Tweet
RA DEPUTY FM ADDRESSES THE JAPAN INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
armradio.am
06.11.2007 15:26
October 29-November 4 RA Deputy Foreign Minister Armen Baibourtian
visited Japan in the framework of the "Encouragement of cooperation
in the 21st century" program. During the visit the Deputy FM made
a speech at the Japan Institute of International Affairs. The full
text of the lecture entitled "A foreign policy for a small state:
Armenia's case" is presented below:
"In 1991 Barry Buzan, British political scientist, contemplating on
the pure model of nationhood questioned the status of statehood as
an objective precondition for a nation's existence. His argument was
exemplified by the Armenians, a nation without a state. Ironically,
his sample did not last long, since the very same year Armenia
becomes independent. However, the potential of the "Armenian case"
to contradict pure models seems to be indefatigable. This point
assumes real content, when we consider Armenia in the mainstream of
world political processes occurring in the last decade of the 20th
century. The end of the Cold war that resulted in the disestablishment
of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia also manifested itself as
the conclusion of centuries' long evolution of different forms of
governances and polities, bringing them to a single surviving model:
the nation state.
In 1992, when Armenia and other former Soviet republics gained their
seats in the United Nations, nearly the whole world was a family of
various nation states. The international system took its final shape
towards which it was moving since the Peace Treaty of Westphalia. Now -
after fifteen years from those landmark changes of the early 1990s -
we can assess how much exactly that shape was "final".
Not surprisingly, as it is the case with many notions and processes,
the end of one cycle in international relations brings to the start
of another one.
Charles Tilly nicely captured this phenomenon while stating that
"...states may be following the old routine by which an institution
falls into ruin just as it becomes complete". And so, having gained
at last the long aspired independence, Armenia had to build its state
institutions without having an undisputed model of a nation state in
the changing world.
The emergence of the United Europe encompassing the greatest portion of
the continent, the transnational promotion of Western values by the US,
Russia's steady determination to maintain its traditional influence
in international politics considerably undermined the conventional
understanding of nation state in its most important dimension:
absolute sovereignty. At the risk of some oversimplification, we
can state that the erosion of the nation state sovereignty is so far
being broadly explained by academicians and practitioners as a part
of either globalization or clash of civilizations. The latter notion
seemingly includes but is not simply reduced to perpetual clashes and
confrontations among different civilizations. It largely refers to
the ascendance of major regional power centers as main players in the
world politics. Hence, simultaneous to the state building process -
with all conventional complexities - Armenia found itself amid the
tendencies of both globalization and regionalization.
>From the very beginning of its independence Armenia has strongly
advocated neo-liberal economic globalization, and closely cooperated
with its main international institutions and the U.S. In general,
Armenia went considerably beyond the majority of former Soviet
republics in carrying out IMF and WB prescribed economic and structural
reforms. The land reform and the following massive privatization of
other sectors of economy were implemented with certain neo-liberal
zeal. As a result, even given the hardships of closed land borders
with two of its neighbors, Azerbaijan and Turkey, Armenia succeeded in
creating a flexible and healthy economy. Yet, the sound foundations of
economy alone could not guarantee its further development in terms of
gaining access to the external markets. For a country with a limited
domestic market and scarce resources, active presence in big regional
markets is an imperative. Armenia's economy had to deal with the
issue of creating knowledge-based entrepreneurial capacities on its
own. Clearly, without consistent expansion to the common markets of
the EU and the CIS, and emerging markets in Asia and the Middle East,
Armenian economy will lose the momentum to acquire sustainability.
Likewise, political issues Armenia is facing today have strong regional
dimension. Strained relations with Turkey and Azerbaijan push Armenia
to seek for the long-term solutions in its regional policy. At
the same time, international organizations such as OSCE, CIS and
EU, which assist in solving these problems, have certain regional
underpinning and vocation. Not surprisingly, Armenia's foreign policy
gravitates towards a balancing act between the global and regional
tendencies. Consequently, the task that Armenia's foreign policy is
compelled to fulfill is a choice between practical short term gains
and a solid conceptual framework for its orientation in the region
and the world.
Here perceptions interact with realities and visa versa. These
perceptions are shaped by a historical record of being a borderland
nation during various historical periods given Armenia's strategic
location at the crossroads between East and West, North and South. As a
borderland throughout the history the Armenian kingdoms were integrated
into different regional systems, by assuming a peculiar role of a
quasi independent "trustworthy alien". Armenia's role as "the sole
Christian Kingdom of the Caliphate" and "the Oriental Kingdom of
Latin Outremere" during the Crusades is a good case in point.
Another reality of Armenia's past and present is the existence of the
worldwide Armenian communities - the Diaspora - which have acquired
a global role since the 16-17th centuries. This organizational form
of the Armenian people came into existence at the initial phase of
global trade, when the Armenian merchants established worldwide trading
network. The author of the perpetual peace theory Immanuel Kant was
one of the first thinkers who drew the attention to the distinctive
character of Armenian Diaspora: "Armenians wander on foot from the
borders of China all the way to Cape Corso on the coast of Guinea
to carry on commerce... in line from North-East to South-West, they
travel through almost whole extent of the ancient continent and know
how to secure a peaceful reception by all the peoples they encounter.".
