Author: Kanayan Tamar

RUSSIA’S MAIN STRATEGY FOR THE NAGORNO-KARABAKH ISSUE

Energy Monitor Worldwide
December 1, 2014 Monday

After the deterioration of relations between Russia and the West, and
some disruption to Russia’s efforts to influence Ukraine’s European
and NATO political course, the Kremlin activated its policy in the
Caucasus and Caspian Sea region. The main goal of Putin’s policy is to
preclude the political influence and activity of Western powers in
unsettled conflicts like Nagorno-Karabakh between Armenia and
Azerbaijan. The Kremlin’s purpose is to marginalize and to distance
itself from the OSCE Minsk Group initiatives.

Russia believes that the time has come to resolve the Karabakh issue
between Armenians and Azerbaijanis by compelling one of the sides of
conflict. Moscow adopted the Eurasian doctrine to resolve the
Nagorno-Karabakh issue in favor of Azerbaijan, which seems more
acceptable for its geopolitical and economic plans. Basically, as
Russia assumed, the acceleration of negotiation around
Nagorno-Karabakh is directly connected with Moscow’s goal to carry out
military-political expansion in the South Caucasus.

Putin’s plan to settle the conflict is clear. Russian policy towards
Armenia is highlighted by its comprehensive impact features:

First, Armenia’s sudden volte-face away from a closer relationship
with the EU since September 3, 2013 was caused by Russian political
pressure and threats. As the Ukrainian crisis started, the Russian
leadership aimed to isolate Armenia politically from the Western
states and Iran, constraining Armenia to relinquish its sovereignty in
favor of Russia’s interests. Moreover, notwithstanding the fact that
most of Russia’s gradually increasing demands contradict the interests
of Armenia, its weak and hesitating leadership reluctantly fulfils
them. Particularly, strengthening its intelligence and ideologically
pro-Russian oriented individuals in the presidential administration
and in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Armenia, Moscow achieved its
purpose to deflect Armenia from the pro-Western path. In this plan
Moscow relied on the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Eduard Nalbandyan,
who certainly satisfies the orders from the Kremlin, having a
comprehensive contribution from the Presidential administration and
advanced political parties such as the “Republican” and oppositional
“Prosperity” parties. The only state institution struggling for
independent policy that still remains is the Ministry of Defense, due
to the numerous high-ranking officers that are experts on various
military institutions of NATO’s member-states. Meanwhile, it is
absolutely clear that Moscow has no enthusiasm for the revival of the
economy of Armenia, which is stuck in stagnation since 2009. Second,
Russia is continually undermining Armenia’s security system,
propagandizing that the future of the people and the state depends on
Russia’s will. Otherwise, Armenia has no alternative but to be drawn
into Russia’s economic and political projects, as the South Caucasus
is part of a traditional Russian sphere. Additionally, pro-Russian
media and satellite organizations imply that if Armenian authorities
or political opposition adopt the Western direction of development,
like Ukraine and Georgia, they will instantaneously face Russia’s
determined and formidable resistance. There is an assumption that
Russians, in the case of Armenia’s political redirection, are going to
use all possible means and methods to thwart those plans even by
affording Azerbaijan to restart the conflict either towards Karabakh
or Armenia.

To achieve the previously mentioned psychological consequences among
Armenian society, Russian leadership conspicuously set in motion
different large-scale military exercises with the participation of the
entire personnel of the 102nd military base and airbase of “Erebuni”,
situated nearby Armenia’s capital.[1] Overall, Russians conducted
military exercises from the Russian base in Armenia from October 13 to
17. In addition, on October 16, Colonel General Victor Bondarev
officially announced that Moscow is planning to expand its airbase in
Armenia,[2] factually without the consent of Armenian leadership. This
tactic is directed not only towards society, but first of all it had a
certain effect of enforcement against President Serzh Sargsyan and his
political team.

The third and final factor of the Russian policy towards Armenia is
closely connected to Azerbaijan. In this case, Russia promotes a
policy of continuous intimidation of Armenia by openly militarizing
Azerbaijan and supporting the modernization of its military power.

