Category: 2023

Russia’s powerful economic levers over Armenia

Ophelia Vardapetian
eurasianet
Nov 1 2023
Arshaluis Mgdesyan Nov 1, 2023

Armenia's relations with its strategic partner Russia are getting worse and worse and its leaders seem to desire a shift in geopolitical orientation towards the West. 

But a look at Russia's powerful levers over the country makes that kind of thinking seem delusional. 

And Moscow has begun dropping hints of how much economic pain it can inflict on Armenians. 

Armenian officials offer assurances that all is fine on the economic front, but economists and businesspeople are increasingly worried about possible consequences of the political tensions.

About 40 percent of Armenia's exports go to Russia, and Yerevan's dependence on Russia for basic goods is overwhelming. 

Gazprom Armenia, the local subsidiary of the Russian state gas company, owns all of the country's gas distribution infrastructure. Imports from Russia of grain and petroleum products also enjoy a near monopoly. 

Armenia's economy is heavily dependent on migrant laborers sending their wages back home from Russia. In 2022 money transfers from Russia accounted for 3.6 billion dollars out of the total 5.1 billion entering the country.

Warning shot fired

On 24 October the lower house of the Russian legislature, the Duma, postponed debate on a bill that would have recognized Armenian driver's licenses for business and labor purposes. The move was widely seen in Armenia as politically motivated and a hint of the economic sanctions that Moscow could implement in a bid to bring its wayward junior partner to heel. 

 In fact, Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin all but directly said that the decision was linked to what he called the Armenian government's failure to take steps toward granting official status to the Russian language.

 Many Armenian labor migrants find work in Russia in the service industry, including as taxi drivers. They have long sought relief from bureaucratic headaches through the recognition of Armenian driver's licenses. Now that seems less likely than ever. 

Economist Suren Parsyan believes the Russian MPs' decision amounts to a "warning shot."

"This is just a gesture for now, one that could be followed by harsher measures if political relations deteriorate," Parsyan told Eurasianet. 

Economic dependency grows

The steady worsening of political ties between Armenia and Russia has had an inverse relationship with the two countries' growing economic cooperation over the past year and half or so. (Eurasianet reported on the same trend in April.)

After the U.S. and EU imposed sanctions against Moscow over its war on Ukraine, Armenia became one of several countries through which Western products have been entering Russia. 

In 2022 the volume of trade between Armenia and Russia nearly doubled, reaching 5.3 billion dollars, according to Armenia's state statistics agency. Armenia's exports to Russia nearly tripled, from 850 million dollars in 2021 to 2.4 billion dollars the following year. Imports from Russia were up 151 percent, reaching 2.87 billion dollars. 

The trend continues apace. The total trade volume for January-August, 2023 surpassed 4.16 billion dollars, a record level since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Exports from Armenia to Russia in this period totaled 2.3 billion dollars and for the first time exceeded the import figure, which stood at 1.86  billion dollars.

Unsurprisingly, most of Armenia's exports to Russia these days are in fact re-exports of Western products that Moscow is no longer able to get directly. 

Armenian Finance Minister Vahe Hovhannisyan recently framed the centrality of re-export in the structure of trade with Russia in stark terms: He said that while exports to Russia were up 215 percent for the first half of 2023 compared to the same period last year, re-export accounted for 187 percentage points of this growth while exports of Armenian products accounted for just 28 percentage points. 

The overall effect is that, since its invasion of Ukraine, Russia has greatly strengthened its positions in Armenia's economy. And many worry that this growing dependence on Russia could greatly limit Armenia's room for maneuver in the political arena.

"The fact that 55-56 percent of exports to Russia are not raw materials but finished goods, speaks to Armenia's high degree of dependence. And in these conditions, if Moscow introduces sanctions, they will be very painful for Armenia," said Suren Parsyan, the economist, adding that there is little prospect for redirecting these goods to Western markets. 

"Quality standards are different there. It would require overhauling whole sectors of the economy, which is a complicated and time-consuming process. And during this time many businesses would close, which would cause growth in unemployment and a worsening of the overall social-economic situation," Parsyan said.

He added that he has not seen any real attempts by the Armenian authorities to diversify the country's economic relations and reduce its dependence on Russia. 

Economics not influencing politics

There is no sign that Armenia's increased economic cooperation with Russia is having any influence on the growing political crisis between the two countries, according to analyst and director of the Caucasus Institute, Aleksandr Iskandaryan.

