US Ambassador John Heffern: Armenia needs to decide which path it wants to pursue

-Mr. Ambassador, let’s start from the most recent incidents in Mashtots avenue. What’s your assessment of Shant Harutyunyan’s movement, his supporters and the police? What are the reasons behind the incident?

-This is a good opportunity to speak about economic, as well as local issues such as the disturbances at Mashtots avenue. The US Embassy has a strong and very active program for working with the police on how to manage a crowd. We work on what is the right way and the wrong way when it comes to demonstrations. I want to comment on this particular demonstration and the work of the police. There was a great improvement. Freedom of assembly was demonstrated during May elections. Peaceful demonstrators and protestors were mostly handled professionally. The police performance for this kind of demonstrations has improved, and we will continue working with them. The second part of the issue is the conduct of demonstrators and whether the demonstration was peaceful and following the law. I think there is a balance, and I do not know whether the police kept the right balance at this particular demonstration. But I would say that the Police’s performance in peaceful demonstrations and freedom of assembly in Armenia has great improvement. During the recent presidential elections there were a lot of peaceful demonstrations; there have been peaceful events such as the demonstration of taxi drivers. This is good for the Armenian democracy. I think this recent particular event was different. I think we should preserve judgment for this particular case as there were some differences in this case. The police have started to handle peaceful demonstrations more professionally.

-Looking at the issue from another angle, why do you think this protest happened taking into consideration the participants. It seemed that everything was going smooth and all of a sudden this happened. What kind of impact do you think it may have for future political developments? Do you think this is a signal or message meaning something specific?

-I think you have to ask them to know why Mr. Shant and others protested this time this way. I do not know precisely why they did it and I can’t say what the long-term implication will be. I just see it as a series of civil activism in Armenia, which for a large part is good for Armenia. It is a good development for people to peacefully express their views. I think that is important. In this case there was a big difference. I am not quite sure about the big implication this particular event will have. What I can say for the Armenian people is that we work and will continue to work with the Armenian police to promote professionalism and international standards for events like this.

-The Constitution of Armenia says that the power vests in people. If the power is occupied by a group of people, can the people use all methods to get the power back or everything should be within the law?

-What you are asking now is a hypothetical question. I do not want to make a general comment on this question. I would say that we have seen improvements and we will continue working with the government, judicial and police authorities for people to have the right to express their opinion peacefully. I would leave to you the hypothetical questions related to the Constitution.

-Shant Harutyunyan’s father is a US citizen. He has said that he was going to turn to the US authorities for his son. Are you aware of any step taken by his father?

-No.

-Recently there was a forum of economists in Armenia. Economist Daron Acemoglu from the United States addressed a message to the participants saying that Armenia’s problem is with the fact that democratic and political problems are not in place. Do you share this opinion? What do you think about the situation with this?

-He is one of the authors of the tremendous piece “Why Nations Fail.” I have read that book, and I have to say that there are really very important lessons for every country in terms of relationship with political institutions, the relation of inclusiveness and economic institutions. What I think they demonstrated in that book was that you cannot just work one part of the house. Friends of Armenia should work on both sides. They need to work both with the political system, parties and institutions, as well as build government transparency and anti-corruption economic field. The answer to your question is that, yes, I agree, that there is a direct relationship between economic performance and political institutions. Absolutely! Armenia has a lot to learn from that analysis, and other countries do as well.

-The US is doing a lot for Armenia in terms of humanitarian and other assistance. However, on the economic side the US is passive. Investment from Russia and Europe are significantly higher than from the US. What is the reason for passive participation in the Armenian economy?

-What you are asking me now I think is one of my top priorities in Armenia. Priorities of the US Embassy in Armenia are to build close people-to-people ties. Armenians and Americans have had good relations for decades and even centuries. I think we can do better to build on those ties and develop closer economic relations in terms of trade and investment. To the tone of your question I would say yes, we could do better. But I would not say there is no US investment. There is very important US investment here. It is getting better every day. As the business climate improves, it will continue to improve. The investment on the IT side is really tremendous and very important for the development of this sector of Armenia’s economy, which is the strongest and most vibrant sector of your economy. US companies are deeply involved in this. More than half of export goes to the United States. More than half of IT companies are American too. There are top American companies here such as IBM, Microsoft, Synopsis, National Instruments and dozens of other US companies. We are trying to do better. Hotels are coming here – now there are two Marriott hotels here. We see bigger US presence here, and the US Embassy is trying to support this through advocacy, assistance and promotion to bring more US companies for mutually beneficial relations.

-Is the main obstacle a lack of contacts or the business environment is not improved yet?

-There has been some improvement. In the World Bank indicators Armenia went up. Doing business has become easier here. But I think that the business climate is the key factor that determines whether a business will come here. Notwithstanding what the ambassador says or what kind of people-to-people ties are, companies want to be success in foreign investment and they need to know that there is transparency, taxes and customs are predictable, and the key thing is the courts. The court area is another area we are working with Armenia for. Predictability of courts is a very important factor. Businesses can go anywhere in the world and they will go where they have more opportunities to be more success. We have a good number here in Armenia, but sure we can do better. There needs to be more improvement in the fields of customs, taxes and courts for sure.

