Month: September 2013

PUTIN, ARMENIAN LEADER EXCHANGE GREETINGS AT START OF TALKS – KREMLIN TRANSCRIPT

President of the Russian Federation website
Sept 3 2013

PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA VLADIMIR PUTIN: Mr Sargsyan, I am very happy to
see you. Thank you for coming, for accepting our invitation. This is
already your second visit in recent months.

I am very happy that our relations are developing so actively in
nearly all areas. There is frequent contact between our parliaments,
cabinets and businesses. Indeed, I hope that in this respect, the
result is positive.

Economically, our trade has increased over 23 per cent. Russia
remains Armenia’s number one trade and economic partner, and this is
a stable trend.

I am very happy to see you in Moscow. Welcome!

PRESIDENT OF ARMENIA SERZH SARGSYAN: Mr Putin, thank you very much
for your invitation.

There is a number of issues that require discussion and
decision-making, with the goal of strengthening our relations and
fostering constructive processes.

Our relations, the relations between Armenia and Russia, are built on
centuries-long traditions of friendship and brotherhood between our
nations. I am confident that these relations will continue develop
in the spirit of mutual understanding in accordance with our Treaty
of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance.

I am confident that every generation of Armenians and Russians must
contribute to the history of these relations. We value them and will
do everything to ensure that they develop. This is an absolute priority
for us.

At the same time, there are matters that need to be resolved – to
ensure that our relations rise to a new, higher level. That is why
I have come to Moscow. Thank you for the invitation.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

PUTIN, ARMENIAN PRESIDENT ADDRESS MEDIA AFTER TALKS – KREMLIN TRANSCRIPT

President of the Russian Federation website
Set 4 2013

PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA VLADIMIR PUTIN: Mr Sargsyan, ladies and gentlemen,

I would like to note that as always, my talks with the President
of Armenia were conducted in a very business-oriented, constructive
and friendly atmosphere. They reflected the nature of our strategic
partnership relations.

I will note that we had a substantive discussion of all the main issues
of the Russian-Armenian cooperation, including, first and foremost,
prospects for further developing our economic ties.

The Russian side supports Armenia’s decision to join the Customs Union
and engage in the Eurasian integration process and its formalisation.

We will assist this process in every possible way. I am confident that
Yerevan’s participation in the Eurasian integration institutions will
give a big boost to mutually beneficial economic cooperation.

Russia is Armenia’s leading trade and economic partner. Last year,
our turnover grew by 22 per cent, exceeding 1.2bn dollars. We managed
to maintain the same trend this year. In January-May of this year,
we registered an additional 13 per cent growth in trade.

Moreover, we have achieved high investment figures. The volume of
accumulated Russian capital investment is over 3bn dollars. This
accounts for nearly half of all foreign investments in Armenia’s
economy.

There are approximately 1,300 Russian companies operating in Armenia,
and they make up more than 25 per cent of all joint ventures with
foreign participation. They operate in a wide range of sectors,
including gas, nuclear and hydropower, transport, telecommunications
and finance.

The major projects include Gazprom’s participation in the construction
of the Iran-Armenia gas pipeline, Inter RAO UES’s work to renew the
Sevan-Hrazdan cascade HPP [hydroelectric power plant], and continued
cooperation in the nuclear sector. Rosatom experts reached an agreement
with Armenian specialists to focus their efforts on implementing a
project to extend the operation of the Armenian nuclear power plant
by ten years.

Anticipated investments by Russian Railways in developing the Armenian
railway network may be as high as R15bn [approximately 500m dollars].

Partners in the banking sector, including Russia’s Vneshtorgbank and
Gazprombank, are also broadening their cooperation.

Interregional ties play a key role as well. More than 70 Russian
regions are engaged in this cooperation. The third Russian-Armenian
Interregional Forum will be held in October 2013.

We intend to continue promoting cooperation in culture and encouraging
scientific contacts, student exchanges and, of course, youth exchanges
in general.

We are developing an initiative to create a Russian-language magnet
school and open a Moscow State University branch in Yerevan. We have
proven experience in the field of education and we will certainly
use it – I am referring to the Russian-Armenian (Slavonic) University
and branches of six Russian university that have opened in Armenia,
which are educating over two thousand students.

Naturally, we also focused on international problems. And, of course,
we also discussed the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict settlement.

I want to once again thank Mr Sargsyan and all our Armenian friends
and partners for a productive, sincere conversation. Thank you for
accepting our invitation and coming to Moscow.

PRESIDENT OF ARMENIA SERZH SARGSYAN: Mr Putin, ladies and gentlemen,

I want to begin by expressing my gratitude to Mr Putin for this open,
trust-based atmosphere. We just completed talks and reached agreements
aimed at further developing Armenian-Russian relations.

As you just heard, the President of the Russian Federation and
I discussed the main issues pertaining to the allied interaction
between our nations in the political, trade and economic, energy,
military technology, humanitarian and other sectors, in the typically
constructive tone of our relations.

Naturally, we discussed regional affairs and the Nagornyy Karabakh
peace settlement; I once again confirmed Armenia’s readiness to resolve
the conflict solely by peaceful means based on the integral principles
of equal rights and the peoples’ right to self-determination, non-use
of force or threat of force, and national territorial integrity.

