NOW RUSSIA HAS NO REASON TO INTERFERE IN ARMENIA’S STABILITY
[ Part 2.2: “Attached Text” ]
April 2 2015
According to the expert for the French Military Research Foundation
Gaidz Minasyan, Serzh Sargsyan is ready to sign the political component
of partnership with the EU. – Recently, French Secretary of State for
European Affairs, Harlem Desir, stated that French President Francois
Hollande will discuss the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh with Armenian and
Azerbaijani counterparts during his visit to Yerevan and Baku on April
24 and 25, accordingly. It turns out that Hollande will visit Armenia
not only for attending the 100th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide,
but also for the Karabakh issue. Will the recent activeness by France
be successful? Is it possible to hold Sargsyan-Aliyev meeting in the
near future?
Gaidz Minasyan – Firstly, it is necessary to lessen the escalation of
tension on the contact line and only then to think about organizing
a new meeting. The United States, France, and Russia seek to save
the negotiation process to show that there is no other way but a
political solution. The Azerbaijani side is thinking about holding
these talks. They consider that it is necessary to negotiate on
the new agreement, thereby seeking to come out of the discussion
of the Madrid principles, as they are against these principles for
the past three years, if not more. Today, the Azeris are primarily
highlighting the economic impulse. As you know, the oil prices fell,
and the investments are less than expected, hence, these two reasons
make them act in dual form over the negotiations.
– It is obvious that Azerbaijan runs a line of maintaining the contact
line in tension, a policy of subversives and provocations. In recent
months, this desire of maintaining the tension does not receive an
adequate response from the West. What do you think, what kind of
work is necessary to carry out on the diplomatic front to restrain
the activities of the Azerbaijani authorities? Why has Azerbaijan
adopted such a tactic? What does it seek?
– If the Azerbaijani side does not exert this terrible pressure
on the Armenian side, does not use this lever by diversions and
provocations, then it means that it has reconciled to the loss of
Nagorno-Karabakh. Simply, they do not have any other choice. Since
they are strongly against the Madrid principles but cannot say it
openly, it remains using the other option – constant diversions
and tension on the border to show to the international community
that the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is not resolved, and since it
is not resolved, they will go on with provocations and subversive
activities. The Armenian government authorities and diplomacy
(firstly, where was the Armenian diplomacy some three, if not eight
years ago?), if the opponent exerts such pressures, should be more
active in voicing that unless the international community guarantees
the security of the people of Armenia and Karabakh, we would not only
refuse negotiations, but will demonstrate a kind of passivity, because
we have done so much in the diplomatic front that after it nothing is
any longer possible. Three options exist, either Armenia retreats and
the Karabakh authorities should return to the negotiating table, or a
war, which no one wants, or the third option – a start of the Karabakh
recognition process by Armenia. Azerbaijan raises only the principle
of territorial integrity, while in the talks, they negotiation on the
principle of self-determination and adopt papers with the RA government
authorities and co-chairing countries, anyway, only one principle is
publicly voiced from Aliyev’s lips and a reference to the four
resolutions of the UN Security Council. Each time Armenia’s
diplomacy should announce after the Azerbaijani diversions that
it is adherent to the negotiation and the OSCE Minsk Group format,
but also should voice the above-mentioned three options. It is clear
that if Armenia recognizes Karabakh, automatically it will assume an
outbreak of war.
But, there is an internal problem here in terms of domestic political
and state institutions. Should we have two chambers of the parliament,
we could demonstrate more flexibility. We would have entered the
resolution on recognition of the Karabakh independence into the agenda,
would respond to every provocations by the Azerbaijani side and would
have voiced the resolution for the Karabakh recognition at the Foreign
Relations Committee of the National Assembly, we would have voted for
the issue to enter into an extensive agenda. Surely, Azerbaijan would
begin complaining, the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs would also say, what
are you doing? While, we could answer that our government branches are
separate: there is a legislative and executive power, and this issue is
under the examination by the legislature rather than the executive, we
are unable to influence. The American and French sides respond to the
Armenian and Turkish sides by using the Armenian Genocide resolutions
in their parliaments. Since the Parliament of Armenia does not have two
chambers, this option can be used to enter the issue of recognizing
the independence of Nagorno-Karabakh into the Constitutional Court,
as it happened in the case of the Armenian-Turkish protocols. But
what does our diplomacy do? Foreign Minister Nalbandyan is right
when he announces that Armenia’s posture is consistent with
the posture of the international community, but this is not enough,
practically, it is necessary to display flexibility.