Why are these two generalizations important for the assessment
of Armenia's foreign policy making? Firstly, both these intrinsic
realities remain valid nowadays and happen to form the constants of
Armenia's foreign policy. Our country is a member of various regional
initiatives, such as CIS, CSTO, CoE, EU European Neighborhood Policy,
and NATO Individual Partnership Programme, trying to develop mutually
beneficial relationship with the EU, Russia, and the US. This is a new
regionalism posing new challenges and creating new opportunities. It
has to be mentioned that the process of regionalization or regional
integration does not have a single model. These processes have
different speed, multiple layers and finally, quite different
purposes and aspirations. From millenarian sentiments of the EU to
issue oriented agenda of the SCO, the new regionalization is taking
different faces.
In its regional policy Armenia values predictability among other
notions and principles in the context of regional integration and
development is constantly making efforts to become a trusted partner
for the countries, institutions and individuals interested in the
region's stable economic, social and cultural advance based on the
universal values of democracy and free market. We have strong belief
that new dividing lines in South Caucasus and the region at large
undermine the positive component of regional developments that has
been formed during these years.
Armenia's European aspirations are a manifestation of our strong
historical and cultural link to Europe and Europeanness, as well as
a national urge to evolve into a free modern society that is able
to meet the demands of the new century. At the moment, we and our
European colleagues are jointly working towards this aim in the
framework of the European Neighborhood Policy programme.
Secondly, there are more Armenians living abroad than in Armenia
proper. The reasons for the existence of modern Armenian Diaspora form
a mixture of political and economic factors. The latter factors have
already been referred to above. The prevailing political factor in
this context is the 1915 Armenian Genocide in Ottoman Turkey, which
forced hundred thousands survivors to settle in the US, European
countries, as well as in the Middle East and Latin America. Hence,
the identity of the Armenian Diaspora was largely shaped by a single
political event and centered around the demand for moral and political
recognition of the Armenian Genocide. The Diaspora Armenian interest
groups are well-organized in the leading countries of the world,
particularly in the US. At the same time, these groups are active
in introducing the American approaches in Armenia, both regarding
Armenia itself and the region at large.
Apparently, Armenia's foreign policy is bound to search for balancing
formulas, keeping in mind the global trends of development and the
traditional interests of regional powers. In essence, in seeking these
solutions our country chooses an "act and see" behavior over "wait
and see" precautious attitude. Armenia tends to meet the challenging
controversies in the international politics bridging them in accordance
with common sense towards positive cooperation."
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
armradio.am
06.11.2007 15:26
October 29-November 4 RA Deputy Foreign Minister Armen Baibourtian
visited Japan in the framework of the "Encouragement of cooperation
in the 21st century" program. During the visit the Deputy FM made
a speech at the Japan Institute of International Affairs. The full
text of the lecture entitled "A foreign policy for a small state:
Armenia's case" is presented below:
"In 1991 Barry Buzan, British political scientist, contemplating on
the pure model of nationhood questioned the status of statehood as
an objective precondition for a nation's existence. His argument was
exemplified by the Armenians, a nation without a state. Ironically,
his sample did not last long, since the very same year Armenia
becomes independent. However, the potential of the "Armenian case"
to contradict pure models seems to be indefatigable. This point
assumes real content, when we consider Armenia in the mainstream of
world political processes occurring in the last decade of the 20th
century. The end of the Cold war that resulted in the disestablishment
of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia also manifested itself as
the conclusion of centuries' long evolution of different forms of
governances and polities, bringing them to a single surviving model:
the nation state.
In 1992, when Armenia and other former Soviet republics gained their
seats in the United Nations, nearly the whole world was a family of
various nation states. The international system took its final shape
towards which it was moving since the Peace Treaty of Westphalia. Now -
after fifteen years from those landmark changes of the early 1990s -
we can assess how much exactly that shape was "final".
Not surprisingly, as it is the case with many notions and processes,
the end of one cycle in international relations brings to the start
of another one.
Charles Tilly nicely captured this phenomenon while stating that
"...states may be following the old routine by which an institution
falls into ruin just as it becomes complete". And so, having gained
at last the long aspired independence, Armenia had to build its state
institutions without having an undisputed model of a nation state in
the changing world.
The emergence of the United Europe encompassing the greatest portion of
the continent, the transnational promotion of Western values by the US,
Russia's steady determination to maintain its traditional influence
in international politics considerably undermined the conventional
understanding of nation state in its most important dimension:
absolute sovereignty. At the risk of some oversimplification, we
can state that the erosion of the nation state sovereignty is so far
being broadly explained by academicians and practitioners as a part
of either globalization or clash of civilizations. The latter notion
seemingly includes but is not simply reduced to perpetual clashes and
confrontations among different civilizations. It largely refers to
the ascendance of major regional power centers as main players in the
world politics. Hence, simultaneous to the state building process -
with all conventional complexities - Armenia found itself amid the
tendencies of both globalization and regionalization.