He pointed to Prime Minister Pashinyan's recent statement that Armenia does not intend to change its foreign policy vector despite its displeasure with Moscow's refusal to support Yerevan in the conflict with Azerbaijan as well as Pashinyan's recent remark to The Wall Street Journal that Armenia does not benefit from the presence of roughly 10,000 Russian soldiers on its territory. 

"The thing is that, so far, this crisis has not gone beyond the level of discourse. There have been no institutional changes in Armenian-Russian relations. They [such changes] are spoken about, they're discussed, but Armenia remains a member of the Russia-led Collective Security Treaty Organization, Commonwealth of Independent States and Eurasian Economic Union. If and when relations deteriorate at the institutional level, interactions will deteriorate at the institutional level as well," Iskandaryan told Eurasianet. 

Arshaluis Mgdesyan is a journalist based in Yerevan.

https://eurasianet.org/russias-powerful-economic-levers-over-armenia

NK Armenians face choice of Armenian citizenship or refugee status

Alex Jidarian
Nov 1 2023
  • JAMnews
  • Yerevan

Status of Karabakh Armenians in Armenia

The government decision according to which the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh are granted temporary protection equal to refugee status is being discussed in Armenia. They are also invited to apply for citizenship of the Republic of Armenia.

Karabakh Armenians cannot understand why they need new passports when they already have the blue passports of Armenian citizens. The government says that residents of the former NKR are not considered citizens of the Republic of Armenia. The passport issued to them at that time is just a “travel document” with which they could travel abroad. Accordingly, the Cabinet considers it necessary to “clarify the status of those displaced from Nagorno-Karabakh”.

International law specialist Ara Khzmalyan considers statements about “travel document” unserious. According to him, all MK residents are citizens of the Republic of Armenia, except for those who have citizenship of another country.

  • “It is not necessary to provide security only with the army” – Pashinyan
  • Meeting in “3+3” format. Opinion from Yerevan: “There are risks, no benefits”
  • “France to help protect Armenia’s skies”. Signing of documents in Paris

This is the position of the Armenian government. According to Artyom Sujyan, Advisor to the Minister of Justice of Armenia, this is the same position Armenia took before the European Court of Human Rights, arguing that “that the residents of Nagorno-Karabakh were issued with RA passports does not mean that they are considered citizens of Armenia”.

“There was an agreement on the basis of which these passports [with the code “070”] were issued to the residents of Nagorno-Karabakh as a travel document, i.e. a document with which it would be possible to leave the country, to travel,” Sujyan said.

Karabakh Armenians are faced with the question of whether to remain in refugee status or obtain citizenship of the Republic of Armenia. They are already considered as persons with refugee status in Armenia because they are registered as residents of Nagorno-Karabakh.

Those who left NK during and after the 44-day war in 2020 are also considered refugees.

To obtain a document confirming this status, they should apply to the Migration Service. Obtaining a certificate is not urgent at the moment. But according to the government’s decision, should they leave the country and return after three months, it will have to be presented together with their existing passport with the code “070”.

If Karabakh Armenians settled in Armenia decide to remain in refugee status, they will lose a number of rights, such as the right to vote and be elected, enter civil service, and form or join parties.

As for obtaining RA citizenship, the law envisages a simplified procedure for them. There will be no requirements for them that are imposed on other applicants. These are three years of permanent residence in the country, knowledge of the Armenian language or familiarity with the Constitution.

The Cabinet of Ministers has expanded the list of those who will be able to receive a one-time financial aid of $250. The government will also compensate the rent and utility costs of the newcomers

A day before the government’s decision to grant temporary protection status to Karabakh Armenians, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said in parliament that it was being adopted “as a result of discussions with fellow lawyers”.

Justice Minister Grigor Minasyan, presenting the draft to the Cabinet, explained that the status would enable more effective protection of the rights and legitimate interests of Armenians living in NK:

“Those taken under temporary protection become refugees by virtue of the law and enjoy the rights provided for refugees by the law and international conventions, including the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees.”

Margarita Karamyan, a resident of NK and head of the “Return to Dizak” NGO, says that obtaining Armenian citizenship means renouncing one’s former life, even one’s biography:

“By becoming a citizen of the Republic of Armenia, a citizen of Artsakh may lose the ability to appeal to international courts and tribunals and demand compensation for his or her lost home and property. We will also lose our rights to the Republic of Artsakh. And in a few years we will have no opportunity to prove that we lived on the land of our ancestors.”

In the event of receiving refugee status, according to her, former NK residents will still have the opportunity to receive compensation, they will receive the benefits and privileges that refugees are entitled to, but will be deprived of pensions.

Karamyan suggests that this status may contain other, “hidden threats.”

