Armenia On A Tightrope

[Yervant1]

Is this a NO WAY OUT for Armenia or reporting sensationalism? Even though it seems like a realistic picture but it has this doomsday scenario. What can the policy makers do to improve the situation?

 

 

ARMENIA ON A TIGHTROPE

 

AZG Armenian Daily

07/03/06

 

World press

 

To say that the Caucasus region is one of the powder kegs of the

world would be an understatement, and Armenia, with its limited

resources and sparse foreign policy assets, has to survive in that

region. In reality it is like walking on a tightrope for the planners

of Armenia's foreign policy.

 

The recent meeting of Presidents Kocharian and Aliev at Rambouillet,

France produced nothing on the complex Karabagh issue. If anything,

it was a step back from the Key West meeting, which had almost

resolved the issue equitably. After President Chirac's trial, now it

seems that it's President Putin's turn, who has recently announced in

Baku that he intends to invite President Kocharian to Moscow to force

his hand.

 

Aliev and his administration do not need to develop a sophisticated

foreign policy, since the oil factor will conveniently substitute for

that need.

 

On the other hand, Armenia has to struggle to apply its complementary

foreign policy to survive in the region and to resolve its problems

with its neighbors.

 

Turkey and Azerbaijan continue to blockade Armenia. For all practical

purposes, Georgia pursues a parallel policy in isolating Armenia.

 

Cases in point are the diversion of Baku-Ceyhan oil pipeline and the

forthcoming revival of the railroad system in the region, which

intends to bypass Armenia again.

 

The U.S., while pressuring Turkey to cooperate with Israel for

regional hegemony, has done little or nothing to convince Ankara to

lift Armenia's blockade, leaving Iran the only reliable alternative

economic survival venue. But demands are high on Armenia; the U.S.

 

Ambassador in Armenia, Mr. John M. Evans, who deftly is able to give

a human face to the Bush administration policy in the region, has

announced that Washington may punish Armenia, should the latter

deepen its economic involvement with Iran.

 

At this time Iran is facing a fate similar to Iraq's because of its

provocative stance on its nuclear policy and empty rhetoric directed

at Israel. Recent pronouncements of Iran's President Ahmadinejad to

wipe out Israel were uncalled for, because it is not in Iran's power

to carry out that threat and because the U.S. will never allow that

to happen. Holocaust denial was another blunder, which serves no

purpose other than aggravating an already tense situation further.

 

Iran's bellicose statements also indirectly affect Armenia, whose

reaction to Iran's threats has been deemed unsatisfactory. Armenia is

supposed to condemn Iran for denying the Holocaust, while Israel's

foreign minister denies the Armenian genocide with a straight face.

 

Also, Iran's threat to wipe out Israel requests a strong condemnation

from Armenia, while Azeri officials threaten to wipe Armenia off the

map, with no reaction from the West.

 

Mr. Donald Rumsfeld and Ms Condoleeza Rice's repeated visits to the

region spell catastrophe to Armenia, since they signal U.S. plans to

invade Iran, using Azerbaijan as a launching pad and potential

beneficiary of Iran's dismemberment.

 

On a regional level Turkey, Azerbaijan and Georgia are Armenia's

hostile neighbors. Iran has proven to be a reliable trading partner,

as long as it survives the threat of a U.S. invasion.

 

On a global level Armenia depends heavily on Moscow's and

Washington's good will, while those two powers have conflicting

interests in the Caucasus.

 

Russia maintains a military base in Armenia, and does not guarantee

the latter's territorial integrity in case of a conflict with Turkey.

 

Also, Russia has demonstrated an ugly face in plundering Armenia of

its economic assets under its policy of assets against debts, while

forgiving most of Iraq's debts.

 

Russia's energy policy towards Armenia has not reflected the

interests of an ally; on the contrary, Armenia has been treated in

the same fashion as Georgia and the Ukraine, which do not veil their

antagonism towards Moscow.

 

All these factors have forced Armenia to gradually reconsider its

policy towards, and dependence on Russia, veering towards EU and

NATO. However, sending representative forces to Iraq and Kosovo does

not seem to have satisfied Washington, Armenia's major benefactor.

 

Armenia also receives generous aid annually from the U.S., and

recently qualified to be the beneficiary of the Millennium Challenge.

 

In any confrontation with Turkey, Armenia can neither rely on Moscow

nor on Washington. Even if Armenia decided to adopt a policy similar

to that of Georgia, antagonizing Moscow and facilitating the U.S.

 

policy in the Caucasus, it still does not have a guarantee that it

can count on Washington's good will in a conflict with Turkey. The

Cyprus conflict is vivid testimony to that - even though Greece and

Turkey are both NATO allies and in Washington's fold, the U.S.

 

allowed, if not engineered, the occupation of Cyprus, thereby letting

down its Greek allies.

 

Therefore, it is obvious that Armenia faces a host of problems to

design a viable foreign policy for survival. The virulent criticisms

by armchair pundits in the Diaspora and in Armenia, only aggravates

the path of foreign policy planning in Yerevan. They need to be

walking on that tightrope to experience, first hand, challenges

facing the country and sober up.

 

The Armenian Mirror Spectator, 2/28/06.

[Sasun]

The points are valid but overall it is an exaggerated outlook to the reality. Too many things are uncertain to make conclusions. One point is clear though, Iran's troubles with the US are bad for us.

[Yervant1]

One point is clear though, Iran's troubles with the US are bad for us.

Armenia needs to conduct a very delicate diplomacy. Iran is our only gate to the outside world, we can't alienate Iran at any cost but at the same time we can't be outspoken against other interests.