Author: Nahapetian Zhanna

TEHRAN – Iran has imported commodities valued at $34 million from Armenia during the first eight months of the current Iranian calendar year (March 21-November 21), the head of the Islamic Republic of Iran Customs Administration (IRICA) announced.

Mohammad Rezvani-Far said that Armenia registered the highest growth in export of goods to Iran, among the other neighboring countries, in the mentioned eight-month period. 

In late October, Iranian Transport and Urban Development Minister Mehrdad Bazrpash traveled to Armenia to meet the country’s senior officials and discuss ways of expanding trade and transit ties between the two countries.

Speaking to the press prior to the visit, Bazrpash emphasized Iran's readiness to export technical-engineering services to Armenia, announcing the plan of the two countries to strengthen the level of trade and transit, and remove cumbersome regulations in the way of trade development.

Regarding the objectives of his trip to Armenia, the official pointed out that the two countries have common borders with each other, which is an advantage for both, saying: “During this trip to Armenia, we have based negotiations with political and economic authorities on two axes.”

“The main focus of the negotiations with the Armenian authorities is the development of economic relations and the removal of redundant regulations that hinder the two countries' trade development. Also, the development of transit is another goal we are pursuing in this trip, because the development of transit is one of the main foundations of the development of economic relations,” he added.

Cooperation between the two countries regarding the issuance of licenses for Iranian airlines, the removal of road tolls, the promotion of cooperation in the framework of the International North-South Transit Corridor (INSTC) and the Persian Gulf-Black Sea Corridor, expanding rail transportation and using Iran's logistics and port capacities were also among the subjects for negotiations during Bazrpash’s visit to the neighboring country.

In a meeting Between Bazrpash and Armenia’s Minister of Territorial Administration and Infrastructures Gnel Sanosyan, the two sides negotiated and agreed on the presence of Iranian companies in the construction and transport projects, the construction of the second bridge at Nordouz terminal, and the holding of a trilateral transit meeting with Georgia.

The Iranian minister emphasized the presence of Iranian companies in the construction and transportation industries, and proposed the elimination of entry and exit tariffs between the two countries to facilitate traffic.

He also proposed the holding of a trilateral meeting between Iran, Georgia, and Armenia to facilitate traffic in the North-South corridor and welcomed the proposal for the construction of a second bridge on the Aras River at the Nordouz border to increase traffic between Iran and Armenia.

The Armenian minister, for his part, said, “We will use the capacity of Iranian companies to build and complete the North-South corridor, and a contract for the construction of a section of the route is ready to be signed with Iranian companies in the field of road construction.”

He welcomed the tripartite transit meeting with Georgia and said, “I will meet with the Georgian minister in the next three days and discuss the issue.”

The official considered the Armenia-Iran-India transit axis important.

Iran and Armenia have signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to cooperate in the fields of labor exchange, technical and professional training, as well as, welfare and empowerment of the disabled

The MOU, signed by Iranian Labor and Social Welfare Minister Solat Mortazavi and his Armenian counterpart Narek Mkrtchyan in Tehran in late October, also covers economic cooperation between the two countries in the fields of petrochemicals, road and construction materials, and medicine.

Speaking in the signing ceremony, Mortazavi said: “Iran is fully prepared to send labor to Armenia while establishing technical and vocational training centers in the country, and transferring experiences to empower the disabled and war victims.”

Pointing to the increase in the economic exchanges between the two countries, the Iranian official said: “Economic exchanges between Iran and Armenia have increased slightly and reached 700 million dollars, but we should aim for three billion dollars in trade between the two countries and plan to achieve this goal.”

“We are ready to develop trade and commerce with Armenia in order to achieve the three-billion-dollar [annual trade] goal. Our economic experts believe that in the first step, we can export strategic items and products that suit the Armenian market’s needs to the country,” he added.

Mkrtchyan for his part praised Iran’s interest in boosting trade ties with Armenia, saying: “In the few days that we have been in Iran, we established paths of cooperation more than expected, and this is a source of satisfaction.”

