TIME TO PAY ONE’S DEBTS

Inter-party consultations to mark the creation of a Eurasian Union, the idea for which was promoted during the presidential election race by Russian President Vladimir Putin, were held in Yerevan in November. Taking part in the event were delegations of the ruling parties of Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Armenia, and also members of the Belarussian parliament and the "Prosperous Armenia" party. The ambassadors and charge d'affaires of Russia, Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan to Armenia were invited as observers. A memorandum on cooperation between the political parties that took part in the event from Armenia, Russia, Kazakhstan and Ukraine was signed on the results of the consultations. According to the document, the sides expressed their readiness to continue a dialogue within the framework of the programme for the creation of a Eurasian Union.

In Armenia itself, where the inter-party consultations were held, the prospects for the country's possible membership of the Eurasian Union are being assessed in different ways. In the opinion of Armenian politicians and experts, although membership of this organization could indeed bring the country economic dividends, at the same time it will worsen relations with the European Union (EU). Some Armenian analysts are also pointing to the bankruptcy of the very idea of a Eurasian Union and are categorically opposed to taking part in such a project. For example, Sergey Minasyan, the deputy director of the Caucasus Institute, is convinced that a Eurasian Union as an idea exists more in the realms of a news story than a political reality. In his view, even in Russia there are people who find it hard to understand what it is all about. The economic component of Armenia's possible participation in the Eurasian Union is more than dubious, because this would require rather serious economic and financial transfers on the part of Russia, which is scarcely ready for this.

And political expert Aleksandr Markarov, speaking to participants in the consultations, noted that so long as the idea of a Eurasian Union has no specific content, all discussions on this subject will remain just that. He pointed out that at the present moment the idea of a Eurasian Union is in a sense abstract and that more comprehensive, detailed and specific proposals should be voiced in its regard. Even the leadership of "Prosperous Armenia", which signed the Yerevan Memorandum, believes that it is premature to speak about the prospects of Armenia's joining a Eurasian Union, because this inter-state project has not been officially approved.

And so, Armenia, which flits to and fro between Russia and the West, is experiencing very serious discomfort with its choice. And the more it tries, by force of habit, to play for time in order to haggle for conditions it finds more acceptable, the more pressure it faces.

The west was a priori unimpressed about the return to the Kremlin of Vladimir Putin and his idea of the creation of a Eurasian Union after the collapse of the USSR on the basis of the Customs Union of Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. In carrying out this project Moscow is first and foremost trying to attract its allies from the member-countries of the Eurasian Economic Union and the CSTO [Collective Security Treaty Organization]. Therefore, for Armenia, which depends totally on Moscow's political will, the question of joining the Eurasian Union has for some time been a very topical one.  

Some Armenian experts suggest playing the well-known Armenian tactic of serving two masters. The process of Eurasian integration will not impede Yerevan's desire for rapprochement with the EU. It should not be forgotten that both Russia and Armenia are members of the WTO. This allows Armenia to take part in any integration processes in the post-Soviet space," the leading Armenian economist and head of the "Alternative" analytical centre, Tatul Manaseryan, says. Meanwhile, Armenia's ruling regime is in no hurry to define its position in relation to the Eurasian Union, although it supports integration within the framework of the CIS Free Trade Zone. Honey is sweet, but the bee stings, as they say. And Yerevan knows this.

Quite recently Germany's Ambassador to Armenia Reiner Morell, commenting on the talks between Yerevan and the European Union about the agreement on a free trade zone, warned that the foundations of the Customs Union proposed by Russia differ from the principles of free trade in the EU. And if Yerevan travels the Russian path "relations in a different format" will be difficult to formulate. To put it more simply, Yerevan's entry into the Eurasian Union would mean a blocking of talks on simplifying the visa regime with the EU. Armenia will also have to forget about credit of 1.5bn euros, which the EU has already refused to allocate until better times.

