Regional Security Issues in the Context Of the EU Agenda

• 02.25.2016, 13:36
•  Europe,  Armenia,  NKR,  Analytics

POLICY PAPER

This Policy Paper is based on opinions expressed during the round-table discussion "Regional Security Issues in the Context of the EU Agenda", held on the 17th of December 2015. The round-table discussion was attended by Parliamentarians, representatives of the Republic of Armenia (the RA) executive body, representatives of civil society organisations and independent experts. The event was organized by  "European Integration" NGO.

The Policy Paper outlines the opinions, suggestions and concerns expressed during the discussion, which could be of some practical use - to influence the decision-making process of the executive and legislative bodies, as well as to be applied in the activities of NGOs and media.  

 

The Eastern Partnership region, as a part of the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP), has a great importance on the security agenda of the European Union (EU).  The EU considers the development of peace and security in the neighboring region as a part of its security component as stated in the European Security Strategy[1] adopted on the 12^th of December, 2003; a document that led to launching the European Neighborhood Policy. The European Security Strategy defines those core objectives, which need to be pursued to spread European values and to preserve security as follows: "to address threats, to build security in the neighboring region and develop international order based on effective multilateral relations." To achieve these objectives an appropriate strategy towards neighboring states is to be developed. In addition, the European Security Strategy identifies regional conflicts as important threats for the EU.

This is why the EU pays quite a great attention to the unresolved conflicts in its neighborhood, including in the Eastern Partnership region (hereinafter – the EaP) and tries to have its input in their peaceful settlement, in post-conflict reconciliation and in prevention of new escalations.

A reference to the EaP unresolved conflicts is made both in the bilateral agenda with each of the EU partners and in the context of regional, multiparty agenda   For example, both on the agenda and in the final documents[2] of the EU-Armenia Cooperation Council, a reference is made on Karabakh conflict, the issue of prolonged conflicts is also regularly raised during the summits with the participation of the EU representatives and the heads of the EaP countries.

The EU plays a direct role in the settlement of the prolonged conflicts acting as a mediator in negotiations, becoming a donor of reconciliation projects or making statements on those conflicts.

In particular, in some conflicts the engagement of the EU is ensured by its one Member State, for example, in case of Karabakh conflict, France is one of the conflict mediators, an OSCE Minsk group Co-Chair.

In parallel, with the use of "soft power" the EU tries to indirectly contribute to the reconciliation of the conflicting sides by promising a prospect of deeper integration or a range of advantages. For example, in case of Serbia-Kosovo conflict, reconciliation of the sides is a precondition for a closer integration with the EU. The same precondition was also used in case of Transnistria, and until 2008 it was also present in the conflicts of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

The principles such as insuring transparency of the processes in an unrecognized unit via integration (for example, Transnistria), engagement without recognition, promoting the growth of democracy in the unrecognized entities,  financing the projects aimed at starting a dialogue among  the conflicting societies, etc. can be identified  among the main principles, that are employed by the EU within the Union (for example, Northern Cyprus), in its  immediate neighborhood (for example, Kosovo) or in a wider neighborhood to contribute to the settlement of the conflicts. However, one can still question how equally they are being used in case of all conflicts.

Is the EU equally interested in and consistent regarding all the unresolved conflicts in its neighboring region? What should our expectations from the EU be? What actions should we undertake?

In the beginning of 1990s, the EU supported Georgia’s efforts to overcome the conflicts in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. In 2003, European Union Special Representative for the South Caucasus (EUSR) was appointed, whose name and responsibilities later on underwent some changes and now it is called EU Special Representative for the South Caucasus and the crisis in Georgia. The aim of the latter is to ensure the EU’s active engagement in the peaceful settlement of the conflicts in the South Caucasus. Until the Five Day War of 2008, the EU was one of the largest donors for the non-governmental organizations and initiatives in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The EU is also involved in the Geneva International Talks aimed at overcoming the consequences of the Five Day War of 2008 war in the capacity of a mediator.

The EU also has a great input in the settlement process of the conflict in Transnistria. For example, since its engagement in the conflict until 2012, it has spent nearly 30 million euro on the confidence building projects. A series of projects and advantages for Moldova, among them the Ukraine-Moldova border management project, visa regime liberalization, open opportunities also for the people in Transnistria. Besides, the Association Agreement for Moldova is prepared in a way that it also ensures the indirect integration for Transnistria: the representatives of Transnistria were invited to participate in the negotiations on the Association Agreement and DCFTA.

In case of Karabakh, EU’s involvement is at a quite low level. Karabakh conflict is also within the responsibilities of the EU Special Representative for the South Caucasus and the crisis in Georgia. However, because of the Azerbaijani policy, the Representative has never even visited Karabakh. Let us remind that all foreign officials and prominent persons, who visit Karabakh become subjects to severe criticism by Azerbaijan and appear in the "black list" being deprived of the opportunity to enter Azerbaijan in the future. Official Baku threatens to apply this policy against the EU Representative, thus preventing his visit to Karabakh and direct contacts with the local authorities and the society.

There is also the European Partnership for the Peaceful Settlement of the Conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh (EPNK) initiative which aims at organizing projects for the societies involved in Karabakh conflict. However, Europe in general, both in terms of the Council of Europe and the European Union, has no direct involvement in Karabakh.

Let us refer to the expectations from the EU and our possible steps.

