and to enact the rule of law.[...].
Although the institutional structure is still slightly unstable, improvements are visible on the political level. [...].
[...]
The economic outlook is not so optimistic. The country lacks natural resources and public coffers are close to empty.[...] economic difficulties are aggravated by the instability linked to the question of the two secessionist republics of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.[...].
[...]
Armenia
From the political reform standpoint, the situation in Armenia is far from ideal and Brussels emphasises that Armenian leaders have a long way to go to come close to European standards, and it hopes that the forthcoming elections will be more democratic than the previous ones.
However, the Europeans have complimented the country for its very good economic performance. “Armenia’s leaders have undertaken structural reforms in many sectors and have been able to stabilise the country’s financial situation”, notes Hugues Mingarelli.
In spite of its land-locked position and the blockade imposed by Turkey, the Armenian economy has seen its GDP progress spectacularly, rising from 3.3% in 1999, to 12.9% in 2002, and to 13.9% in 2003. But the economy still remains in the hands of “clans” and a significant proportion of the population does not have access to the growing riches.
Brussels also hopes that the Armenian authorities will be “flexible” in negotiations on Nagorno-Karabakh, reminding Armenia in the meantime that the Turkish blockade is a heavy price to pay.
The EU is not planning to increase pressure on Turkey to open its borders. Likewise, the denial of the Armenian genocide by the Turkish state is not considered to be a human rights issue. Brussels restricts itself to calling on Ankara to seek reconciliation with Armenia. And to Armenians who invoke the duty of remembrance, European officials generally point out “the difference between ‘little’ Armenia and the geostrategic weight of its Turkish neighbour”.
Another subject under discussion is the nuclear power station of Medzamor, which supplies 40% of the country’s electricity but whose venerable age makes it dangerous. [...].
On 23 September however, Yerevan let it be known that it intends to close down Medzamor and to build a new plant with the help of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Moreover, the construction of the gas pipeline between Iran and Armenia should cover, upon its completion in 2007, a third of Armenia’s gas requirements. [...].
[...] Europeans are backing Yerevan’s denunciation of the project by Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaidjan to build a new Kars-Tbilisi-Baku railway designed to circumvent Armenia. Brussels believes the new railway would be surplus to requirement since a rail link already exists between Kars and Gumri (Armenia), which is currently closed due to the Turkish blockade.
[...]
Azebaijan
Regarding political and economic reform, Azerbaijan has a long way to go to catch up.[...].
The European Commission sees President Ilham Aliyev as “reasonable”. [...]. However, Ilham Aliyev is not alone and must take into account his entourage”.
The EU is insisting that the government steps up its fight against its still endemic corruption and wants it to use its oil revenue to fight poverty and strengthen social cohesion. [...].
“Within the framework of its action plan, Baku has to expect strong pressure from us”, Brussels says, recognising that thanks to its energy resources Azerbaijan has greater room for manoeuvre than the other two South Caucasian republics. Neither does it share their financial constraints. “Azeris are far more relaxed”, notes Hugues Mingarelli. “They are less dependent on European largesse than Georgia and Armenia”.
Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.
Caucaz
By Anne-Marie MOURADIAN in Brussels
Translated by Michèle-Ann OKOLOTOWICZ
The European Union is getting ready to negotiate action plans with each of the South Caucasus republics, which will allow it to implement its new neighbourhood policy in the region. [...].
The idea of the future action plans can be summarised in a nutshell: treat each country on its own merits, by “rewarding” those that progress the most rapidly. [...]. “If in five years’ time we observe that the partner country has progressed well, we can move on to a form of closer partnership”, Brussels explains. [...].
[...]
Georgia
Today, Georgia is at the top of the charts of the South Caucasus republics. The EU’s presence there is also the most visible. [...]. Moreover, Georgia is the only country to have benefited from an international donors’ conference, held in Brussels.
[...]
[...] Brussels has observed a positive evolution and a manifest desire among its leaders to fight corruption, clean up the State apparatus and public accounts, and to enact the rule of law.[...].
Although the institutional structure is still slightly unstable, improvements are visible on the political level. [...].
[...]
The economic outlook is not so optimistic. The country lacks natural resources and public coffers are close to empty.[...] economic difficulties are aggravated by the instability linked to the question of the two secessionist republics of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.[...].
[...]
Armenia
From the political reform standpoint, the situation in Armenia is far from ideal and Brussels emphasises that Armenian leaders have a long way to go to come close to European standards, and it hopes that the forthcoming elections will be more democratic than the previous ones.
However, the Europeans have complimented the country for its very good economic performance. “Armenia’s leaders have undertaken structural reforms in many sectors and have been able to stabilise the country’s financial situation”, notes Hugues Mingarelli.
In spite of its land-locked position and the blockade imposed by Turkey, the Armenian economy has seen its GDP progress spectacularly, rising from 3.3% in 1999, to 12.9% in 2002, and to 13.9% in 2003. But the economy still remains in the hands of “clans” and a significant proportion of the population does not have access to the growing riches.
Brussels also hopes that the Armenian authorities will be “flexible” in negotiations on Nagorno-Karabakh, reminding Armenia in the meantime that the Turkish blockade is a heavy price to pay.
The EU is not planning to increase pressure on Turkey to open its borders. Likewise, the denial of the Armenian genocide by the Turkish state is not considered to be a human rights issue. Brussels restricts itself to calling on Ankara to seek reconciliation with Armenia. And to Armenians who invoke the duty of remembrance, European officials generally point out “the difference between ‘little’ Armenia and the geostrategic weight of its Turkish neighbour”.
Another subject under discussion is the nuclear power station of Medzamor, which supplies 40% of the country’s electricity but whose venerable age makes it dangerous. [...].
On 23 September however, Yerevan let it be known that it intends to close down Medzamor and to build a new plant with the help of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Moreover, the construction of the gas pipeline between Iran and Armenia should cover, upon its completion in 2007, a third of Armenia’s gas requirements. [...].
[...] Europeans are backing Yerevan’s denunciation of the project by Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaidjan to build a new Kars-Tbilisi-Baku railway designed to circumvent Armenia. Brussels believes the new railway would be surplus to requirement since a rail link already exists between Kars and Gumri (Armenia), which is currently closed due to the Turkish blockade.
[...]
Azebaijan
Regarding political and economic reform, Azerbaijan has a long way to go to catch up.[...].
The European Commission sees President Ilham Aliyev as “reasonable”. [...]. However, Ilham Aliyev is not alone and must take into account his entourage”.
The EU is insisting that the government steps up its fight against its still endemic corruption and wants it to use its oil revenue to fight poverty and strengthen social cohesion. [...].
“Within the framework of its action plan, Baku has to expect strong pressure from us”, Brussels says, recognising that thanks to its energy resources Azerbaijan has greater room for manoeuvre than the other two South Caucasian republics. Neither does it share their financial constraints. “Azeris are far more relaxed”, notes Hugues Mingarelli. “They are less dependent on European largesse than Georgia and Armenia”.
Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.
posted by Vahe Balabanian at 8:44 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home