ARMENIA AND RUSSIA AGREE: FOREIGN POLICY CHANGE UNLIKELY AFTER ELECTIONS
5/10/07
Eurasianet
Haroutiun Khachatrian"Political scientist Iskandarian noted that Russia is losing its traditional influence in Armenia since Moscow "works only with the state and not with [Armenian] citizens." Among more than 30 think tanks in Armenia, he added, only two or three are supported by Russians. At the same time, he noted, Russian is losing ground to English as a second-language for Armenians.
Changes may come after Armenia’s upcoming parliamentary vote, but don’t look for them in the country’s close bilateral ties with Russia, a group of Armenian and Russian experts concluded at a May 10 government-sponsored conference in Yerevan.
"I am often asked: What will happen after the elections? The answer is: nothing will happen in terms of foreign policy," said political scientist Alexander Iskandarian, head of Yerevan’s Caucauss Media Institute. "Because there are no forces in Armenia which are striving to come to power with the purpose of spoiling its relations either with Russia or the West."
The most outspoken members of Armenia’s opposition are largely pro-Western; pro-government parties, billed as the frontrunners in the parliamentary race, take a more measured stance; or, in the case of pro-government Prosperous Armenia Party, an avowedly pro-Russian stance.
Prosperous Armenia Party leader Gagik Tsarukian recently told one Russian media outlet that 90 percent of Armenia’s foreign relations should be focused on Russia and only 10 percent on the West. A party representative, however, confirmed Prosperous Armenia’s support for the current official government policy of attempting to balance Armenia’s ties with both.
No doubt with such considerations in mind, Russian parliamentarian Konstantin Zatulin, director of the Moscow-based Institute of Commonwealth of Independent States, noted that the timing of the conference was deliberate. The gathering was organized by Zatulin’s institute, which recently opened a Yerevan branch office, and supported by the Armenian government.
"It is extremely important for us in Russia to know what will be the situation in Armenia, in a country which is of great importance for Russia," Zatulin said. Zatulin is one of more than 40 Russian Duma deputies who are observing the May 12 parliamentary vote.
Competition between Russia and the West was among the main topics discussed at the event.
In a nod to Armenia’s existing foreign policy, Armenian Justice Minister David Haroutiunian, a leading member of the ruling Republican Party of Armenia, assured conference participants that the country wants to preserve its ties with both Russia and other outside powers interested in the South Caucasus, a veiled reference to the United States and other Western states.
Both Russia and the West want stability in the region, he continued, but differ on tactics. "[E]ach side believes that the best way of keep stability is by establishing its own dominance. Armenia does not share this vision, and this is why it will oppose efforts to push Russia out of the region," the minister said.
Haroutiunian named Armenia and Russia’s joint membership in the CIS Collective Security Treaty as the most important aspect of relations between the two states, noting that he preferred the term "alliance" to "partnership."
In turn, Aleksei Gvinianin, a Russian foreign ministry department head who represented the ministry at the conference, hailed Armenia for providing "a good source of security, given Russia’s problems in both the North and South Caucasus." In an apparent tit-for-tat overture, Gvinianin did not exclude the possibility that Moscow could join Western countries in encouraging Turkey to reopen its borders with Armenia. Policy-planning cooperation on this front with Yerevan was also proposed.
Sympathy for Armenia’s own sensitive areas in its relations with the West was made clear. Gvinianin went so far as to recommend that Armenians not take recommendations about the parliamentary elections from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe/Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODIHR) as "truth of the last instance." Moscow has a long history of conflicts with the OSCE about the organization’s various activities in the former Soviet Union.
Russian political scientist Vitaly Tretyakov, editor of the Moscow News weekly, added that former Soviet republics might not have any other choice but to ally with Russia on various issues, as the "EU or NATO cannot grow infinitely." Tretyakov went on to predict that further incentive for strong Armenia-Russia ties could lie in the creation of a new organization of former Soviet republics, in which Russian President Vladimir Putin, would play a leading role. Tretyakov put the timeline for such an event at "less than a year," but did not provide further details or cite sources for his information.
Nonetheless, as shown at the conference, ties between Moscow and Yerevan are far from trouble-free. Russian representatives did not answer questions from Republican Party parliamentarian Armen Ashotian on whether signatories of the 1992 CIS Collective Security Treaty would help Armenia in case of "possible aggression" from Azerbaijan, nor whether Russia might recognize the disputed territory of Nagorno-Karabakh if Western states recognize the breakaway territory of Kosovo in the Balkans.
Other problems were also raised. Political scientist Iskandarian noted that Russia is losing its traditional influence in Armenia since Moscow "works only with the state and not with [Armenian] citizens." Among more than 30 think tanks in Armenia, he added, only two or three are supported by Russians. At the same time, he noted, Russian is losing ground to English as a second-language for Armenians.
Moscow-based political scientist Andranik Migranian had a simple explanation: Russia is still recovering from the economic collapse of the 1990s, he claimed. Assistance to Armenian civil society will "increase rapidly," he predicted.
Editor’s Note: Haroutiun Khachatrian is a Yerevan-based writer specializing in economic and political affairs.
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.