Moreover, from the political aspect Russia adheres to Azerbaijani
positions, simultaneously, opposing Azerbaijan to the United States on
the Nagorno-Karabakh issue. A case in point: during the current year
some Russian experts, who have close ties with the Putin
administration, repeatedly accused the US in their reluctance to
return Karabakh to Azerbaijan and are interested in the persistence of
the status quo.[3]

The known military contract between Russia and Azerbaijan, in which
Russia is going to deliver until the end of 2014 offensive weaponry
costing $5 billion, definitely affects the reaction of Armenia.[4]
Meanwhile, Moscow is using this fact as a tool for disseminating
additional tensions among Armenian society, and this is one of the
reasons why Armenia’s parliamentary opposition announced the beginning
of a protest movement but refused to criticize Russia’s expansionist
policy.

Thus, these three basic aims of Russia concerning Armenia form
Moscow’s approach towards the Nagorno-Karabakh issue. Moscow applies
different tactics and methods with Azerbaijan, trying to illustrate a
reliable partnership and friendly attitude. Russia intends to control
Azerbaijani oil and natural gas capacities and transportation
infrastructure. Baku in certain circumstances may offer to supply its
oil and gas to Europe through the Russian territory, accepting Putin’s
rules and energy policy concerning Europe. In exchange for this
political service, Ilham Aliev’s government may gain the patronage of
Russia in the Karabakh issue. Furthermore, the Kremlin may convince
Baku to join the Eurasian Union in exchange for several territories of
Karabakh. Interestingly, for the ideologists of the Eurasian doctrine,
Azerbaijan is more valuable than Armenia, and this is why Russia is
deeply interested in developing a close relationship with Azerbaijan.

Additionally, another benefit that Moscow emphasizes is the
significant capacities of the Azerbaijani minority in Georgia, which
can be used with the support of Baku after the final deterioration of
Armenia and the Armenian factor in the South Caucasus.

Putin strongly believes that settlement of the South Caucasian
conflicts and particularly Karabakh issue resolution are Russia’s
prerogative only. And now, for the future development and expenditure
of the Eurasian Union, Moscow is interested in the quick resolution of
the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. To accomplish this goal, Russia
attempts to monopolize the right of intermediary, with the purpose of
imposing its own position on the OSCE Minsk Group. From the other
side, after Armenia’s involvement in the Eurasian Union, there are the
first signals that Russia is going to coerce Armenia to relinquish the
seven territories around Nagorno-Karabakh in order to deepen its
influence in Azerbaijan. Furthermore, some Russian officials believe
that 2015 will be the time of great changes in the Caucasus. This
means that Putin will pursue the goal to eliminate the recent status
quo in the South Caucasus, implementing the policy of coercion against
Armenia and the policy of conviction towards Azerbaijan. All the
changes will be directed to mitigate Western impact on the region.

Such a disposition suggests that Karabakh will be used as a tool of
Russian domination in the region.

Because of insufficient participation by NATO, the United States, and
the EU in the military-political integration of the South Caucasian
states–particularly in Armenia–Russia is able to dictate to the region
as Putin wills.

Some representatives of the Russian political elite, sympathizers of
the Soviet might of the past, and Russian hegemony adherents do not
rely on Armenia as a sovereign state. And now, from the background of
Russian military-political expansion in the South Caucasus, Putin’s
leadership has a strong reason to liquidate Armenia as an independent
political factor. In 1991, during the agony of the USSR, Moscow
decided to organize a referendum for the future of the Union, and the
question put to voters was “Do you consider necessary the preservation
of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as a renewed federation of
equal sovereign republics in which the rights and freedom of an
individual of any nationality will be fully guaranteed?”[5] Armenian
local authorities boycotted this referendum and undertook the
organization of a national referendum in order to re-establish the
Armenian Republic, occupied by the Soviets in 1921. Ninety-nine per
cent of Armenian voters were for national independence, whereas
Azerbaijani authorities organized the referendum dictated from Moscow
and 94.12% of registered voters gave their consent for saving the
Soviet Union.[6] These different paths adopted by neighboring
Caucasian states had a considerable effect on Russian social and
political elites in prospect. These are the roots of the Putin
administration’s attitude nowadays. Recently, Russia feels more
comfortable with Azerbaijan. The bilateral relations are benefiting a
political convergence than relations with Armenia, which is
traditionally orientated towards the West on par with Georgia.