>From the very beginning of its independence Armenia has strongly
advocated neo-liberal economic globalization, and closely cooperated
with its main international institutions and the U.S. In general,
Armenia went considerably beyond the majority of former Soviet
republics in carrying out IMF and WB prescribed economic and structural
reforms. The land reform and the following massive privatization of
other sectors of economy were implemented with certain neo-liberal
zeal. As a result, even given the hardships of closed land borders
with two of its neighbors, Azerbaijan and Turkey, Armenia succeeded in
creating a flexible and healthy economy. Yet, the sound foundations of
economy alone could not guarantee its further development in terms of
gaining access to the external markets. For a country with a limited
domestic market and scarce resources, active presence in big regional
markets is an imperative. Armenia's economy had to deal with the
issue of creating knowledge-based entrepreneurial capacities on its
own. Clearly, without consistent expansion to the common markets of
the EU and the CIS, and emerging markets in Asia and the Middle East,
Armenian economy will lose the momentum to acquire sustainability.
Likewise, political issues Armenia is facing today have strong regional
dimension. Strained relations with Turkey and Azerbaijan push Armenia
to seek for the long-term solutions in its regional policy. At
the same time, international organizations such as OSCE, CIS and
EU, which assist in solving these problems, have certain regional
underpinning and vocation. Not surprisingly, Armenia's foreign policy
gravitates towards a balancing act between the global and regional
tendencies. Consequently, the task that Armenia's foreign policy is
compelled to fulfill is a choice between practical short term gains
and a solid conceptual framework for its orientation in the region
and the world.
Here perceptions interact with realities and visa versa. These
perceptions are shaped by a historical record of being a borderland
nation during various historical periods given Armenia's strategic
location at the crossroads between East and West, North and South. As a
borderland throughout the history the Armenian kingdoms were integrated
into different regional systems, by assuming a peculiar role of a
quasi independent "trustworthy alien". Armenia's role as "the sole
Christian Kingdom of the Caliphate" and "the Oriental Kingdom of
Latin Outremere" during the Crusades is a good case in point.
Another reality of Armenia's past and present is the existence of the
worldwide Armenian communities - the Diaspora - which have acquired
a global role since the 16-17th centuries. This organizational form
of the Armenian people came into existence at the initial phase of
global trade, when the Armenian merchants established worldwide trading
network. The author of the perpetual peace theory Immanuel Kant was
one of the first thinkers who drew the attention to the distinctive
character of Armenian Diaspora: "Armenians wander on foot from the
borders of China all the way to Cape Corso on the coast of Guinea
to carry on commerce... in line from North-East to South-West, they
travel through almost whole extent of the ancient continent and know
how to secure a peaceful reception by all the peoples they encounter.".
Why are these two generalizations important for the assessment
of Armenia's foreign policy making? Firstly, both these intrinsic
realities remain valid nowadays and happen to form the constants of
Armenia's foreign policy. Our country is a member of various regional
initiatives, such as CIS, CSTO, CoE, EU European Neighborhood Policy,
and NATO Individual Partnership Programme, trying to develop mutually
beneficial relationship with the EU, Russia, and the US. This is a new
regionalism posing new challenges and creating new opportunities. It
has to be mentioned that the process of regionalization or regional
integration does not have a single model. These processes have
different speed, multiple layers and finally, quite different
purposes and aspirations. From millenarian sentiments of the EU to
issue oriented agenda of the SCO, the new regionalization is taking
different faces.
In its regional policy Armenia values predictability among other
notions and principles in the context of regional integration and
development is constantly making efforts to become a trusted partner
for the countries, institutions and individuals interested in the
region's stable economic, social and cultural advance based on the
universal values of democracy and free market. We have strong belief
that new dividing lines in South Caucasus and the region at large
undermine the positive component of regional developments that has
been formed during these years.
Armenia's European aspirations are a manifestation of our strong
historical and cultural link to Europe and Europeanness, as well as
a national urge to evolve into a free modern society that is able
to meet the demands of the new century. At the moment, we and our
European colleagues are jointly working towards this aim in the
framework of the European Neighborhood Policy programme.
Secondly, there are more Armenians living abroad than in Armenia
proper. The reasons for the existence of modern Armenian Diaspora form
a mixture of political and economic factors. The latter factors have
already been referred to above. The prevailing political factor in
this context is the 1915 Armenian Genocide in Ottoman Turkey, which
forced hundred thousands survivors to settle in the US, European
countries, as well as in the Middle East and Latin America. Hence,
the identity of the Armenian Diaspora was largely shaped by a single
political event and centered around the demand for moral and political
recognition of the Armenian Genocide. The Diaspora Armenian interest
groups are well-organized in the leading countries of the world,
particularly in the US. At the same time, these groups are active
in introducing the American approaches in Armenia, both regarding
Armenia itself and the region at large.
Apparently, Armenia's foreign policy is bound to search for balancing
formulas, keeping in mind the global trends of development and the
traditional interests of regional powers. In essence, in seeking these
solutions our country chooses an "act and see" behavior over "wait
and see" precautious attitude. Armenia tends to meet the challenging
controversies in the international politics bridging them in accordance
with common sense towards positive cooperation."
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress