Category: 2017

ARMINFO News Agency, Armenia
 Saturday


Expert: It is time to transfer economic cooperation in the EAEU from
the supply of agricultural products to high-tech industries

Yerevan December 23

Tatevik Shagunyan. If we compare the values of positive attitudes in
the society of Armenia to the Eurasian Economic Union with the level
of private money transfers from Russia to Armenia, it is obvious that
private transfers are very powerful, directly and quickly a factor
that determines these attitudes. This opinion was expressed at the
conference "Three years of the EAEU: achievements and prospects" at
the annual meeting of the Eurasian Expert Club, Candidate of
Sociological Sciences, Deputy Executive Director of the Noravank
Foundation, member of the Eurasian Expert Club Samvel Manukyan.

He noted that in 2012 money transfers from Russia to Armenia amounted
1.64 billion USD, and in 2013 - 1.73 billion. "The growth of this
indicator by 100 million, or 5%, led to an increase in positive
attitudes by 6%," the expert explained. Meanwhile, against the
background of sanctions against Russia in 2014, remittances from
Russia to Armenia decreased to $ 1.55 billion (by 10%), in 2015 to
1.01 billion (by 35%), and in 2016 to $ 0.9 billion (another 11%).

"When Russia's economy adapted to economic sanctions in 2017, it began
to grow and the growth of remittances from Russia to Armenia in the
period Jan-Oct 2017, compared to the same period of 2016, was 16%. As
we have already noted, the level of positive attitudes towards the
EAEU in 2017 increased by 4%," he said. As the expert noted,
calculations based on the mathematical model show that the growth of
private cash transfers from Russia to Armenia by $ 100 million, on
average, increases the positive attitude towards the EAEU by
approximately 0.5%. On the other hand, he said, even if remittances
from Russia to Armenia are reduced to zero, approximately 40% of the
population will positively regard the EAEU.

According to him, today the task of integrating high-tech industries,
as well as scientific and technological research in the EAEU,
including between Armenia and Russia, is extremely urgent.

"These works are determined by two factors: the first factor is the
ideas existing in the Armenian society that Russia is preferable to
partnering for the development of industry than the EU, and for the
development of science, EU is preferable to Russia. It is known that
today industry, high technologies and science are inseparably linked,
that is, there are no longer any production worthy of implementation,
without high technologies, therefore, Russia's advantage as a partner
of industrial integration will gradually melt," the expert explained.
The second factor, he said, is a derivative of the global competition
of large economic spaces with the goal of achieving a primacy in a new
economic order based on fundamentally new technologies.

Therefore, Manukyan summed up, it is time to immediately begin to
transfer economic cooperation within the frame of the EAEU from the
supply of agricultural products, wine and vodka products and gas and
oil products, to the sphere of high-technology production, development
of technologies and scientific research.

The conference is organized by the research and analytical public
organization "Integration and Development" and the scientific and
educational fund "Noravank".

ARMINFO News Agency, Armenia
 Saturday


Expert: Energy component of the Armenia-EU agreement conceals big
threats for Armenia

Yerevan December 23

Tatevik Shagunyan. Over the past almost 30 years, Armenia and the
whole region are in a state of rupture between two major integration
projects - conditionally integration along the West-East axis (or the
"Western Project") and the North-South axis (the "Eurasian Project").
Such an opinion at the conferences "Three years of the Unified Energy
System: achievements and prospects" within the framework of the annual
meeting of the Eurasian Expert Club, the leading analyst of Noravank,
the national expert of the UN on energy Ara Marajyan expressed.

According to him, it is within the framework of the "Western Project"
that the energy transport blockade of Armenia is being implemented.
"It is not just about laying the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline or
the railway blockade of Armenia, but also what little is known about,
and even less about cutting off Armenia from the development of the
regional high-voltage power line network (Borchka-Ahlha line),
achieved in 2004-2007 within the framework of the Organization of the
Black Sea Economic Cooperation, at the initiative of Turkey and with
the support of the United States and the EU. Or isolating Armenia from
the development of backbone optic-logical networks of broadband
networks and the Internet in the region, in the late 90s and early
2000s," the expert explained.