“Won’t it happen that tomorrow the RA government will insist that Azerbaijan guarantees the return of Artsakh Armenians to NK, and all those people who have refugee status must return to Artsakh? In case of the policy of the current RA authorities nothing can be excluded.”

According to Karen Mirzoyan, former foreign minister of the unrecognized NKR, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan wants to “destroy the collective image of the people of Artsakh.”

“Having become citizens of the Republic of Armenia, the citizens of Artsakh give up their rights, do not demand return to Artsakh, and the issue of Artsakh becomes solely a territorial issue, although it has never been a territorial issue.”

People of all ages and professions, including students and even schoolchildren, can be found among the voluntary helpers to compatriots who arrived from Nagorno-Karabakh

“The so-called status is just a fiction. And, if I understand correctly, it is a consequence of the demand of part of the Artsakh people themselves to grant them a special status,” he told JAMnews.

He does not understand the noisy discussion on this issue and claims that no one can deprive a citizen of citizenship. When asked whether registration at a new address in Armenia can affect the future realization of the rights of those from Nagorno-Karabakh, including the claim for property compensation, the expert said:

“From the point of view of international law, it will not have any impact.”

According to him, only changes in the legislation inside the state and in the social assistance programs implemented by the Armenian government are possible.

“The work on the protection of the rights of these people should be built on all necessary grounds, one of which is probably the refugee status,” he said in a conversation with JAMnews.

The expert believes that the protection of rights is a fundamental and, at the same time a complex, long-term process. Therefore, in his opinion, in parallel with this work it is necessary to create for all Karabakhis “an opportunity to build their lives” in Armenia.

“The problem is what exactly is offered to people. If the offer meets their needs and creates a predictable prospect for them, no one will complain, it is not an end in itself. If problem-solving is effective, grievances will go off the agenda. The problems are not insoluble.”

The expert suggests involving legal, social and other workers for explanations and, if necessary, initiating legislative changes.

https://jam-news.net/status-of-karabakh-armenians-in-armenia-citizens-or-refugees/

Lemkin Institute issues Red Flag Alert for Azerbaijan in Armenia

Bedik Zaminian
Panorama, Armenia
Nov 1 2023

The Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention is issuing a Red Flag Alert for Azerbaijan in Armenia, due to the alarming potential for an invasion of Armenia by Azerbaijan in the coming days and weeks.

"Azerbaijan has long coveted Armenia’s southern Syunik Province, which has been discussed in the recent past as the site of an Azerbaijani-controlled “Zangezur Corridor” to Nakhichevan. Considering recent political developments in the region—including the Azerbaijani invasion of Artsakh on September 19, 2023 and the ensuing seizure of the territory—and well-established genocidal Armenophobia endemic in Türkiye and Azerbaijan, an Azerbaijani invasion runs a dangerously high risk of devolving into genocide. We remind the world that genocide is not only expressed through mass murder. As was the case during the recent seizure of Artsakh/Nagorno-Karabakh in September of 2023, genocide can also be expressed through a pattern of massacre, atrocity, and forced displacement from indigenous territory when the ideology behind these actions is aimed at destroying an identity in whole or in part," it said in a statement on Wednesday.

"To avoid a catastrophic invasion of Armenia by Azerbaijan, which would considerably threaten the peace and stability in the region for decades to come, it is imperative that Armenia and its allies do everything in their power to ensure that an invasion is unpalatable to Azerbaijan. Western powers, which have encouraged Armenia to distance itself from the Russian Federation (the state that has traditionally protected Armenia from Turkish and Azerbaijani aggression and expansionism—whom critics allege failed to defend Armenia from invasion as a member of the CSTO), must not fail to act while another genocide has begun brewing in the South Caucasus. Granting such a level of impunity to the genocidal atrocities committed by the Azerbaijani government and enabled by the Turkish state will only embolden them to continue their destabilizing agenda of aggression and expansionism in the South Caucasus, the Middle East, and Central Asia.

"Accordingly Western powers need to help Armenia strengthen its sovereign borders and its diplomatic position in the region. They can do this by insisting on Armenian control of any corridor running through its territory. They can further assist Armenia in securing its sovereignty by forcing Azerbaijan to withdraw its army from the border regions, by imposing sanctions on the Aliyev family, and by suspending Azerbaijan’s current visa and energy agreements with the EU, as suggested by a European Parliament resolution on October 5. France’s decision to increase weapons sales to Armenia could be helpful, but only if there is coordinated action and material support in the event of an invasion by Azerbaijan. The United States, for its part, can enforce Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act (1992), which excludes Azerbaijan from participation in economic programs created by the act. Section 907 has been waived by US presidents each year since 2002 but, given that Aliyev has proven to be a brutal genocidaire, the waivers must come to a permanent end.

