Tweet
THE EU AND THE CAUCASUS: NAVIGATING THE COURSE OF INTEGRATION
by ZAUR SHIRIYEV
Today's Zaman
April 24 2012
Turkey
This month has seen increased EU-based involvement in the South
Caucasus, with the second plenary session of the Euronest Parliamentary
Assembly held in Baku from April 2-4 and with recommendations
being issued at last week's European Parliament session to the
European Council and European Commission regarding the negotiation
of Association Agreements with Armenia and Azerbaijan, which first
began in July 2010.
The Euronest Parliamentary Assembly, it was hoped, would provide
a platform for mediation between Azerbaijan and Armenia and would
serve to build trust and understanding between the two countries. The
European Parliament issued two documents, one each for Azerbaijan
and Armenia, which addressed two key issues for the resolution of the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and the implementation of the EU Association
Agreement.
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict In their recommendations to the European
Council on the EU-Azerbaijani Association Agreement, the members of
the European Parliament touched on the importance of the resolution
of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, emphasizing the right to return to
the region, the property rights and the right to personal security of
Azerbaijani internally displaced persons (IDP) from Nagorno-Karabakh
and the surrounding territories.
They called for the unconditional restoration of their rights and
financial support from the EU for those affected.
Many of the same recommendations appear in the EU-Armenian Association
Agreement, in which the members of the European Parliament call upon
Armenia to withdraw its forces from the occupied territories and to
return these territories to Azerbaijani control, which would be a
positive development from the EU perspective. The same recommendation
was made in the past but saw little follow-up action, despite the
European Parliament's resolution of May 20, 2010, "on the need for
an EU strategy for the South Caucasus," which stressed that "frozen
conflicts are an impediment to the economic and social development and
hinder the improvement of the standard of living of the South Caucasus
region, as well as the full development of the Eastern Partnership;
whereas a peaceful resolution of the conflicts is essential for
stability in the EU neighborhood."
Another important aspect of the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict is security guarantees following the post-settlement
return of IDPs to their homes, which the EU describes as a "genuine
multinational peacekeeping operation in order to create suitable
conditions for the future legally-binding free expression of will
concerning the final status of Nagorno-Karabakh." But the question of
who will lead such a peacekeeping operation is conspicuously absent
from this document, and the matter remains one of some contention. Any
UN-mandated multinational peacekeeping force would likely be seen as
neutral and a potentially realistic solution.
Regional issues beyond the Association Agreement One of the concerns
raised by the members of the European Parliament is Armenia's policy
regarding Iran; Armenia still does not fully support the sanctions
against Iran. The recommendation by the European Parliament states
the need to "urge Armenia to make efforts to align its policy towards
Iran with the EU approach to this country."
Clearly, Armenia's energy future, as far as it is based on
joint initiatives with Iran, will be negatively affected. Despite
international sanctions on Iranian oil exports, Armenia has continued,
and even increased, its import of Iranian oil, much to the dismay of
the West.
When Armenian Defense Minister Seyran Ohanyan visited Washington on
March 20, his US counterpart, Leon Panetta, raised the question of
Armenia's coziness with Iran. It seems that the EU and the US are both
concerned about the future of this Armenian-Iranian cooperation. When
asked, Armenian government officials simply replied, "We have several
scenarios, and they are described in our National Security Strategy."
If we look at Armenia's National Security Strategy, it states only
that the sanctions against Iran pose security challenges to Armenia,
despite claims by Armenian officials that there is described in
the document a strategy for how to join in the implementation of
sanctions against Iran. In fact, there is not; neither is there any
description of what Armenia's strategy should be nor any possible
alternate courses of action for how to deal with security if Armenia
chooses to fall in line with the sanctions.
Another issue in EU-Armenian cooperation is the upcoming parliamentary
elections in Armenia in May. The EU has urged Yerevan to take all
possible steps to ensure free and fair elections. While the EU does
not seek to impose a model or "recipe" for political reform in either
Armenia or Azerbaijan, it supports a policy of mutual effort; "do more
to get more." The resolution notes that at the time of Armenia's last
elections, people were killed during the course of police attempts to
prevent an opposition demonstration. It further notes that Armenia
has yet to complete a "transparent and impartial investigation of
the events of 1 March 2008."
Additionally, one of the important points in the European Parliament's
recommendations relates to democratic development and political
reform. The EU emphasizes in the Association Agreement the crucial
importance of freedom of expression and human rights issues.
It appears that such issues are high on the agenda of the EU; the EU's
general strategy since 2009 can be read as supportive of sensitive
issues -- namely territorial integrity. Additionally, it has used
this support as leverage in improving human rights and democracy.
One of the basic problems with the EU's regional policy is that
on the one hand it wants to perform a balancing act, especially
between Azerbaijan and Armenia, but on the other hand it demands full
support for the Minsk Group process, in which it is not directly
involved. The Minsk Group spearheads efforts by the Organization
for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) to find a political
solution to the conflict in and around Nagorno-Karabakh involving
Armenia and Azerbaijan. This balancing act is the main problem in
the EU's conflict resolution policy, as EU assistance cannot replace
a targeted political and security strategy for conflict prevention
and the deterioration of the situation on the ground has destroyed
the potentially stabilizing effect of EU financial efforts towards
long-term conflict resolution. This is related to the EU's failure to
create sufficient leverage over the conflicting parties, which would
have enabled it to broker peace. Moreover, the EU proved incapable of
using policies of conditionality, which bring to bear the pertinence of
European Commission President Romano Prodi's decade-old comment that
"the European Union has 'limited resources' to settle the unresolved
conflicts in the South Caucasus" (November 2002). The real question
is whether they have limited resources or whether they only want to
invest limited resources.
