“If we leave our biased approaches aside and approach the problem objectively, it should be admitted that Turkey is one of the most dynamically developing economies in the region. During the last 2-3 decades Turkey’s economy has made remarkable successes, which allows the country’s leadership to knock on EU doors”, Tatul Manaseryan, Doctor of Economics, told Aravot.am, adding that Turkey has already gained all the privileges that European countries have in terms of trade, development, and cooperation. EU-Turkey disagreements concern political, specifically foreign policy issues. According to the economist, the competitiveness of Turkish goods and services allows the country to have relations with the EU from such position.
In the context of these realities, referring to the negotiations on the free trade zone agreement between Turkey and the EAEU, the economist notes that neither Russia, nor Kazakhstan, nor Belarus, nor Armenia, nor Kyrgyzstan have the GDP successes neither in structural terms, nor in terms of the competitiveness, which have been recorded by Turkey. “That is, there are serious concerns here. Even if Turkey does not hinder Armenia from the political point of view, there are no closed borders and so on, Armenia’s economy is not ready to openly cooperate with Turkey in the free regime. In terms of competitiveness, we are still behind of Turkish products, and this can greatly hurt domestic production in areas that we think are developed in here”, said the economist. Those are jewelry and agriculture. “In the first case, we have a successful area: jewelry is really considered Armenia’s competitive advantage, and the potential in agriculture is high, but we have not yet implemented it completely. All other spheres may be in danger. Let’s not forget that Turkey has brought its local production to a level that is considered a regional center for many multinational companies. There are many leading western centers, that have their branches and factories in Turkey, and from there they export to the post-Soviet territory and Arabic world. That is, before talking about Turkey’s cooperation with the EAEU, we should know Turkey’s economy well”, said the economist. In his opinion, Russia will have a serious problem: having such a Turkish partner, it should strive to raise the competitiveness of its economy, which it has failed for several decades, especially during the years of independence, and being a hydrocarbon-based economy, it has not succeeded in diversifying either the GDP or the export structure.
According to our interlocutor, being a small country, Armenia still has had successes. For example, the achievements in the field of information technology, the high-tech industry, which is not fully realized, but can be considered a competitive advantage. Also, institutional reforms, according to which, in his opinion, Armenia is a leader not only in the post-Soviet territory but also in comparison with Turkey: “From this point of view, it is preferable for Europe to have such a partner as Armenia, rather than Turkey. There is also the issue of stability and predictability”.
Let us remind that Turkey has also made numerous attempts to join the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which were abortive. No one expected Turkey there.
Nevertheless, considering the Russians’ cautiousness in Russian-Turkish relations only a couple of years ago, the economist treats Moscow’s offer to Turkey to join the EAEU, with reservations. He thinks that it would be more expedient if Russia viewed Iran’s integration into the EAEU, which has not only useful, profitable and enormous potential but also is predictable and less sensitive in terms of strategic interests.
In any case, Tatul Manaseryan thinks that Armenia should pay attention to its economic diplomacy so that we can present at least the available opportunities at least in the EAEU.
Nelly GRIGORYAN
