Will Armenia’s choosing Customs Union change Europe’s attitude towards Nagorno Karabakh conflict? - ANALYSIS
Baku. Vugar Masimoghlu – APA. Armenia has made a choice between Europe and Russia and officially turned back on Europe with its decision to join the Customs Union. Yerevan’s “attempt” to play among the two power centers failed in the short run. With the decision announced yesterday Armenia once confirmed that it is not and will not be an independent player.
Armenia has made official its strategic choice passing a decision to join the Customs Union. It is not surprising that a country, which is not independent from political, economic and military point of view and is an outpost of Russia in the South Caucasus, has selected Moscow instead of Brussels. It was surprising that earlier, Armenia intended to sign an association agreement with the European Union and Europe sincerely believed this intention. Europe is well aware of Russia’s dominant position in the policy of Armenia and it was naive to think that it would draw Yerevan out of Moscow’s influence with the association agreement. Europe is suffering from this superficial approach.
The membership of the Customs Union crossed out Armenia’s Europe prospects and means the gradual loss of Europe’s initiative to interfere in Russia’s influence – the importance of the “Eastern Partnership” program. Europe is expected to face the same fate regarding Belarus after Armenia. Thus, the target countries of the “Eastern Partnership” program will be only GUAM member states.
A question arises – Why Armenia, which was aware of Russia’s plans on the Customs Union and its place in this project, was going to sign an association agreement with the European Union? It should be estimated as an indirect message of Armenia to Russia. The migration crisis and economic collapse in the country and the sharp decrease of financial means transferred to the budget of Armenia through Diaspora obliged Armenia to think.
The world is facing a serious financial crisis, which has led to the decrease of Diaspora donations. On the other hand, the investments in Armenia’s economy by the countries, where the Armenian Diaspora organizations are strong, have also decreased. Last year, direct foreign investment in Armenia’s economy dropped 64%. Russia has invested a total of $38 million in Armenia’s economy this year.
Though Armenia, which is facing severe economic crisis due to the self-isolated policy relies on Russia, the support of Moscow is restricted to political and military support. In the recent presidential elections, some candidates accused Russia over the lack of economic support and some of them showed Europe as a way out of the situation. These views should be assessed as an approach of the Armenian society, not of separate political circles.
Armenia’s attempt to sign the association agreement with the European Union was a message to Russia. Threatening Russia with European integration plans shows that Armenia can’t objectively evaluate its foreign influence capabilities and political maneuvering opportunities are so limited that it can be easily predicted (“It will be finally admitted to the Customs Union”, “It will do what Russia says” and other evaluations).
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s policy towards Azerbaijan has also influenced Armenia’s choice of the Customs Union. The statements issued in Baku and steady development of relations between Azerbaijan and Russia caused the fear in Yerevan that “Moscow may refuse the mission of guarantor of Armenia's security” and this fear objectively made the neighboring country hastily formalize its role as “Russia’s mistress”.
The European Union’s superficial assessment of the processes also played a key role in this process. Europe that doesn’t seriously interfere in the process of settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and tries only to ensure its economic interests in the region has jeopardized its long-term plans. Though, steps were taken to remove the South Caucasus region from the sphere of influence of Russia (the Eastern Partnership, energy projects, visa facilitation regime for the South Caucasus countries, financial aid, etc.), political basis has not been established. One can also see these mistakes in the West’s relations with Georgia.
The only way for the West, wishing to gain strength in the South Caucasus, is to appeal to Azerbaijan that has openly declared its policy of European integration and is pursuing a balanced policy. Unlike Armenia and Georgia, the West shouldn’t repeat its mistakes regarding Azerbaijan. Baku has made its energy resources an important factor of the foreign policy and assumed an important role in ensuring energy security of Europe.
Azerbaijan has expectations from Europe – unlike Europe, the official Baku wants to ensure political interests rather than economic interests and doesn’t hide that the main objective of the energy policy is to obtain results in the settlement of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Following the recent step of Armenia, it would be another mistake for the West not to assess these expectations.
The first statements of the EU officials on Sargsyan's decision to join the Customs Union bore initial signs of it. For example, German member of the European Parliament and chairman of its Foreign Affairs Committee Elmar Brok stated that the European Union not dealing with this issue up to now should be seriously interested in the solution of "frozen conflicts". It is not excluded that high-ranking officials would make similar statements soon.