– Recently, Serzh Sargsyan addressed the subject of arms sale to
Azerbaijan by Russia, noting that the Armenian-Russian relations are
concerned about the fact that the Armenian young man standing on our
borders realizes that he is tried to be destroyed by the Russian arm.
Is it possible for the Russian side to be limited to arms sales to
Azerbaijan in the context of this statement, and the balance of the
arms sale between Armenia and Azerbaijan is broken?
– First of all, Serzh Sargsyan voices the arms sale to Azerbaijan
by Russia for the second time. Last time, he spoke on this in his
interview with Argentinian newspaper. Unfortunately, this was talked
about quite late, however, let’s leave this issue aside now,
better late than never. I think Serzh Sargsyan runs a special tactics
here. Armenia joined the Eurasian Economic Union so that Russia
would not prevent the stability of Armenia, as well as for security
reasons. To some extent, a balance is maintained. Armenia is both a
CSTO member and cooperates with NATO. Currently, Armenia is willing
to maintain a balance, on the one hand, with EaEU, and, on the other
hand, with the EU relations. Perhaps, Armenia would reach an agreement
with the EU in the political sphere. The next important factor is that
the Russians offered Azerbaijan to join the EaEU, instead, perhaps,
promising to return the liberated territories or simply the Karabakh
to Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan refused to join the EaEU. Serzh Sargsyan
then played another game, realizing that the relations between Russia
and Azerbaijan are not so good. If Armenia had not joined the EaEU,
Russia would prevent the stability of Armenia, now, they have
no reason for doing so. Russians are not for fiery situations in
everywhere, there is a Ukrainian crisis, as well as socio-economic
problems inside Russia. In this situation, Serzh Sargsyan employed
his diplomatic tactics. Using certain problems between Russia and
Azerbaijan, he spoke on the subject of arms sale to Azerbaijan by
Russia. Serzh Sargsyan is ready to sign the political component
of the partnership with the EU because he knows that Russia seeks
settling down the problems with the EU. Thirdly, the President of
Armenia visited China, this is another important step politically and
economically. China is interested in relations with Armenia. China
is seeking to open new routes to the West, a more convenient and
secure route through our region, as they would not have to get to
the Suez and South Africa. Both Russians, Europeans, and Americans
know about this new road projects. But a question arises of who will
be controlling this road. Armenia is within the important crossroad,
and Armenia’s role is extremely important today. Two years ago,
Russia acted against Ukraine and Armenia to adopt the EU Association
Agreement because it was against this road project.
– A few days ago, French Ambassador to Armenia Jean-Francois
Charpentier mentioned that prior to the upcoming Riga summit in May,
the technical component of the EU-Armenia talks, perhaps, will be
completed. The Ambassador informed that the EU-Armenia relations will
be discussed during the upcoming visit of the President of France to
Yerevan on April 24. Should we expect any surprise at the EU summit
in Riga? Is it possible to adopt a specific paper between Armenian
and the EU?
– In principle, it is possible, but the important question is where
we have reached in the negotiations with the EU, and whether the
signing of a document is possible. It is positive that the French
are negotiating. The role of Germany is also important here, and this
issue should be clarified with Germany too. If we want to understand
to what extent the talks on this-or-that issue are serious, we should
determine the posture of France and Germany. If statements are made
by these two countries, then signing a document is expected, and if
not, then no document will be signed between Armenia and the EU. The
positions of France and Germany are also important for Russia. Moscow
trusts these two European countries. After the Russian-Georgian war
in August 2008, Russia was negotiating with France, Russia approved
the EU Election Observation Mission activities as France and Germany
were involved. Today, Hollande and Merkel, again France and Germany,
are negotiating with Russia on the issue of Ukraine.
Emma GABRIELYAN