"If the Western world continues to ignore genocide and effectively embrace it as a legitimate solution to intractable conflicts created and perpetuated by regimes like Azerbaijan, it will not only declare an end to the rules-based order of the post-Holocaust world; it will usher in an age of genocide as (if not more) destructive than the one that characterized the last mad rush for control of territory and resources across the globe," the Lemkin Institute said.

COMMENT: Aliyev could still lose in the Great Game he started

Emil Lazarian
Nov 1 2023


By Robert Ananyan in Yerevan November 1, 2023

The Great Game in the South Caucasus continues despite the de facto dissolution of Nagorno-Karabakh. Russia and the West are in fierce competition to reconcile Armenia and Azerbaijan, which would also confirm one of them as the prime mover in the South Caucasus.

After its new attack on Karabakh on September 19,  relations between the West and Azerbaijan have become complicated. 

Azerbaijan, which is in alliance with Turkey and Russia to remove the West from the region, recently refused to negotiate with Armenia through the mediation of European Council President Charles Michel in Brussels. The USA and the EU had strongly pressured Aliyev, who broke his promise not to start a war against Nagorno-Karabakh, according to German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock.

In order not to suffer political losses from the occupation of Karabakh, Aliyev first refused to go to Granada to participate in the meeting with Michel, French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, and then also cancelled the meeting in Brussels. Afterwards he announced in Bishkek that his preferred format is with Russian mediation. He invited the Armenian premier to both Moscow and Tbilisi. This is Aliyev's blackmail against the West to block any pressure on Baku.

In Granada, Armenia received the support of Germany, France, and the European Union (EU), which in a sense is a kind of security guarantee. In the agreed statement, what happened in Nagorno-Karabakh was described as a mass displacement, and there was unwavering support for Armenia's sovereignty, territorial integrity, and inviolability of borders. It was also mentioned that borders should be drawn according to the last map of the USSR.

The European Parliament, in a resolution adopted on October 5, condemned Azerbaijan's military aggression against Nagorno-Karabakh and called on the EU leadership to impose sanctions on Azerbaijani officials who are responsible for the ceasefire violation in Nagorno-Karabakh and numerous abuses of human rights. The European Commission was urged to refuse the purchase of gas from Azerbaijan if it takes military steps against Armenia. Parliaments of individual European countries also adopted resolutions condemning Azerbaijan.

The US State Department announced on October 15, that it strongly supports Armenia's sovereignty and territorial integrity. "We emphasised that any violation of that sovereignty and territorial integrity will lead to serious consequences," it said. In short, the West drew a red line before Aliyev, forbidding any military aggression against Armenia. 

Avoidance strategy

These developments made Aliyev realise that he would not succeed in Brussels, but on the contrary, would be told to recognise the territorial integrity of Armenia with an area of 29,800 square kilometers.

This would deprive Baku of the chance to create a narrative to carry out new military attacks against Armenia, using as an excuse, for example, the eight villages under Armenian occupation. The West has forbidden Azerbaijan to attack Armenia and re-occupy the "eight villages or three enclaves".

Aliyev avoided meeting the European interlocutors. Furthermore, he exploited the fact that Armenia had recognised Nagorno-Karabakh as a territory of Azerbaijan in the previous negotiations under the EU format. He declared that this is a basis for extending his sovereignty over Karabakh through a military operation. He no longer has anything to gain from the Western format, and is therefore boycotting it.

Why is the Russian format preferable for Azerbaijan? Azerbaijan cannot demand in Brussels that Armenia provide it and Russia with the "Zangezur Corridor" through Armenian territory to its exclave of Nakhitchevan, but it can do this in Moscow.

At the meeting held in Brussels on May 14, Azerbaijan had agreed that Armenia and Azerbaijan should seek the help of the World Customs Organisation to restore railway and transport connections. This implies the approval of Armenia's sovereignty and jurisdiction over roads in its territory. The West considers the topic of the Zangezur Corridor closed.

Meanwhile, Russia is interested in creating a Zangezur Corridor outside of Armenia's customs, border, and security controls, which it will control with Russian Security Forces.

Unlike the United States and the European Union, Moscow also turns a blind eye to Aliyev carrying out military attacks against Armenia. During the Azerbaijani attacks, Russia refused to fulfill its security obligations towards Armenia, causing a security vacuum. This is a lever of pressure against the Armenian government so that it is forced to cede the Zangezur Corridor to Baku and Moscow. This scheme has been used for three years now.

