Author: Kajoyan Gevork

FM DAVUTOGLU MEETS WITH NALBANDIAN IN SIGN OF THAW WITH ARMENIA

Today’s Zaman, Turkey
Dec 12 2013

Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu has met with his Armenian counterpart,
Eduard Nalbandian, in the first high-level visit from Turkey to Yerevan
in five years, on the sidelines of a meeting of the Organization of
the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC).

During his one-day visit to Yerevan, where he arrived to attend the
BSEC’s 29th assembly of foreign ministers, Davutoglu had a meeting with
Nalbandian, a move that can be seen as significant for the restoration
of diplomatic ties between Ankara and Yerevan — who have been at
odds over allegations of genocide and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

Davutoglu visited Yerevan for the purpose of joining the BSEC meeting;
however, his trip can be read as an important step regarding relations
that have been stalled since 2009 over the Nagorno-Karabakh issue
between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

An Armenian diplomat who wished to remain anonymous said that the
two-hour meeting between the two foreign ministers took place in
the afternoon.

At the BSEC meeting, Foreign Minister Davutoglu called for the
strengthening of trade cooperation between countries in the Black Sea
region. He said that as a key solution for economic problems in the
world, regional cooperation will pave the way for better opportunities
in the region.

Speaking before the meeting with Davutoglu, Nalbandian told the
reporters that relations between Turkey and Armenia should be
normalized without any preconditions.

He said the stance of Armenia and the international community on the
normalization of relations is obvious. “Turkey linking normalization
with other issues makes no sense and won’t yield any results,” he said.

Nalbandian also said that Armenian officials are supposed to hold
meetings with all the member states’ delegation heads, including the
Turkish delegation.

On the BSEC, Davutoglu underlined that it is an organization
in a highly strategic region and it will play an important role
regarding the bridge to be built between Asia and Europe. He noted
that connecting the Balkans and the Caucasus via transportation and
trade projects will turn the Black Sea into a basin of peace.

A reconciliation process was launched between Turkey and Armenia in
2009, when the two sides signed twin protocols to normalize diplomatic
relations, but the move was not well received by Azerbaijan. The
protocols, signed in Zurich, shook Turkish-Azerbaijani relations,
as the Nagorno-Karabakh territorial conflict between Armenia and
Azerbaijan has yet to be resolved.

Foreign Minister Davutoglu had a tete-a-tete with his Bulgarian
counterpart Kristian Vigenin and congratulated him on Bulgaria taking
the BSEC’s presidency for the next term. According to news agency
reports, Davutoglu said Turkey and Bulgaria can work together much
more closely under Bulgaria’s BSEC presidency. Vigenin also reportedly
underlined that Bulgaria placed importance on cooperation with Turkey.

Reports said that Davutoglu and Vigenin mainly discussed bilateral
ties between their two countries. They revised the preparations of a
joint commission that will be made in Sofia under the presidencies
of the undersecretaries of their ministries. The situation in the
Balkans and the Syrian crisis were also discussed during the foreign
ministers’ meeting.

During the BSEC meeting, Davutoglu posted on Twitter that Turkey will
continue to be active on resolving the problems that surround it,
as it did in the past. He said he hopes that his visit to Yerevan
will contribute to peace and economic stability in the Black Sea and
the Caucasus.

The foreign minister was greeted by protests from several groups
upon his arrival on Thursday morning. Early in the day, protesters
gathered in front of the hotel where Davutoglu was set to attend the
BSEC meeting of foreign ministers. Protesters shouted slogans and held
placards in English and Armenian condemning Turkey for its stance
against the 1915 incidents. Security forces clashed with protesters
when they insisted on moving toward the building. Davutoglu entered
the hotel through the backdoor.

Speaking to the Cihan news agency, a protester who identified
himself as Gerafin Vartanyan said that Turkey should accept the
“Armenian genocide.” “Even though Turkey doesn’t accept [that it
carried out genocide], other countries have agreed on this. Besides
we want our territories back,” he said. He stressed that Turkey’s
“policy of creating problems” has affected Armenia negatively,
referring to Turkey closing its border with Armenia and taking sides
with Azerbaijan on the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute.

A socialist party member also told Cihan that they are protesting
Turkey’s policy of creating problems. He reportedly said Turkey isn’t
taking any steps forward for better ties, but Armenia wants to get
along with its neighbors. “Turkey doesn’t want to accept ‘genocide’.

