Armenia backs Turkey in EU

December 12 2007
Financial Times, UK
By Tony Barber in Brussels

Armenia favours Turkey's bid to join the European Union because it might improve the prospects for overcoming the strained relations between Ankara and Yerevan, according to Serzh Sargsyan, Armenia's prime minister.

"I think it would be good for us if Turkey's desire to become a member of the European Union were satisfied," Mr Sargsyan told the Financial Times. "Maybe the problems between us could find a solution within an EU framework."

Turkey has no diplomatic relations with Armenia and closed its borders with its smaller, poorer neighbour in 1993 in solidarity with Azerbaijan, its regional partner. Armenia complains the closure has severely disrupted its foreign trade.

Turkey made its move in response to the capture by Armenian forces of Azerbaijani territory during a war over the predominantly ethnic Armenian enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh, which lies inside Azerbaijan.

Turkey and Armenia are also at odds over the mass killings of Armenians in 1915 in the Ottoman Empire, an event that Armenia regards as genocide, but which the modern Turkish state refuses to recognise as such.

Mr Sargsyan, 53, who is the early favourite to win Armenia's presidential elections on February 19, said he hoped Turkey would produce proposals for improving ties with Armenia after the vote.

Referring to Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey's prime minister, he said: "I don't think it's correct to say he's not committed to establishing relations with Armenia. We'll see what happens in the future."

Mr Sargsyan, describing himself as optimistic that Armenia and Turkey would make progress, asked: "After all, what do we gain, what do the Turks gain, from the present situation? Even in the time of the cold war, when Armenia was part of the Soviet Union and Turkey was in Nato, we used to have a certain relationship with Turkey.

"A railway line was built through Armenia to Turkey. A high-voltage electricity line was built between the two countries. Why should my wish for relations not be logical now?"

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007

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.

European Parliament pleased with reform process in Armenia

22.09.2007
PanARMENIAN.Net

Armenia has an important place among the EU’s priorities, Chargé d’Affaires of the Delegation of the European Commission to Armenia, Mr. Raul de Luzenberger told a news conference in Yerevan September 22.

Both sides are rapidly moving towards each other after ratification of the Armenia-EU Action Plan within the ENP, according to him.

“Presently, the EP is pleased with the reform process in Armenia. Moreover, it’s planning to establish a free trade zone and seal economic relations with Yerevan as trade relations,” he said.

When commenting on the policy of neighbor countries which are implementing economic projects bypassing Armenia, Mr de Luzenberger said “the EU cannot impose cooperation.” “The European Union can only render assistance to the states which decided to cooperate,” he said.

For his part, Armenian Deputy Foreign Minister Armen Bayburtian underlined that the Armenia-EU relations have entered a new stage. “The day when the EU member countries will sign an agreement on simplification of visa regime with Armenia is not far off,” he noted.

“Armenia should first of all manage its migration flows,” de Luzenberger’s remark followed.

As to reforms in human rights protection and democracy, both officials gave a high estimation to the May 12 parliamentary elections.

Mr. Raul de Luzenberger wished all inaccuracies and omissions could be corrected during the 2008 presidential elections, IA Regnum reports.

! Reproduction in full or in part is prohibited without reference to «PanARMENIAN.Net».

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.

EU's Solana praises Armenian election, opposition blasts it

14/ 05/ 2007
Ria Novosti

BRUSSELS, May 14 (RIA Novosti) - EU foreign policy and security chief, Javier Solana, praised Monday parliamentary elections in Armenia saying they were held in line with international norms and regulations, while local opposition parties said the poll was undemocratic.

More than 2 million Armenians voted May 12 in Armenia's fourth elections since the South Caucasus country gained independence in 1991, with twenty-two parties and one election bloc running for 131 seats in the parliament.

According to preliminary results, three parties backing the current prime minister and the president won an overwhelming majority. Two opposition parties also got seats in the legislature.

Solana called the poll a considerable progress and said it was held in line with norms of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the requirements of the Council of Europe. He added the elections were the first since the European Union and Armenia signed the Neighborhood Policy Action Plan in 2006.

But, opposition parties claimed the vote was falsified, undemocratic and not free.