Another military aggression of Azerbaijan against Armenia would be an excellent opportunity for Russia to finally deploy Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO) peacekeepers on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border. The Kremlin announced the plan to deploy the CSTO in Armenia in autumn 2022, when Yerevan decided to deploy an EU observation mission on its territory.

Therefore Putin and Aliyev invited Pashinyan to Moscow to negotiate. It is unlikely that Yerevan will accept this offer. Yerevan realises that Russia is not a mediator, but a party to the conflict. Russia does not want to establish real peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan, unlike the US and the EU. If Armenians and Azerbaijanis stop killing each other, who would the Russians "save"? Russian troups would be removed from the South Caucasus.

Georgia could be an interesting option, but Prime Minister Irakli Gharibashvili can at most offer Aliyev and Pashinyan a good hotel, delicious food, and a sincere wish not to go to war and reconcile. Georgia cannot present a political plan to resolve the 35-year-old Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. Georgia has no leverage on the parties for the implementation of the agreement. If the Tbilisi meeting takes place, it will actually be an Armenian-Azerbaijani bilateral format.

Position of strength

Azerbaijan offers the formats of Moscow and Tbilisi to Armenia in order to exclude the US and the EU from the negotiation process. The absence of the West would be dangerous for Armenia, because Azerbaijan will continue to speak from a position of strength. Armenia has not yet managed to restore the military balance.

It will not sign a bilateral peace agreement with Azerbaijan in Georgia and participate in the Russian-Turkish-Azerbaijani plan to push the US and the EU out of the region. If it did, Yerevan will lose the support of the West.

Yet Aliyev could still lose in the "Great Game" he started. Despite the support of Turkey and Russia, Azerbaijan is a weak link for the US and the EU. The West can apply sanctions against Azerbaijan, imposing embargoes on the sale of Azerbaijani oil and gas, and the purchase of arms.

France, one of the leading states of Nato, will start supplying weapons to Armenia and will support the reforms of its armed forces. America's ally India is preparing to deliver a new batch of weapons to Armenia. Armenia has security cooperation with three other Western countries.

If Azerbaijan continues to boycott Western formats, the West can strengthen Armenia's defence capabilities, forcing Aliyev to forget about the new war and return to constructive negotiations. Azerbaijan could even be forced to accept back the 150,000 Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh under the international mandate of the United Nations.

Aliyev's next step will be decided by Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Putin, who held a meeting in Sochi 15 days before Azerbaijan's September 19 attack on Karabakh.

It is still the case that Azerbaijan may not sign a peace treaty with Armenia and could prefer the logic of the "Cold War". There is a possibility that Azerbaijan will wait until a suitable window for new military aggression is created. Elections are coming soon in the US and the EU.

But if the US and the EU increase the pressure against Azerbaijan now, a new date for the meeting between Aliyev and Pashinyan could be announced in the near future under the Western format.

Robert Ananyan is a journalist based in Yerevan, Armenia, who focuses on the political, and security problems of the South Caucasus.

https://www.bne.eu/comment-aliyev-could-still-lose-in-the-great-game-he-started-299409/?source=armenia

Pashinyan: Azerbaijan and Armenia in agreement on principles of peace treat

Tambiyan Samvel
Nov 1 2023
 1 November 2023

ByArshaluys BarseghyanandIsmi Aghayev

Officials in Baku and Yerevan have expressed hope throughout October of an impending peace agreement between the two countries. 

On Monday, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said that Yerevan and Baku were in agreement on the ‘three main principles of peace and normalisation of relations’. He said that if both parties remained faithful to those principles, ‘the signing of the peace treaty becomes realistic’.

Pashinyan’s statement comes less than a week after he unveiled the ‘Crossroads of Peace’, an Armenian government proposal to establish a series of roads, railways, and power lines connecting Azerbaijan and Turkey through Armenia. 

‘Without roads, it will be very difficult to build peace’, noted Pashinyan after unveiling the proposal at the Tbilisi Silk Road Forum, where he also expressed hope that Armenia and Azerbaijan would reach a peace agreement ‘in the coming months’. 

Hakob Vardanyan, Armenia’s Deputy Prime Minister, also announced Armenia’s willingness to buy Azerbaijani gas after the settlement of ‘political problems’.

At the forum in Tbilisi, Georgia’s Prime Minister Irakli Gharibashvili also offered his country’s mediation in the Armenia–Azerbaijan peace process. He later had an informal meeting with his Azerbaijani and Armenian counterparts.

