ACCORDING TO KAREN BEKARIAN, NOT EVERYTHING IS SO CLOUDLESS IN ARMENIAN-GEORGIAN RELATIONS AS IT IS PRESENTED
Noyan Tapan
July 1, 2009
YEREVAN, JULY 1, NOYAN TAPAN. According to Adviser to Georgian
President Van Bayburt, Mikheil Saakashvili’s June 24-25 visit to
Armenia was a visit of a friendly country’s head to a friendly
country. It was a success irrespective of some commentaries
in press. V. Bayburt expressed such an opinion at the July 1
Yerevan-Tbilisi video bridge on the subject Results of Georgian
President’s Visit to Armenia: Prospects of Bilateral Relations.
In the affirmation of another representative of the Georgian side,
political scientist Gia Nodia, there are no problems between the two
countries that can damage the bilateral good-neighborly relations. In
his words, a positive tendency has been always observed in the issue
of solving the problems between the two countries, irrespective of
the fact who headed the two countries at that moment.
Karen Bekarian, the head of the European Integration NGO, a member of
the Public Council of Armenia, opposed to these optimistic views. In
his opinion, not everything is so cloudless in the bilateral relations
as it is presented. He also gave assurance that it will be difficult
to expect real development of the two countries’ relations as long
as the Armenian and Georgian political figures have contacts rather
"at the level of toasts." In K. Bekarian’s words, this discussion
also confirms that the Georgian side is not able to overcome the
stereotype that it is Armenia that is more interested in the two
countries’ good relations, as well as in relaunching of the Verin
Lars Russian-Georgian border check-point.
K. Bekarian called his Georgian colleagues for not conditioning the
Armenian-Georgian relations by Georgia’s relations with a third side,
Russia when discussing the Armenian-Georgian relations, but being
realistic and trying to find out who and why, for instance, prohibited
Armenian NA deputy Shirak Torosian’s entrance to Georgia. And
Sergey Minasian, the Deputy Director of the Caucasus Institute,
inquired how much the prohibition to have retraining in Armenia to
teachers teaching Armenian in Georgia contributed to development of
the Armenian-Georgian relations.
In response V. Bayburt stated that Armenian deputy’s entrance was
prohibited for his "Russian rhetoric."