From: Baghdasarian
by ZAUR SHIRIYEV
Today's Zaman
April 24 2012
Turkey
This month has seen increased EU-based involvement in the South
Caucasus, with the second plenary session of the Euronest Parliamentary
Assembly held in Baku from April 2-4 and with recommendations
being issued at last week's European Parliament session to the
European Council and European Commission regarding the negotiation
of Association Agreements with Armenia and Azerbaijan, which first
began in July 2010.
The Euronest Parliamentary Assembly, it was hoped, would provide
a platform for mediation between Azerbaijan and Armenia and would
serve to build trust and understanding between the two countries. The
European Parliament issued two documents, one each for Azerbaijan
and Armenia, which addressed two key issues for the resolution of the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and the implementation of the EU Association
Agreement.
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict In their recommendations to the European
Council on the EU-Azerbaijani Association Agreement, the members of
the European Parliament touched on the importance of the resolution
of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, emphasizing the right to return to
the region, the property rights and the right to personal security of
Azerbaijani internally displaced persons (IDP) from Nagorno-Karabakh
and the surrounding territories.
They called for the unconditional restoration of their rights and
financial support from the EU for those affected.
Many of the same recommendations appear in the EU-Armenian Association
Agreement, in which the members of the European Parliament call upon
Armenia to withdraw its forces from the occupied territories and to
return these territories to Azerbaijani control, which would be a
positive development from the EU perspective. The same recommendation
was made in the past but saw little follow-up action, despite the
European Parliament's resolution of May 20, 2010, "on the need for
an EU strategy for the South Caucasus," which stressed that "frozen
conflicts are an impediment to the economic and social development and
hinder the improvement of the standard of living of the South Caucasus
region, as well as the full development of the Eastern Partnership;
whereas a peaceful resolution of the conflicts is essential for
stability in the EU neighborhood."
Another important aspect of the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict is security guarantees following the post-settlement
return of IDPs to their homes, which the EU describes as a "genuine
multinational peacekeeping operation in order to create suitable
conditions for the future legally-binding free expression of will
concerning the final status of Nagorno-Karabakh." But the question of
who will lead such a peacekeeping operation is conspicuously absent
from this document, and the matter remains one of some contention. Any
UN-mandated multinational peacekeeping force would likely be seen as
neutral and a potentially realistic solution.
Regional issues beyond the Association Agreement One of the concerns
raised by the members of the European Parliament is Armenia's policy
regarding Iran; Armenia still does not fully support the sanctions
against Iran. The recommendation by the European Parliament states
the need to "urge Armenia to make efforts to align its policy towards
Iran with the EU approach to this country."
Clearly, Armenia's energy future, as far as it is based on
joint initiatives with Iran, will be negatively affected. Despite
international sanctions on Iranian oil exports, Armenia has continued,
and even increased, its import of Iranian oil, much to the dismay of
the West.
When Armenian Defense Minister Seyran Ohanyan visited Washington on
March 20, his US counterpart, Leon Panetta, raised the question of
Armenia's coziness with Iran. It seems that the EU and the US are both
concerned about the future of this Armenian-Iranian cooperation. When
asked, Armenian government officials simply replied, "We have several
scenarios, and they are described in our National Security Strategy."
If we look at Armenia's National Security Strategy, it states only
that the sanctions against Iran pose security challenges to Armenia,
despite claims by Armenian officials that there is described in
the document a strategy for how to join in the implementation of
sanctions against Iran. In fact, there is not; neither is there any
description of what Armenia's strategy should be nor any possible
alternate courses of action for how to deal with security if Armenia
chooses to fall in line with the sanctions.
Another issue in EU-Armenian cooperation is the upcoming parliamentary
elections in Armenia in May. The EU has urged Yerevan to take all
possible steps to ensure free and fair elections. While the EU does
not seek to impose a model or "recipe" for political reform in either
Armenia or Azerbaijan, it supports a policy of mutual effort; "do more
to get more." The resolution notes that at the time of Armenia's last
elections, people were killed during the course of police attempts to
prevent an opposition demonstration. It further notes that Armenia
has yet to complete a "transparent and impartial investigation of
the events of 1 March 2008."
Additionally, one of the important points in the European Parliament's
recommendations relates to democratic development and political
reform. The EU emphasizes in the Association Agreement the crucial
importance of freedom of expression and human rights issues.
It appears that such issues are high on the agenda of the EU; the EU's
general strategy since 2009 can be read as supportive of sensitive
issues -- namely territorial integrity. Additionally, it has used
this support as leverage in improving human rights and democracy.
One of the basic problems with the EU's regional policy is that
on the one hand it wants to perform a balancing act, especially
between Azerbaijan and Armenia, but on the other hand it demands full
support for the Minsk Group process, in which it is not directly
involved. The Minsk Group spearheads efforts by the Organization
for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) to find a political
solution to the conflict in and around Nagorno-Karabakh involving
Armenia and Azerbaijan. This balancing act is the main problem in
the EU's conflict resolution policy, as EU assistance cannot replace
a targeted political and security strategy for conflict prevention
and the deterioration of the situation on the ground has destroyed
the potentially stabilizing effect of EU financial efforts towards
long-term conflict resolution. This is related to the EU's failure to
create sufficient leverage over the conflicting parties, which would
have enabled it to broker peace. Moreover, the EU proved incapable of
using policies of conditionality, which bring to bear the pertinence of
European Commission President Romano Prodi's decade-old comment that
"the European Union has 'limited resources' to settle the unresolved
conflicts in the South Caucasus" (November 2002). The real question
is whether they have limited resources or whether they only want to
invest limited resources.
From: Baghdasarian