I re-confirmed our readiness to continue looking for solutions to end
the crisis based on the settlement principles and elements reflected
in the joint statements by the presidents of Russia, the United States
and France.

One of the main topics in our talks today was the need for
infrastructure transformations in Armenia, modernization and
diversification of our economy, which features a large number of
Russia enterprises.

We had a detailed discussion on potential areas for cooperation to
broaden the horizons of our joint work, for example, in the military
technology and fuel and energy sectors, including cooperation in
nuclear energy, transport and supply lines.

We also had a substantive exchange of views on Eurasian integration
issues, and I confirmed Armenia’s desire to join the Customs Union and
get involved in the process of creating the Eurasian Economic Union.

Twenty years ago, Armenia built its military security system within
the Collective Security Treaty format, in partnership with Russia
and several other CIS nations. Over the last decades, the system has
proven its viability and efficacy.

Now, our CSTO partners are creating a new platform for economic
cooperation. I have stated on many occasions that since we share
a system of military security, it is impossible and inefficient to
isolate ourselves from the corresponding geo-economical space. This
is a rational decision; it is a decision based on Armenia’s national
interests. This decision is not a rejection of our dialogue with
European institutions.

Over the years, Armenia has undergone many serious infrastructure
reforms with support from European partners. And in this respect,
today’s Armenia is a much more productive and competitive state than
it was several years ago. We are determined to continue these reforms
into the future.

Ladies and gentlemen, the results of our talks are reflected in the
joint statements that the President of Russia and I just signed. I am
confident that implementing all our agreements will give our strategic
allied partnership new momentum.

Thank you, Mr Putin, for your warm welcome and for our agreements.

From: Baghdasarian

AGAINST ALL ODDS, FEMALE REPORTERS LEAD IN SYRIA

The News Today (Bangladesh.)
September 4, 2013 Wednesday

Women both domestic and foreign are bringing to light the untold
stories of Syria’s brutal civil war. Still audible through the
increasingly sectarian cacophony of Syria’s ongoing civil war, a
small but influential group of Syrian and foreign women are telling
the stories of the country’s destruction in unique and meaningful ways.

Present in all aspects of the conflict, women are penning the history
of Syria.

>From the very beginnings of the initial and peaceful opposition to
Bashar al-Assad’s Baathist regime, Syrian women have played a powerful
role. Samar Yazbek, a female Syrian writer and journalist-herself an
Alawite, a member of a religious group traditionally associated with
the regime-was among the women who initiated oppositional activism.

Women, she says, were among the first who went out and protested:
“They organized these protests, formed coordinations and organizational
bodies.”

According to Yazbek, as the peaceful protests turned to armed
resistance and then into civil war, the role of women in the conflict
changed. “Syrian women didn’t pick up arms, but kept helping the
revolution by documenting violations, organizing, writing and in
the media.”

Nour Kelze, a young photographer from Aleppo, is one of these women.

An English teacher before the revolution, she began documenting
the revolution with her cellphone before being given a camera by a
professional photographer. She now spends her days on the front lines
as photo stringer for Reuters.

The visible role of women in the early stages of the uprising is what
drew American reporter Anna Day to the conflict, which she has been
covering for two years. She says her involvement was mobilized by
her original connections with women in the resistance via social media.

“It was exciting, and as a young woman myself, I was incredibly
inspired and felt privileged to tell the story of my peers in Syria
fighting for their rights.”

Historically, Syria has a reputation for being a more equal society
for women than other Arabic-speaking countries. This attitude, combined
with the absence of sexual violence like that faced by female reporters
covering Egypt and of the inherently male-dominated and militarily
embedded reporting of the Afghan and Iraqi wars, means the Syrian
conflict has drawn an unprecedented number of female foreign reporters.

For some, like journalist Jenan Moussa, based in Dubai, United
Arab Emirates, or American reporter Clarissa Ward, the conflict has
brought them wide acclaim. Others haven’t been so fortunate. Sunday
Times journalist Marie Colvin was killed by shelling in Homs during
the early days of the war, and just over a year later, Yara Abbas,
a prominent female war reporter for Syrian state-owned Al-Ikhbariyah
TV, was murdered by sniper fire in the same province.

Armenian-American journalist Lara Setrakian, founder of the digital
media project Syria Deeply, says gender is not a disadvantage in
reporting in the dangerous and unforgiving environment. “I think
at this point it is a fallacy to assume that women cannot approach
rebels or even rebel commanders in the field. I don’t think there is
any gender barrier to accessing people involved in this conflict.”

In fact, Setrakian says, women bring a unique approach to the story.

She cites female reporters’ unwavering dedication to the ongoing
conflict and says those she works with are “extremely patient and
diligent.” Comparing the Syrian conflict to a patient to a chronic
illness, she says this approach is essential. “You don’t just leave the
patient while it’s breathing. You pay attention. The women journalists
I’ve seen working in Syria have that kind of consistency and ethic.”

In conflict, women often bear the brunt of tremendous amounts of
suffering while attempting to maintain family life-and Syria is no
exception. For Yazbek, the most tragic stories are those of women
who struggle to preserve a normal home existence despite the violence.

“Most important are the women who still live out a normal life
under the shelling,” she says. Women reporters are usually those who
represent female civilians’ stories. Yazbek and Day try to give these
women a voice in their reporting.

