Interview with Dr. David Shahnazaryan
Former head of Armenia’s National Security Service David Shahnazaryan is raising the alarm over the threat of the Third Armenian Republic’s decline.
Q. On October 10 the question of Armenia’s accession to the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) will, in all likelihood, receive a final solution. Is there any reverse option or have things become irrevocable?
A. One can not rule out that the question of Armenia’s accession to the Eurasian Economic Union may be delayed again because of deepening political disagreements within the union. As for Armenia’s chances to initiate a reverse course, there is unfortunately none. The reason is that our political system has no political agenda, no objective and no plan of action to preserve and consolidate our state and our sovereignty, and both the ruling majority and the parliamentary minority that calls itself the “non-authority” are part of the same oligarchic system. The latter, in turn, is a natural component of Russia’s oligarchic system (this is not the case, by the way, with the Ukrainian or Azerbaijani oligarchic systems).
Read also
Q. So, there is nothing we can do?
A. At this point, the overriding goal for us is to have as few losses as possible because we are already losing our statehood and sovereignty. There is another no less important task with no possible solution visible either at this point – Armenia’s political establishment is not prepared for future developments, which are unavoidable – the collapse of the Putin regime and Russia’s recurrent withdrawal from our region, for example. When this happens, Armenia will encounter the harsh reality – Azerbaijan, armed to the teeth and its ally Turkey. When the Soviet Union collapsed, Armenia had a politically matured and well-institutionalized (liberation) movement with all its structures that appeared to be able to find correct solutions in dire conditions. Armenia’s gravest problem now is its corrupt political system. I mean both the authorities and “non-authorities” (the fact that this word is used by the latter to describe itself is politically absurd). It would be correct to call it “no-opposition.” The latest developments show that the “no-opposition” trio (the Armenian National Congress, the Prosperous Armenia and Heritage parties) is unable to create political content or to form a political agenda despite possessing substantial material resources. Moreover, the trio and other parliament-represented forces have handed over the resolution of Armenia’s most pressing problems, including the issue of power formation, to the Kremlin.
Q. The authorities’ argument that Armenia’s membership in the Eurasian Economic Union is prompted by security considerations is not acceptable to you?
A. There is no single economic reason for Armenia’s membership in the Russia-led union. Armenia has no economic border with any of its member states; its accession to the Eurasian Economic Union will entail a greater economic downfall and further worsening of people’s living standards. But most importantly, Armenia’s accession to the EEU is anti-constitutional because an important component of its sovereignty – economic policy- will be handed over to a transnational body, which is banned by the Constitution and can not be circumvented even by a referendum. The accession will actually mean the usurpation of Armenia. The only argument that was cited by the authorities was the security consideration, however, all the developments show that the largest internal threat to Armenia’s sovereignty is corruption, and the largest external threat emanates from Russia. According to a draft EEU agreement, after joining the union, Armenia will not be able to revoke its membership in it without the consent of other members. This means making Armenia a captive; even the former Soviet Union’s Constitution provided for a secession procedure, which was implemented by Armenia in 1991. By the way, Armenia was the only one of 15 former Soviet republics that seceded from the USSR by observing all the requirements of the existing law.
Q. Do not the ruling party and the minority realize these dangers or don’t they care about them?
A. I think this is a secondary question for them. The biggest threat to our sovereignty as I have said is the corrupt political and the criminal-oligarchic systems. The decline of the third Armenian republic has begun and if it continues to increase we will have to register that the systemic corruption has gorged our state and sovereignty. In fact, these two forces- the ruling majority and the parliamentary minority – have joined efforts to resolve a number of issues important to them – for example, to not allow wide public discussions on external threats to Armenia’s sovereignty and to use all available means to hinder the formation of democratic political institutions.
Q. And what about the public at large? Doesn’t it want to play a role in these decisive questions?
A. In my opinion, the public at large is hugely disappointed having lost all trust in political parties. The only choice is to choose between the previous and current authorities. ‘The “no-opposition” trio is trying to give its actions a political coloring to pretend that it is pursuing political objectives, but I would like to reiterate – it lacks political content altogether.
Q. I would not like to end the interview on a sad note. Is there no way out at all?
A. Of course, there is. The replacement of the corrupt political system with a political system based on sovereignty and democratic values is inevitable. The Eurasian Economic Union and the Putin regime are anti-historical in their nature and their collapse is also inevitable. The Eurasian Economic Unity has no chances for consolidation at all.
Q. Do young think that establishment of a customs border between Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh is a real danger?
A. By arguing that the Eurasian Economic Union must protect its external economic borders, the Kremlin wants to set up customs checkpoints along the union’s borders, including between Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh. The next step – border protection- will be implemented by the transnational body. This suggests that the Kremlin seeks to deploy its presence between Armenian and Nagorno-Karabakh. Russia’s current regime is not only selling billions of dollars in offensive weapons to Azerbaijan, but has built very close relations with it, making Baku a military and political partner, and is not hiding it. Joining the Russia-led Eurasian Economic Union is not only a threat to Armenia’s security and sovereignty- it actually hands the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict to Russia, which has never concealed its plan to de-internationalize the Karabakh peace process and to monopolize it.
Second, Moscow offers Azerbaijan a choice: to choose a conflict settlement option that would please it but only in return for its consent to the deployment of Russian “peacekeeping” forces in the conflict zone. The question is which will happen first in this quickly changing world – the implementation of this plan or the collapse of Putin’s regime that has become the number one international threat today. The alternative for Armenia is Europe (there is no doubt about it) that was building for us the most favorable climate both in terms of national security and the Karabakh conflict. The only reason that made us reject Europe is corruption that has zeroed our political system’s resistibility. By the way, during the 3.5 year-long negotiations between Armenia and EU on the Association Agreement, the EU never raised the question of customs checkpoints between Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh, saying clearly there would be no such problem.
Q. The Armenian authorities have reiterated that they would not allow establishment of customs checkpoints between Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh. Do you think this could be used as a pretext to backtrack on EEU accession?
A. The Kremlin’s plan is to establish customs checkpoints between Armenia and Karabakh step by step. First, they would say customs checkpoints are only a formality and then they would toughen control. To resist this, the authorities in Yerevan must have enough independence. Nonetheless, some independent moves are being made. There are even signs of enlarging cooperation with NATO and the EU. Here are two examples –first, is President Serzh Sarkisian’s participation in the recent NATO summit in Wales, which was very positive and the second is the signing of a political-military cooperation agreement with the UK. However, it is hard to predict whether more such steps could follow as Russia is also seeking to assume control over Armenia’s relations with all Western organizations.
Q. Do you think these dangers could trigger a national awakening as it was back in 1988 when the Nagorno-Karabakh liberation movement began?
A. I would like very much that concerns for our sovereignty, which is the only guarantee of Nagorno-Karabakh security, trigger that awakening. The weakening of Armenia means that the Karabakh settlement process goes to Moscow while history is rife with examples of how Russia behaves in such cases. Armenia is the only security guarantee for Nagorno-Karabakh, there is no other.
Interview by Melanya Barseghyan