Such signals do not remain unnoticed by Moscow, which is also cautioning Yerevan against taking unpopular moves. One such warning to the Armenian authorities was a statement by a well-known Russian TV presenter and editor-in-chief of the "Odnako" ["However"] magazine, Mikhail Leontyev, who is close to the Kremlin. "Armenia could indeed serve as an ideal example of a failed state such as Kyrgyzstan or Moldova, had it not been for Russia. Most probably, she simply would not even have been on the map… Armenia emerged in its present form only thanks to Russia and continues to exist because of her. The total dependence on Russian gas and Russian transfers for which experts from the IMF reproach Armenia is a direct illustration of this," Leontyev writes in his article.

As regards Armenia's vain attempts to liberalize the economy and attract foreign investments, Leontyev notes that there is no investment boom and nor is one foreseen. And the powerful diaspora all over the world, including in Europe and the US, has not particularly helped to lift the Armenian economy either. On the contrary, all it has done is to expedite the mass exodus of Armenians from the country. Accordingly, Leontyev is baffled by Yerevan's double-dealing position. "Against this background it is strange to hear statements in Armenia itself about a 'European choice' and the tough warnings of the German ambassador about the threat to this choice in the event of Armenia's participation in the Eurasian integration project…To some degree the obsequious swings of Armenian politics may be explained by the current peculiarities of Russia's position, which have forced many of its partners to periodically seek alternative airfields. The problem is there is no such airfield for Armenia. As far as Eurasian integration is concerned, it is as geopolitically inevitable as the changing of the seasons. And a common border will appear," the Russian journalist stresses.  In short, Moscow, through the lips of Leontyev, is telling Yerevan in no uncertain terms that Armenia clearly has no way out other than to cry out for entry into a Eurasian Union.

And Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has twice postponed his official visit to Armenia, is actually making it clear to Yerevan that without a positive response regarding the Eurasian Union this visit may not take place at all. In the same way Armenia's request for the allocation of more Russian credit to the sum of $2bn may be ultimately rejected. It is perfectly obvious that Moscow will build pressure on official Yerevan the nearer it gets to the presidential elections in Armenia, which are scheduled for next February.

It is significant that after the Armenians' angry rejoinders to Leontyev, Germany's ambassador to Armenia Morell, during his meeting with the country's Defence Minister Seyran Oganyan, said that Germany sees Armenia as a reliable partner and is prepared to continue its bilateral relations even more. In the meantime, however, at the beginning of November, the US ambassador to Armenia, John Heffern, considered it his duty to covertly warn Yerevan that Morell's complementary rhetoric was not grounds for optimism. "Armenia is in a difficult geopolitical situation, two of the country's borders are closed, and therefore the republic must diversify its geopolitical position. Armenia can share western values and obtain economic and material benefit," the ambassador said. In other words, Washington is making it clear that it is high time Yerevan drifted towards the west and shed its chains of dependence on Moscow.

Poland's ambassador to Armenia, Z. Raczynski, spoke in the same vein as other western colleagues: "On the one hand I can understand greater integration with Europe. And if I correctly understand the words of the president and the foreign minister, this is the aim of Armenia's foreign policy. But what do we have from the other side - a Eurasian union? What is a Eurasian union? Is there such an organization? When such an organization exists then we shall talk about what we will choose…The choice here must be realistic. But there is no Eurasian union at the moment," the Polish diplomat said.

Replying to the question: "Are you saying that Armenia has no choice?" the ambassador diplomatically warned Yerevan that it will have to choose one of two things: "No, there is always a choice, so choose. No-one can decide in place of the Armenian people. It is the Armenians themselves who choose, you do the choosing. Go to Europe and then you can see what you can choose between."

From all this it follows that the goodwill of the world's geopolitical poles towards Armenia is on the wane, and the day is not far off when Yerevan will have to pay its debts. But the political lame duck Yerevan will not be in a position to do this by preserving its already flawed independence.

The leading American scholar N. Spikeman set out ten criteria for a state's geopolitical might: land surface, nature of borders, size of population, existence or lack of minerals, economic and technological development, financial strength, ethnic homogeneity, level of social integration, political stability and national spirit. If the sum of the assessment of a state's political potential based on these criteria is small, then this state has to renounce part of its sovereignty. From the aforementioned criteria Armenia, which has been turned into a mono-ethnic country, may boast only of ethnic homogeneity. The choice of the future of their state is up to the Armenian people themselves…