As stated by the political technologist, Hoagland was reminding what Putin and Sargsyan speak about
Can the will of “Yelq” on drawing Armenia out of the Eurasian Economic Union become top one issue on Armenia’s political agenda, if the conversations on Turkey’s cooperation with Customs Union become a reality. “If that step is serious and is not going to be agreed with the member countries of the EAEU in either way and all that is realized through neglecting the interests of Armenia, neglecting Armenia overall and becoming another wrinkly issue in Armenian-Russian relations, it may induce a serious discontent in our country”, told political technologist Vigen Hakobyan.
Let us remind you that the Minister of Economy of Turkey made an announcement on receiving a proffer to commence close relations between the Customs Union and Turkey in days. The previous day the official representative of the Ministry of foreign affairs of the Russian Federation Maria Zakharova, responding to the publications and analyses following the announcement of the Turkish minister told that for Turkey-Customs Union to be possible, it should be agreed with all members of the Union.
Overall, the question of Armenia’s withdrawal from the EAEU, according to Mr. Hakobyan, can be a political agenda for the opposition, but he does not think that the evolvements will take that route for the opinion of the public change abruptly. In these days, in Armenia opinions were voiced constituting that the possible integration of Turkey in the EAEU may open new doors for armenia also for solving former wrinkly issues. Taking into consideration the bitter experience of not a distant past of Armenia of settling relations with Turkey – in the image of football diplomacy, are such claims realistic especially in the years of the current president of Turkey in office. The political technologist says it is a rather hard and multi-layered issue: “The version of Artsakh issue resolution put on the table encompasses a point about which it is not accepted to speak. Pursuant to expert and media sources, that document includes a point whereby it is suggested that if Armenia concedes the liberated territories, then a blockade is taking place not solely by Azerbaijan, but Armenian-Turkish border opens alike. That is, Turkey considers every issue connected with him in the package – together with Artsakh issue. And it is Turkey’s statement. If Turkey is even suggested officially to become a member of the EAEU or the Customs Union, Armenia will represent its overview in that package as well. Thus, to some extent, yes, opportunities arise for Armenia for political bargaining or political maneuvers. But it is a very complex and multi-directional issue taking into consideration how serious adversaries and partners we have: and the interests of the Russian Federation connected with Turkey, and the relations of the Republic of Armenia with Turkey and our not-existing or existing bad relations with Turkey. And if we do not speak of the membership but cooperation, in this case there is no right to veto, they should make an agreement. In case of conversations around ay idea, opportunities arise which should be taken advantage of or not to take one.”
In this context, the political technologist brings an example the interests of Israel towards Armenia. “A new platform opens – Armenia-Russia-Qatar-Syria-Turkmenistan, where a geopolitical, even geo-economic component is in place. The issues is, whether Armenia is able to make a decision among those opportunities and make an advantage of”, told Vigen Hakobyan.
Touching upon the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chair Richard Hoagland’s version of the Artsakh conflict settlement, mentioned at the meeting of the Armenian and Russian Presidents, the political technologist said: “I think Hoagland reminded what Putin and Sargsyan were talking about. He reminded-hinted about the option on the table, to activate the Armenian society again. And as we saw, there were such reactions in the social media, as if it was the first time people heard of it. Actually, there was nothing new at all. It was just a political technology, a diplomatic move, reminding that it’s being talked about this now. Generally, it was an interesting move”.
Let’s remind, what the American co-chair had said: “The area within the borders of the former Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region, which is not controlled by Baku, should be given a temporary status, which at least guarantees security and autonomy. The occupied territories surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh should be handed to Azerbaijan’s control. There cannot be any settlement without taking into account Azerbaijan’s sovereignty. Azerbaijan’s sovereignty over these territories must be restored. There should be a corridor to connect Armenia with Nagorno-Karabakh. It should be sufficiently wide enough to ensure safe transportation. However, it cannot cover the entire Lachin region. The long-term settlement should recognize the right of all displaced persons and refugees: to return to their former place of residence. The settlement should include international security guarantees that include peacekeeping measures. There is no scenario in which peace can be secured without well-prepared peace operations, which enjoy the confidence of all parties”.
Nelly GRIGORYAN