Stepan Demirchyan, the leader of the Armenian People's Party, said Monday that "the new parliament does not reflect the will of people and has been formed by mass bribes, terror and intimidation". His party, formed in 1998, received about 24,000 of votes (1.7%) failing to overcome the 5% barrier necessary to gain parliamentary seats.

Another opposition party, Orinats Yerkir, which cleared the barrier, has said: "Intimidation of electors, use of bribes and non-existent ballot papers, numerous breaches in the vote count and the distortion of real voting results give ground to question the legitimacy of elections."

The processing of 99.99% of ballot papers showed Sunday that five parties elected to the parliament are - the Republican Party led by Prime Minister Serzh Sarkisyan with 33.8% of the vote, the pro-presidential Prosperous Armenia and Dashnatsutyun with 15.1% and 13.1% of the vote, respectively, and the opposition parties Orinats Yerkir and Heritage with 7% and 6% of the vote, accordingly.

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.

European Commissioner stated that “Armenia has made an important step forward in fulfilling a key priority of the ENP Action Plan”

14-05-2007
Mediamax

Yerevan, May 14. /Mediamax/. European Commissioner for External Relations and European Neighborhood Policy (ENP) Benita Ferrero-Waldner stated today that, holding the parliamentary elections largely in accordance with the international standards, “Armenia has thus made an important step forward in fulfilling a key priority of the EU / Armenia Action Plan under the European Neighborhood Policy”.

Mediamax reports that the member of the European Commission expressed confidence that “the new parliament, together with the new government, will continue firmly on the path of reform”.

“This is vital for the Armenian people as well as for the future of our relationship", Benita Ferrero-Waldner stated.--0--

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.

Turkey’s membership to EU is not problem for Armenia

20.04.2007
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ “Turkey’s membership to the European Union is not a problem for Armenia, even just the opposite. Armenia would benefit most of all if Turkey fulfilled those preconditions that the EU demands. It would mean an open border between Armenia and Turkey, improving protection of the Armenian minority in Turkey and their property, Turkish intellectuals could freely speak about the Armenian Genocide and EU’s borders would approach Armenia. What else we would like to wish?” Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian stated at the interview to Austrian newspaper Der Standart.

He expresses concerns saying that, “It looks like Turkey cannot be transformed,” “Obviously the country moves on the wrong way, after the assassination of Hrant Dink they even did not change the Penal Code article of “insulting Turkishness”. We also fear that the EU in the issue of Turkey’s membership will compromise and will accept a country without waiting for final transformations to take place there. Also we are concerned that the border with Armenia will continue to be closed. Our hope is the European Union. The Copenhagen criteria state that candidate-states must open their borders. Armenia is not mentioned there, instead our neighbor Turkey is mentioned. Ankara must open his borders. The EU must point to it as soon as possible, to improve political and economic situation in our region. We do not have clear answers for the motives of closing the borders. What’s the matter, in Azerbaijan, in Nagorno Karabakh, what else? The fact is that border is closed and it does not have any justification,” Vartan Oskanian underscored.

! Reproduction in full or in part is prohibited without reference to «PanARMENIAN.Net».

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.

The South Caucasus countries and the ENP: Three different paths to Europe?

Article published in 08/01/2007 Issue
© CAUCAZ.COM
By Lili DI PUPPO in Tbilisi

After their inclusion in the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) was initially rejected in a footnote in the European Commission document “Communication on the Wider Europe” of 2003, the three South Caucasus countries are finally part of a group of the EU’s neighbours, which are set to benefit from privileged relationships with the European Union (EU). While the three ENP Action Plans were released on the 14th of November 2006, what can Tbilisi, Baku and Yerevan now expect from the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP)?

It was the Rose Revolution of 2003 in Georgia that for the first time sent the potent signal to Brussels that the South Caucasus, this distant corner of Europe, was not as static and marred in stagnation as its “frozen conflicts” and slow reforms suggested at first glance.

While launching an ambitious reform programme, the Georgian government immediately sent further signals to Brussels to underline Georgia’s European aspirations such as the EU flags hanging since 2003 from many official buildings in the capital Tbilisi.