>From the global point of view, Russian-Azerbaijani rapprochement is
determined by the political aspirations of Turkey to have close ties
with Russia. Specifically, Azerbaijan might become a convenient factor
for Russia to contain both the West and Iran. In t 2014 Global Data
Point.

ARMENIAN AMBASSADOR HONORS PROMINENT SYRIAN RESEARCHER

Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA), Syria
November 30, 2014 Sunday

Damascus, SANA-Armenian ambassador in Damascus Arshak Poladian granted
Syrian writer and researcher Dr. Nabil Touma the Armenian embassy’s
golden medal for his efforts in boosting bilateral Syrian-Armenian
relations.

The ceremony took place at the Armenian embassy in Damascus on the
23rd anniversary of Armenia’s independence.

In a statement to SANA, ambassador Poladian said the honoring ceremony
was an acknowledgement of Touma’s role in “enhancing bilateral
relations between Syria and Armenia, mainly in the cultural sphere,
as well as his publications that divulged attempts to exterminate
the Armenian nation.”

“Despite all adverse conditions in his country, Dr. Touma insists to
write, think and publish for the wellbeing of mankind,” he added.

Dr. Touma was born in Damascus.

He holds a PhD in mechanics from Ukraine and a PhD in Humanities
from Italy.

He is the founder of economic and cultural periodicals and the author
of numerous philosophical and poetical works.

Dr. Touma was a UNESCO peace prize laureate in 2007.

Manar al-Frieh/Manal Ismael

DAMAGE OF 1.3 MILLION AMD CAUSED TO NATURE IN TAVUSH, LORI, SYUNIK AND VAYOTS DZOR REGIONS AS A RESULT OF ILLEGAL DEFORESTATION AND OTHER VIOLATIONS

16:13 December 01, 2014

EcoLur

Damage of 1.3 million AMD was caused to nature in Tavush, Lori, Syunik
and Vayots Dzor regions as a result of illegal deforestation and other
violations. The Information and Public Relations Department reports
on this. According to the news source 16 decisions of administrative
fine of total amount of 1.3 million AMD was made as a result of
the activities carried out by the Ministry of Nature Protection of
the RA during the period 24-28.11.2014 and the investigation of the
cases under proceedings of State Environmental Inspectorate. Overall
1.98million AMD from the sanctions imposed by the Ministry of Nature
Protection of the RA entered the state budget during the reporting
period.

LYDIAN RECEIVES COMPREHENSIVE MINING RIGHT APPROVAL FOR AMULSAR GOLD PROJECT

Tuesday 2 December 2014 12:24
Photo: Mediamax

Hayk Aloyan, General Manager of Geoteam CJSC

Yerevan/Mediamax/. The Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources of
Armenia has granted to Geoteam CJSC, Lydian International’s 100%
owned subsidiary, Mining Right for the Amulsar Gold Project.

This represents the final stage of the mining permitting process and
grants the Company the right to develop the Amulsar Project in line
with the parameters detailed in the feasibility study.

The approval covers:

– all project infrastructure, including the location for crushers,
the conveyor and heap leach facility; – a mining permit applicable to
the pits; – definition of the area within which operating activities
may take place; – a mining agreement that outlines the nature and
duration of mining operations.

Granting of the Mining Right follows an extensive application,
consultation, and review process.

Previously, Lydian received approval of its environmental impact
assessment (EIA) from the Armenian government’s Ministry of Nature
Protection, acting under the Armenian Mining Code and EIA Law, based
on expert reviews and public discussions. In parallel, the Ministry
of Emergency Situations approved the Technical Safety Program (TSP.