It gives support to Azerbaijan and prevents our borders from being
open and this affects us negatively,” Cihan reported him as saying.

Turkey closed its borders with Armenia in a display of solidarity
with Azerbaijan on the issue of the Nagorno-Karabakh region — an
Azerbaijani territory occupied by Armenian troops in 1991.

US welcomes Davutoglu’s Yerevan visit

The US Department of State spokeswoman Jen Psaki said the US welcomed
Davutoglu’s visit to Armenia, which has come after a long time
without contact.

Speaking at daily press briefings on Wednesday, Psaki said that the US
hopes the Turkish foreign minister’s visit will provide an opportunity
for dialogue between regional leaders.

“We continue to urge both Turkey and Armenia to ratify the
normalization protocols and to pursue tangible steps, such as opening
the border that can help strengthen ties between neighbors and create
jobs and opportunity for the people of both countries. So we certainly
support the visit, and we’re hopeful they’ll be able to move the
process forward,” she said.

Davutoglu’s visit to Yerevan was the first high-level diplomatic
visit from Turkey since 2009. Deputy Prime Minister Ali Babacan,
then-foreign minister also visited Armenia in 2009 on the sidelines of
the BSEC. The normalization protocols followed Babacan’s Armenia visit.

Two Turkish journalists of Armenian origin, columnist Markar Esayan
and Rober KoptaÅ~_, the editor-in-chief of the Armenian weekly Agos,
accompanied Davutoglu during his trip to the capital city.

TURKISH FM FACES PROTESTS IN LANDMARK YEREVAN VISIT

Hurriyet Daily News, Turkey
dec 12 2013

YEREVAN

A group of people protested Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu
in the Armenian capital Yerevan on Dec. 12, according to Dogan
News Agency.

The group had gathered to demand that Turkey officially recognize
the mass killings of Armenians in 1915 as a genocide.

Davutoglu is paying a one-day visit to Yerevan today to attend the
Organization of Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC) meeting, making
him the highest-level Turkish official to visit Armenia since 2009.

Davutoglu described the BSEC as an organization which performs for
peace, prosperity and economic prosperity in the region.

“I hope that my visit to Yerevan will contribute to comprehensive
peace and stability efforts in the BSEC region and the Caucasus,”
Davutoglu wrote on his Twitter account. “As Turkey, we will continue
to make efforts to solve conflicts in the periphery.”

Turkish FM protested in Yerevan

Turkish diplomats underlined that they would have no hesitation in
holding talks with their host if they received an invitation from
Armenia.

“Former Foreign Minister Ali Babacan visited Yerevan in 2009 to attend
the BSEC summit. And he held a meeting with his Armenian counterpart
then,” Turkish diplomats recalled.

At the time, Turkey and Armenia signed two protocols to normalize
their relations and open the sealed borders, but neither succeeded
in accomplishing the process for different reasons. Turkey’s current
position vis-a-vis Armenia is to wait for its eastern neighbor to
resolve its problems with Azerbaijan over the Nagorno-Karabakh region.

Armenia’s potential and partial withdrawal from occupied
Nagorno-Karabakh would accelerate the normalization process of Armenia
with both Turkey and Azerbaijan.

Meetings between Azeri and Armenian officials over the last two
months boosted hopes for a meaningful negotiation process to restart
between the two countries. This latest set of Azeri-Armenian talks
made Davutoglu more willing to attend the BSEC meeting in Yerevan.

The Turkish foreign minister’s decision to go to Yerevan was welcomed
by the United States and leading European countries. According to
information gathered by the Hurriyet Daily News, European and American
diplomats deemed Davutoglu’s visit and potential bilateral meeting
a very promising move. They also advised Armenia “not to miss the
opportunity” created by the visit.

However, Turkish diplomats did note that this visit should not be
regarded as a new opening toward Armenia.

“We are emphasizing and reiterating our call for a stable, prosperous
South Caucasus. We always underline that we have no prejudices towards
Armenia,” the diplomats said.

They underlined that Davutoglu’s attendence at the BSEC meeting was
another indication of Turkey’s intention to build regional cooperation,
and Armenia was certainly a part of this sphere.