The conflict has also brought suffering to the Syrian journalists
and activists covering it. Last month Human Rights Watch released a
report detailing the torture suffered by 10 female activists in Syria.

Accordingly, for Yazbek, Syria is no longer her physical home-she has
been living in exile in Paris since 2011. “I don’t live in a place
now, I live in the idea of a country and a revolution. My home is
my own head, filled with blood, the cries of children, and with the
sound of airplane bombs.”

For Kelze, the price of war was physical. In February she was hit by
shelling and broke her leg. “The shell hit the wall that I was using
as a shelter to cover myself. There was half of a second when I felt
like all I could see was black.” She said about the incident: “I tried
to stand up when I realized that there was a problem with my leg.”

Even in the immediate aftermath of her injury, Kelze’s first instinct
was to tell the story: “I kept shouting, ‘Where is my camera?'”

For Western journalists, the impact of covering the conflict has
been a desire to find creative ways to tell the story. Frustrated by
lack of coverage and the limits of mainstream news, Setrakian left
a successful reporting job to start Syria Deeply. The online project
compiles news, interviews, social media, and background information
to provide a detailed picture of the conflict.

“I could see that this was a chronic story. It’s hard to follow,
and it’s a very complex crisis. I was reporting to television, radio,
and Web, and I could see that across those platforms we still weren’t
really capturing the essence of what was happening.” She continues
to develop the Syria Deeply platform and hopes to expand it to other
news subjects in the future.

Day, shocked by apathy from both news outlets and audiences, has
used social media to change the way she tells stories. “I did one
experiment where I shared Instagram photos that showed snippets of
some of the most haunting stories I covered over the course of an
assignment.” Her project created a cohesive narrative arc focused
on the civilian catastrophe, she says: “I found this brief but
personalized way of telling the story to be effective in piquing the
interest of people in my networks that may not follow world politics.”

As the conflict drags well into its third year with little sign of
resolution, these dedicated women from varied backgrounds and nations
all want to keep working to find new ways to get people to listen.

Each has a different hope for Syria and for herself. Yazbek laments
the rise in sectarianism, which she blames on regime strategy. She
insists she will return to Syria and be involved in the reconstruction
of the country she has sacrificed so much for. Of herself, she says:
“I have only one dream: the fall of Bashar.”

RUSSIA PILES PRESSURE ON FORMER SOVIET SATELLITES TO DROP EU ASPIRATIONS

The Sofia Globe, Bulgaria
Sept 5 2013

Written by Alex Bivol

As the Vilnius summit of EU’s Eastern Partnership draws nearer, at
which several former Soviet states are expected to sign association
agreements with the EU, Russia appears to have stepped up efforts to
pull those same former Soviet states closer and into its own Customs
Union, with mixed results.

On the surface, it appears to be a simple choice between which free
trade agreement would offer those countries a better economic incentive
– but where the EU can wield the carrot of foreign aid, Russia leans
on the stick of threatening to withhold energy resources (and, unlike
the EU, could not care less about asking for lasting reforms).

In the long run, Russian president Vladimir Putin sees the Customs
Union as the building block of the Eurasian Economic Union – outlining
its key institutions in an article he penned for Russia’s newspaper
of record, Izvestia, in October 2011.

Despite pointing out in that piece that that the new entity was not
meant to hijack the EU aspirations of former Soviet republics, it has
become clear that at the very least the Eurasian Union is meant as
a counterweight to the EU, but also a way to bring the former Soviet
states closer into Russia’s orbit in a way that the Commonwealth of
Independent States (which former out of the ashes of the Soviet Union
in December 1991) never quite managed.

One of the four countries expected to initial an association and
free trade agreement with the EU at the Eastern Partnership summit
in Vilnius in November, Armenia, has now given in to Russian wooing,
announcing that it would join the Moscow-led Customs Union.

Given the government change in Georgia, which has lead to the thawing
of relations with Russia, Tbilisi could be expected to follow suit.

Indeed, pro-Russian prime minister Bidzina Ivanishvili said on
September 4 that his government was “studying” the customs union issue,
although that statement was later clarified to mean that membership
was not an option, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty reported.

But in Moldova, Russia’s efforts have been unsuccessful so far,
prompting a deputy Russian prime minister to make not-so-subtle threats
that the country could find itself freezing come winter. And the big
prize, Ukraine, appears also out of the Kremlin’s grasp.

Abrupt announcement

Armenian president Serzh Sargsyan’s announcement on September 3,
following talks with Putin in Moscow, appeared to take the EU by
surprise.

“We look forward to understanding better from Armenia what their
intentions are and how they wish to ensure compatibility between these
and the commitments undertaken through the Association Agreement and
the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area,” the European Commission
said in a statement. “Once this consultation has been completed,
we will draw our conclusions on the way forward.”

The bafflement was best summed up by Swedish foreign minister Carl
Bildt, a frequent visitor to Eastern Partnership countries in recent
years, who tweeted: “Armenia negotiated 4 years to get Association
Agreement with EU. Now President prefers Kremlin to Brussels.”

It appears security concerns – Armenia still has an unsolved dispute
over Nagorno-Karabakh with Azerbaijan – might have played the decisive
role in Sargsyan’s decision, according interpretations by some EU
politicians, like British MEP Charles Tannock, who told the BBC
on September 5 that concern about Russian arms sales to Azerbaijan
appeared to have influenced Sargsyan more than any other issue.

