Updates
Statements and messages of the President of RA
22
06, 2010
Remarks by President Serzh Sargsyan at the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung
Mr. Chairman,
Dear Friends,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I am grateful for the opportunity to be here today, at this reputable Foundation which is named after the first Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany. I greet all the participants of today’s meeting, the leadership of the Foundation and particularly Mr. Pottering with whom I had a chance to work. I am glad to see you, Mr. Pottering, again and to learn that you continue to maintain interest toward our region. Konrad Adenauer’s vision, which defined the post-war Germany’s political orientation and made possible the implementation of the idea of a united Europe, is a brilliant example of political wisdom, which has not diminished even decades later.
Dear Friends,
Today, I will talk about the South Caucasus, about its role, significance, about its past, and, what’s even more important, about its future. Our region has been defined in different terms – a bridge between Asia and Europe, an energy security knot, a factor of stability or instability, a transit zone for communication routes, a stage where forces compete and interests are juxtaposed – the list goes on and on. All these definitions are impersonal, aloof and unconcerned since they do not reveal but rather conceal differences existing among the inhabitants of the region, differences among the peoples – bearers of collective national identity and culture, differences among the vectors and trends of their development.
Moreover, perceptions shaped by such definitions are obstructive for us too and create a situation when, as Konrad Adenauer said, “We all live under the same sun, but we don’t all have the same horizon.”
Certainly, there are not too many places in the world where one can find such a diversity of nations, ethnic groups, cultures, religions and civilizations. But all of it combined constitutes our real wealth. We should be able to rise and move forward, working not against this diversity or rejecting each other but rather complementing and mutually enriching each other – just like other European states have done and continue to do so.
International borders in the Caucasus run for 3000 kilometers, and I note with regret that these borders divide rather than unite us. It is also true, that there are not too many places in the world where the inhabitants have similar historical problems, anguish and even animosity towards each other. However, the example of Konrad Adenauer is indeed relevant in this context – he was the one that saw Europe’s future and Germany’s place in that Europe.
Is it possible to build a similar future for our region? Of course, it is possible. It is possible if there is a political leadership able to see far and deep, to set the goal, to show unified approach, proper rationalization, strong will to accept it and move toward that goal together. Does it sound like a too difficult task? Probably, yes, it does. But not here, in Europe. Achievements of those who passed that road are obvious to everyone. These achievements are inspiring, the manner in which the road have been passed – exemplary.
The end of the Cold War brought peace and stability to many places in the world. But there are still places, including the South Caucasus, where the end of Cold War heralded the era of fierce conflicts. State-building of newly independent countries has been accompanied by wars, coups, severe economic crises, militarization of societies, xenophobia, intolerance and hatred. Almost two decades have passed. Have we learned the lessons of our not so distant past? I think, no.
In a post-crisis society the easiest and the most tempting solution for a politician is to employ chauvinism. For the society which is emerging from wars, crises, economic recession it could be perceived as a promise of salvation: “I will save you because we are of the same kind.” Even though it can in short-term mobilize the society’s internal forces, this is an erroneous solution, this is not a solution aimed into the future. It cannot be. To repair your own apartment in a crumpling building, hoping that you are taking care of your personal safety, is useless. Moreover, it is inadmissible to build your own security at the expense of your neighbors. The neighbors won’t easily forget that. A couple of pipes running to the neighboring building can provide neither security, nor prosperity, nor increase upon the level of significance of a given landlord in the eyes of the others.
The greatest economic project implemented in our region so far, was the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline. Some even called it a “world project”, the “project of the century”, and so forth. During the August 2008 war in Georgia, when the pipeline ceased operations, the world oil market didn’t register any fluctuations. For me personally that was the best indicator of the project’s “world” caliber. What brought the project to the region? Deepening dividing lines, arms race, sharp increase in bellicose rhetoric… Was it the anticipated “security and prosperity”? God forbid the region to taste all the “benefits” of that project.
With this regard, it is important that all the future projects and scenarios maintain balance and do not instigate disagreements or heat up temptations to resort to force for the resolution of the problems.
From time to time I hear a representative of a country to boast that his or her nation is situated on the “crossroads of civilizations”. To be frank, I have used the same definition myself on a number of occasions. I am indeed a representative of the nation which through the millennia of its existence has always been positioned on such a crossroads. And not only geographically. We were at the crossroads of religions, imperial ambitions, languages, different types of Weltanschauung, and in the 20th century – also on the crossroads of ideologies. That reality advanced the spiritual and cultural development of our nation. But it had also become a source of horrendous catastrophes for my people. Other small nations at the crossroads can appreciate what I said.
We are swiftly entering a historic phase which assumes a multipolar world. I think apprehensions that even the slightest manifestations of North-South-East-West confrontation would “dissect” our region at the “crossroads” are justified, and the stability can be maintained only until the first shot is fired. In 2008 the spillover of the military confrontation was averted only due to great efforts and restraint that had been exercised. It may not be possible to do it for the second time. After all, a hundred years ago nobody would imagine that the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, would result in the death of 16 million people and impair another 31 million.
If we are to choose among the depictions of our region mentioned above, the people of South Caucasus have only one way to avoid a disastrous scenario such as that one – to see and recognize the future, our “same horizon for all”.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Condensed human experience proves that nothing stimulates nations to reach agreement more than the anticipated economic profit. There are multiple examples which prove that integration through economic cooperation and political solutions guarantee long-term stability.