Although the three South Caucasus countries were included at the same time in the ENP to accentuate the regional approach favoured by the EU, they seem to be taking different paths. While the Action Plans are supposed to be tailor-made for each country, the EU traditionally favours a regional approach in its external relations. Due to a dispute concerning flights between Azerbaijan and the Northern part of Cyprus, not only Baku, but Tbilisi and Yerevan also had to suffer a delay in the negotiations over the Action Plans in the summer of 2005. The three Action Plans were finally signed on the same date.

The Georgian government has expressed some doubts regarding this regional approach, as since the Rose Revolution Georgia has had its hopes set on being included in a Black Sea region, which would comprise Ukraine and Moldova, rather than in the rather “unstable” South Caucasus region.

Indeed, the region hosts not only the “frozen conflicts” between Georgia and the secessionist territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, but also the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict whose resolution is regarded as particularly tricky by regional observers. While for Brussels the regional approach seems effective with regards to the Nagorno Karabakh issue because it requires the cooperation of the two parties and has been designed as a priority in the EU-Armenia and EU-Azerbaijan Action Plans, it is perceived by Georgia as an obstacle on the road to a fast progression towards the EU.

Until now, Georgia seemed the most inclined of the three South Caucasian countries to undergo a process of Europeanisation on the level of norms and values and to adopt European democratic standards. Armenia is being more conscious, while Azerbaijan’s European ambitions are clearly more limited. But what is the EU itself expecting from these three countries?

For Brussels, Armenia seems to be the “better pupil” among the three South Caucasian states. Better than the others, Yerevan seems to understand and embrace the rather technical language of Brussels, which prioritizes trade and economic measures and the adoption of the acquis communautaire through changes in national legislation, rather than the political support expected by Georgia.

Although Armenia has chosen a pro-Russian foreign policy course until now, it does not seem to have been perceived as a hindrance by Brussels until now. On the contrary, Armenia’s limited hopes regarding a future EU accession seems to better match the type of cooperation envisioned by the EU within the ENP framework, a policy that precisely wants to be perceived as not being an open door to future candidacies.

The ENP is more an answer to security threats stemming from what is perceived as instable regions at the EU’s borders than an attempt to diffuse European democratic norms and standards in the region as was the case with enlargement.

The visit of Azeri President Ilham Aliev in November 2006 to Brussels, where he was welcome with open arms, shows that the EU is ready to close an eye to democratic deficiencies and restricted freedoms in Azerbaijan due to the strategic importance of the country in terms of energy security and its strategic location as a direct neighbour of Iran.

Brussels sees a powerful ally and a guarantee of future alternative energy supplies in Baku. Azerbaijan itself does not seem particularly inclined to a “Europeanisation” and has never shown an excessive interest in cultivating strong ties with the Union or to accept the conditions set by the EU in terms of democratic progress. Azerbaijan is conscious of its particular status as a country which can dictate its own conditions to the EU contrary to the two other South Caucasian countries.

The paths of these three different countries will ultimately depend on what the EU expects from the ENP. The EU-Georgia Action Plan shows that the EU has been sensible to the demands of Tbilisi and is ready to offer some increased political support to Georgia in the area of conflict resolution, which it had refused until now.

The inclusion of Georgia in a Black Sea dimension, which is a key initiative for Tbilisi, has also been acknowledged in the Action Plan. However, it remains to be seen to what extent the EU’s expectations will match those of the three South Caucasus capitals in comparison to those during enlargement. The answer will likely appear in five years, when the ENP Action Plans will be renegotiated on the basis of what the EU thinks these countries have achieved.

© CAUCAZ.COM | Article published in 08/01/2007 Issue | By Lili DI PUPPO

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.

NEW PARTNERSHIP WITH EUROPEAN UNION PROMPTS HOPES IN ARMENIA

11/30/06
eurasianet
By Haroutiun Khachatrian

Armenians have welcomed the recent launch of a program to foster stronger ties between the European Union and Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia, but questions persist in Yerevan about what will be the actual results of this new partnership.

The November 14 adoption of the European Union (EU)-Armenia Action Plan for the bloc’s European Neighborhood Policy (ENP) program is one of the few recent topics that has met with apparent satisfaction from both the government and the opposition.

The plan sets eight priority areas to be addressed as part of Armenia’s cooperation with the EU over the next five years: strengthening democracy and rule of law; enhancing respect for human rights; continuing economic development and poverty reduction; improving the climate for private investors; streamlining economic policy and policy administration; creating an energy strategy that would include the decommissioning of the Medzamor nuclear power plant; working towards a peaceful resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict with Azerbaijan; and expanding opportunities for regional cooperation.