Sargsyan’s own statement at the joint news conference with Putin could
certainly be interpreted to lend credence to such claims. “Twenty
years ago, Armenia in cooperation with Russia and other CIS countries
established its military security structure in the format of the
Collective Security Treaty Organization. Through these decades,
the structure proved its viability and efficiency,” he said.

“Currently, our CSTO partners are forming a new platform for economic
cooperation. I have said on many occasions that participating in one
military security structure makes it unfeasible and inefficient to
stay away from the relevant geo-economic area.”

Under pressure

Moldova is home to the other major “frozen conflict” dating back
to the immediate aftermath of the Soviet Union’s dissolution, with
the de-facto independent (albeit unrecognised by the international
community) breakaway region of Transnistria, or Pridnestrovie, as
its Moscow-backed government calls it.

Over the past two decades, Moscow has opposed any efforts to remove
its troops in the region and replace them with international
peacekeepers. Russia has also rebuffed any plans to settle the
conflict, other than its own plan to form a federation, on equal
footing, between Moldova and Transnistria.

Moscow has also given the breakaway region hundreds of millions of
roubles in financial aid, but, curiously, insists that the bill for
all the gas shipped to Transnistria – where consumption outweighs
that in the rest of Moldova – be footed by authorities in Chisinau.

Moldova is entirely dependent on Russian gas supply. On September 3,
Russian deputy prime minister Dmitry Rogozin, who is also the Russian
envoy to the region, said during a visit to Chisinau that “energy
is important, especially to stop the cold; I hope you won’t freeze
in winter.”

At the same time, a senior official at Russia’s consumer watchdog
Rospotrebnadzor, Kremlin’s weapon of choice in blocking foreign
imports (such as Moldovan wine in 2006, or anything from Georgia until
recenty), raised the prospect of a new ban on Moldovan products –
prompting Bildt to tweet “Threatening a small nation to cut off gas
and to block exports – is this Europe 2013?”

Trade war

Most recently, Rospotrebnadzor banned, in August, all confectionery
made by Ukrainian firm Roshen, claiming it contained carcinogens.

Similar checks carried out in several other countries reportedly
found no problems.

Chocolate is not the only Ukrainian products not welcome on the
Russian market – Russia recently scrapped the quota for Ukrainian
steel pipes. Furthermore, some Ukrainian companies have complained
in recent weeks about harassment by Russian customs officials.

Most recently, Russian authorities plan to bill Ukraine for all the
taxes Ukraine has collected from goods delivered to Russia’s Black
Sea fleet, stationed under a long-term lease on Ukrainian territory,
Russian daily Nezavisimaya Gazeta reported on September 4. Russia
estimates the figure at an annual $10 million to $15 million.

(A dispute there could end costing Russia more than Ukraine, since
Moscow pays only $98 million a year to lease the fleet’s base, built
during the Soviet times – Ukrainian opposition parties have long
been demanding a review of the leasing agreement, which currently
runs until 2042.)

Separately, Moscow is demanding $7 billion from Ukraine under the
terms of the long-term gas contract Kyiv has with Gazprom, claiming
that Ukraine has failed to buy the amounts stipulated under the
“take-or-pay” clause of the contract – as part of its efforts to
convince Ukraine to turn over its gas grid to Gazprom.

Negotiations with Russia on a “bilateral consortium” to manage the gas
grid – relinquishing control to Gazprom in all but name – reportedly
came close to being finalised earlier this year, but the legislative
amendments that would have allowed the privatisation to go ahead were
never tabled. Since then, Moscow has stepped up its rhetoric against
Kyiv, hinting at a possible repeat of gas disruptions like the ones
in 2006 and 2009.

Ukraine is one of the two largest former Soviet republics – Kazakhstan
has long been on board with Moscow’s initiatives and is a founding
member of the Customs Union – and would represent a coup for the
Kremlin both politically and economically, especially given that
Ukraine trades as much with the EU as it does with Russia.

Ironically, the presidency of Viktor Yanukovich, elected on the ticket
of the pro-Russian Party of Regions, has not brought quite the results
that Moscow expected when he took office in 2010.

PUT ARMENIA’S CHOICE OF ECONOMIC COOPERATION TO VOTE

Huffington Post
Sept 5 2013

by Simon Saradzhyan
Research fellow, Harvard’s Belfer Center

It is unfortunate that decisions of such tremendous importance for
the Armenian nation’s future, as whether this former Soviet republic
should apply for membership in the Customs Union (CU), are prepared
and made without asking the Armenian public’s opinion.

The decision — that Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan has announced
when hosted by his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin in Moscow earlier
this week — had been prepared in such secrecy that, apparently, even
some of the senior officials in the Armenian government and parliament
had not been briefed in advance, to say less of the general public.

One would have thought that this momentous decision would have merited
a comprehensive explanation, especially, given that the Armenian
president’s hand-picked Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan (no relation
to the president) was sceptical about Armenia’s membership in CU as
recently as last year. At that time the premier’s public position was
that countries don’t participate in customs unions with which they
don’t have common borders. Rather than explain exactly what caused the
Armenian government to become more optimistic about CU membership, the
president merely stated that “it is a rational decision stemming from
the national interests of Armenia.” “This decision does not constitute
a refusal to continue our dialogue with European structures,” he added.