Eurasianet
Haroutiun Khachatrian
"Political scientist Iskandarian noted that Russia is losing its traditional influence in Armenia since Moscow "works only with the state and not with [Armenian] citizens." Among more than 30 think tanks in Armenia, he added, only two or three are supported by Russians. At the same time, he noted, Russian is losing ground to English as a second-language for Armenians.
Moscow-based political scientist Andranik Migranian had a simple explanation: Russia is still recovering from the economic collapse of the 1990s, he claimed. Assistance to Armenian civil society will "increase rapidly," he predicted. "
Changes may come after Armenia’s upcoming parliamentary vote, but don’t look for them in the country’s close bilateral ties with Russia, a group of Armenian and Russian experts concluded at a May 10 government-sponsored conference in Yerevan. "I am often asked: What will happen after the elections? The answer is: nothing will happen in terms of foreign policy," said political scientist Alexander Iskandarian, head of Yerevan’s Caucauss Media Institute. "Because there are no forces in Armenia which are striving to come to power with the purpose of spoiling its relations either with Russia or the West."
The most outspoken members of Armenia’s opposition are largely pro-Western; pro-government parties, billed as the frontrunners in the parliamentary race, take a more measured stance; or, in the case of pro-government Prosperous Armenia Party, an avowedly pro-Russian stance.
Prosperous Armenia Party leader Gagik Tsarukian recently told one Russian media outlet that 90 percent of Armenia’s foreign relations should be focused on Russia and only 10 percent on the West. A party representative, however, confirmed Prosperous Armenia’s support for the current official government policy of attempting to balance Armenia’s ties with both.
No doubt with such considerations in mind, Russian parliamentarian Konstantin Zatulin, director of the Moscow-based Institute of Commonwealth of Independent States, noted that the timing of the conference was deliberate. The gathering was organized by Zatulin’s institute, which recently opened a Yerevan branch office, and supported by the Armenian government.
"It is extremely important for us in Russia to know what will be the situation in Armenia, in a country which is of great importance for Russia," Zatulin said. Zatulin is one of more than 40 Russian Duma deputies who are observing the May 12 parliamentary vote.
Competition between Russia and the West was among the main topics discussed at the event.
In a nod to Armenia’s existing foreign policy, Armenian Justice Minister David Haroutiunian, a leading member of the ruling Republican Party of Armenia, assured conference participants that the country wants to preserve its ties with both Russia and other outside powers interested in the South Caucasus, a veiled reference to the United States and other Western states.
Both Russia and the West want stability in the region, he continued, but differ on tactics. "[E]ach side believes that the best way of keep stability is by establishing its own dominance. Armenia does not share this vision, and this is why it will oppose efforts to push Russia out of the region," the minister said.
Haroutiunian named Armenia and Russia’s joint membership in the CIS Collective Security Treaty as the most important aspect of relations between the two states, noting that he preferred the term "alliance" to "partnership."
In turn, Aleksei Gvinianin, a Russian foreign ministry department head who represented the ministry at the conference, hailed Armenia for providing "a good source of security, given Russia’s problems in both the North and South Caucasus." In an apparent tit-for-tat overture, Gvinianin did not exclude the possibility that Moscow could join Western countries in encouraging Turkey to reopen its borders with Armenia. Policy-planning cooperation on this front with Yerevan was also proposed.
Sympathy for Armenia’s own sensitive areas in its relations with the West was made clear. Gvinianin went so far as to recommend that Armenians not take recommendations about the parliamentary elections from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe/Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODIHR) as "truth of the last instance." Moscow has a long history of conflicts with the OSCE about the organization’s various activities in the former Soviet Union.
Russian political scientist Vitaly Tretyakov, editor of the Moscow News weekly, added that former Soviet republics might not have any other choice but to ally with Russia on various issues, as the "EU or NATO cannot grow infinitely." Tretyakov went on to predict that further incentive for strong Armenia-Russia ties could lie in the creation of a new organization of former Soviet republics, in which Russian President Vladimir Putin, would play a leading role. Tretyakov put the timeline for such an event at "less than a year," but did not provide further details or cite sources for his information.
Nonetheless, as shown at the conference, ties between Moscow and Yerevan are far from trouble-free. Russian representatives did not answer questions from Republican Party parliamentarian Armen Ashotian on whether signatories of the 1992 CIS Collective Security Treaty would help Armenia in case of "possible aggression" from Azerbaijan, nor whether Russia might recognize the disputed territory of Nagorno-Karabakh if Western states recognize the breakaway territory of Kosovo in the Balkans.
Other problems were also raised. Political scientist Iskandarian noted that Russia is losing its traditional influence in Armenia since Moscow "works only with the state and not with [Armenian] citizens." Among more than 30 think tanks in Armenia, he added, only two or three are supported by Russians. At the same time, he noted, Russian is losing ground to English as a second-language for Armenians.
Moscow-based political scientist Andranik Migranian had a simple explanation: Russia is still recovering from the economic collapse of the 1990s, he claimed. Assistance to Armenian civil society will "increase rapidly," he predicted.
Editor’s Note: Haroutiun Khachatrian is a Yerevan-based writer specializing in economic and political affairs.
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.
Labels: Armenia and Russia
posted by Vahe Balabanian at 8:20 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home