On Wednesday, Nikoloz Samkharadze, the Georgian Parliament’s foreign relations committee chair, said that Georgia wishes Tbilisi would be ‘where the peace treaty will be signed’. 

Despite Armenia’s apparent optimism towards a potential peace deal with Azerbaijan, Azerbaijan has sat out several planned meetings with Armenia throughout October.

Pashinyan and Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev were due to meet in Brussels with Toivo Klaar, the EU’s Special Representative for the South Caucasus, in the end of October before the meeting was postponed.

Armenia’s Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan later explained that ‘obviously’ Aliyev did not find the time to go to Brussels for the meeting, despite Armenia’s readiness to participate in the talks.

‘I hope that the problem is really the specific dates, and in the near future, it will be possible to agree on new dates for the new meeting’, said Mirzoyan.

Aliyev also sat out another big meeting with Pashinyan in Granada in early October.

Following this, Yerevan raised doubts about Baku’s willingness to complete the peace process, with the Armenian Deputy Foreign Minister Vahan Kostanyan stating that Aliyev’s statement about readiness to hold negotiations in Tbilisi that Baku’s ‘constant chang[ing] of formats raises serious doubts about whether it is interested in completing the peace process at all’.

Last month, Politico reported that US Secretary of State Antony Blinken told US lawmakers that Azerbaijan might invade southern Armenia ‘in the coming weeks’. 

Washington has described the claims as ‘inaccurate’, while officials in Baku have expressed hopes for a peace agreement in the near future.

In another interview with Politico, Aliyev’s Presidential Adviser, Hikmat Hajiyev, even went so far as to stress that Azerbaijan had no interest in staking claims to Armenian territory.

Hajiyev told Politico that Azerbaijan’s proposed ‘Zangezur corridor’, a road that would connect western Azerbaijan to the Azerbaijani exclave of Nakhchivan, had ‘lost its importance’.

Azerbaijan has previously repeatedly pushed for the corridor, with Aliyev even threatening to establish it by force earlier this year.

Instead, Azerbaijan and Iran began the construction of a corridor to reach Nakhchivan through Iranian territory. 

‘Our agenda was the establishment of transport links and connections within the framework of bilateral negotiations. The project is still on the table, but the Armenian side should show that it is really interested in it’, said Hajiyev.

On Monday, Azerbaijan’s Deputy Foreign Minister Elnur Mammadov told Azertaj that ‘Azerbaijan is committed to the agenda of a peace treaty with Armenia’.

‘Azerbaijan’s proposal regarding the peace agreement is still valid today. Therefore, the next steps should be taken mostly by Armenia. To date, most of the points of the peace agreement have been agreed between the parties’ he said.

‘We believe that after Azerbaijan fully restores its sovereignty over its internationally recognised territories in Karabakh, the signing of the peace agreement is even more comfortable, easy, and the probability of its signing should be high.’

https://oc-media.org/pashinyan-azerbaijan-and-armenia-in-agreement-on-principles-of-peace-treaty/

"Economic growth in Armenia is unstable": analysis of the situation and expert’s forecast

Emil Lazarian
Nov 1 2023
  • JAMnews
  • Yerevan

On the problems of the Armenian economy

The Armenian government intends to achieve economic growth of 7% in 2024. Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan stated that the macroeconomic stability observed in the country is the most important tool for managing challenges and capitalizing on opportunities.

According to economist Lilia Amirkhanyan, macroeconomic indicators do point to positive trends in the economy. But the factors driving this, she says, are external, and warns that without them Armenia’s economy will face serious problems.

  • The effect of “positive and negative shock” on Armenia’s economy. Opinion
  • “A blow to microbusiness in Armenia”: experts on the abolition of tax incentives
  • Construction boom in Yerevan, prohibitively high housing prices will remain for the time being

During the preliminary discussions on the state budget for 2024, the Prime Minister said that macroeconomic stability is one of Armenia’s most important achievements:

“We were able to maintain it during the war, internal political instability and the coronavirus pandemic. Armenia continues to maintain the level of high economic growth for the second year in a row.”

According to Pashinyan, macroeconomic stability was also facilitated by “a principled and systematic fight against corruption”.

About the latest developments – according to the stories of ordinary people. Also, an expert’s commentary on support for socially vulnerable segments of the population and uneven distribution of income

According to Finance Minister Vahe Hovhannisyan, “the services sector will remain the driving force of Armenia’s economic growth, and consumption will remain the driving component.” He believes that the inflow of investments and exports will also contribute to growth.

