Ruben Mehrabyan, editor of the Russian edition of Aravot Daily, participated in 12th Europe-Ukraine Forum in Rzeszow, Poland. There he delivered a speech on the topic “Eastern Partnership, New Ideas for a New Reality: View from Yerevan”.
Distinguished chairperson,
Ladies and gentlemen,
First of all, I want to thank organizers of the forum for the opportunity to meet and discuss such a crucial issue.
Starting in 2009, when Polish diplomacy’s brilliant idea of Eastern Partnership (EaP) was born, gained strength by the experience of Swedish diplomacy and became an Eastern component of European Neighborhood Policy (ENP), much water has flown since then. Throughout the last complicated decade almost all benchmarks and political atmosphere in Europe have changed.
What one seemingly should and might strive to, and even particular steps, strategy and tactics were being developed proceeding from certain “constant magnitudes”, now are perceived something unrealistic, as those “magnitudes”, to put it mildly, proved to be not so constant, and challenges that exist now seemed unrealistic in distant 2009, and nowadays certain realities we could have imagined in our nightmares only.
The idea was born in a period, which was immediately followed by Putin’s well-known speech in Munich, Russia’s invasion into Georgia, which the civilized world was more inclined to perceive as misunderstanding, and not as a starting point for extremely hazardous mutation. And this was the case, when, unfortunately, the civilized world was mistaken, and the subsequent developments came to prove it. Yet three months before Euromaidan, Moscow made a proposal to Armenia’s corrupt leadership, which the latter couldn’t but agree, and Yerevan refrained from the Association Agreement (AA) with the European Union (EU). However, it didn’t have an effect on determination of Ukraine’s heroic citizens, when they rebelled against the decision of the then corrupt leadership to abandon AA. Blood was shed on the streets of Kiev, Russia attacked on the country, occupied some part, and annexed the other part. Europe hadn’t seen anything similar after 1938. This time again, although with not so much enthusiasm, the civilized world started to resist—sanctions against Russia were imposed.
On the one hand, to conclude that the idea of EaP is no longer relevant, is a conceptual mistake. It’s still actual, as the concept of a single European family has no alternative, and Europe doesn’t end at Poland-Ukraine border, and stretches on, including the South Caucasus as well. However, on the other hand, new realities require new ideas to advance and overcome present-day challenges.
Certainly, no one has a ready and realistic recipe, by which all problems will be solved and new ideas require platforms, as there is no treatment without the diagnosis.
The information and telecommunication revolution has begun and continues in the world, and we have all the grounds to claim that the very first line by John in the Gospel (“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”) should be perceived rather practical—yes, in the beginning was the Word. Practical, as first and foremost, it’s being developed and transmitted by functioning media outlets with multi-million auditorium.
It’s necessary to develop and run media network, where new ideas will be “boiled” under the new realities. Also, it’s necessary to put the network of think tanks into action, involving EU partners and partner organizations, which will pass on a pan-European dimension to our joint work.
Moreover, our opponents, tended to devastate it structurally and philosophically, to which Europe has reached since 1945, have realized its significance even earlier in reaching their goal. In this sense, like it’s said in chess, we play black to now. I wouldn’t say we progress.
Secondly, the fermentations ongoing inside PACE, i.e. corruption scandals, practice of lobbying for unhealthy initiatives, incomprehensible budget cuts and so on, don’t even suggest that European inter-parliamentary formats have been degraded. Inter-parliamentary format of Eastern Partnership, Euranest, is still far from its bar of usefulness with its full potential.
At least regarding Armenia I can say the following: as a result of snap parliamentary elections following the Velvet Revolution, held in compliance with free, fair and democratic standards, Armenia’s National Assembly has changed its preface and content, it’s aimed at active and productive work, including in the direction and format of EU Eastern Partnership.
We reflected to information and telecommunication revolutions; IT-revolution is taking place in the world as well. At the same time, unlike the USA and Asia, Europe, unfortunately, doesn’t have its Silicon Valley, however, undoubtedly Europeans don’t step back with their creativity, and the issue bears economic-systemic nature. In that sense, EaP member countries represent serious potential. This is a field, where a big investment potential was shaped both in the very field and in the field of respective vocational education.
Furthermore, the world is experiencing revolution in energy, which besides its economic component, has a solid ecological one as well. In that sense, Europe is an unconditional leader. For instance, Germany, according to 2018 official data, received 40 percent of its electricity from renewable sources. There is no any developed industrial country in the world to provide such indices. This has clear political significance, too, as it comes to put an end to corrupt, authoritarian, however, frightened by their powerlessness before the future, that’s why—to the era of petrocracies, armed to the teeth.
However, of course, it’s not an issue of one day. And before that several urgent issues need to be solved, without which it’s difficult to imagine the normal course of these constructive processes. The first one, of course, is Russia. Without the West’s productive restraint of Putin’s Russia each EaP country will continue existing under permanent existential threat to statehood, without a serious perspective for development, which doesn’t promise any future, but being a political and civilizational periphery. In September 2014 NATO commander, General Philip Breedlove was concerned that NATO doesn’t have a formulated policy on how to deal with nations beyond the alliance and which aren’t a part of Russia. Does that formulated policy exist now, five years later? I leave the question as rhetorical. So far, at least for me, it isn’t clear whether Europeans consider EaP member countries as EU future members or not. Even in uncertain future.
Consequently, the need for dialogue on security with EaP member countries, development of respective platforms should be viewed as a priority.
And, as a conclusion, it’s difficult to imagine, that even in case of best ideas, in EaP separately things are going rather well, when the EU and Trans-Atlantic alliance, which has a historical role, face numerous unlucky challenges. In the processes of recovery, renewal, political transformation simultaneous new charges should be passed on to Old and New Europe by not forgetting one another in all possible affairs. And let God help us.
Photo credits: Yuri Panchenko