Continued dialogue with the European Union (EU) might indeed be what
Sargsyan has hoped for. However, that didn’t stop senior EU officials
from expressing surprise and asserting that the Association Agreement
and the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) that Armenia
has planned to sign with the European Union in November — is “not
compatible” with membership in the Customs Union. Swedish Foreign
Minister Carl Bildt – who is known to have no love lost for Russia –
described Sargsyan’s decision as a “U-turn.”

We don’t know whether Sargsyan has given any of EU’s top dogs a heads
up on his decision to have Armenia join CU, but it is clear that the
Armenian leader has certainly failed to ask his own nation before
making a choice that will have a tremendous impact on the lives of
his compatriots.

Why is it that Ukraine’s Viktor Yanukovych — who is not exactly a
beacon of participatory democracy — has recently announced that the
Ukrainians would get a chance to vote to choose between DCFTA with
EU and membership in CU, but Armenia’s Serzh Sargsyan has decided
that consulting his nation on the same choice is not necessary? I
don’t the exact answer to that question. But I do know a national
leader increases probability of making a fateful mistake every time
he confines process of formulating a momentous decision to a narrow
circle of confidants.

It is not that I harbor illusions that the package deal with EU
would miraculously transform Armenia into a prosperous country with
effective public administration overnight. Nor do I want to imply that
I believe that Armenia’s membership in the Customs Union would be a
mistake. Rather my point is that there is no sufficient information
on this issue available to even someone — who regularly monitors the
news out of Armenian as I do — to understand which of the two options
the best for the Armenian nation is. And I suspect that many residents
of Armenia are also in the dark because there has been no publicly
available detailed comparison of costs and benefits associated with
Armenia’s membership in CU versus DCFTA.

On a personal level, as a Russian citizen of Armenian descent, I can
only welcome a strong relationship between Russia and Armenia and I am
sure majority of Armenians living in Armenia hold the same view. But
as a scholar of government decision making, I cannot help wondering
whether the Armenian authorities have thoroughly weighed all pro’s
and con’s of Armenia’s membership in CU and association with EU, and,
if so why the results of this analysis has not been shared with the
Armenian public.

Off the top of my head I can give you half a dozen of good reasons
why Armenia should be in the Customs Union, including the fact
that Russia is Armenia’s largest trading partner among individual
countries, supplier of affordable weapons, which Armenia needs to deter
Azerbaijan, and a major source of foreign investment and remittances
sent by Armenian diaspora. One should also factor in potential
costs of alienating Russia, which is keen to see CU expand. Russia’s
potential as a spoiler vis-a-vis Armenia is unmatched, given the role
it plays as a guarantor for Armenia’s security, Armenia’s dependence
on Russian gas and other levers that Moscow has vis-a-vis Yerevan. A
Russia alienated by Armenia can also aid Armenia’s arch-foe —
Azerbaijan. (Even being Armenia’s ally, Russia has sold Azerbaijan
4 billion dollars worth of weapons, as Azeri president Ilham Aliev
revealed when hosting his Russian counterpart Putin who visited Baku
in August in what some political analysts in Armenia interpreted as
a warning to the Armenian leadership which at that time was signaling
readiness to sign the EU association agreement.)

But association with EU through DCFTA is not without merit either,
especially given that EU’s 27 member countries are collectively
Armenia’s largest trading partner and the know-how in modernization of
economy and public administration that Yerevan can glean from Brussels.

Exactly why Armenia’s government and research community had not
researched and publicly presented comparative analysis of the two
options before Sargsyan unveiled his choice on September 3rd is
unclear. (That such indigenous comparison was lacking as late as this
summer became clear to me when leadership of one of Armenia’s premier
think-tanks asked me whether I could refer them to any study on costs
and benefits of Armenia’s membership in either CU or EU, albeit there
have been external assessments on benefits of association with EU
for Armenia, such as this one) Perhaps, one reason could be that the
Armenian leadership is reluctant to admit that Russia’s importance as
a security partner trumps any economic benefits of deeper cooperation
with EU. It might be also the case that preserving the Kremlin’s
support is instrumental for Armenia’s ruling elite as it seeks to
preserve the political stability in the republic.

Whether it is security or political considerations or simple
lack of foresight that have prevented a meaningful discussion of
Armenia’s economic cooperation options, lack of such a debate is
still regretful. Encouraging a public debate of such options and then
putting these options to a vote is the least that a leader could have
done for the people who have elected him to steer their nation state
toward not only security, but also prosperity.

From: Baghdasarian

ARMENIA AT THE CROSSROADS

The Messenger, Georgia
Sept 5 2013

By Messenger Staff
Thursday, September 5

There is a possibility that Armenia might officially refuse to
continue its policy of cooperation with the European Union’s (EU)
Eastern Partnership project. At the Vilnius Summit scheduled in
November, 2013 Armenia will have to sign the official document with
the EU about the associated membership. However, after the visit of the
Armenian President, Serzh Sargsyan, in Moscow, September 3, things may
radically change. Initially Armenia took the position when it claimed
to enjoy both options – cooperate with Russia and at the same time
participate in the Eastern Partnership project. However, Moscow has
managed to blackmail Yerevan and in return of Armenia’s sovereignty
and safety demanded Armenia to join the alliance with Moscow.