When asked by MPs what Armenia’s economic growth will be like without the positive influence of external factors, the minister replied:

“Armenia’s economic growth potential is estimated at 5.5%. The scale of this potential depends on the investments, diversification of our economy and the reforms we are implementing. The main efforts of the government should be directed precisely at increasing this potential.”

Economist Hrant Mikaelyan agrees with agency experts that economic growth in Armenia is “indirectly linked” to the ongoing war in Ukraine

Economist Lilia Amirkhanyan says that all the factors that have been the drivers of Armenia’s economy over the past year and a half are still going, but are mainly external, largely due to the economic effect of the Russian-Ukrainian war, i.e. migrants and cash remittances.

The expert notes that two “cornerstone areas of the economy” – industry and agriculture – are significantly lagging behind the growth rate. She is alarmed that the agricultural sector continues to be at ground zero, while industry is recording a decline.

“The economic growth in trade, service, services and construction is steady. These sectors dominate both the GDP structure and the economic activity index.”

But the recorded economic growth is unstable and the cessation of external factors will cause major problems:

“We will face the problem of an economy with declining industry, agriculture and agrarian sector and exports. These problems already exist, but the indicators of other sectors so far give us the opportunity to cover the gap.”

As for the influx of Armenians who left NK for Armenia, the expert said they could become a “stimulus” for economic activity:

“If additional value is to be created as a result of increased state budget expenditures and return to the state budget, this is a natural phenomenon, not a negative one. The problem is the lack of institutional mechanisms and inefficiency, not only in the case of migrants from Artsakh, but also in the case of Russian migrants.”


https://jam-news.net/expert-on-the-problems-of-armenias-economy/

Why does Israel still dominate the news and not Nagorno-Karabakh?

Jhanna Virabian
Nov 1 2023

01-11-2023

Opinion

Evert van Vlastuin, CNE.news

The Israeli representative at the UN in New York put on a yellow star last Monday. His photo was used all over the world, confirming the observation that the conflict between Israel and Hamas still dominates all the news. Why is that?

Early October, just before the terrorist attack on Israel, we shifted our focus to Nagorno-Karabakh. Something historic was going on there: the “ethnic cleansing” of Armenians from the region.

The conflict there has a spiritual element as well. You can view these events as Christians (Armenians) against Muslims (Azerbaijan). But why does it not come back as a central topic in the news? Why is it still Israel and Gaza?

These questions are not easy to answer.

Of course, the Armenians are of no less value than Israelis or Palestinians. And it is still difficult to understand that such events that took place in Nagorno-Karabakh recently can take place in our days.

Still, there is a difference between Nagorno-Karabakh and Israel. Israel is not a country like all others; it is unique. And therefore, it is called the Holy Land. What does that mean? You can give three perspectives on that:

The Middle East has been a challenging region, at least since the end of the Second World War. Since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, there has been unrest continuously. Of course, this has to do with the territorial issue: not only the Jews but also the Arabs want their state to be on the same soil.

Together with this, the West has many interests there. The UN’s partition plan from 1947 was one of the significant decisions of this new international body. The United Nations still feel committed to the Israel-Palestine problem (although the relationship between Israel and the UN has never been so bad as it is now).

Many leaders in Israel have strong relations with the Western world. Prime Minister Netanyahu, for instance, even lived in the USA. And the same applies to thousands of other Israelis. Western journalists always have somebody to talk to. The country is quite easily accessible to the media compared with Nagorno-Karabakh.

Another aspect of this horizontal perspective is this short word: oil. The Middle East is a region that is essential for the economic development of the rest of the world because of energy. From this standpoint, it is understandable that the media focus on the region’s stability. Take only the nuclear ambitions of Iran.

There is more between Israel and Palestine than the issue of land. It is religion. Most Arabs are Muslim, and many Jews are Judaistic. They have different visions, even colliding values. In most Muslim countries, anti-Semitism is extreme. It seems that Islam and Judaism cannot live along each other easily.

Especially in Jerusalem, this is a problem. The Jews are proud that they are back in the Old City, in which even King David lived. But for the Muslim nations in and around Israel, this is an offence. A Muslim is not allowed to give up land that was occupied by Islam once. It doesn’t surprise that they use power and even violence to get this land back again.

The West has been trained in a secular outlook. Especially Protestantism has taught there is no difference between the sacred and the profane; God creates both, and they are equally holy. This sometimes resulted in an indifference towards the Israel-Palestine issue. If all land is sacred –even the Sahara desert– why would I be concerned about the Temple Mountain? Of course, this has not helped to solve the problem.

For many, Israel is not only called the Holy Land but is Holy Land. And within the country, Jerusalem is the very location where heaven meets earth.