In the context of regional security the following should be taken into consideration:

1. First of all, the RA counts on the EU support to ensure the country’s economic and political stability, including support in the EU-Armenia resumed talks, in the reforms of different spheres, in the development of cooperation, etc. Taking into account that the EU considers regional stability as one of the most important guarantees for its security, it should take active steps to support the stability of each country. This should be a stable principle, not something subject to interpretation.  
2. Another important guarantee for stability is supporting the reforms in the partner countries by the EU, encouraging their willingness to cooperate with the EU and keeping the partners away from any artificial dilemma, for example, from "either-or" principle in the issues of economic integration, which Armenia faced after its decision of join the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). Integration processes should not become a matter of choice between "black and white", moreover their combination should be encouraged by the EU as a guarantee of stability in the region. Armenia, being the EAEU full member, in parallel strives to develop relations with the EU, paying a great attention also to the cooperation on economic component.  Closed borders and the policy of blockade are also a direct threat to regional security. Therefore, such a policy, pursued by Azerbaijan and Turkey against Armenia, should be condemned by the EU.
3. The EU should encourage the expansion of Armenia's engagement in regional economic projects: for example, projects on the development of infrastructure network, on the transit of energy resources, on the expansion of trade routes, etc., which will give an opportunity to overcome the consequences of blockade policy of Turkey and Azerbaijan against Armenia and would stabilize the region, as well as deepen regional cooperation.
4. Armenians, as a nation that survived Genocide, are very sensitive about their own security issues. The feeling of danger objectively grows when the involvement of the Turkish side in the context of Karabakh conflict settlement increases – a reality we are witnessing today. Armenia's possible concessions in the context of Karabakh conflict settlement has been put forward by Turkey as a precondition for the normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations. Turkish officials also regularly come up with statements in support of Azerbaijan's policy[3] in the context of Karabakh conflict. In this way, Turkey is trying to put pressure on Armenia forcing to make unilateral concessions.

It should become clear for the EU that this activity is destructive. On the one hand, it is perceived by the Armenians as a provocation, on the other hand, it leads to artificial hardening of Azerbaijan's stance. If this behavior pattern does not change - also with the support of the EU partners - then, of course, Armenia will expect additional security guarantees from its partner countries in a large context (including military-political).

1. It is logical that the RA expects from the EU a more balanced policy towards the countries in the region - in particular, this concerns Turkey. The concessions on migrant crisis by Turkey and its progress in the talks on the EU membership, create an atmosphere of impunity for Turkey and overestimation of its role, contributing to a more aggressive policy both inside the country (for example, against Kurds) and in the region by supporting Azerbaijan's war rhetoric.
2. The RA also expects from the EU to expand cooperation with Karabakh, working with the local authorities and different layers of its society. The EU should be interested in receiving "first hand" complete information about Karabakh and its people, their concerns and views. For example, in Kosovo, before it was recognized by a number of countries, there were economic, human rights and other programs of cooperation, which were contributing to the development of democracy in that region and to protection of the rights of its residents. In case of Northern Cyprus, the EU has set up a Task Force for the Turkish Cypriot community which runs a Programme Support Office (EUPSO) in the northern part of Nicosia.

Karabakh is also a part of Europe, and the people who live there, have the same European values and greatly suffer from non-recognition; they experience the need to closely cooperate with the EU and receive support for strengthening the democracy. It would be logical for engagement without recognition formula, which works, for example, for Northern Cyprus, to be applied for other unrecognized entities, including Karabakh.

The society of Karabakh, like the societies of Transnistria, Abkhazia, Ossetia, Kosovo, Northern Cyprus, also carries European values, and it seems not logical that the opportunities for the protection of their rights differ from the rights of citizens of other regions and countries and they do not receive EU’s support, when there is a willingness to cooperate with Europe on their part.

 

As for Armenia’s possible steps and the expectations from the Armenian state institutions, NGOs and media, the actions for ensuring stability in the region can be the following:

1. In its communication with the European partners Armenia should repeatedly emphasize and make clear the fact that the escalation of the conflict is a potential threat not only for Armenia, but also for the whole region, including Europe.To ensure stability in the region it is necessary to take into account the interests of all players; the interests of one country cannot be defended at the expense of others. For example, energy projects in cooperation with Azerbaijan, concessions towards Turkey have a destructive influence on the region, as they strengthen the positions of those countries, further contributing to the increase of their war rhetoric.
2. Based on the requirements of regional security, Armenia as a founding member of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) and a country that for so many years has been closely working with NATO, highlights the importance of the dialogue between these two military-political alliances in the region. Therefore, Armenia can come up with an initiative of starting such a dialogue, of organizing joint activities on its territory and will expect the support of European partners.
3. The main expectation from the Armenian media should be to cover the political and social life of Karabakh more, to present it not only as a conflict side and a territory subject of controversy - the international community should first of all see and hear about the people living there. Media's role should be to make the problems, attitudes, opinions and demands of the residents of Karabakh heard more often.
4. Non-governmental organizations can also play an important role. They should ensure extensive involvement of Karabakh NGOs in the projects they implement and give an opportunity to Karabakh society to become involved in international communication. The development of civil society can have a significant importance with regard to the promotion of dialogue and democratic values in the region.
5. The representatives of Diaspora, in their part, can play a major role in disseminating information about Karabakh in their communities and in cooperating with Karabakh.

 

Thus, the unresolved conflicts of Eastern Partnership region, including the Karabakh conflict, are of great importance for the EU. To prevent the exacerbation of the situation and, on the contrary, to ensure stability by integrating and involving all regional actors, the EU and the ENP countries should combine their efforts. Regional security is on the agenda of all countries, and the pragmatic politics should aim to familiarize deeper with each other’s problems, as well as to take balanced and effective steps.