Howard Stevenson, President and CEO Lydian International, said “The
previous EIA and TSP approvals, and now this most recent approval
of the Mining Right, were the subjects of intensive and thorough
interaction with the Armenian authorities, local communities, members
of civil society, and others. Thank you to all who participated in
this process. We look forward to a long working relationship within
Armenia as this project progresses into construction and production.

Lydian intends that Amulsar will become an exemplary mining and
investment project in Armenia, beneficial both for the country and for
our investors. Lydian is committed to implementing best international
practices at Amulsar by complying with IFC and the EBRD environmental
and social standards throughout the project’s duration.”

Hayk Aloyan, General Manager of Geoteam CJSC, said “Amulsar is
around US$420 million investment project that represents tangible
opportunities for economic benefits for the country and the adjacent
communities. It will offer around 1500 jobs during the two years
of construction and over 700 permanent jobs for at least 10 years
of operation. Amulsar also highlights an opportunity to develop a
mining project in Armenia in line with industry best practice, with
world-class environmental and social management that will benefit
the country and the communities around the project. We believe that
Armenia can have a modern and well managed mining industry that
will contribute greatly to the well-being of its citizens. We are
looking forward for productive cooperation with the communities and
all stakeholders across Armenia to be able to make this project a
successful investment, beneficial for our country”.

CHANGE OF POWER IDEA WITH MOBILIZING ROLE IN ARMENIA SINCE 1992 – MANVEL SARGSYAN

16:50 * 02.12.14

Manvel Sargsyan, Director of the Armenian Center for National and
International Studies (ACNIS), believes the following formula has
developed in Armenia since the country gained independence: the
pre-election coalition’s post-election struggle.

No other political activities are perceived as a policy.

“One idea that is playing a mobilizing role – a change of power –
has existed in Armenia since 1992,” he said at a discussion at ACNIS.

In 2012, political parties launched a struggle against the criminal
and oligarchic system.

“Armenia declared itself a rule-of-law state, which is a compulsory
course for all the citizens,” Mr Sargsyan said.

For the past 23 years, the problem of coming to power has been
accompanied by that of system reforms. If society is really seeking
system reforms, society itself must carry out them without placing
hopes on political parties.

Armenian News – Tert.am

ARMENIA: ECONOMY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BUDGET

by Emmanuil Lazarian

Tuesday, December 2, 12:56

Our country, which faces a number of fundamental uncertainties,
including the uncertainty of the impact of accession to the Eurasian
Economic Union on the country’s economy, needs to determine a new
conceptual vision of development. Nothing of the kind is noticeable
yet. The impression is that the country’s economy will keep staying
in turbulence, i.e. it will continue taking decisions a posteriori –
by means of band-aid approach.

Armenia has been experiencing a permanent sluggish crisis for years.

Now it is in an unusually complicated economic situation again due to
the strong foreign shocks connected with the situation in Russia. The
decline in private transfers from Russia may not only reduce the
aggregate demand in our country, whose economy is reasonably called
a transfer economy, but it may also considerably spoil the balance of
payments. The latter, along with the traditionally immense unfavorable
balance of foreign trade, already has a bad impact on the macroeconomic
stability, bearing various risks, including the risks of national
currency devaluation.

Today some of our economy functionaries are calming the population
by saying that the slight AMD devaluation is able to support the
export-oriented enterprises of the country by providing them with
better competitive possibilities. As far as we remember, in the
mid-2000s the AMD strengthened too much, and the same functionaries
were persuading us of the opposite, relying on a specific structure
of export-import orientation of economy, which would allegedly become
“a safe harbor” attracting huge investments. We all remember what that
“safe harbor” turned into in 2009 – it resulted in 18% decline in GDP.