While the schedule for implementation of Armenia’s Action Plan will not be completed until January 2007, the government is already emphasizing its commitment to cooperation with the EU. Most notably, the Respublika Armenii (Republic of Armenia) newspaper, a Russian-language government mouthpiece, wrote in its November 15 issue that Armenia has asked the EU to monitor its implementation of the Action Plan once a year, instead of once every two years, as is standard.

The plan notes that "[t]he level of ambition of the relationship will depend on the degree of Armenia’s commitment to common values as well as its capacity to implement jointly agreed priorities, in compliance with international and European norms and principles."

Already, though, the government is focusing on the possible rewards for demonstrating that commitment. In a recent interview given to the Noyan Tapan news agency, Deputy Foreign Minister Armen Baibourtian noted that a free trade agreement with the EU could be one of the results of the Action Plan. The Armenian government does not rule out that such an agreement could be signed even before the completion of Armenia’s Action Plan in 2011, the deputy minister said.

The potential economic benefits of closer ties with the EU have attracted widespread support, but, not unexpectedly, many ordinary Armenians have also displayed special interest in how the documents signed in Brussels will address the question of Nagorno Karabakh. While in Brussels, Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan and Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov met to discuss the Karabakh conflict as a precursor to a November 28 encounter between Armenian President Robert Kocharian and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev during the Commonwealth of Independent States summit in Minsk. While President Aliyev has stated that the negotiations have now entered their final phase, Armenian media reports about the meeting, held at the Russian embassy in Minsk, imply that no progress was made. The meeting was the third between the two leaders this year.

The Armenian and Azerbaijani Action Plans include almost identical language about goals for resolving the Karabakh conflict. The Armenian plan cites a "[c]ontinuing strong EU commitment to support the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, drawing on the instruments at the EU’s disposal … and in close consultation with the OSCE [Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe]." One distinction could be cause for future debate: the Actions section of the Azerbaijani agreement mentions accomplishing this task while observing "the relevant UN Security Council resolutions," but the Armenian document mentions negotiation on the basis of international law, "including the principle of self-determination of peoples."

During a November 18 public discussion on Armenia’s ties with the European Union held at the Urbat (Friday) Club in Yerevan, analysts, however, were not optimistic about the impact of the Neighborhood Policy on the conflict. At best, they said, the EU could act as an "extinguisher" for tensions between the two sides.

One analyst, however, expressed concern that, in other regards, Armenia may find itself left behind in building a strong relationship with the EU, compared to Georgia and Azerbaijan. Georgia may secure more rapid integration because of its government’s strong pro-West orientation, contended Washington-based political analyst Richard Giragosian, while Azerbaijan could prove attractive because of its energy resources.

Giragosian, however, saw geopolitical benefits for the EU in extending its European Neighbor Policy to the South Caucasus. The program allows the EU to bypass Turkey, a regional player whose EU membership ambitions have proven problematic, and to have contact with Iran, potentially via Armenia, a long-time Iranian ally. "The formula is: ‘One step beyond Turkey, one step closer to Iran’," Giragosian said.

Some observers saw other distinctions. Considerable attention has focused recently on Georgia’s ambitions to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). One opposition leader, Shavarsh Kocharian, head of the National Democratic Party, suggested at the discussion that Georgia might, in fact, try to use its NATO membership campaign to advance its ambitions to join the EU.

Strengthening democratic development could prove a surer way to advance Armenia’s relationship with the EU, Kocharian continued. Like other opposition members, however, Kocharian expressed doubts that the government would fulfill its pledges to strengthen democracy and the rule of law along with economic growth. Other discussion participants worried that Armenia’s opposition is not strong enough to press for such changes.

Political analyst Giragosian shared Kocharian’s viewpoint, saying that the West may reach the limit of its patience with Armenia if the country’s spring 2007 parliamentary elections fail to meet democratic standards. "Armenia now faces greater expectations for clean elections. The key question is whether the Armenian authorities understand that that the expectations of the West are higher this time," he said.

At a July 2006 Republican Party of Armenia conference, Defense Minister Serge Sarkisian predicted that the May 2007 vote will prove Armenia’s "best elections" to date.