As an outsider, I have witnessed how European Jews visited the Western Wall. The nearer they came to the Wall, the more they were captured by emotions. For them, this place is very, very special.

Also, for Muslims, Jerusalem is a holy city. This is where the prophet Mohammed prayed and was taken to heaven. For them, it is difficult to share the holy place with the Jews.

But also, for Christians, Israel is a beloved country. For centuries and centuries, God only revealed Himself to the twelve Israelite tribes. Only after the resurrection of Christ and Pentecost (around the year AD 35) the Gospel went abroad “till the end of the earth”. But still, no land was as blessed with God’s interference as this soil. It is self-evident that people with an interest in the Bible also have an interest in the land of the Bible. This is the place where it all happened. Many places in the world are historic, but this place is central in salvation history!

But after 1948, many Protestants –especially Evangelicals– have taken on a position that sometimes is similar to the Jewish and Muslim one, in that sense that Jerusalem has a vertical dimension that London, Paris and Moscow do not have.

In the past, Roman Catholics had this idea about the Vatican. We read that Martin Luther had strong expectations when he went to Rome in 1510; he would see a holiness that he had never seen before – and he returned very disappointed.

The same vertical dimension we see in Mecca, where the Muslims think the Black Stone from the Kaaba has fallen out of heaven. This stone gives a material connection between the earth and the spiritual world.

Does Jerusalem indeed have that vertical element? Well, as a staunch Calvinist, it would be difficult for me to say that. I don’t believe the Bible teaches that there is less sin in Jerusalem than in my hometown. Neither is there more holiness.

On the other hand, I believe that God still has a plan with the Jews, the chosen people. Few ancient nations have survived the centuries until the present day, but the Jews did. Why? I think that God has a unique goal with that, to glorify Himself and to bring the Israelites to Christ (see Romans 11,26).

Some have said recently that anti-Semitism is not just hatred against men but hatred against God. I believe this is true. Satan does not want this spiritual change among the Israelites.

Of course, this has nothing to do with politics and the Middle East. But it might be so that God brought (half of) His people back to their old house for a particular purpose.

I use the word “house” deliberately. The State of Israel is an earthly house for a special people. It is not helpful to put this state on a unique level, different from other states. But for the Jewish nation, yes, I think the Bible teaches that we can expect something of God for them.

Back to the first question: why so much publicity for Israel? I have given some considerations that could help.

It seems wise to me first to consider horizontal aspects. I believe that God works in horizontal things as well. If we don’t think of Him, He thinks about us. And there are plenty of reasons why the Middle East gets more continuous attention from the media than other regions.

And at the end, there remains a riddle. Or a secret. Only God knows that.

In my church tradition, they sometimes make the comparison with an embroidery: we only see the back of the stitching, a bit rough and full of loose ends. But God guides the history according to His plan – don’t be afraid.

https://cne.news/article/3822-everts-comment-why-does-israel-still-dominate-the-news-and-not-nagorno-karabakh

Armenia’s Pashinyan lists three agreed principles for settlement with Azerbaijan

Alex Nanijanian
TASS, Russia
Oct 30 2023
"If the sides observe these principles, the signing of a peace treaty will become a reality," Nikol Pashinyan said

YEREVAN, October 30. /TASS/. Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said that it is necessary for the sides to observe three basic principles of settlement in order to reach a peace treaty with Azerbaijan.

"Three basic principles have been agreed upon that can contribute to peace and regulation of relations with Baku. And if the sides observe these principles, the signing of a peace treaty will become a reality," Pashinyan said in Yerevan at a parliamentary hearing on the 2024 budget.

The Armenian leader enumerated these principles. The first is formal recognition by both countries of each other's territorial integrity, given a sovereign territory of 29,800 square kilometers for Armenia and 86,600 square kilometers for Azerbaijan. The second principle is that the 1991 Almaty Declaration should become the political basis for the delimitation and further demarcation of the international border. The third principle is the opening of all regional communications lines and other utilities on the basis of mutual respect for the two countries’ respective sovereignty, jurisdiction and legislation, Pashinyan concluded.

Armenia and Azerbaijan are negotiating a peace treaty. One of the main obstacles is the issue of demarcation of the common section of the border. Pashinyan and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev have held several face-to-face meetings mediated by Russia and the EU. Another issue discussed by the sides is the opening of regional communications. Yerevan insists that the principle of maintaining the jurisdiction of the countries through whose territory such communications pass should be applied.

In late October, Pashinyan said that he expected an agreement on peace and normalization of relations between Yerevan and Baku to be signed within a few months.