Analysis: Special and Strategic Relations - (1) Armenia in the bosom of Mother Russia

Although President Serzh Sargsyan has been in Moscow many times, both since becoming President and before, this week he was there for his first state visit. The event was meant to symbolise the special character of the relationship between Armenia and Russia, a relationship that has been close for a long time, but that has become closer still under President Sargsyan's leadership.

The President told students at Moscow Sate University that the relations between the two countries go beyond that of good neighbours. The Russian President Dimitri Medvedev, also spoke of a "broad ranging alliance" between the two countries, and the visit offered an opportunity for the two sides to sign a number of agreements on a wide range of topics.

Consolidating and developing this relationship has been the cornerstone of President Sargyan's foreign policy, and that of his Foreign Minister, Edward Nalbandian, over the last three years. Whilst the initiative to open up relations with Turkey - an initiative that remains frozen largely not through the fault of Armenia - was also an important objective, this was never meant to be either a substitute to the special relationship with Russia, nor even a counterbalance to it. It was simply an expression of "real politik", which Russia itself supported.

At the heart of the special relationship between Armenia and Russia is Armenia's security. Whichever way you look at the relationship it always comes down to the question of Russia's underwriting of Armenian security. The continued presence of a large Russian base in Armenia, under an agreement which has recently been extended until the middle of this century is justified through this prism. The extent of these security guarantees is not absolutely clear, but all Armenians believe that they are there, and the Russians have never said anything to the contrary.

This makes the special relationship with Russia a popular policy in Armenia. All three Presidents since independence have worked hard to cultivate the relationship, although none more than Serzh Sargsyan.

In the last few years Russia has also become the ultimate guarantor of Armenian economic security, as the country struggled through the global economic downturn. Russia has provided considerable direct financial support, but perhaps more importantly continues to be the main source for investment in Armenia. It is also a safety net for Armenia's labour market, and remittances from permanent and seasonal workers in Russia are an important source of foreign currency earning for the Armenian economy.

This relationship is therefore special, but hardly equal. But then neither is the relationship between the United States and Israel.

There are two challenges to the Armenia-Russia special relationship. The first is that President Medvedev, presumably reflecting a wider state position, has since 2008 tried to change this relationship and turn it into a "threesome" - the third side being Azerbaijan. So far he has failed. If he succeeds it will be a great victory for Russian foreign policy, but the prospect worries some Armenians who fear being sold out. The many visits of the Armenian leadership to Moscow, including the pomp of the recent state visit are meant to reassure Yerevan.

The second challenge is Armenia's own desire to have good relations with other international partners, apart from Russia. Here Yerevan threads carefully. A case in point is the relationship with the European Union - a relationship that Armenia needs and from which it can benefit tangibly. At the technical level this relationship is developing positively. So far nobody has called this relationship either special or strategic, but the wide consensus in both Yerevan and Brussels is that it is useful. Russia itself has still to make up its mind whether to consider the European Union as a partner or a competitor. When it comes to the former Soviet space, through instinct rather than through logic, it regards the EU more as a competitor. The Armenian leadership is aware of this, so for the moment the "useful" relationship has to play second fiddle to the "special relationship".

source: This article is the first of a three part series on "special and strategic relations" in the South Caucasus and was prepared for commonspace.eu by the analytical team of LINKS. Opinion expressed does not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of the website. The second article entitled "Turkey and Azerbaijan: One nation, two states, seperate chequebooks" will be published on Friday 28 October.

photo: President Sargsyan and President Medvedev in the Kremlin (picture courtesy of the Press Service of the President of Russia)

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Landmines present to the European Union both a contradiction and a dilemma

Landmines present to the European Union both a contradiction and a dilemma

Finland’s decision to buy one million landmines creates a serious contradiction in the policy of the European Union, and is symbolic of a bigger dilemma facing European countries as they get used to the need to acquire “hard” power to face an increasing threat from Russia. Finland is seeking to acquire one million anti-personnel mines at a cost of 100 million euros. Finland, together with Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia last year abandoned the Ottawa agreement, the international framework that bans the use of anti-personnel mines, which the EU had been instrumental in establishing and supporting. All five countries cite the threat from Moscow as the reason. Colonel Riku Mikkonen of the Army Command told Finland’s national news agency STT that officials are now gathering information from suppliers regarding the deal, the AFP news agency reports. Helsinki would like domestic manufacturers to supply the mines, with contracts signed by the end of 2027 and production up and running by 2028. “It would be useful in many ways if Finnish companies produced the anti-personnel mines in Finland,” Mikkonen said. About half a dozen Finnish firms qualify, he told STT. “However, at this stage, buying the mines from abroad is not totally ruled out,” he added. LANDMINES PROVIDE THE EU WITH BOTH A CONTRADICTION, AND A DILEMMA Eliminating landmine contamination worldwide is one of the EU’s main soft power postures, and it basks in its record as the biggest funder of anti-landmine action in the world. But the fact that 5 of its 27 member states  have now left the Ottawa Treaty dents the EU moral high ground. It is a contradiction that is too big and important to be ignored. It also presents the European Union with a deeper dilemma. The threat from Russia is changing what the EU has stood for decades, namely a force for good able to mobilise its considerable soft power for the greater good of humanity. How the Union will implement this change will define its future. In the meantime landmines have not become any less lethal, benign, or unimportant. They remain in many parts of the world a major threat to life, an impediment to prosperity, and a potential trigger to further conflict. The 22 EU members states that still adhere to the Ottawa treaty must regroup, and be more assertive in their quest against anti-personnel land mines. All the reasons why they supported the Ottawa treaty in the first place still exist. The message must be clear: NO TO LANDMINES!
Editor's choice
News
Pashinyan says that he wants peace treaty with Azerbaijan by 2031

Pashinyan says that he wants peace treaty with Azerbaijan by 2031

Armenia should sign and ratify a peace treaty with Azerbaijan before 2031, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said. He described the objective as the top priority for his administration. Earlier, the Armenian prime minister also spoke about a possible land-swap with Azerbaijan Armenia and Azerbaijan should agree to establish a clear, conventional border without enclaves or exclaves, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said. Armenia controls three Azeri enclaves inside its borders while Baku controls one Armenian enclave – those could be subject to a land swap, Pashinyan announced.

Popular

Editor's choice
Interview
Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Today, commonspace.eu starts a new regular weekly series. THURSDAY INTERVIEW, conducted by Lauri Nikulainen, will host  persons who are thinkers, opinion shapers, and implementors in their countries and spheres. We start the series with an interview with Murad Muradov, a leading person in Azerbaijan's think tank community. He is also the first co-chair of the Action Committee for a new Armenian-Azerbaijani Dialogue. Last September he made history by being the first Azerbaijani civil society activist to visit Armenia after the 44 day war, and the start of the peace process. Speaking about this visit Murad Muradov said: "My experience was largely positive. My negative expectations luckily didn’t play out. The discussions were respectful, the panel format bringing together experts from Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Turkey was particularly valuable during the NATO Rose-Roth Seminar in Yerevan, and media coverage, while varied in tone, remained largely constructive. Some media outlets though attempted to represent me as more of a government mouthpiece than an independent expert, which was totally misleading.  Overall, I see these initiatives as important steps in rebuilding trust and normalising professional engagement. The fact that soon a larger Azerbaijani civil society visits to Armenia followed, reinforces the sense that this process is moving in the right direction." (click the image to read the interview in full)