December/12/2013

TURKEY WANTS NORMALIZATION OF AZERBAIJANI-ARMENIAN RELATIONS

Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
Dec 12 2013

12 December 2013 – 12:53pm

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said that Ankara wanted
Azerbaijan and Armenia to normalize relations, Trend reports.

He noted that Armenia’s withdrawal from the occupied territories of
Azerbaijan was the main condition for the normalization process to
begin.Yerevan is hosting a session of the BSEC attended by Davutoglu.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said that Ankara wanted
Azerbaijan and Armenia to normalize relations, Trend reports.

He noted that Armenia’s withdrawal from the occupied territories
of Azerbaijan was the main condition for the normalization process
to begin.

Yerevan is hosting a session of the BSEC attended by Davutoglu.

ARMENIA: YEREVAN COLD-SHOULDERS IRAN AS GAS SUITOR

EurasiaNet.org
Dec 12 2013

December 11, 2013 – 4:07pm, by Marianna Grigoryan

Armenia is the most gas-hungry country in the South Caucasus, and
already is in a committed energy relationship with Russia. But many
Armenians, tired of being taken for granted by the Kremlin, want their
government to start flirting with another natural-gas suitor: Iran.

Just days after a December 2 visit to Armenia by Russian President
Vladimir Putin, Iran put out a feeler to Armenian officials about
potential gas sales. So far, Yerevan hasn’t shown interest in talking.

In any event, Tehran could face some hard bargaining; Russia seems
determined to maintain its dominant energy position in Armenia. Alexei
Miller, the chief executive officer of Russian energy giant Gazprom,
has stated that Armenia, as a member of Moscow’s planned Customs
Union, could obtain gas at Russian “domestic prices.” Specifics about
gas-pricing plans remain sketchy.

Russia currently exports roughly 1.9 billion cubic meters of gas per
year to Armenia. According to Energy and Natural Resources Minister
Armen Movsisian, the gas sells at the border for $189 per thousand
cubic meters (tcm), but markups mean that the price that consumers pay
is about $391/tcm. The high cost puts the squeeze on many Armenians,
about one-third of whom are estimated to live in poverty.

Iran, which has the world’s second-largest gas reserves after Russia,
clearly wants to grab a share of the Armenian market. But Armenian
officials contend that Iranian gas — which, in sales to other
countries is priced in the $400/tcm range — is too expensive to be
a viable alternative.

Despite the apparent lack of interest on Yerevan’s part, Iran seems
persistent. On December 6, Iran’s ambassador to Armenia, Mohammad
Rajesi, convened a rare news conference in Yerevan to declare that
Tehran is ready to supply Armenia with gas on more favorable terms
than Russia, if need be.

“We have to sit down and negotiate,” Rajesi asserted.

The only negotiations to date, he claimed, concern an electricity-gas
barter, in which Armenia receives one cubic meter of gas from Iran
for every three kilowatts of exported electricity. Under the terms
of that deal, the gas price for Armenia works out to be $181.7/tcm.

Armenia is no stranger to energy cooperation with Iran – the two are
working on a 365-kilometer oil pipeline, scheduled for completion
in 2014. Yet, Armenian officials seem to be keeping the Iranian gas
offer at arm’s length out of concern about upsetting Russia, whose
Customs-Union trade bloc Yerevan intends to join. Russia also wields
vast influence over Armenia’s energy infrastructure.

The looming prospect of Armenian membership in the Customs Union
may be a motivating factor for Iran, some observers believe. “Iran
understands that if the Customs Union’s border is situated in the
southern part of Armenia [which borders on Iran], its own interests
will be at risk, too,” said Stepan Safarian, a senior member of the
opposition Heritage Party.

“This is actually an anti-Russian move, which also gives Armenia a
chance for independence as well,” he added, referring to Rajesi’s
offer.

Some Armenians, remembering Iran’s help during the grim fuel and
food shortages that followed the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union,
don’t think Yerevan should be so dismissive at the Iranian gas offer.

“We were able to survive in those years of cold and lack of electricity
because Iran helped us,” recollected 40-year-old Yerevan physicist
Armen Babaian. “They supplied us with food and even oil cooking
stoves. Now they are making a friendly move, but the Armenian
authorities cannot accept it because their hands are tied.”