In fact Russia can influence the decisions of all the former Soviet
Union countries: Moldova, Belarus, Ukraine, and Armenia; whereas
Moscow cannot exercise such influence on Georgia.

OPINION: ARMENIA TURNS ITS EYE TO THE EAST

Lithuania Tribune
Sept 5 2013

The Lithuania Tribune presents an opinion article by an American
journalist Steven G. Traylor on Armenia’s decision to join the
Customs Union.

The European Union received somewhat disturbing news this week,
when it was announced in Moscow that the President of Armenia, Serzh
Sarksyan and the President of Russia, Vladimir Putin have signed
agreements between the two; signalling that Armenia will likely join
the counterpart of the European Union, the Customs Euro Asia Economic
Community (EurAsEC).

The EurAsEC has become a top priority since 2008 for Russia to offset
the expansion of the European Union into what is believe to be Russia’s
“sphere of influence” especially in the Eastern and Central Europe.

While the EU, as a unified 28 member economic power-house, is rivalling
the biggest economy in the world – the United States, Russia is
seeking to rekindle its dwindling influence since the demise of the
Soviet Union as a world player both politically and economically.

Today, the only former Soviet Republics that border on Russia are
the three Baltic States.

“Russia supports the decision by Armenia to enter the Customs Union
(EurAsEC). We will fully work for this to happen,” Putin said regarding
the bilateral talks conducted at his country house outside of Moscow.

Russia is Armenia’s largest trading partner and the largest foreign
investor in the landlocked country. Trade between the two reached
$1.2 billion in 2012 and Russian capital investment was over $3
billion, nearly half of Armenia’s foreign investment, Putin said
during the talks.

Back in July, Armenia concluded talks with the EU regarding a deep
and comprehensive free trade agreement. Political observers fully
expected the country to initiate a free trade agreement with the EU
this November in Vilnius, site of upcoming European Union Summit,
as Lithuania holds the revolving Chairmanship of the EU currently.

However, the European Union does not allow member-states to participate
in other non-EU memberships, as it is considered “incompatible”
with the EU’s Charter.

Armenia is now an invited guest to Vilnius.

Armenian President Sarkisian said: “this decision is not a rejection
of our dialogue with the European institution. Armenia is considerably
more effective and competitive state than it was years ago”, hinting
it being a result of negotiations with the EU.

“We intend to continue these reforms also in the future,” he said.

Reaction in Yerevan and Brussels

>From Yerevan, Hovhannes Igityan, former Chairman of the National
Assembly Foreign Relations Committee said: “I consider the statement
made during Sargsyan-Putin meeting retarded and a big mistake”.

“I do not know the response of Europe, but I think it is an economic
and political mistake. To our question of what the Customs Union will
give Armenia and what we were deprived of not joining the EU deep
and comprehensive free trade area. We have a contract with Russia
on free interactions and trade, and time showed that it does not
provide us with economic growth, while Russia is number one investor
country for Armenia, and Armenia’s only chance of quick development
was the development of economic relations with the European Union
which failed”.

Vice-Chairman of Heritage political party, and Yerevan City Council
Armen Martirosyan has been quoted as saying, “I will stay away from
giving the final assessment, because it is possible that a short
while later, after meeting with the high-ranking European officials,
such statements (coming out of Moscow) is possible to sound again
that we will be signing the Association Agreement. I think I still
have time and the final word will be known in the near future. In
any case, if we are going to join the Customs Union, I think we would
have a system of governance that we have so far. However, after the
decision to join the Customs Union, we would have the same corrupt,
rotten systems of governance. Nothing will change,” according to
local press reports

EU Enlargement Commissioner Stefan Fuele’s spokesman Peter Stano
has said: “currently consulting our Armenia partners on the latest
developments and the potential implications would be examined when
all necessary details were at hand.”

Mother Russia still to be reckoned with

For President Putin, this move is considered a political victory.

Former member-states of the Soviet Union have tasted independence and
found that not all is in harmony with the way it is done in the west.

Economic considerations are always in play when political decisions
are made.

Armenia, for example, has no adequate oil reserves or natural gas, and
most of its energy demands are met through cheap imports from Russia.

Nearly 80 per cent of Armenia’s energy system is estimated to be
under Russian control according to

Ukraine, another potential aspiring member to the EU expected in
Vilnius in November, has felt recently political pressure as well.

Officials are accusing Russian customs of discriminating against their
export with tighter customs inspection that potentially could run
up billion of dollars in losses. Kiev sees this bilateral trade war
designed to discourage Ukraine for signing the Association Agreement
with the EU.

Sergey Glazyev, a senior economic adviser to President Putin has been
quoted by RIA Novosti: “we are preparing to tighten customs procedures
in case Ukraine suddenly makes this suicidal step of signing the EU
Association Agreement”. Ukraine’s export to Russia totalled over $16
billion in 2012, nearly a quarter of all goods, and export to Europe
were just over $17 billion according to EU trade data.

Georgia likewise is an interested member in joining the European Union,
and only recently resumed trade following the contentious war with
Russia, of which each side accuses the other of starting.

So, who will show up?