“I am sure that by signing this memorandum, we can move things forward and implement the MOU as soon as possible. I am sure that we will m

Also, the deputy head of the Islamic Republic of Iran Customs Administration met with his Armenian counterpart in Moscow in late October to discuss boosting cooperation in borders.

During the talks, which were held on the sidelines of the annual International Customs Forum, the two sides discussed measures to increase the acceptance of trucks importing and exporting commodities and to promote transit on the joint border crossings.

Exchanging information electronically and developing the area of customs in the borders were also among the topics agreed upon by the officials.

The two officials also exchanged views about the acceleration and facilitation of trade affairs between Tehran and Yerevan.

After the talks, the two sides also agreed to hold expert meetings continuously to pursue the implementation of agreements.

In early September, Fars News Agency reported citing ARMENPRESS that Armenia is seeking to export its goods through Iran to the Arab countries of the region and India, as the country is trying to also increase trade with the Islamic Republic.

“Armenia and Iran attach great importance to the prospect of carrying out shipments through the Persian Gulf-Black Sea logistic route, and the Armenian side is maximally seeking to support the implementation of this megaproject, attaching great importance to the use of its own territory. The option of exporting Armenian goods through Iranian territory to Arab countries and India is also under discussion, and in this context, the parties have decided to find solutions through joint efforts and simplify the procedures applied from both sides on that road,” Armenia’s commercial attaché to Iran Vardan Kostanyan told ARMENPRESS.

“We are now looking into the untapped potential and opportunities to utilize them in bilateral cooperation. On the other hand, our neighbor is still under sanctions, therefore while carrying out economic policy we are unconditionally taking into consideration this fact. Iran provides state support and protection to companies investing in its economy,” Kostanyan said, highlighting direct meetings between business representatives.

According to Kostanyan, both sides are seeking new opportunities to further develop trade. The two countries plan to increase bilateral trade to one billion dollars, and then to three billion dollars.

He further noted that Iran plans to open eight new free economic zones, bringing the number of its free zones to 15.

Armenia’s membership to the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) and its land border with Iran gives opportunities for establishing enterprises and carrying out broad joint projects, he said.

Iran and Armenia are working to significantly increase trade turnover. Last year bilateral trade stood at $714 million, while the data of this year’s first half shows a 13 percent increase, which in turn shows that the positive pace of dynamics is maintained.

On August 25, an exhibition showcasing the products offered by Iranian and Armenian companies in the fields of agriculture, manufacturing, and tourism opened in Yerevan with the purpose of boosting bilateral trade between the two countries.

Hojatollah Abdolmaleki, the secretary of Iran's Free Zones High Council and presidential advisor was personally leading a delegation to Armenia and attended the event.

Iran and Armenia signed an MOU at the end of the two countries’ 17th meeting of the Joint Economic Committee in Yerevan in May 2022.

The MOU, which covers cooperation in areas of transit, transportation, facilitation of exchange of goods, energy, development of environmental cooperation in Aras area and removal of pollution from border rivers, as well as medical tourism, was signed by Iranian Energy Minister Ali-Akbar Mehrabian and Armenian Deputy Prime Minister Mher Grigoryan, who are the chairmen of the two countries’ Joint Economic Committee.

In that meeting, which was attended by a large number of deputy ministers, senior officials, ambassadors, and members of parliament of the two countries, the main issues that play a key role in the development of relations between the two countries were discussed.

According to the officials, the purpose of holding the 17th meeting of the Iran-Armenia Joint Economic Committee was the real and tangible development of relations between the two countries.

Among the issues raised at the meeting were transit, transportation, facilitation of trade, and broader cooperation in the field of energy.

MA

https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/493036/Armenia-exports-commodities-worth-34m-to-Iran-in-8-months

The EU Council extended the application of restrictive measures under the so-called Magnitsky list for another 24 months, until December 8, 2026.

Among the mentioned countries that joined the sanctions against individuals and legal entities from Russia subject to restrictive measures are:

Ukraine,

North Macedonia,

Montenegro,

Albania,

Moldova,

Bosnia and Herzegovina,

Iceland,

Liechtenstein,

Norway.