Others advocate caution. While supporting the notion of diversifying
Armenia’s gas supplies, Iranian affairs expert Gohar Iskandarian,
a research associate at the National Academy of Sciences’ Oriental
Studies Institute, said “Iran is in an unsteady situation now”
and can’t be counted upon to be an alternative to Russia. “Let us
not forget that Armenia imports not only gas from Russia, but other
strategic goods as well,” Iskandarian added.

Concern about US sanctions against Iran – still in force despite a
recent nuclear deal- plays no role at all in the Armenian domestic
debate. The United States generally has not raised a public fuss over
Iran’s energy ties with landlocked Armenia, blockaded by Azerbaijan
and Turkey over the 1988-1994 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

Safarian, the opposition politician, expressed doubt that the Kremlin
would “allow” Yerevan to talk gas sales with Iran. “Political forces
and society would have to play a great role here by increasing the
pressure,” he said, hinting that mass protests, on a scale similar
to those now occurring in Ukraine, would have to occur before the
Armenian government would feel a need to parley with Tehran.

Although there was a small public protest December 2 in Yerevan
opposing the country’s pending move into the Russia-led Customs Union,
there is no evidence to suggest a large-scale show of civil opposition
to the government’s current political course is in the offing. The
mere hint of cheap gas supplies from Moscow seems sufficient to keep
the Armenian government from exploring other options.

Editor’s note: Marianna Grigoryan is a freelance reporter based in
Yerevan and editor of MediaLab.am.

TURKISH MINISTER’S VISIT RAISES HOPES OF THAW WITH ARMENIA

Reuters
Dec 12 2013

Dec 12 (Reuters) – Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu made Turkey’s
first high-level visit to Armenia in nearly five years on Thursday,
raising the prospect of a revival in peace efforts between the
historical rivals which stalled in 2010.

Muslim Turkey and Christian Armenia signed accords in October 2009
to establish diplomatic relations and open their land border, trying
to revive relations frozen by the legacy of the World War One mass
killing of Armenians by Ottoman Turks.

The U.S.-backed efforts to bury a century of hostility became
deadlocked six months later, with each side accusing the other of
trying to rewrite the texts and set new conditions, and neither
country’s parliament approved the deal.

“I hope my Yerevan visit will contribute to efforts for a comprehensive
peace and economic stability in the BSEC region and the Caucasus
in particular,” Davutoglu, who traveled to Yerevan for a Black Sea
Economic Cooperation (BSEC) group meeting, wrote on Twitter.

Underscoring persistent tension, young activists from Armenian
opposition parties protested, prompting Davutoglu to use a back door
to enter the central Yerevan hotel where the BSEC meeting was held.

Demonstrators chanted “shame” and waved posters saying: “Stop the
occupation of Armenian land” and “Stop the blockade”.

Davutoglu later said his meeting with Armenian Foreign Minister Edward
Nalbandian on the sidelines of the gathering was “sincere and honest,”
but that it would be wrong to think that problems could be solved in
a single meeting.

“Our priority is to build our dialogue on a sound psychological basis
and continue on that basis. In this framework all kind of creative
ideas could come on the agenda, the countries already know their
perspective,” he told Turkish reporters in Yerevan.

The last visit by a Turkish minister was in April 2009, six months
before the protocols were signed, when Deputy Prime Minister Ali
Babacan attended a BSEC meeting in Yerevan.

Turkey closed its border with Armenia in 1993 in solidarity with
Azerbaijan during the war in Nagorno-Karabakh, when ethnic Armenians
backed by Armenia threw off Azeri rule with the collapse of the
Soviet Union.

Nalbandian said before meeting Davutoglu that “relations between
Armenia and Turkey should be settled without any pre-conditions,”
meaning Armenia does not want Turkey to tie a bilateral rapprochement
to a resolution of the ongoing dispute over Nagorno-Karabakh.

Turkish critics of the 2009 deal between Ankara and Yerevan had said it
was a betrayal of fellow Turkic-speaking Azerbaijan, while Armenian
opponents said the accords betrayed Armenian efforts to have the
massacres during World War One recognised internationally as genocide.

Turkey accepts that many Armenians died in partisan fighting beginning
in 1915 but denies that up to 1.5 million were killed and that it
amounted to genocide – a term used by some Western historians and
foreign parliaments. (Reporting by Tulay Karadeniz, Seda Sezer in
Ankara and Hasmik Lazarian in Yerevan; Writing by Daren Butler and
Margarita Antidze)

Details of Azeri lobby in Mexico revealed

(Agencia Prensa Armenia).- Carlos Antaramian, a Mexican professor,
published an article in Istor magazine where where he denounced
several details of Azeri lobby in Mexico.