Editor’s Note: Haroutiun Khachatrian is a Yerevan-based writer specializing in economic and political affairs.

Posted November 30, 2006 © Eurasianet

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.

EU: Armenia, Azerbaijan, And Georgia Sign Accords

BRUSSELS, November 14, 2006 (RFE/RL) -- The EU today signed European Neighborhood Policy action plans with the South Caucasus countries of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia.

The agreements offer aid, improved trade, and more political cooperation in exchange for political and economic reforms.

But EU External Relations Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner told RFE/RL, they don't even mean what the EU would call a "membership perspective."

"The neighborhood policy is not for membership. I have to say that very clearly. But at the same time, this is the policy of today. Therefore, the future is clearly not prejudged," Ferrero-Waldner said. "But these countries have to use this momentum now to do everything to get the experience that we have, the knowledge, the possibilities of cooperation. We want to help them, because best practices are there already. And the easiest thing is to look at what others have done in order to become successful."

'Ring Of Friends'

Brussels wants a "ring of friends," which eventually could include countries such as Israel, Jordan, Moldova, Morocco, and Ukraine.

Those countries would get access to the EU's vast internal market. In return, Brussels would get the promise of reforms -- and, ideally, the regional security that successful reforms would ensure.

Under the agreements, the EU offers economic help and help in reforming the justice, energy, education, health and other sectors.

'Frozen Conflicts'

Brussels has also said that the accords should help defuse separatist disputes in the three South Caucasus countries.

In Georgia, Abkhazia and South Ossetia are trying to secede, while Azerbaijan has a dispute with Armenia over the Nagorno-Karabakh region.

The foreign ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan are meeting today to discuss Nagorno-Karabakh.

Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov says the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process is moving in the right direction:

Strategic Region

In recent years, the South Caucasus has gained greater strategic significance for the EU and the West.

Since its 2003 Rose Revolution, Georgia has pursued a more pro-Western course. It has made good headway with political and economic reforms -- although the problem of implementing legislation on the ground still remains. And in September, Georgia was offered an "intensified dialogue" with NATO.

Speaking today at the European Parliament in Strasbourg, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili praised closer ties with Brussels. He called for deeper EU involvement in Georgian political and strategic issues.

"At every negotiation, let's say on the conflict issue, everywhere there should be EU representatives present," Saakashvili said. "Georgia is certainly strongly in favor of EU involvement. We should make sure that in every energy issue [EU representatives] should be present, in a conflict issue they should be present, because energy is a European issue, a conflict issue is a European issue, wider economic cooperation is a European issue."

While Armenia has made some successful economic changes, its political reforms remain sluggish at best.

Azerbaijan is the region's exception. With huge oil and gas deposits, the country's economy is growing rapidly -- and expected to continue apace.

But questions remain about Azerbaijan's rampant corruption, dubious electoral practices, and rights abuses. Drunk on oil and gas, its detractors say, Azerbaijan can act with virtual impunity.

Standards For Energy?

And with the EU always ready to diversify its energy supply to avoid dependence on Russia, critics have said the union is prepared to compromise its own standards in exchange for access to Azerbaijan's vast energy reserves.

In an interview today with RFE/RL, EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana denied the charge: "Most of [the EU's] energy doesn't come from Azerbaijan. For us Azerbaijan is not a source of energy as other countries are. We would like Azerbaijan to develop because it's an important country and we would like Armenia to develop because it's [also] an important country."

The EU has defended its stance, saying that the countries in the South Caucasus are coming from different starting points -- and must be judged accordingly.

The EU's special representative to the South Caucasus, Peter Semneby, said it's better to embrace these countries than to leave them out in the cold.

"The problems would be larger if the two countries were left outside completely. That would mean that developments would be totally unpredictable; there would be immense dangers. The two countries are now included in a cooperative framework with the European Union which also includes a perspective for the future," Semneby said. "It would be much easier to control the risks in the short term, and in the longer term to find a solution based on mutual benefits in a new reformed neighborhood that will look very different from the one we have today."

(Interviews conducted in Brussels by RFE/RL Armenian Service director Harry Tamrazian and RFE/RL Azerbaijani Service acting Director Kenan Aliyev.)

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.