But it is of little importance, because economic activity is a
statistical and to a certain extent conventional notion for a small
country with an extremely undiversified economic structure. The bad
thing is that it was in the second half of the 2000s that due to
“the competent economic policy” Armenia decided to reduce the economy
diversification by destroying one of the most important items of
its export production – the lapidary industry, which used to ensure
thousands of jobs for skilled specialists. The extremely “unfair”
(in terms of economic terminology) strengthening of AMD led to the
closure of not only small but also large lapidary enterprises such
Shoghakn and DCA. At that time, some representatives of economic
structures, together with the then minister of economy and amiable IMF
representative, displayed an extremely monetary approach and officially
stated that a fully flexible exchange rate was a “sacred cow” and if
any sectors were unable to survive in such unusual conditions, the
country simply did not need them! Each economic entity in the country
remembers how that policy ended up as soon as the global economic
crisis broke out. That policy ended up in currency depreciation,
decline in aggregate demand, certain problems in the banking sector,
reduction in budget revenues and sharp growth in tax administration,
which “swept clean” the accounts of thousands of enterprises to
fulfill the revenue item of the budget.

To all appearances, we are going to the other extreme today and the
result may be desperate again. Though the Central Bank of Armenia took
competent steps and prevented the exchange rate from collapsing within
an hour the way it happened on 6 March 2009, imbalance of the key
macroeconomic parameters is already being observed in the country. An
important component of this imbalance is the growing deficit of the
trade balance without increase in private transfers. So, the gradual
rise in the trade balance deficit connected with the prevalence
of export growth slowdown over the import growth rates can create
certain problems. According to the official statistics, the export of
commodities and services from the country considerably slowed down
in both monthly and annual dynamics: in October 2014 export dropped
by 1.1% (versus 21.3% growth in October 2013), and in the two-year
dynamics the export growth rates slowed down almost twofold – from
18% to 10.9%. It was these fundamental reasons that dictated the need
for balancing “the currency parity” through AMD devaluation.

If things go the way they are going now, this hard – but hopefully
not very long – transition will lead us to declining exports and
shrinking forex revenues. Our financial and economic authorities’
concept that weaker AMD can help exports could make sense were it not
for one big BUT: my skepticism would have no grounds if RUR were not
as weak as it is today. This weakening is forcing our exporters to
raise their prices, which, given low demand in Russia, can make our
goods less competitive there.

This is not the very problem tough: the key risk we may face is a
possible fall in ore and gold prices. These are our key export items.

So, we will hardly stand this challenge. In 2009 we were saved by a
500mln RUR stabilization loan from Russia. Now that the Russians are
also facing an economic recession, we can hardly hope for their help.

According to international sources, today the price of one troy ounce
has dropped to $1,130. One of the Barclays banks predicts that in 2015
the price will grow to $1,180. According to the Customs Service of
Armenia, some local gold recovery companies are already experiencing
problems. In Jan-Sept 2014 Armenia exported 2,771 kg of gold against
1,857 kg a year before. The customs value of the gold made up $59.9mln
against $54.4mln.

That is, despite quantitative growth, the earnings have dropped and
will be even lower by the end of this year due to further slide in
prices and pessimistic outlooks. Today Armenia must be very attentive
to such global economic factors as growing economy in the United States
and expected rise in interest rates, which is prompting investors to
move their money from gold to dollar. As a result, the costs of most
of global gold producers have exceeded the spot prices.

The companies have reacted by cutting their staffs and spending less
on new fields. The S&P/TSX Global Gold Sector index, embracing the
shares of 40 global gold producers, has already dropped by 16%.

According to Bloomberg, today 5 out of 19 gold producers in the US
are spending on their gold more than they can earn from it. The same
is true for copper. Today copper costs $3 per pound against $4.6 in
early 2011. The basic factors here are demand in China and concerns
for the future of the global economy. For the moment, the prices are
dropping and experts see no factors that can push them up in 2015.

All these factors can affect our economy and finances and force
our authorities may go all lengths just to get revenues. This fiscal
pressing has long been shattering our business activity and may sooner
or later bring our economy to knees.

ARMENIA, ISRAEL INTENSIFY THEIR TIES IN CUSTOMS SECTOR

YEREVAN, December 2. /ARKA/. Armenia and Israel intend to intensify
their ties in customs sector, the press office of Armenia’s ministry
of finance told ARKA.

The report says the two governments signed an agreement to provide
mutual help in customs sector.

The agreement was signed when Armenia’s delegation headed by the
minister of finance Gagik Khachatryan was in Jerusalem on November 26.