“Why does Mexico, a country that have not recognized any other
genocide in parliamentary statements (except the Holocaust),
recognized Khojaly,
a discussed issue?” asks Antaramian at the beginning of his
text. “After that in late 2011, the following year they opened
in Mexico City two squares restructured by the Azeri government: the
first, called ‘Mexico-Azerbaijan Friendship Park’, had a
huge statue of the leader Heydar Aliyev, father of the current
president of Azerbaijan, before being removed on January 26, 2013, and
the second one, called ‘Tlaxcoaque-Khojaly Square’, has a
monument of a woman raising her arms and a base that reads
‘Khojaly Genocide’. Both parliamentary statements and
squares correspond to effective lobbying by the Azeri ambassador Ilgar
Mukhtarov”, he explains, considering that Azerbaijan threatened
to retire the investments when they decided to remove the statue of
Aliyev. Mukhatarov stated that “so far, the Latin American
countries were free field for Armenians, since Azerbaijan was not
represented in the region”.

The document notes that one of the examples of Ambassador Mukhtarov
lobby “were the conferences organized at universities in Mexico
to present the Azeri version of Khojaly”. In the report, the
professor carefully explains all manipulations, distortions of history
and lies presented by Azerbaijan: “It is well known that history
is sometimes manipulated and rewritten to be used as a powerful tool
of territorial struggle and even denial of the culture and identity of
other groups”. At the same time, Antaramian recalls that
“any Azeri who dares to challenge the official version of the
Azerbaijan’s history is considered a traitor by the government
of that country”.

Antaramian also evokes the visit of Armenian Foreign Minister Edward
Nalbandian to Mexico, where he said that “the parliamentary
statements issued by the Chambers of Mexico contain distortions of the
facts of the conflict in Nagorno Karabakh”. “These
documents where written using only the position of the Azeri Embassy
in Mexico, thanks to Ambassador Ilgar Mukhtarov lobby. He, as Roving
Ambassador in Latin America, has also taken the same document to be
ratified by other congress in Latin America”, explained
Antaramian, citing the case of Colombia , where the Senate made a
statement “condemning the ‘Armenian occupation’ and
saying that what happened in Khojaly was a genocide”.

Denouncing the various political actors that promoted the
parliamentary statement on Khojaly and agreed to the construction of
statues of Heydar Aliyev and “Khojaly genocide”,
Antaramian presents a unique document in the world, showing every
stages of the work of Azeri diplomacy to rewrite and lie about their
own history.

Dr. Carlos Antaramian has a degree in International Relations in the
UNAM (1999), and Master and PhD in Social Anthropology in Michoacan
College (2006). He completed a postdoctoral fellowship at UAM -X
(2008-9). He is currently a professor and researcher in the Multimedia
Production Area of Michoacan College, and is conducting a research on
“La migración armenia en America Latina”. He has recently
made the documentary “Los armenios en La Merced” (2012)
and published “Del Ararat al Popocatepetl. Los armenios en
Mexico” (2011), along with some articles on the Armenian
Genocide and Armenian communities in general. He is a member of the
National System of Researchers (SNI).

The full article is available in PDF

or in Diario ARMENIA of Buenos Aires site

( Link -> )

Agencia de Noticias Prensa Armenia

Armenia 1366, Ciudad
de Buenos Aires, Argentina

Tel. (5411) 4775-7595

[email protected]

twitter.com/PrensaArmenia

CASPS KOMITAS NIGHT CHARMS L.A.

Monday, December 9th, 2013

The collaborative event featured performances by students and world
renowned artists

On November 24, CASPS-Committee for Armenian Students in Public
Schools-and Lark Musical Society, held their first-ever collaborative
effort, dedicated to Komitas, the “father of modern Armenian music.”

The event, which took place at the Colburn School of Performing
Arts, was a fund raiser for CASPS and was very well received by
the community.

