Russia has won this round, but it’s not the end of the game
Interview with the head of Russia and Eurasia Programme at Chatham House: James Nixey
-Mr Nixey, first of all, what is your opinion about the sharp turn of Armenian authorities to Russia and the Customs Union? Armenia declined the Association Agreement with the European Union in fact.
-It’s interesting of course, because what happened with Armenia to the end of last year was very quickly overshadowed by Ukraine, because, I’m afraid to say (I mean no offense here) but Ukraine is more important both to Russia and Europe, than Armenia is. So Armenia in relative terms is less important, perhaps not to America, because of armenian diaspora, but we’re talking about Europe here. The Ukrainian turn was so much bigger and so much more surprising and so much more overblow quite frankly to the European Union, so in a way I have to say, and please don’t take this as an offense, but people very quickly forgot about Armenia and began to think about Ukraine, because, I’m afraid to say, Russia has outplayed and outmoved the EU as far as Eastern Partnership is concerned. Because let’s ask ourselves, what is the Eastern Partnership now? It’s not the Armenia, it’ll never be the Azerbaijan it will never be the Belarus and it’s not Ukraine. Russia has put the pressure on Moldova right now. So remains Georgia, and that’s not an Eastern Partnership, that’s a bilateral relationship. So there has been very, very debilitating and embarrasment to the EU, it’s also about the Ukraine and Armenia, but Ukraine and Armenia didn’t suffer embarrasment in the same way, quite honestly. So what I do understand from discussions with EU officials is they are seeking ways to accommodate Armenia’s closer relationship with Russia and find package with the EU, that is an aspiration, and I think that might be quite difficult when it comes to a detail, because, ultimately, we’re talking about lessening trade bariers and increasing trade bariers, and that both things are rather incompatible.
-So can we say, that Russia has won this level of struggle?
-Yes, I think Russia has won this round, but it’s not the end of the game, because the end of the game is years, years on! Russia often wins victories, and, quite honestly, it is one victory on Armenia and a one very big victory in Ukraine right now. But it’s not the end of the game, it’s just the second or the third round and there’s seven more rounds to go. That is credit to president Putin for his tactics and credit to Russia for its determination and conviction. It’s like the sport matches: if you don’t have that then you have to lose! I think that in short term the offer from Russia was more actractive and the pressure from Russia was more intense, where the pressure from the EU was less intense, because we don’t do pressure in that way and the immediate financial benefit was not there, I think, for Armenia in terms of security and for Ukraine in terms of economy, there would have been serious financial disadvantages. Quite honestly, Armenians think about security first.
-I’d like to speak especially about the latest controversial gas agreement between Armenia and Russia on 30 years. Armenian society is really concerned about this. The government of Armenia sold the last 20 % of its share in the co-created “ArmRusgazard” company to the Russian “Gazprom”, or rather they didn’t sell, they gave it for a debt (and nobody knew about that debt). They also provided “Gazprom” with too much astonishing authorizations such as like Armenia can’t change his legislations in this branch and can’t buy gas from other country. What can you say about this?
-I think that is part of a larger picture. Russia does have many instruments of disposal: energy is one, finance is another, security is another, history etc. I think it is part of Russia’s wider, larger grip on Armenia and that grip comes through buying out politicians, buying out industries, it comes through security, economic threats and energy. And if you keep control transit on flow and equity in companies, then you have enormous leverage. And I am sorry to say that Russia’s leverage in Armenia is greater than almost anywhere I can think of. And, you know, when you ask armenian politicians this question, they will tell you: “Well, yes we sold to the highest better, and we needed the money!” And that is true, because Armenia does need the money, and Russia was the highest better, but that is, unfortunately, rather narrow view to take.
-We should state, that all these agreements have been signed in the time of the visit of the Russian president Putin to Armenia on December 2. By the way, Armenia became a soviet country exactly on December 2 of 1920. What about Putin, his main message in Armenia was: “Russian isn’t going to leave the Caucasus”. How would you comment this?
– I think that Putin is right, I’m afraid. Russia isn’t going to leave the Caucasus, it has no desire to. And it is at the moment powerful enough not to leave. You have to remember, that Putin not only visited Armenia on december, but he also visited Azerbaijan firstly just a few months before that. So, quite honestly, Putin is not an honest broker, I’m not saying that the West is or America is or anyone, but Russia isn’t an honest broker either. But he is honest in a way that the European Union is not: the European Union rhetorically backs Armenia, backs the peace process, it backs free trade agreements, it backs freedom movement, but it sort of any backs rhetorically. But Russia often says what it means, Russia says it’s going to be in the Caucasus and it will be. He may not be welcomed and it may be an unequal deal as in the case of gas, but it is certainly true that Russia has the ability, financies, the commitment, the time and the willingness to remain in Caucasus. And that is the problem that the Caucasus is going to live with for a long time. But I don’t think that Russia shouldn’t be in the Caucasus at all, I think it’s just a question of relative values, and it’s more important that there is a sense of balance. And the only real problem of Armenia is that it lacks balance.
-Do you think that phrase was a message to Armenian people or to the region – Azerbaijan, Turkey or…?
-And the West! I think that is a message to everywhere. It has a multiple use: it’s a message domesticly, it’s a message to Armenia, it’s a message to the West, it’s a message to Azerbaijan and to Georgia.
-And what future do you see for Armenia after all these?
-Well, I don’t know, I think it makes much more difficult. It’s more difficult for Armenia to prosper and develop. I’m not suggesting that the western model is the only way but I think that there are aspects at the West, which will be desirable in terms of institutions and how decisions are made mostly. They are good models, and that models will not be copied right now, because Armenia is going to the different part. Unfortunately, Armenia doesn’t have the luxury that Azerbaijan does: streams of money coming in. That means that Armenia has more difficult role to play. It’s easier for Georgia, because he has also chosen a different part, and it’s easier for Azerbaijan, bacause Azerbaijan has a greater degree of foreign policy independence, because of its energy. But Armenia is in the most unenviable position both geographicly and economically. And I have to tell you, that I do worry for Armenia.
Interview by Aram Sargsyan
