Saturday, October 19 2013

What are the prospects of the Russian policy on
creation of the Eurasian area?

 

I
think the prospects of the Eurasian policy conducted by Russia today are rather
positive. Such optimism is based on impartial facts - the integration processes
are backed as they have been developing on the ways of the integration ties
available earlier. The industrial and social ties of the USSR will be restored
in some cases. This will reduce expenses for integration much. Moreover,
despite the years of independent development, today the true and potential participants
in the Eurasian integration processes are much closer to each other by their
historic roots, than it seems at first sight. Using an example of fast
extension rates of the European Union for the last decades, today we can see
that absence of historical affinity and the gap in the social and culture
surroundings between the newcomer-states and "old term residents"
give birth not to the integration but assimilation processes.  As a rule, as a result of such unification,
new members of the EU lose their national identity.

 

Some experts say that despite its declared commitment
to join the Customs Union, the Armenian elite still represents the interests of
the West. Do you think this opinion meets the realities?

 

Unfortunately,
I do. In the last years Armenia has been actively pro-Western. This policy is
welcomed by most Armenian communities abroad even though Russia too has a big
Armenian community. This is mostly the fault of Russia, who has neglected the
South Caucasus and Central Asia in the last years. Today Israel and Turkey have
much more influence in the region than some 5-10 years ago, let alone China and
the United States. So, it would be wrong to expect that everything will change
the moment Armenia joins the Customs Union. 
In fact, it was more the personal initiative of Armenian President Serzh
Sargsyan.

 

What economic benefits may Armenia
get from its accession to the Customs Union? Are these benefits commensurable
with those from signing the AA/DCFTA with the EU? 

 

I
think the question is asked in the wrong way. I would offer to turn it around -
what is Armenia ready to bring to the Customs Union to be useful to that and to
ensure its own prosperity? I am absolutely confident that the current stage of
integration is based on the conditions of mutual pragmatic usefulness. The
times have passed when Russia shouldered problems of its close allies only to
ensure their false "integration". Few allies appreciated Russia's
"kind will gestures". As a rule, they were striving to gain profit
both from Moscow and other geo-political centers simultaneously. So Yerevan's
profit will depend on the fact how Armenia will display itself in the new
union, what it is ready to bring to it, and how much interesting it will be to
other partners. Only preserving of the current status-quo at the labor market
and preserving an opportunity of the non-visa trips to the Customs Union
member-states will allow Armenia to preserve significant share of the foreign
currency receipts, to avoid unemployment at the local labor market, and as a
result, to preserve certain social stability. Europe cannot replace Russia's
labor market. And taking into account the failure of multi-culturalism policy,
the reorientation of the European policy towards the national objectives, one
should wait for tightening of the migration policy in the EU countries.

 

Many experts, including Russian ones, think that the
major goal of Moscow’s integration projects is Ukraine rather than Armenia or
Moldova. What can Moscow offer Kyiv to prevent Ukraine's European integration?

 

I
am one of those specialists who consider Ukraine as one of the key participants
in the Eurasian integration process, without offence. Since the Soviet period,
Ukraine has been the basis of the country's industrial and agricultural might.
Big well-educated human resources, fruitful soil, potential in high-tech
industry have really made that country one of the most desirable candidates for
Eurasian integration. Without Ukraine, this integration process will be
incomplete. The West tries its best to prevent rapprochement of Moscow and
Kyiv, he said. What Moscow offers Ukraine is development of economic ties
between Russian and Ukrainian enterprises. Unlike Europe, Russia is interested
in Ukrainian aircrafts and potential in the field. Besides Russia, the only
country that is interested in, at least, preservation of Ukraine's industrial
potential is China, and not Europe. The global financial-economic crisis showed
that the real sector is the only pillar even for a developed country. And the
Customs Union offers development and protection of domestic markets through
preferential internal taxation and high foreign taxes. Integration ties of
Russia and Ukraine will be lost if their relations deteriorate. And what then?
Is Europe ready to support the aircraft and space engineering, and agriculture
industry of Ukraine? I am afraid, not. All the above sectors are just rivals
for Europe. What happened to the industry and agriculture of the countries of
Eastern Europe that joined the EU: GDR, Czech Republic, Hungary, and the Baltic
States? Did they manage to sustain competition with of their European
rivals?  No, they didn't. Does Armenia
need such perspectives? I think there is much to think about. 

 

After Armenia had taken a decision
to join the Customs Union, Russian experts started speaking of possible
recognition of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic by Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan.
They also say that Azerbaijan can prevent this by Eurasian integration only.
How promising is this policy of “soft pressure” on Baku? 

 

Russia's decision on Nagorno-Karabakh depends on
Armenia's decision on South Ossetia and Abkhazia. As regards Azerbaijan, I
would not say that Russia is trying to force anybody to do join the Customs
Union. This is a pragmatic project. If Azerbaijan decides that it is good for
it, it is free to join. All territorial disputes must be solved before the
accession to the Customs Union lest they might cause tension in it.  This is what the EU does. They refuse to
admit a country if it has territorial disputes.

 

Global politics is experiencing
sharp fluctuations directly affecting the South Caucasus and the neighboring
regions. The Syrian situation is one of the examples. What can these
fluctuations do to a small country such as Armenia?

 

Even
though Armenia is a small country, it must be tougher in defending the rights
and freedoms of Armenians living in Syria. I regret that the strong Armenian
Diaspora is doing nothing to solve the Syrian problem. Pressured by the United
States and the United Kingdom, Armenia prefers being neutral on this problem,
and this is in strong contrast to the pro-American positions of Georgia and
Azerbaijan. I believe that Armenia and Russia must have a common stance on the
Syrian problem. Russia has managed to stabilize the situation in Syria, but we
are still far from peace. In this context, the assistance of the Armenian
Diaspora would be really invaluable. Their support for our efforts would help
us not only to stop the civil war in Syria but also to save the lives of its
citizens, many of whom Armenians.