For Lithuanian President Dalia GrybauskaitÄ-, who is fresh from the
Baltic Summit with President Obama in Washington D. C., the task of
the EU leadership is daunting. The political landscape can and does
change on a daily basis, while the G20 currently underway in St.

Petersburg, Russia – statements and agreements reached there can have
an effect on the EU decisions.

Vilnius will be an interesting place to be come in November, and see
who’s there and who’s not from the South and East of Lithuania.

RUSSIA’S POLICY TOWARDS ARMENIA: BIG STICK AND SMALL CARROT

New Eastern Europe
Sept 5 2013

Author: Konrad Zasztowt

During his meeting with President Vladimir Putin in Moscow on
September 3rd President Serzh Sargsyan’s declared Armenia’s will to
join the Customs Union. This decision may undermine Armenia’s economic
rapprochement with the European Union despite the fact the country
accomplished its technical negotiations on the DCFTA with the EU in
July. It came as a surprise not only to EU officials in Brussels, but
also to many Armenian observers of Yerevan’s foreign policies. One may
ask if it was a surprise for Sargsyan as well? Most probably, he didn’t
intend to go so far with declarations about Armenia’s integration
with economic structure. However, Putin had a number of arguments to
influence the Armenian leader’s decision, the most serious of which is
about the security of the Armenian Nagorno-Karabakh separatist state.

This territory officially doesn’t belong to Armenia, which means it
is not protected by Russia-led Collective Security Treaty Organization
(CSTO). After the Georgian attempt to reunite separatist South Ossetia
in 2008, which failed because of Russian intervention, Azerbaijan
has become less eager to choose military solutions to regain the
lost territory of Nagorno-Karabakh. Russia’s image of the mighty
protector of all post-Soviet separatist entities deterred Baku from
taking actions against Armenians. Thus, even if outside of the CSTO,
Nagorno-Karabakh was secure thanks to Moscow. However, it was clear
that this situation may not last forever. Vladimir Putin’s Russian
foreign policy resembles the old Soviet style. It is not about
universal values or even Russia’s economic interest. These may be
declared goals. The real goal is to maintain Russian hegemony in
the former Soviet Union. Once Armenia became too self-confident in
declaring its wish to integrate economically with the EU within the
framework of the Eastern Partnership, Putin decided to act.

Russia heavily criticised Ukraine for selling weapons to Georgia,
which it used in the 2008 war in South Ossetia. However, since July
this year Russians have begun delivering tanks, artillery cannons and
rocket launchers worth 1 billion US dollars to Azerbaijan, forgetting
the fact that this equipment might be used in the Karabakh conflict.

For the Armenian government it was a clear signal: Russia easily
switches sides (like it has already done in past) and support
Azerbaijan in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Putin’s visit to Baku on
August 13th – the first since 2006 – only fuelled Armenian leadership’s
fears. Azerbaijan’s leader, Ilham Aliyev, acknowledged that his country
has already spent 4 billion US dollars on Russian weapons since 2010.

Clearly, Russia has also offered Armenia a positive agenda. During
Sargsyan’s visit to Moscow, Putin informed him that Russian Railways
are ready to invest 15 billion Russian roubles in developing Armenia’s
railway system. However, less obvious are Armenian profits from
integration with the Custom’s Union. The current predicament in
economic relations between Russia and Belarus, both members and
founders of the organisation, reveals the illusive nature of the
Moscow-led Eurasian economic structure. Therefore, the Armenian
leadership should recognise main difference between the EU’s Eastern
Partnership and Russia’s Customs Union proposals. The EU project’s
agenda is focusing on Armenia’s internal reforms, modernisation
and sustainable development. Russia’s proposal doesn’t require any
reforms. However, it does demand resignation from any independent
foreign policy goals, which may strengthen Armenian statehood and
weaken Moscow’s influence on Yerevan.

Konrad Zasztowt is an analyst at the Polish Institute of International
Affairs and specialises in the South Caucasus and Central Asia
regions. Previously he worked at the National Security Bureau
(2008-2010), where he monitored international security issues in
the Black Sea and Caspian regions. He is a graduate of the Institute
of Ethnology and Cultural Anthropology and East European Studies at
University of Warsaw and also studied at Yeditepe University in Turkey
(2003-2005). His areas of interest include international relations and
energy security issues in the Black Sea region (Ukraine, the Caucasus,
Turkey) and Central Asia, ethnic and religious minorities as well as
the issue of Islam in the former Soviet Union.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

EU NEIGHBOURHOOD POLICY THROWN OFF COURSE BY RUSSIA

European Voice
Sept 5 2013

By Andrew Gardner

Armenia chooses Russian-led Eurasian Customs Union over pending
free-trade agreement with the EU

The European Union’s policy towards its eastern neighbours has been
thrown into disarray by a decision by Armenia to abandon a pending
free-trade agreement with the EU.

Armenia is instead joining the Russian-led Eurasian Customs Union. The
change of heart comes as a blow to the EU’s Eastern Partnership
programme, formed in 2009 in an attempt to encourage ex-Soviet states
to move towards the EU.

Russia has launched a diplomatic counter-offensive against the EU,
aimed at preventing the EU from gaining more influence over its
neighbours. It explicitly linked a trade dispute with Ukraine last
month to that country’s plan to sign agreements with the EU.