Concerning Armenia's integration preferences, the expert cites the
opinion polls of the Helsinki Conference and Norway (Vanadzor office).
"So, according to the results of the survey, third of respondents
(33%) considered the desired participation of Armenia in the European
Union, and another third (32%) - in the Eurasian. 12% considered the
desirable participation in both of these unions, and 10% - in none of
them. In August 2016, 41% of the respondents considered the
participation of Armenia in the European Union, and only 25% in the
Eurasian Union. No country in the world has caused such a serious
damage to the positive attitude towards the Eurasian integration
process and Russia, than Russia itself. The situation here was
stabilized only by extraordinary measures: deliveries of Iskander, the
creation of a single field of air defense and missile defense, the
formation of a unified army, the consistent implementation of measures
to extend the life of the Armenian nuclear power plant to 2026-2027,"
he said.

Concerning the agreement on comprehensive and expanded partnership
between Armenia and the EU, the expert, in particular, focused on the
energy component of it. Article 42 of the second chapter of the
agreement states in part: "In the civil nuclear sector, in particular,
to pay special attention to the high level of nuclear safety, based on
IAEA standards and European Union standards and practices, and on the
basis of international guidelines and practices on nuclear safety,
cooperation in this area should include, inter alia: the closure and
safe decommissioning of Metsamor NPP and the early adoption of a "road
map" or plan for this purpose, taking into account the need for
substitution nuclear power plants of new capacity, providing energy
security of the Republic of Armenia and conditions for its sustainable
development".

According to the expert, this formulation contains both positive and
dangerous points. The positive moment is the 2nd block of Metsamor
NPP. "The tasks are important and included in the list of priorities
of the Armenian government," Marajyan said. "Second, the recognized
fact" of the specifics of "Armenia, in the formulation that leaves
freedom in interpreting this very specifics", as well as "emotional
security", the countries deprived of their own hydrocarbon resources
and dependent on the supply of primary energy carriers," he said.

As the third argument of the expert, he cited the fact that he
recognized the need for a substitute Metsamor NPP capable of ensuring
energy security and sustainable development of the republic. Here it
is necessary to emphasize that Metsamor NPP is first of all
"guaranteed generating capacity"(GGM) and only then - a source of
energy. It is the deficit of GGM - the main problem of the Armenian
energy. It is the GGM that is the basis for energy security and the
key to its development in the long term (solar, wind energy, small
hydropower plants, and can not serve as substitute power for nuclear
power plants.) For Armenia, these are either a new nuclear unit (and
this, by the way, is the second principle of a state energy strategy
developed by the government and approved by the President of Armenia
in 2015.) Either large hydropower stations with reservoirs of
long-term regulation, and nothing more," Marajyan said.

The concealed dangers of the text of the agreement, in his opinion,
should be attributed to the fact that the above formulation actually
erodes the sole responsibility of the IAEA, the only professional
international organization that has been dealing with the Armenian
nuclear power plant for decades. "Today, after the signing of the
agreement, in the issue of the Armenian NPP, and, consequently, in the
matter of choosing the technology of the new nuclear power plant unit,
Euratom and its 28 members joined the IAEA. The situation here
alarmingly resembles attempts to blur the single mandate of the Minsk
Group for the settlement of the confrontation in Artsakh, or attempts
by the US and Israel to dilute the mandate of the same IAEA to monitor
the implementation of the agreement on Iran's nuclear program," the
expert said.

Summing up, according to Marajyan, it turns out that Prague (sells
weapons to Azerbaijan and calling for lifting the EU's restrictions on
the sale of lethal weapons to this country), Warsaw (with its
military- strategic cooperation with Turkey within NATO, including
missile defense and nuclear weapons), or Budapest - with its close
relations with Azerbaijan, as well as Vilnius, Riga or Tallinn, can
effectively and, most importantly, legally, block the use of any
Russian nuclear technology in the construction of a new unit of the
Armenian NPP. Including the technology of WWER-type reactors familiar
to Armenian specialists, which for today, and in the foreseeable
future - are the most reliable, effective, and most importantly
competitive in nuclear energy.

"In the final analysis, all this means that a mechanism has been
created that could potentially deprive Armenia of nuclear energy."
Moreover, a mechanism has been created that can cut Armenia off from
Russia in the most significant, technological, long-term and
science-intensive segment of cooperation," he concluded, saying that
the wording of article 42 of the agreement has some freedom of
interpretation.