"They will ensure that their national policies conform to this Council Decision. The European Union takes note of this commitment and welcomes it.," the release states.

Neither Armenia nor Azerbaijan are mentioned in the document.

Background

Earlier today, on December 18, it was announced in the EU Council that Armenia and Azerbaijan had joined the EU sanctions against Russia for human rights violations. Ukraine and Moldova were also included in the list of states that supported joining the restrictions.

As previously reported, according to a statement published on the European Council's website earlier on Monday, Armenia, for the first time since Russia's invasion of Ukraine, supported EU sanctions against individuals and legal entities from the aggressor country.

It is worth noting that Armenia had previously joined the framework decision on the establishment of a Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime dated December 22, 2020.

The sanctioned lists include individuals and entities involved in various human rights violations worldwide, including Russians. Since the start of the full-scale Russian aggression, those involved in crimes on Ukrainian territory, such as the Wagner Group, have been included in these lists.

Among the known Russian officials on the list are the head of the Investigative Committee, Alexander Bastrykin, and the head of the National Guard, Viktor Zolotov.

The EU's extension of sanctions against Russia for human rights violations will remain in effect until almost the end of 2026.

Key features of this list

Since 2020, Armenia has not joined the expansion of sanctions under this regime until the European Council's recent decision on December 4 this year.

In addition, according to previously released press releases from the European Council, Azerbaijan was set to join this sanctions regime for the first time.

Armenia's position on sanctions against Russia: Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has repeatedly stated that his country is compelled to comply with anti-Russian sanctions in trade, financial services, and more to avoid falling under Western secondary sanctions. However, Armenia has been named in Western media as one of the key routes for bypassing anti-Russian sanctions.

An indirect confirmation of this is the significant increase in Armenian exports to Russia since the start of the full-scale war in Ukraine.

Armenian government officials have acknowledged that re-export plays a significant role in this, but they have denied supplying Russia with sanctioned goods.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/eu-sanctions-against-russia-armenia-removed-from-magnitsky-list-supporters/ar-AA1lHyoL?ocid=sapphireappshare&fbclid=IwAR3r1TafZ-NY96Sw3dfd2mXZQOfq-zoQOwlxnQeBM6KbNdbGlbzk8_lsTPE

While all eyes have strayed from the conflict in Ukraine to the conflict on Gaza, no one has been noticing what is happening in Nagorno-Karabakh.

In September, the Turkish-backed state of Azerbaijan conducted a lightning incursion into the landlocked island of Nagorno-Karabakh, which Russian-backed ethnic Armenians had held since capturing it after the USSR broke up in the early 1990s.

In what remains one of the most astonishing political events of modern times, the Armenians stood down instead of fighting back. In doing so, they avoided the violence and bloodshed that have marked previous encounters between the two groups. Then, rather than risk the persecution they feared that the Azerbaijanis might mete out on them, the Armenians—some 120,000 of them—simply packed up their possessions and retreated across Azerbaijan to Armenia proper. 

There were tears and recriminations but the community took the view that a safe life in its homeland was better than an uncertain life in contested territory. 

A week ago, the story became even more miraculous. Armenia announced its intention to recognise Nagorno-Karabakh as Azerbaijani territory and the two sides agreed to normalise their relations, exchange prisoners and, by the end of this year, sign a peace treaty based on mutual respect.

These two sides have, in the past, been locked in deadly war, with some 38,000 killings between 1988 and 1994, and another 3,000 in the following 25 years. And yet, in late 2023, pragmatism finally overcame rhetoric and the two countries can now look forward to a future in which both can bloom and prosper side-by-side. 

It’s hard to know why this happened but it may have had to do with the Armenians’ growing loathing of Putin (in return for which the Kremlin banned residents of Nagorno-Karabakh from flying Ukrainian flags) and even—we do not know—the receipt of tangible incentives to realign themselves alongside Azerbaijan within Turkey’s more welcome sphere of influence.

Had something similar happened in Gaza, I wonder what the world’s reaction would have been. Would those who carry banners in support of the Palestinians and who casually accuse Israel of apartheid and genocide have berated Gaza’s leaders and accused them of an unprincipled climb-down? Would there have been protests that the people of Gaza City and Khan Yunis, not to mention the Strip’s 1.7 million “refugees”, had been betrayed by spineless apparatchiks without a grain of commitment to the Palestinian cause?

The only answer can be yes: that is exactly what the world would have said, because the world evidently wants the Palestinian people to be locked into permanent enmity with Israel, and to act as a lightning rod for the world’s hatred of its bullying neighbour. 

How do we know this? Because that is what we hear from the overwhelming majority of United Nations members, who last week voted for a ceasefire that would prevent Israel from defeating Hamas—in the name of “peace”. It is what we see, also, from the massive United Nations apparatus that keeps Palestinians in an enduring state of dependence, funding their complaints about the Zionist entity on its doorstep, and burnishing their sacred sense of victimisation. 

Unembarrassed by this, UNRWA boasts that it is the largest agency of the United Nations, employing over 30,000 staff, 99 per cent of whom are locally recruited Palestinians, and registering nearly 6 million people as eligible for its services, compared with the 700,000 who took up residence in Gaza after the Arab attack on Israel at the founding of the state in 1948. And UNRWA is evidently adored by other arms of the UN, including UNICEF.

Had Hamas acted as the ethnic Armenians did in Nagorno-Karabakh, the world would have branded them as traitors. Or so one has to assume because no one has suggested that Hamas has behaved in anything other than an appropriate way in the face of Israeli rockets. Rather than backing down, and saving thousands of lives, Hamas has happily defied the IDF, sacrificing the Palestinian masses and goading Israel further by launching missiles of its own and threatening to replay October 7 again and again in the future, given the opportunity.

How can it be that less than a thousand miles away, one ruling faction—that of State President Samvel Shahramanyan—decided it was better to save lives and accommodate itself to reality while another ruling faction—that of Yahyar Sinwar (or possibly Ismail Haniyeh)—decided it was better for its people to hold out against reality and get slaughtered, and in the greatest possible numbers?

Yahya Sinwar (or possibly Ismail Haniyeh) has not been excoriated by the world. The world has not called for him to be captured, put on trial and punished for abusing those charged to his care, whether during this war or before it. Far from it. He is seen as heroic, a freedom fighter, and even—in a crass distortion of logic—a peace campaigner. His face flies on flags and his name is chanted in public gatherings, not only among the two billion Muslims who make up a quarter of the world but in the West among reasonable people and on campuses at respected universities. 

How shocked the world would be if he were to say, “I was wrong to take my people down this disastrous path. If only I had seen, as President Samvel Shahramanyan has seen, the potential that exists in forging an accord with those we have fought against so wastefully for so long.”     

Why do I think the world would have been outraged had Yahyar Sinwar (or possibly Ismail Haniyeh) fallen on his knees and begged the Palestinian people to forgive him? Because of the obduracy with which those who are paid to know better still cling to their hateful prejudices.

I used to admire the way that Sarah Montague handled interviewees on the BBC’s highly regarded weekday lunchtime news show, The World at One, and on the World Service programme HardTalk. She is cool, composed and persistent and her questions are to the point. Her tone changes, however, when she gets Israel in the sight of her gun. In a sequence of interviews on radio yesterday she was especially egregious—not only in the words she used but in her tone of voice, exposing a bias inappropriate to someone representing the UK’s foremost public broadcasting channel.

Here, her repeated questioning of Ehud Olmert about how long he thought the war in Gaza should go on was provocative, because the idea of waging war by calendar is preposterous. Her quoting of a phrase used by former UK Secretary of State for Defence Ben Wallace—that Israel’s attack was a “killing rage”—was provocative because it is self-evidently something quite different. Her asking Olmert whether he thought too many innocent Palestinians had died was provocative because it implies that he has a favoured death tally. Her suggesting that a one-off accident (the killing of the three hostages) was indicative of something more general about Israel is provocative because it promotes a judgement based on no knowledge of battlefield conditions. 