The afternoon began with a welcoming address by CASPS Executive
Director, Arsineh Hovannisian, and an introduction by Tagouhi
Arzoumanian, VP of Lark Conservatory. It was followed by a group of
students’ flawless recitation of Paruyr Sevak’s “The Ever-Ringing
Belfry,” whose powerful delivery stirred emotions and drew a
standing ovations. The program continued with musical selections by
Armenian composers, performed by very talented young musicians, and
enthusiastically applauded by the audience. And for the finale, under
the artistic directorship of Movses Pogossian, the world acclaimed
Dilijan String Quartet delighted everyone with beautiful renditions
of Komitas favorites.

Rouben Gourjian, CASPS President, and Mrs. Laura Atoian, CASPS
Board member and event Chair, expressed their heart-felt gratitude to
Maestro Vatsche Barsoumian and the entire LARK organization, for their
unparalleled dedication to the betterment of Armenian youth. Gourjian
praised Lark for its excellence and for the promotion of Armenian
music and culture in the world. Atoian then presented a Kamancha
to Maestro Barsoumian in gratitude for his generous gifts of time
and talent. Mrs. Tagouhi Arzoumanian accepted on his behalf. Atoian
explained that the Kamancha had been commissioned by CASPS from one
of the few people in Armenia who still make the instrument by hand,
explaining further that it was a symbolic gift of friendship to be
displayed at the Lark facility, as a memento of the two organizations
joining hands to work on their shared philosophy of arts and education
for Armenian youth.

During the past couple of decades, both CASPS and Lark have been
focused on service to young Armenians, providing academic and social
support, and honing Armenian aesthetic and intellectual values,
respectively. CASPS and LARK look forward to future joint activities,
and invite the community to stand behind their common mission.

ARMENIA’S OMBDUSMAN REVEALS THE GOING RATE FOR A COURT RULING

10.2013 00:52 epress.am

Findings from a survey conducted by Armenia’s Human Rights Defender’s
Office indicate the existence of corruption in the judicial system.

The results are outlined in the “Mechanisms of Corruption” section
of the Ombudsman’s annual report, which was presented in Yerevan today.

“A bribe is given to the judge of the court of first instance,
who assumes responsibility only for the ruling he hands down. For
every following instance, it is the briber himself who is obliged to
‘harmonize’ the outcome of the case – by sealing a new deal with
the judge or judges of that court. In another case, the judge asks
for a greater sum to keep the ‘verdict’; that is, he guarantees that
his ruling won’t be reversed in higher courts. This method assumes a
divvying up of funds among higher court judges,” reads the report, in
part. According to the report, judicial bribe amounts are determined
based on 10% of the amount of the lawsuit or claim.

“Generally, according to the majority of respondents, bribe rates
fluctuate between $500 -$10,000 at the court of first instance;
$2,000-$15,000 at the Court of Appeal; and $10,000-$50,000 USD at
the Court of Cassation,” reads the report.

However, according to the majority of respondents, there are no uniform
standards of determining bribe amounts, and there is an individual
approach to deciding the amount in each case. “The participant in
the case is immediately in contact with any member of the Court of
Cassation and then the case is directly under the control and orders
of the Court of Cassation member.

“He who has not achieved success in two courts, coming to an agreement
with the Court of Cassation, manages to get the judicial act quashed;
that is, he doesn’t pay anything to the court of first instance or
the appeals court, and he ‘addresses’ his problem only at the Court
of Cassation,” reads the Ombudsman’s report.

The print version of the report was distributed to reporters at
Ombudsman Karen Andreasyan’s press conference. Andreasyan begins
each chapter with an excerpt from legislation, laws, international
instruments, and even the Bible.

EU: STATUS QUO IS UNACCEPTABLE AND PEACEFUL RESOLUTION OF NAGORNO-KARABAKH CONFLICT REMAINS A TOP PRIORITY

Trend, Azerbaijan
Dec 9 2013

By S. Ahmedova: – Trend: Baku, Azerbaijan, Dec 9, 2013:

The status quo is unacceptable and that the peaceful resolution of
the Nagorno-Karabakh remains a top priority. Linas LinkeviÄ~Mius,
the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Lithuania, said following the
fourteenth meeting of the Cooperation Council between the European
Union (EU) and the Republic of Armenia.

LinkeviÄ~Mius said that the Cooperation Council reviewed progress on
the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict: “The EU welcomed the
recent meeting of the Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan in Vienna
and the Presidents’ agreement to advance the negotiations toward a
peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict”.