Polish MEP Jacek Saryusz-Wolski, who has drafted a resolution in the
European Parliament condemning Russian pressure, yesterday warned
that its success with Armenia could have a “domino effect” on more
of the EU’s eastern neighbours.

The EU has repeatedly said that it views membership of the Eurasian
Customs Union as “incompatible” with the type of deep and wide-ranging
trade deals that Armenia and Ukraine have been seeking with the EU.

Armenia completed technical preparations for such a deal in July. An
agreement was to have been sealed in November at a summit meeting of
leaders from the EU and the six countries of the Eastern Partnership.

The summit is billed as a flagship event of Lithuania’s presidency
of the Council of Ministers.

As well as Armenia and Ukraine, the EU was hoping for agreements with
Georgia and Moldova. No progress is expected with the partnership’s
other members, Azerbaijan and Belarus.

Saryusz-Wolski pointed to a statement made yesterday by Georgia’s
President Bidzina Ivanishvili, when he was asked whether Georgia
would consider joining the Eurasian Customs Union. Ivanishvili said:
“If…we see that it is interesting for our country, then why not? But
at this stage we have no position.”

EU sources said that they were still trying to ascertain why
Armenia’s President Serzh Sarkisian abandoned his ambitions for a
trade agreement with the EU within the space of four days, following
a demand from Russia’s President Vladimir Putin on Friday (30 August)
for an immediate meeting.

However, Sarkisian’s decision on Tuesday (3 September) came days after
Putin signed a ~@3 billion arms agreement with Azerbaijan, lending
credence to suggestions that Sarkisian feared losing Russian backing
in Armenia’s ‘frozen conflict’ with Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh.

Sweden’s foreign minister, Carl Bildt, said yesterday (4 September)
that Moscow had engaged in a “dangerous game” in the Caucasus.

An official privy to EU consultations said that one of the primary
considerations in the EU’s deliberations was how to avoid lending
“ammunition” to Russia in its geopolitical battle with the EU.

Russia explicitly linked its decision to restrict exports from
Ukraine in August to the EU’s offer of free trade and other benefits
to Ukraine. An adviser to Putin described the move as a warning to
Ukraine not to take the “suicidal” step of signing association and
trade agreements with the EU in November.

Ukraine says that the flow of exports to Russia is now returning to
normal, but Russia has officially said that it may reassess rules
affecting the many Ukrainians who work in Russia.

Russia’s pressure on Ukraine has led to a call from Pawel Kowal, the
Polish chairman of the European Parliament’s delegation to Ukraine, for
the EU to sign trade and political agreements with Ukraine immediately,
before the Eastern Partnership summit in Vilnius.

EU officials expect Russia to apply further pressure in the coming
months. Gunnar Wiegand, the EU diplomat responsible for relations with
the EU’s eastern neighbours, told the European Parliament last week
(28 August) that the clash with Ukraine was “likely to be a first
warning shot” to Ukraine.

One EU source suggested that, cumulatively, Russia’s pressure on
Ukraine and Armenia amounts to Russia’s biggest challenge to the EU
in the neighbourhood since the EU enlarged to include eight formerly
communist states in 2004.

The EU responded to Russia’s pressure on Ukraine by saying that
Ukraine and Russia should resolve their disputes in the World Trade
Organization.

Olga Shumylo-Tapiola of the Brussels-based think-tank Carnegie Europe
said the EU was right to put the Ukraine-Russia dispute “into the
international or European framework” of legal norms and trade rules.

“I don’t think that to fight politically with Russia makes much sense;
that is Russia’s game,” she said. “The EU has to use the instruments
that it has.”

EU ASKS ARMENIA TO CLARIFY DECISION ON RUSSIA-BACKED CUSTOMS UNION

Europe Online Magazine
Sept 5 2013

Brussels (dpa) – The European Union said Wednesday that it would seek
clarification on Armenia’s decision to join a Russia-backed customs
union, after years of free trade negotiations with the 28-member bloc.

“We look forward to understanding better from Armenia what their
intentions are,” said Peter Stano, the spokesman for EU Commissioner
Stefan Fule, who is responsible for neighbourhood policy.

He said the European Commission would ask Yerevan how it planned to
“ensure compatibility” with the association and free trade agreement
it sought with the EU.

“Once this consultation has been completed, we will draw our
conclusions on the way forward,” Stano added.

Diplomats have previously expressed scepticism about the possibility
of a country entering into a free trade agreement with the EU as well
as the customs union initiated by Russia.

Moscow and Brussels have been vying for influence over six former
Soviet countries that the EU is seeking closer ties with under its
Eastern Partnership programme.

After more than three years of negotiations, Armenia had been expected
to initial its agreement with the EU at a key November summit, which
is also being attended by Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova
and Ukraine.

But on Tuesday Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan and Russian President
Vladimir Putin issued a joint statement from Moscow declaring
Yerevan’s intention to join the customs union formed by Russia,
Belarus and Kazakhstan.

The ultimate aim would be the formation of a Eurasian Economic Union,
the presidents said.

EU lawmaker Gunnar Hoekmark, who specializes in EU neighbourhood
policies, said Armenia was “turning away from Europe.”

“With this step, the prospects for democracy will be weakened and the
risk of increased Russian influence over its neighbours will increase,”
Hoekmark said.

dpa NOTEBOOK

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress