Armenia-EU cooperation to continue, says ruling party rep.

Armenia-EU cooperation to continue, says ruling party rep.

News | 18.10.13 | 09:51

Photo:

Regardless of whether Armenia signs an association deal or some new
document at the upcoming Eastern Partnership summit, cooperation with
the European Union will continue, said ruling Republican Party of
Armenia (RPA) spokesman Eduard Sharmazanov.

Speaking to reporters after the Thursday night meeting of the RPA
executive body, during which, he said, mostly intraparty and internal
political matters were discussed, Sharmazanov did not clarify whether
President Serzh Sargsyan will attend the summit in Vilnius, Lithuania,
on November 28-29 after what many analysts and officials in Brussels
said was an apparent U-turn in Armenia’s policy of European
integration connected with the announcement of the decision to join
the Customs Union of Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan.

`I cannot say whether an association agreement, a statement, a
declaration in the old form or a new document would be signed at the
upcoming meeting in Vilnius, but it is our deep conviction that
cooperation will continue and it is necessary for both Europe and
Armenia,’ said the RPA spokesman as quoted by RFE/RL’s Armenian
Service.

`And the focal point of our dialogue should be freedom of speech and
establishment of democracy,’ added Sharmazanov.

http://armenianow.com/news/49293/armenia_eu_republican_party_sharmazanov
www.parliament.am

Sergey Grinyaev: Russia’s decision on NK depends on Armenia’s decisi

Sergey Grinyaev: Russia’s decision on Nagorno-Karabakh depends on
Armenia’s decision on South Ossetia and Abkhazia

ArmInfo’s Interview with Sergey Grinyaev, Director General of the
Russian Center of Strategic Assessment and Forecasts

by David Stepanyan

Saturday, October 19, 17:15

What are the prospects of the Russian policy on creation of the Eurasian area?

I think the prospects of the Eurasian policy conducted by Russia today
are rather positive. Such optimism is based on impartial facts – the
integration processes are backed as they have been developing on the
ways of the integration ties available earlier. The industrial and
social ties of the USSR will be restored in some cases. This will
reduce expenses for integration much. Moreover, despite the years of
independent development, today the true and potential participants in
the Eurasian integration processes are much closer to each other by
their historic roots, than it seems at first sight. Using an example
of fast extension rates of the European Union for the last decades,
today we can see that absence of historical affinity and the gap in
the social and culture surroundings between the newcomer-states and
“old term residents” give birth not to the integration but
assimilation processes. As a rule, as a result of such unification,
new members of the EU lose their national identity.

Some experts say that despite its declared commitment to join the
Customs Union, the Armenian elite still represents the interests of
the West. Do you think this opinion meets the realities?

Unfortunately, I do. In the last years Armenia has been actively
pro-Western. This policy is welcomed by most Armenian communities
abroad even though Russia too has a big Armenian community. This is
mostly the fault of Russia, who has neglected the South Caucasus and
Central Asia in the last years. Today Israel and Turkey have much more
influence in the region than some 5-10 years ago, let alone China and
the United States. So, it would be wrong to expect that everything
will change the moment Armenia joins the Customs Union. In fact, it
was more the personal initiative of Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan.

What economic benefits may Armenia get from its accession to the
Customs Union? Are these benefits commensurable with those from
signing the AA/DCFTA with the EU?

I think the question is asked in the wrong way. I would offer to turn
it around – what is Armenia ready to bring to the Customs Union to be
useful to that and to ensure its own prosperity? I am absolutely
confident that the current stage of integration is based on the
conditions of mutual pragmatic usefulness. The times have passed when
Russia shouldered problems of its close allies only to ensure their
false “integration”. Few allies appreciated Russia’s “kind will
gestures”. As a rule, they were striving to gain profit both from
Moscow and other geo-political centers simultaneously. So Yerevan’s
profit will depend on the fact how Armenia will display itself in the
new union, what it is ready to bring to it, and how much interesting
it will be to other partners. Only preserving of the current
status-quo at the labor market and preserving an opportunity of the
non-visa trips to the Customs Union member-states will allow Armenia
to preserve significant share of the foreign currency receipts, to
avoid unemployment at the local labor market, and as a result, to
preserve certain social stability. Europe cannot replace Russia’s
labor market. And taking into account the failure of multi-culturalism
policy, the reorientation of the European policy towards the national
objectives, one should wait for tightening of the migration policy in
the EU countries.

Many experts, including Russian ones, think that the major goal of
Moscow’s integration projects is Ukraine rather than Armenia or
Moldova. What can Moscow offer Kyiv to prevent Ukraine’s European
integration?

I am one of those specialists who consider Ukraine as one of the key
participants in the Eurasian integration process, without offence.
Since the Soviet period, Ukraine has been the basis of the country’s
industrial and agricultural might. Big well-educated human resources,
fruitful soil, potential in high-tech industry have really made that
country one of the most desirable candidates for Eurasian integration.
Without Ukraine, this integration process will be incomplete. The West
tries its best to prevent rapprochement of Moscow and Kyiv, he said.
What Moscow offers Ukraine is development of economic ties between
Russian and Ukrainian enterprises. Unlike Europe, Russia is interested
in Ukrainian aircrafts and potential in the field. Besides Russia, the
only country that is interested in, at least, preservation of
Ukraine’s industrial potential is China, and not Europe. The global
financial-economic crisis showed that the real sector is the only
pillar even for a developed country. And the Customs Union offers
development and protection of domestic markets through preferential
internal taxation and high foreign taxes. Integration ties of Russia
and Ukraine will be lost if their relations deteriorate. And what
then? Is Europe ready to support the aircraft and space engineering,
and agriculture industry of Ukraine? I am afraid, not. All the above
sectors are just rivals for Europe. What happened to the industry and
agriculture of the countries of Eastern Europe that joined the EU:
GDR, Czech Republic, Hungary, and the Baltic States? Did they manage
to sustain competition with of their European rivals? No, they
didn’t. Does Armenia need such perspectives? I think there is much to
think about.

After Armenia had taken a decision to join the Customs Union, Russian
experts started speaking of possible recognition of the
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic by Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. They also
say that Azerbaijan can prevent this by Eurasian integration only. How
promising is this policy of `soft pressure’ on Baku?

Russia’s decision on Nagorno-Karabakh depends on Armenia’s decision on
South Ossetia and Abkhazia. As regards Azerbaijan, I would not say
that Russia is trying to force anybody to do join the Customs Union.
This is a pragmatic project. If Azerbaijan decides that it is good for
it, it is free to join. All territorial disputes must be solved before
the accession to the Customs Union lest they might cause tension in
it. This is what the EU does. They refuse to admit a country if it
has territorial disputes.

Global politics is experiencing sharp fluctuations directly affecting
the South Caucasus and the neighboring regions. The Syrian situation
is one of the examples. What can these fluctuations do to a small
country such as Armenia?

Even though Armenia is a small country, it must be tougher in
defending the rights and freedoms of Armenians living in Syria. I
regret that the strong Armenian Diaspora is doing nothing to solve the
Syrian problem. Pressured by the United States and the United Kingdom,
Armenia prefers being neutral on this problem, and this is in strong
contrast to the pro-American positions of Georgia and Azerbaijan. I
believe that Armenia and Russia must have a common stance on the
Syrian problem. Russia has managed to stabilize the situation in
Syria, but we are still far from peace. In this context, the
assistance of the Armenian Diaspora would be really invaluable. Their
support for our efforts would help us not only to stop the civil war
in Syria but also to save the lives of its citizens, many of whom
Armenians.

http://www.arminfo.am/index.cfm?objectid=9538F0E0-38C0-11E3-A45A0EB7C0D21663

President of European Mvmt Azerbaijan wants to visit Nagorno-Karabak

President of European Movement Azerbaijan wants to visit
Nagorno-Karabakh despite the threat to be declared persona non grata
in Azerbaijan

by Marianna Lazarian

ARMINFO
Saturday, October 19, 15:01

President of the European Movement Azerbaijan (EMA) Ramin Hajili
urges Armenia to withdraw its troops from “the occupied territories”.
He assures that if Armenia withdraws its troops from “these 6
regions”, official Baku will make very big concessions.

Hajili fails to answer ArmInfo’s question about the concessions to be
made by Azerbaijan, as well as the question why Armenia, the winner in
the Karabakh war, should make any concessions. “In this particular
case, someone should make concessions. Azeri people want no war and
want the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict to be settled peacefully”, he says.

In the meantime, despite the prospect to be declared persona non grata
in Azerbaijan, Hajili has expressed a desire to visit Karabakh.
“Despite that threat, I would like to visit Nagorno-Karabakh. I may
also be blacklisted for I have visited Armenia, but if we are afraid
of such actions, the problem will not move off the dead center”, says
Hajili.

Hajili says that he was born in Nagorno-Karabakh and lived there till
he became 10 years old.

To note, EMA President Ramin Hajili and EMA Expert on Peace Building
Hamida Giyasbeyli have visited Yerevan within the framework of the
European Movement International’s project on improvement of civic
initiatives in the peaceful settlement of the Karabakh conflict.

Romanian TV channel broadcasts program dedicated to Armenians

Romanian TV channel broadcasts program dedicated to Armenians

12:30, 19 October, 2013

YEREVAN, OCTOBER 19, ARMENPRESS. “Suceava Reports” (VorbeÅ?te Suceava)
program broadcasted on Plus TV television of the Romanian city of
Suceava regularly hosts historian and publicist Adrian Popovici. Each
time Adrian Popovici appears in the program, he touches upon the
issues dedicated to the Armenians despite the topic of the program.
The scope of the program includes social, religious, and educational
issues. After four thematic programs dedicated to the Armenians, the
TV audience sent a number of letters asking the administration of the
TV Company to continue introducing the world’s oldest Christian
nation, which lived side by side with the Romanians for centuries.
Hence, the host of the program Relu GavrilÄ? Ursache and Adrian
Popovici came to a conclusion to start the program introducing
materials published in Romanian-Armenian “Ararat” periodical. One of
those materials was titled “The Canonization of the Armenian Genocide
Victims in the Armenian Church”.

This is a unique initiative in the history of the local television.
Adrian Popovici states that “Suceava is also an ancient Armenian
spiritual
centre, like Etchmiadzin, Sis, and Ani.”

http://armenpress.am/eng/news/737143/romanian-tv-channel-broadcasts-program-dedicated-to-armenians.html

László Kemény: Armenia will manage `to keep a foot in both worlds’

László Kemény: Hungarian professor: Armenia will manage `to keep a
foot in both worlds’

ArmInfo’s interview with László Kemény, Professor of Political Science (Hungary)

by Marianna Lazarian
Saturday, October 19, 12:37

The ruling party of Armenia claims that the decision to access the
Customs Union stems from national security of Armenia. How much
grounded is that statement, given that Russia sells weapons to
Azerbaijan amid Kazakhstan’s demands to immediately close the borders
with Nagorno Karabakh? What did really motivate Armenia to access the
CU?

The national security of all countries, including Armenia, is a
complicate system having its secrets and nuances that are not subject
to disclosure. I suppose that Armenia’s decision was based on
long-term interests of your people. The geopolitical location of your
country, as well as the political, economic, military and other
developments around it should also be taken into account. It is
necessary to take into account also the social and economic situation
in the country, external factors, the attitude of external forces
towards Armenia, their possible pressure and the country’s ability to
resist that pressure or use it in its favor. I could bring further
arguments to show how complicate was that decision, but the
responsibility for that decision is laid upon the leadership of
Armenia and the people will assess whether it was a right decision at
the next democratic elections.

As regards the sale of arms of Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan’s pressure on
Nagorno Karabakh’s `hot-button subject,’ one can assess those actions
only taking into consideration all the aforementioned.

In Armenia’s decision to access the Customs Union besides strategic
factors, there were also specific calculations and historical
experience of partnership with super powers. Now we observe a new
world order where every country is free to decide what integration
process is more beneficial for it, though some political forces still
force their vision of `cold war.’ Armenia has decided that it is more
favorable for it to access Russia’s Customs Union to establish ties
with the countries of that integration bloc.

What prospects will Armenia have in the Customs Union and will there
be any prospects at all? What impact will this decision have on the
republic? Experts say that by making this decision the republic has
once for all refused European integration. How much grounded is this
opinion? What has Armenia lost by refusing the Association Agreement?

When speaking of `Armenia’s intention to join the Customs Union’, one
should remember that Armenia has been negotiating with the
representatives of the Customs Union and the European Union for a long
time. In the meantime, Armenia also announced its intention to get
integrated into the Eurasian Union. The country has been participating
in the European Neighborhood Policy since 2004 and in the Eastern
Partnership program since 2009. Moreover, a public opinion poll
conducted in 2005 demonstrated that almost two-thirds of the country’s
population would like to see Armenia in the European Union. In the
meantime, Armenia has close ties with Russia and it stated in both
2006 and 2010 that there was no alternative to those relations.

The process is rather complicated. In the course of time the
participants’ approaches towards the two major integration projects
have changed. For instance, on 10 July 2013, Stefan Fule, European
Commissioner for Enlargement and European Neighbourhood Policy, said
in Yerevan that the European Union did not make Armenia choose between
the integration projects. Your issue
(¹6E67A0-EA06-11E2-A9410EB7C0D21663)
said that Fule did not know whether Russia exerted pressure on Armenia
though he followed the news and was aware of a number of problems.
Fule thought that the signing of the Association Agreement would not
restrict Armenia’s interaction with other countries. It would help
Armenia to strengthen its positions even more, he said. In the
meantime, the European Commissioner stressed that there should be
elementary compatibility between the two integration projects. He said
that the EU did not force its partners to restrict their relations
with Russia. He added that the EU would encourage the cooperation with
Russia in the fields that met Armenia’s interests.

On 11 September, 2013, Fule pointed out that the member states of
Eastern Partnership could expand their cooperation with the Customs
Union, however, as observers only, since the Customs Union membership
was incompatible with Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area. A day
later he met with Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian and
stressed that the issue of initialing the Association Agreement was no
longer on the agenda given that on Sept 3 Armenian President Serzh
Sargsyan announced Armenia’s decision to join the Customs Union and to
contribute to the formation of the Eurasian economic union.

On October 8, Edward Nalbandian, Foreign Minister of Armenia, had a
meeting in Brussels with Catherine Ashton, the EU High Representative
for Foreign Affairs. Minister Nalbandian underlined that Armenia
wished to move forward the partnership with the EU in all possible
directions relying on those achievements and progress which were
jointly made in recent years in Armenia-EU relationships. High
Representative Catherine Ashton noted that the EU wished to continue
the development of comprehensive cooperation with Armenia in all
areas, which could be compatible with the decision of Armenia to join
the Customs Union
().

The impression is that Armenia will be able `to keep a foot in both
worlds’ and create a similar development prospect for other countries
as well.

What should Armenia expect from the Eastern Partnership Summit in
Vilnius? Will EU offer Armenia a new format of cooperation?

The Eastern Partnership has undergone various changes since its
establishment. Its initial goal announced in 2008 was to develop
integration processes of the EU and the partner countries: Ukraine,
Moldova, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia and Belarus. The situation has
changed after the Constituent Meeting in Prague on 7 May 2009 when a
new joint declaration was adopted to boost the political and economic
integration between the EU and the EaP countries. However, the
political and economic impact on these countries has not been fully
justified.

The prior component of EU’s new initiative is the energy component,
particularly, energy supply to Europe alternative to Russia’s
deliveries. Another evident goal is to break Russia’s geopolitical
influence in Eastern Europe and strengthen the EU’s positions there.
Some Russian experts still think that the EU intends to finally
disintegrate the post-Soviet area via the Eastern Partnership project
and bring the CIS countries out of Russia’s influence.

Actually, none of the six countries is able to fulfill the EU’s
requirements. Ukraine is closer to the EU partnership more than
others, but it has faced an impassable barrier – “Timoshenko case.”
Ukraine will be able to overcome these obstacles only if it fulfills
the EU’s requirements, which have not been coordinated with the
Ukrainian public yet. As for Armenia, it is out of the question.

Thank you, Mr. Kemény.

§CDC900-3899-11E3-A45A0EB7C0D21663

http://www.arminfo.info/index.cfm?objectid
http://www.mfa.am/en/press-releases/item/2013/10/08/eu_hight/
http://www.arminfo.am/index.cfm?objectid

Yerevan to host a high-level conference on `Combating racism, Xenoph

Yerevan to host a high-level conference on `Combating racism,
Xenophobia and Intolerance in Europe’

12:03 19.10.2013

Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian, Chairman of the Committee
of Ministers of the Council of Europe and Thorbjørn Jagland, Secretary
General of the Council of Europe, will open in Yerevan a High Level
Conference on Combating Racism, Xenophobia and Intolerance in Europe
on 21 October.

The conference takes place in the framework of the Armenian
Chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe
and brings together state representatives, governmental, international
and independent experts, representatives of international
organisations and civil society.

During the conference the participants will have the opportunity to
reflect upon racism and xenophobia in political discourse, the role of
human rights institutions in combating racial and ethnic
discrimination as well as topics related to combating hate speech and
racial stereotypes on social networks and media.

http://www.armradio.am/en/2013/10/19/yerevan-to-host-a-high-level-conference-on-combating-racism-xenophobia-and-intolerance-in-europe/

Anti-LGBT law would reflect noncompliance with international obligat

Anti-LGBT law would reflect noncompliance with international
obligations – HRW to Armenian president

10:56 – 19.10.13

Human Rights watch has expressed its concerns over a proposal for
revising the gender equality law in Armenia in an effort to remove the
controversial provision regarding the definition of gender.

In a letter addressed to President Serzh Sargsyan, a deputy director
for the organization’s Europe and Central Asia Division, Rachel Denber
, says the measure would amount to a restriction against people based
on sexual orientation, reflecting t he Armenian government’s
noncompliance with its obligations to promote tolerance towards LGBT
people and protect them against discrimination.

The organizations calls for the Armenian government’s efforts to
protect the rights of the LGBT people and take action to prevent the
passage of any measures that it says would violate the European
Convention on Human Rights and other international instruments.

The full text of the letter is provided below:

Dear Mr Sargsyan,

We are writing to express our concern regarding a proposal for
legislative amendments that appeared on the website of the Police of
the Republic of Armenia on August 5. The proposals sought to add two
articles to the Code of Administrative Offenses outlawing the
`propaganda of nontraditional sexual relations,’ a move that would be
in clear violation of freedom of expression and discriminate against
lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people.

The police have since removed the proposal from its website, and media
reports indicate that there are no immediate plans for parliament to
consider it. However, we are concerned that other institutions may
seek to introduce similar proposals and ask that you ensure that such
measures are forcefully opposed as incompatible with international
human rights law and would not advance for parliamentary debate.

The proposal claimed the ban would `protect’ Armenian families. It
would impose fines of up to 350 times Armenia’s minimum wage on
citizens, public officials, and legal entities who breach the law. The
proposal did not define `propaganda’ or `nontraditional sexual
relations.’

The broad wording of the proposal meant that it could have been used
to restrict the rights of human rights organizations, civil society
groups, or anyone else who works on issues such as the rights of LGBT
people or sex workers. It also would have discriminated against LGBT
people on grounds of their sexual orientation and gender identity.

Armenian civil society organizations learned of the proposal only when
it was published on the website of the Police of the Republic of
Armenia.

Measures such as those proposed by the police are illegal under
international human rights instruments that Armenia is obliged to
uphold. They impose unjustified – and therefore unlawful –
restrictions on the freedoms of expression and assembly, in violation
of articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights and
articles 19 and 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights. Armenia is a party to both. They also violate the
international prohibition on discrimination, guaranteed by both
instruments.

The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe has unanimously
adopted a set of recommendations (CM/Rec (2010)5) to member states,
including Armenia, on measures to combat discrimination on the grounds
of sexual orientation or gender identity. The recommendations invite
the member states to ensure that the stipulated principles and
measures are applied in national legislation, policies, and practices
relevant to the protection of LGBT people. Relevant recommendations
are:

1. Examine existing legislative and other measures, keep them under
review, and collect and analyze relevant data, in order to monitor and
redress any direct or indirect discrimination on grounds of sexual
orientation or gender identity;

1. Ensure that legislative and other measures are adopted and
effectively implemented to combat discrimination on grounds of sexual
orientation or gender identity, to ensure respect for the human rights
of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons and to promote
tolerance towards them.

Measures such as those in the proposal directly contradict the Council
of Europe recommendations.

Civil society organizations in Armenia have expressed concern over the
government’s failure to protect the social, economic and political
rights of LGBT people. LGBT people continue to face discrimination in
accessing employment and healthcare, as well as violence in the army
and in families. The government has yet to pass a law banning hate
crimes in Armenia, leaving LGBT people vulnerable to abuses such as
the repeated homophobic attacks against the DIY pub during May 2012. A
draft law currently under consideration by parliament outlawing
discrimination on the grounds of sex, ethnicity, and age omits sexual
orientation from its considerations.

Any measures to limit LGBT peoples’ freedom of expression and assembly
on the basis of their sexual or gender identity would further reflect
the Armenian government’s noncompliance with its obligations to
promote tolerance towards LGBT people and protect them against
discrimination. They could also possibly condone homophobia and
transphobia, which contributes to a climate of hatred and violence.

We call on the Armenian government to support LGBT peoples’ human
rights and take actions to curb the passage of any measures that
violate the European Convention on Human Rights and other
international instruments to which Armenia is party.
Sincerely,

Rachel Denber

Deputy Director

Europe and Central Asia Division

Copies of the letter have been sent to Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan
and President of the National Assembly Hovik Abrahamyan.

http://www.tert.am/en/news/2013/10/19/hrw-armenia/

Washington – City Of Satirists

WASHINGTON – CITY OF SATIRISTS

Only not so impressive people would fail to notice changes in
Washington, when big problems occur, and details acquire a new
importance, such as, for example, the state of asphalt in the central
districts of Washington. Nevertheless, the paradigm of Washington
humor is not in remarks of ex-government officials on dislocation of
public toilets but in the fact that the problems of America are the
problems of the world, and the international community rather than
the Americans will need to resolve them.

There is nothing in the cultural life of Washington, and the National
Gallery is a banal exhibition, and even two paintings by Jackson
Pollock cannot add intrigue to this dull exposition. Everything is
more interesting outside Washington, at the riverhead of the Potomac
and the foothills of Appalachia.

In such non-presentable places take place the meetings of the
right Conservative American elite to discuss the plans of fight
against Barack Obama’s regime hated by the American people. However,
the Washington humor does not give up, evidence to which was the
demonstrative dismissal of up to one million government officials that
was the winning trick of the left Liberal administration of President
Obama. They say the purpose was blackmail of opponents in and outside
of the Congress, i.e. the entire American society.

It seemed to be hard in such a comic situation to see the evaluations
and reactions to events in Armenia which is invisible from Washington.

In fact, things are not going well with regional policy but this is
only the point of view of “objective experts”, whereas the experienced
Republicans, as well as most government administrators responsible
for the U.S. policy in the regions, think the political catastrophe
in Armenia on September 3 might be useful to activate the U.S. policy
on the South Caucasus.

The Russian topic is one of those few circumstances that brings
together the current administration with the Republicans. The Armenian
situation cannot be an important factor but it could act as a detonator
to reanimate and upgrade several forgotten scenarios in Eastern Europe.

No doubt there is an agreement between the United States, the EU
and NATO on strong pressure, or rather parrying of Russia’s efforts
in the Eastern Partnership. The Armenian situation helped Americans
(not every one of them, of course) to identify the weaknesses in their
regional policy. In the American strategy the regions are prioritized,
and the main factor determining the role and importance of the South
Caucasus is its being part of the European space. In addition, the
perception of the South Caucasus stops being adequate, and it is time
to separate Georgia and Armenia into a separate region.

Russia’s hopes and plans that continue to rely on reduced activity of
the United States in the Black Sea and Caucasian region are profanation
and attempts to rush into a hypothetical uncertainty in this indefinite
situation. The situation in Syria showed that after Russia’s “victory”
in the region it is not there and will never be.

This happens when an uncertain and unprincipled elite is trying to
get into a sphere where their country has no interests and sufficient
political resources.

In fact, Armenia may even benefit from this situation in case its
government stops this meaningless and detrimental game and continues
attempts to integrate with the Euro-Atlantic space. In addition, it
would have been more effective to undertake new initiatives relating
to NATO. After all, the European Union is always only a means of
rapprochement with NATO, and the Atlantic establishment differs from
the EU team in terms of organization and role.

Apart from these, there is another circumstance – the opinion of
Armenia on its being a sovereign state cannot be accepted fully. Most
probably, there is a more substantial opinion. “If Russia considers
Armenia to be its vassal, the United States also considers it as
such.” The United States cannot withdraw Armenia from this situation,
only the Armenians can do it, and the Americans could include one
interest of Armenia or another in their policy. The Americans will
have such activities in the regions where Ukraine is at stake.

However, Armenia is facing a crucial point when it may find itself
amid the confrontation between the United States and Turkey, not the
United States and Russia.

The Armenian Americans, from hopelessly smart ones to fools, are
devastated by the political catastrophe of September 3. However, wild
messages continue to come from the homeland regarding unification
of Karabakh with Russia. Despite all the documents establishing
the sovereignty of Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, the Hero of Artsakh,
forgetting about the victims and hardships of war and ignoring the
national dignity, announces that the Karabakh people have nothing
else to do but to lick the boots of Russians.

In addition, neither the president, nor parliament, and nobody and
NKR stirred a finger against this outrageous action. And this is
happening at the time of the greatest humiliation of the entire nation
(or almost the entire nation).

So, what is the meaning of the announced goal of independence of NKR?

And what is the meaning of recognition of NKR, and annual assistance
of the United States to the Karabakh Armenians? By the way, this opus
could be found on the monitors of Russian-speaking American experts.

Such banal meanness and betrayal acquire a specific international
character, especially that someone is interested in using it as
an argument.

No doubt devastation of September 3 is not finished. Anything should
be expected from the Armenians, and hardly anyone still has a wish
to utter anything about this den.

Hence, it is something outrageous in here, guys, but we could work
it out. There is only one thing to do – begin with a blank page.

Washington, September-October 2013 Igor Muradyan
12:40 19/10/2013 Story from Lragir.am News:

http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/31136

La Confiance Du Frere Du President Sur La Suite Des Relations Avec L

LA CONFIANCE DU FRERE DU PRESIDENT SUR LA SUITE DES RELATIONS AVEC L’UE

DIPLOMATIE

Un frère des frères du president Serge Sarkissian occupant un poste
diplomatique de haut rang a exprime jeudi sa confiance dans le fait
que l’Armenie et l’Union europeenne signeront un ” document ” sur
leur cooperation continue au sommet de l’UE le mois prochain a Vilnius.

Mais Levon Sarkissian n’a pas voulu dire s’il s’agira d’une version
edulcoree de l’accord d’association ou d’une simple declaration
commune . ” Un document sera signe [ a Vilnius ] et vous verrez “,
a-t-il declare .

Les fonctionnaires de la Commission europeenne et certains Etats
membres de l’UE ont clairement indique que l’accord d’association
n’etait plus sur la table a cause de la recente decision de l’Armenie
de se joindre a l’Union douanière dirigee par la Russie. Certains
d’entre eux ont egalement indique qu’une declaration non contraignante
des deux parties serait egalement peu susceptible d’etre publiee dans
la capitale lituanienne.

La presence de president Sarkissian au sommet prevu les 29-29 novembre
est cependant largement pressenti. De meme qu’il etait sur la bonne
voie pour parapher l’accord d’association historique avec l’UE jusqu’a
l’annonce le 3 septembre de la decision de l’Armenie de faire partie
de l’union douanière .

Levon Sarkissian , qui est professeur a l’universite d’Etat d’Erevan et
ministre plenipotentiaire, a defendu le choix controverse de son frère
et s’est declare non surpris par sa decision.. ” Je n’avais pas eu
de confidence a sujet, ” a-t-il dit . ” Je pensais juste que c’est ce
que les choses allaient se derouler de cette facon, car nous n’avions
pas le droit de modifier notre système de securite si rapidement. ”

Serge Sarkissian avait de meme attribue sa volte-face a des
considerations de securite nationale. Il avait explique que l’Armenie
ne pouvait rester loin du bloc commercial dirigee par la Russie si
elle etait parallèlement desireuse de maintenir des liens militaires
etroits avec elle.

samedi 19 octobre 2013, Ara ©armenews.com

Armenia More Free In Decision-Making Than Russia: Expert

ARMENIA MORE FREE IN DECISION-MAKING THAN RUSSIA: EXPERT

October 18, 2013 – 17:05 AMT

PanARMENIAN.Net – Armenia’s decision to join the Customs Union was
extremely important not only for Russia but first of all for Armenia
itself, according to director general of EurAsEC institute.

Speaking at a press conference in Yerevan, Vladimir Lepekhin said
that Armenia is much freer in taking decisions than Russia and can
get lots of dividends from joining the CU. “This first of proceeds
from Armenia’s interests and the country can set conditions for the
CU membership and seek their realization,” he said.

According to him, Armenia’s main interests are tariffs for gas
and the Customs Union membership will allow resolving the issue to
Yerevan’s benefit.

Lepekhin agreed that Russia is in a way dependent on the West. “The
dependence is rather strong, however, Europe is even more dependent.

It’s possible to reach an agreement with Russia, as the problems
mostly refer to resources, but we can’t say the same about Europe,”
Panorama.am quoted him as saying.

According to Novosti Armenia, Lepekhin also said that the Customs
Union is not an important geopolitical project but a union aiming to
improve turnover between the member states.

During a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Sept 3,
Armenian leader Serzh Sargsyan said Armenia is ready to join Customs
Union, with further plans to be involved in formation of the Eurasian
Economic Union.

Mr. Putin supported the initiative, voicing readiness to assist Armenia
in the process. He also noted that Russian Railways may invest 15
billion rubles in development of Armenia’s railway network.

The Customs Union was formed in 2010 to include of Belarus, Kazakhstan,
and Russia; Kirghizia and Tajikistan later expressed willingness to
join the Union.