According to him, both sides reiterated their support to the efforts
deployed by the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs.

“The EU confirmed its readiness to further support and complement these
efforts by facilitating peace-building activities,” LinkeviÄ~Mius said.

He also expressed concern over incidents on the ground and urged the
sides for restraint on actions and statements that would heighten
tension and impact on the negotiations.

ARMENIA. THE SILENT VOICE IN VILNIUS

New Eastern Europe
Dec 9 2013

by Giacomo Manca

Amongst all others, there was one voice at the Vilnius Summit, and
in particular during the Civil Society Conference, which remained
mostly silent. That was the voice of the representatives of Armenia:
a country that, after announcing its decision to start its journey
towards the Customs Union and the Eurasian Union, no longer represented
a solid partner for the European Union.

In Vilnius, the EU and the Republic of Armenia adopted a joint
statement declaring that even having completed negotiations on
an Association Agreement, including the talks on the Deep and
Comprehensive Free Trade Area, it will no longer proceed with its
initialling due to “Armenia’s new international commitments.” They
also agree on the need to update the EU-Armenia Neighbourhood Action
Plan. Together with the Ukrainian announcement, Armenia represented
an addition thorn in the side of the Eastern Partnership’s success.

When in September the Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan announced
the decision to join the Russian-led Customs Union, it implied the
rejection of any possible signature of the Association Agreement
with the EU. The two treaties, in facts, are totally incompatible:
in this way, Armenia’s choice doesn’t leave any hope or chance to
continue talks with the European Union on this level. According to
the former minister of foreign affairs, Vartan Oskanian, who defines
Armenian stance as a “northern choice”, geopolitics and security
prevailed over economic interests or cultural belonging to one or
the other civilisation.

Oskanian stated that this decision, which breaks a long tradition
of equal distance between the powers, was mainly due to Armenia’s
foreign relations with its neighbours; which are part of the Eastern
Partnership. The previous trend in Armenia’s foreign policy was in
fact the policy of complementarity, which considered independence
the paramount priority for such a small republic. It is reasonably
understandable that security and survival are among the main concerns
of a country squashed between two almost historical enemies which
have already powerful alliances. While Georgia’s rapprochement with
the EU is going to be enforced with the treaties, Azerbaijan has in
Turkey a mighty ally.

European values of democracy are firmly embedded in Armenia’s citizens,
Oskanian affirmed, and was convinced that the agreement with the
Customs Union won’t prevent the civil society or the opposition
from participating in modernising the country’s infrastructures and
fighting corruption.

Representatives of the Armenian civil society expressed fear, however,
that the EU has lost its legal framework to push for reforms and
it will be much more difficult to modernise the private sector and
change the legal system. A hope that Europe will continue in exercising
conditionality by encouraging Armenia to undertake necessary reforms
is still bright and alive in the minds of many Armenians. However, the
country could soon find itself alone and is likely to be left behind.

Armenia’s change in direction raises the possibility of dividing
the Eastern Partnership member countries into two different groups:
one that has the possibility of achieving stronger integration with
the EU; and those less interested. While it is still not clear which
group Ukraine will land, Armenia’s position lies farther away from
Moldova and Georgia, who do not hide their final ambitions for full
membership in the EU.

The diplomatic history of Armenia explains the lack of divisions among
the civil society and the political scenario for its decision. Even
though there are divisions, the Customs Union is not perceived
as a consequence of Russian imperialism in the face of European
integration. Although in the civil society there are many against to
the Customs Union agreement, there is a strong difference among them
between their feelings towards Russia.

Armenia is a country which traditionally entertains good relations
with Russia and where subordination to such a regional geopolitical
power has always had a pragmatic purpose. In a country which lacks
any critics to Russia and whose citizens have a good perception of the
Russian Army, the Ukrainian situation is not entirely understood. Even
the civil society in Armenia has never been so anti-Russian and it
doesn’t perceive it as a threat to its independence.

When it comes to the end of prospects for the Association Agreement,
however, many Armenians show their disappointment for not having
preserved at least a lighter profile, preventing such a drastic shift
towards Russia. In the civil society and the opposition, the prevailing
feeling remains a desire to restore the complementarity option, which
would ensure a bigger possibility to benefit from EU conditionality
for reforms and modernisation while maintaining close ties with Russia.

Giacomo Manca is a contributing editor with New Eastern Europe