-You and the British Ambassador are supporting the mining project of Amulsar, which is being criticized by environmental activists. You also support environmental issues. These are different poles. Is there a balance for cooperation between these two?

-This idea of a balance is the right approach. We work closely with the civic society. We welcome their energy and activism to improve mining and other practices in Armenia that are important for the environment. But that does not mean that all mining is bad. Armenia’s economy and employment major part depends on mining. The question is how to bring this to balance to do mining right and based on international best practices. The reason we are supporting the Lydian company and Amulsar Gold Mine is that this company is funded by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the International Financial Corporation, which impose international standards. When a company borrows money from these international institutions, they impose strong practices and standards to follow. Our goal here is to promote mining to be done the right way based on international practices. Amulsar mine is rich of gold, and it will bring great benefit to the economy of the country. It is important for the mining companies to pay their taxes and work with their communities so that the local people and public benefit by paying taxes and working with the community. That is what we think is important.

-Are you sure that the Lydian company will be able to support “the right work” in the mining sector in Armenia and its development?

-Yes, I think that the Lydian can and will be a good corporate citizen. It has been like that so far. I have visited the area and talked to three community heads. They strongly support the mining project as they work closely with them. Laboratory work has been done in the village, and they don’t send the sample to anywhere else but bring the job to the local community. I think they do the best practice for Armenia and they do positive impact on the local community.

-Now Armenia is taking steps to join the Customs Union. Do you think this may have adverse effect on relations with the US and Europe?

-The president announced his decision to join the Customs Union on September 3rd. Until that time Armenia had worked intensively and very successfully to deepen relations with the European Union. I have talked to my European counterparts and leaders here, and I think as much as it is possible, both sides are committed to do. We have not given up on the European track, and Europeans certainly have not given up either. Both sides want to do whatever they can do in terms of cooperation. That is not incompatible with the Customs Union. Customs Union does not cover every sector, it does not cover every type of issue, and certainly does not cover political issues. I am confident, hope and expect that Armenia will continue to pursue relations with the United States and Europe such as they are not incompatible with the Customs Union. We will do our best not to let this decision have a negative impact on what we do here. Now more than ever we want to step up and be seen as a confident constructive partner and friend of Armenia. We are going to provide any resources, access and promotion that the Armenian government welcomes to continue the process of Armenia being a key friend and partner of the US here, and demonstrating international and Western values. By this I mean transparency, good governance and rule of law, mostly on economic and political nature. We are going to continue to push on that friendship, those ties. So far every conversation I have had, I was welcomed to continue that effort.

-Do you think for Armenia it is possible to have both and work in both directions?

-Armenia will have to decide which direction it wants to work. Armenia needs to decide which path and sector it wants to pursue. Armenia is a sovereign country, and the US and Europe are not trying to take that sovereignty away from them. The United States wants to present encouragement and ways to continue the process to use the West and follow the West, select values and areas of cooperation. We are not trying to force; we are trying to make it available for Armenia for partnership and cooperation. We want to make good governance, rule of law and similar values available for Armenia.

-Recently the US co-chairs of the Minsk Group said there is a window of Nagorno Karabakh conflict settlement. What is your opinion about this? (the interview was conducted before the two presidents met in Vienne – 168.am)

-The co-chairs recently visited both Baku and Yerevan. They met with both presidents. They have decided to meet. We are confident that both presidents will meet. The fact of the meeting is very important because they are meeting for the first time since two years ago. But the meeting only is not enough. What the co-chairs suggested is that they urged both sides to find ways to break the ice and move forward in a way that would bring parties closer to the peaceful resolution, which is very important for the region. I would say the window of opportunities is the fact that the two presidents agreed to meet. It is a good thing. The co-chairs, and our new co-chair in particular, have suggested a couple of ways that would help the parties to move in a productive negotiating path to deal with some hard questions. The hard questions are still there and have not been resolved. What he meant is that with the next phase of negotiations there may be progress in some of the outstanding issues to bring to peaceful negotiation of Nagorno Karabakh conflict, which is our goal as well.

-In consideration of the rhetoric from Azerbaijan, there are opinions that the settlement of the conflict can be only through a short war. What is your opinion about this?

-I think another conflict of Nagorno Karabakh will be a serious problem for all people involved. We are committed, and Secretary Kerry has given our new co-chair a strong instruction to come out here and be creative to push the parties to find a way to peaceful resolution. The outlines of the agreement are there. There are statements issued publicly too. There are several different points, which both sides have agreed to. It’s a matter of getting the parties to talk and build trust between them. There is no trust between them now. We should try to build trust so that they can begin to face some of the difficult questions. To your question whether I think this conflict may be resolved through war, I will say no. The best solution for this twenty-year old conflict is the only way through serious efforts to agree upon a solution that will be long-term and sustainable. This is what the co-chairs are committed to do.

Interviewed by Babken Tunyan