Tweet
ARMENIA AND RUSSIA AGREE: FOREIGN POLICY CHANGE UNLIKELY AFTER ELECTIONS
Haroutiun Khachatrian
EurasiaNet, NY
May 10 2007
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.
Haroutiun Khachatrian
EurasiaNet, NY
May 10 2007
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.