Related news releases
- 18.11.2017Such ill-mannered attitude towards Turkey ‘unacceptable’ - Azerbaijani MP
- 14.09.2017The Contract of the New Century: New opportunities to strengthen independence, political and economic stability
- 09.09.2017Azerbaijan newspaper: Obama-era stereotypes still exist in the US
- 07.09.2017Why did Israel choose Azerbaijan? - ANALYSIS
- 31.05.2017Political analyst: Trump’s letters indicate beginning of new period in US-Azerbaijan relations
- 13.03.2017Trace of "Armenian Connection" in Strasser fantasy
- 06.03.2017The Armenian Connection: How a secret caucus of MPs and NGOs, since 2012, created a network within PACE to hide violations of international law - ANALYSIS
- 19.09.2016Failed rallies that proved unworthy of being called ‘mass’ - ANALYSIS
- 24.08.2016Referendum Act: The Cabinet of Ministers could not change to locomotive of economic reforms – ANALYSE
- 24.06.2016Tseghakronism – fascist doctrine of Garegin Nzhdeh - ARTICLE
- 08.06.2016More people displaced than at any time since WW2- Global Peace Index
- 07.05.2016Sargsyan’s failed attempt of demarche against Kremlin - ANALYSIS
- 13.04.2016Helsinki Final Act – the main factor in breaking Karabakh deadlock - ANALYSIS
- 07.04.2016‘Four-day war’: Changed status quo, balance against Armenia
- 02.04.2016Azerbaijani president’s visit to Washington: Maximal use of all opportunities of essential platform for dialogue - ANALYSIS
- 11.02.2016Turkey and Israel: Rapprochement arising from mutual need - ANALYSIS
- 22.09.2015Russian military support to Syria: A second Afghanistan?
- 11.09.2015European Parliament “annexing” Nagorno-Karabakh to Armenia - ANALYSIS
- 09.09.2015Europe’s migration policy: Is Schengen area regime being abolished? - ANALYSIS
- 26.08.2015Who benefits from Greece’s exit from Eurozone? - ANALYSIS
- 10.07.2015Representatives of Azerbaijani community in Nagorno-Karabakh will also address Chatham House, says FM
- 02.07.2015Expectations arising from a default in Greece - ANALYSIS
- 29.06.2015US legalizing ISIL de facto - ANALYSIS
- 22.06.2015Rebecca Vincent – problem of anti-Azerbaijani network - ANALYSIS
- 22.06.2015Western technologist’s lies proved by figures
- 18.06.2015Democracy and human rights lessons from totalitarian Poland under democracy guise - ANALYSIS
- 17.06.2015The Guardian and principles of journalism - ANALYSIS
- 10.06.2015National Endowment for Democracy - generator of coups and chaos - ANALYSIS
- 09.06.2015BBC: Anti-Azerbaijan campaign deriving from Islamaphobia
- 22.05.2015‘Good’ and ‘bad’ separatists classified by West, Azerbaijan’s right to change partners - ANALYSIS
- 27.04.201524 April: Who won? Who lost? - ANALYSIS
- 18.04.2015Human Rights Watch – joint organization of Soros and Obama - ANALYSIS
- 16.04.2015European Parliament’s resolution incapable of changing realities in the region - ANALYSIS
- 02.04.2015“Georgian expert card” against Georgia - ANALYSIS
- 13.02.2015Southern Gas Corridor: unique project of common interests to all parties - ANALYSIS
- 16.01.2015Azerbaijan-US relations: Tension after returning to bipolar world order - ANALYSIS
- 10.12.201421st member of G20: Azerbaijan - ANALYSIS
- 05.12.2014Putin's visit to Turkey: messages, offers, opportunities ... - Analysis
- 03.12.2014Panoramic notes (second part) - ANALYSIS
- 02.12.2014Panoramic notes (first part) – ANALYSIS
- 10.09.2013The Republic of Azerbaijan: A Model of Good Governance - ANALYSIS
- 14.04.2014Actual international view as a result of the occupation of Azerbaijani territories
- 30.06.2014Two Europes, double Europe…. - ANALYTICS
- 14.08.2013Five visits balancing Azerbaijan’s foreign policy course - ANALYSIS
- 13.06.2013Nagorno Karabakh – “new Afghanistan” of the region - ANALYSIS
- 09.04.2013Whose future was determined in Baku: South Caucasus and Central Asia, or European economic area? - ANALYSIS