It envisages direct exchange of information, joint anti-smuggling
measures, sharing of experience and joint training activities to
develop trade and economy ties and facilitate trade growth between
the countries, says the report.

According to the press office, imports from Israel amounted to $28.7
million and Armenian exports to Israel were $2.4 million in ten months
of 2014.

During the visit, the sides discussed possible applications of the
new agreement and other issues of mutual interest.

The first stage of Armenia-Israel negotiations on the agreement was
held in Jerusalem in May 2012. Apart from this, talks were held from
November 10 to 13, 2014, in Yerevan on a draft convention to prevent
double taxation and prevent tax evasion. The convention was initialed
afterwards. -0–

AGHASI YENOKYAN: RUSSIA-ABKHAZIA TREATY IS IN EURASIAN UNION SPIRIT

ArmInfo’s interview with Aghasi Yenokyan, Head of the Armenian Center
for Political and International Relations

by David Stepanyan

Tuesday, December 2, 12:57

Despite the latest Russian-Abkhaz agreement on strategic
partnership and Russian President Vladimir Putin’s hints that it
is necessary to re-launch the Abkhaz railway section to restore
the railway communication with Armenia, many experts believe that
the Russian-Abkhazian treaty has shot down that project. What is
your opinion?

The given document will probably increase tension in the
Russian-Georgian relations. This scenario may be prevented only in
case if pro-Russian forces continue to gain power in Georgia. There are
such prospects given the latest changes in the Georgian Government. On
the other hand, along with technical problems there is another, a
very important question connected with reactivation of the Abkhazian
section of the railway i.e. where the will be the Georgian border
and the customs point. The railway will not be reactivated, unless
this question gets an answer. Given that the new treaty between
Abkhazia and Russia implies a border between Abkhazia and Georgia,
the incumbent authorities in Georgia will never agree to it.

Well, what were the reasons of such statement by the Russian president?

Russia’s policy is a PR by 80% today. For instance, the treaty with
Abkhazia was a serious step, in this view. In fact, that treaty will
bring nothing essential either to Abhkazia or to Russia. Neither it
will be useful for a third party. It was a treaty in the Eurasian Union
spirit. At present, parallel to the events in Ukraine, Moscow is trying
to develop certain events in other regions too. Look at the changes in
the government of Georgia and the recent escalation of situation at
the Armenian-Azerbaijani border. In fact, we see the most important
in the Kremlin’s policy – everything has been developing in Ukraine
not the way Vladimir Putin wanted. And this should be compensated by
acquisitions in other places. On the other hand, these acquisitions,
as Putin thinks, are called to compensate the failure in Ukraine.

Do you mean that resignation of Irakli Alasania and his ministers
was a result of the Kremlin’s lobby?

Not everything is clear in what has recently happened in Georgia. One
thing is clear that rather prominent men in Georgia have left the
government, and not so much prominent ones have remained. Nobody
knows why the men having a strict pro-Western orientation have left
the government. So, it is quite natural that the new government has
got all the chances for turning the vector of the Georgian foreign
policy towards Russia. The main property of the “secretary general”
of the Georgian authorities is in Russia with all the consequences
stemming from that for him and Georgia.

You talked about Ivanishvili’s loyalty to, let’s say, Russian value
system. Isn’t it a factor for future de-blockading of Georgia’s border
with Abkhazia?

I don’t think so. With Bidzina Ivanishvili being adherent to Russian
values, Armenia can hardly hope for Georgia reopening its border with
Abkhazia as this is against Russia’s interests. In Moscow they are
not interested in Armenia’s economic development. They need blockaded
Armenia for if Armenia had a link with Russia, it would ignore the
blockade and there would be no more Armenian-Turkish problem. Russia
needs an Armenia constantly feeling a threat from Turkey.

Could you comment on the current stage of the Ukraine crisis? I
don’t mean the military actions. What are your forecasts of further
developments?

Russia has begun to panic after Petro Poroshenko’s decision to stop
financing Donbass. This has put the Russians into a kind of zugzwang.