In all these cases, Montague acted exactly as a cheerleader for Hamas might have done, letting the listener know not just where she stood but where they should stand too. Instead of questioning a string of very objectionable value judgements, she endorsed them. 

In the same way, she appeared to accept, because she offered no challenge, the idea that Hamas could not be destroyed “because it’s an ideology”, that Israel has lost its moral authority, and that what is most urgently needed now is a rapid humanitarian truce, a set of notions which also serves to protect Hamas, which the BBC (like the three American university heads quizzed in Congressional hearings recently) still refuses, to its shame, to call a terrorist, genocidal, racist, repressive organisation that has totally failed to protect the wretched people it claims to represent.

Has this war gone on too long, as Montague asked? Absolutely. Have too many been killed? Absolutely. Could the war have been shortened and the number of deaths diminished? Yes, easily—by Hamas resigning, just as the Armenian authorities in Nagorno-Karabakh did in September, within 24 hours of Azerbaijani forces moving in. That was an honourable surrender, and the ethnic Armenians are greatly to be praised for it. There was a cost but the cost was face, not lives, and face is a trifle. By the end of December, Samvel Shahramanyan’s presidency will have been wound up and, with it, the post itself. He accepts this, in the name of the greater good. Now that’s real heroics. 

Exactly the same could have happened at any time in Gaza. And yet Sarah Montague and all the bien-pensants of the BBC and the liberal establishment of which I consider myself a member have done nothing to push for it. Instead, they ally themselves with the accusation that Israel is the shameful party. It is deplorable. 

In the most recent issue of the magazine I edit—Booklaunch—the cultural critic Keith Kahn-Harris has mused on the question of how those who have no skin in a game choose sides. Why do they find it so easy to cry with the Palestinians but not, say, with the Tamils (or the Sinhalese)? It’s a very good question and not one I know the answer to. But Sarah Montague, a supposedly impartial news host who adjudges that Israel has lost its moral authority, evidently knows better than me. She must do, because she represents precisely that inexplicable taking of sides. 

Armenia has suspended the license of Russian state-owned media outlet Sputnik in the country. This 30-day suspension follows outcry from Russian pundit Tigran Keosayan making offensive comments about Armenia. In a November broadcast, Keosayan made unspecified remarks which reportedly “encouraged illegal acts” within Armenia’s border. The Russian Embassy in Armenia made this statement following the ban:

“We regret that the verdict of the republican regulator will affect the unconditional right of the Armenian listener to receive information from the source of his choice.

We also noticed that the decision to suspend broadcasting of a branch of the Russian media in our friendly Armenia was made just a week after the December 14th of this year. In a constructive manner of consultations through the Ministry of Digital Development, Communications and Mass Communications of the Russian Federation and the Ministry of High-Technological Industry of the Republic of Armenia, during which the parties agreed on close cooperation in resolving all controversial issues that arise.

This step cannot but look like a concession to those who are increasingly in favor of breaking the traditional, mutually beneficial and mutually respectful allied relations between Russia and Armenia.”

Russian State Duma member Khinstein also called the ban “depressing and sad” in a Telegram post.

This move to suspended the Russian outlet is significant in that it occurred in a deeply Russian aligned caucus state, a state that currently has thousands of Russian troops stationed in it for security. However, Sputnik has been branded a propaganda arm of the Russian Federation and has already been banned in the European Union. After the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, Western countries rejected the propaganda line of the invasion with alacrity.

MOSCOW, 20 December (BelTA) – Secretary General of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) Imangali Tasmagambetov is set to visit Armenia on 21 December, BelTA learned from the CSTO press service.

“On 21 December, CSTO Secretary General Imangali Tasmagambetov is scheduled to visit Yerevan to meet with Armenian Minister of Foreign Affairs Ararat Mirzoyan. The parties are expected to discuss the results of the joint meeting of the CSTO Foreign Ministers Council, the CSTO Defense Ministers Council and the CSTO Committee of Secretaries of the Security Councils and the session of the Collective Security Council held in Minsk in November 2023,” the press service said.

As BelTA previously reported, Armenia did not take part in the abovementioned events.