On the other hand, growing corruption in Kyiv may well lead to further
Russian expansion and even new elections.

Despite the failure of the latest round of negotiations of Iran and
six world powers on the Iranian nuclear problem, Tehran’s entry to the
world market is, sure, able to provoke a reduction of the Russian gas
and oil prices. What holds the West from using “the Iranian playcard”?

Is it Russia’s stand?

In the current situation that has arisen due to both Russia’s stand
and the latest steps of the Islamic State, Iran has turned into a
natural ally of the West. However, the capacities of that natural ally
still remain as a potential. The problem is the West’s aspiration to
save its face in the policy regarding Iran. Tehran also has a similar
problem. This explains the difficult course of the negotiations on
the nuclear problem. Nevertheless, given that the talks have not been
stopped and have even led to some elements of lifting the blockade
from Iran, the prospects are quite encouraging.

Armenia’s import-oriented economy will face a problem with
compatibility of iots customs regime with the EEU criteria already
in 2016. How will they settle that problem, if they do it at all?

The key problem Armenia will face in the Eurasian Economic Union is
that this is a way to nowhere. The last restrictions imposed by Russia
on some foodstuffs from Belarus have proved that this structure is
not serving its purposes. So, it is early to say how things will be in
Armenia in 2016, simply, because it is not yet clear how things will
be in Russia. In this light, I have certain doubts about the future of
the Eurasian Economic Union. Putin is losing authority in Russia. He
has no more bread and circuses to offer to his people. Nationalism
is not effective any more, so, he may need a new conflict in the
post-Soviet area so as to boost the morale of the Russians. This may
have quite unpredictable consequences but Putin no longer cares. What
he needs today is an event rather than a solution to it.

A rhetorical question arises as to whether Armenia is controlled by
internal or external forces?

Armenia is controlled by both internal and external forces. Th degree
of self-rule of any country depends first of all on the legitimacy of
the country’s authorities and on its place in foreign interests and
capability to resist the foreign challenges. Today the legitimacy of
the Armenian authorities leaves much to be desired. The country is
involved in the zone of vital interests for Russia.

POUTINE PROPOSE LA REPRISE DE LA LIAISON FERROVIAIRE SOUKHOUMI-EREVAN

ARMENIE

La Russie et l’Abkhazie, en cas d’accord de toutes les parties,
peuvent organiser un service ferroviaire de transit dans la direction
de Soukhoumi-Tbilissi-Erevan. “Nous estimons qu’il est possible avec
d’autres partenaires d’envisager et d’un accord commun de mettre en
oeuvre un projet comme, par exemple, une liaison ferroviaire de transit
dans la direction de Soukhoumi-Tbilissi” a declare le president russe
Vladimir Poutine cite par l’agence de presse RIA Novosti.

“La mise en oeuvre de ces projets contribuera a la creation de
conditions pour le developpement des relations entre toutes les
parties interessees”, a ajoute le president russe.

L’Armenie, qui deviendra membre de l’Union economique eurasienne
dirigee par la Russie dès l’an prochain, n’a aucune liaison terrestre
avec le reste des membres de l’Union, y compris egalement la
Bielorussie et le Kazakhstan.

Plus tôt les presidents de la Russie et de l’Abkhazie ont signe un
accord bilateral sur le partenariat strategique et d’alliance.

La Georgie ne reconnaît pas l’Abkhazie comme un pays independant et
considère qu’elle fait toujours partie de son territoire. La Russie a
reconnu l’Abkhazie après la guerre russo-georgienne de 2008 en Ossetie
du Sud et a l’heure actuelle lui fournit une assistance economique
et militaire.

mardi 2 decembre 2014, Stephane (c)armenews.com

OTAN : PAS D’ALTERNATIVE A UNE SOLUTION POLITIQUE AU CONFLIT DU KARABAGH

ARMENIE

Lors de la reunion de l’Assemblee parlementaire de l’OTAN a La
Haye, le Secretaire general de l’OTAN, Jens Stoltenberg, a exprime
son inquietude au sujet de la recente flambee de violence dans le
Haut-Karabagh, rapporte RIA Novosti.