The South Caucasus is a place where interests of all parties – partner states, regional leaders, and interests of investors – can coalesce. And the one who would try to stir things up could be kept at bay only if all actors – superpowers, regional frontrunners and other interested parties – had the opportunity to complement each other and efficiently serve their interests.
I realize that against the backdrop of the sanctions against Iran, some skeptics will doubt my approach, but I am confident that with regard to regional solutions Iran cannot be overlooked or neglected. It is very important for the region to dissipate the Iranian perception of being endangered. Otherwise, there will be no solution – neither for the next day issues nor even for the current nuclear problem.
Will the South Caucasus “economic pie” satisfy everyone’s appetite? Probably, partition of a small pie will not satisfy everyone’s craving, however the decision to hand the pie to one or two actors is not a right one either since it will only instigate the problem. It is simply necessary to bake a larger pie.
If we speak about energy, it means that the region instead of being a source of energy should become an energy knot. If we speak about dead-ends and closed borders, it means that the region should become a transportation knot, connecting North and South, East and West. It is necessary to diversify the programs. Oil and gas pipelines and communications running solely from East to West cannot ensure security, stability and prosperity of the region.
In recent years, we have initiated a number of major programs.
We have tangible developments in the energy area. We have concluded the construction of a new thermo-energy station and continue to operate the old one. We have also undertaken the construction of a new, more powerful bloc of the Armenian Nuclear Power Station. As a result, our country can become an important supplier of electric power in the region.
We are also commencing works on the construction of a highway which will connect the Georgian sea ports via Armenia with the Iranian border. We are also planning to kick off the Armenia-Iran railroad project development. These infrastructure development projects may hold revolutionary significance for transport communications connecting the Black Sea to Persian Gulf and the Indian ocean, running through Iran to Central Asia and beyond - to Pakistan and India.
Searching for supporters and sponsors for these projects we have been looking at a very wide range: from Washington to Moscow, from Brussels to Beijing and Tokyo. And we are not limiting ourselves by merely looking for investors. In our perception the issue is larger than that: To create a wide network encompassing interested parties and consequently to coalesce as many interests as possible. We would love to see the European giants – such as Germany and France – to have a more sound participation in this project. After all, it’s not about whether you’re ready or not to invest in this or that area. The question is larger than that – are you ready to invest into the future of the region?
Approaching the issue from the viewpoint of economic benefit only, we are overlooking its most important component – considerable increase of security and proportionate development level. Eventually, the claim that region’s internal problems are nothing more than region’s internal problems and if necessary they can be contained in the region still needs to get proved.
I must also disagree with the viewpoint or approach which maintains that initially it is necessary to achieve some kind of political solution, which later will be “sugar-coated” with generous economic assistance. I have serious doubts that such approach will be viable in our region. Approaches such as this one work in the situations when the “enforcing” party for an agreement is a very well-known actor, whose authority is not and will not be challenged by anyone involved. Such approach works in the Balkans; however, in the absence of an “enforcing” party it doesn’t work in many other places, most notably – in Palestine.
Anyway, I don’t believe there will be comprehensive political solutions in our region in the nearest future, while the enhancement of the economic regional cooperation will by itself compel to reconsider the status quo of closed borders and contained relations and will create the atmosphere of mutual trust conducive to the resolution of the conflicts.
I would like to depart a little from the topic and speak about the experience acquired as a result of the developments concerning our initiative to normalize relations with Turkey. In asserting our initiative to normalize relations with Turkey, we were also guided by the concerns regarding the security of the region, which I expressed today. It was a concern about our common future in the region, about the need to remove the dividing lines, about the need to establish atmosphere of trust, about enhancement of economic cooperation as a guarantee of setting a favorable outline for the solution of political problems. Why our initiative didn’t succeed? Turkey backed out of its commitments and not only failed to ratify the signed Protocols but also got back to its pre-negotiation position, to the language of preconditions, diktat and even threats. And today, the last closed border in Europe, the Armenian-Turkish border remains closed.
Undoubtedly, the obstruction of the normalization process by the Turkish side can be explicated by the inability and unwillingness of that country’s political leadership, probably also by their various political calculations. The analysts will probably add the factor of the Azeri pressure. Some Western analysts have been trying to convince me that it is a temporary matter, for the internal, pre-election consumption. Perhaps it is, the time will show. However, a deeper analysis brings about one conclusion: In our region the approach of solving one’s problem at the other’s expense is deeply enrooted, the approach “I am strong, I will be setting the terms” is still very much alive. Turkey’s “zero problems with neighbors” policy yields zero results. This will continue as long as Turkey will be searching for the benefits in the clash of interests in our region rather than in their coalescence.
I am convinced that the time has come for the regional leaders to transcend parochial political agendas and concepts and display the qualities of true leaders aimed at shaping the future, and not the revival of the past. I hope that this generation of leaders will be able to adopt such changes.
Armenia has appealed for many times to its Eastern neighbor Azerbaijan to employ the capacities of our countries for the benefit of stability and development of the region. Arms race and bellicose statements cannot promise a good future to our children. I make this statement as a person, who had gone through the crucible of an imposed war, enjoyed the raptures of victory but will never forget the bitterness of war. At the end of the day, when the region will see the processes of economic integration, we will be able to solve the Karabakh issue with less difficulty and ensure a safe and secure, prosperous existence for our nations, in conditions different from current – from existence in the atmosphere of distrust and suspicion. I am confident that our Georgian colleagues share our approaches regarding regional integration.
We are entitled to expect similar approach from our partners engaged in the region. We are talking constantly about encouraging integration and interdependence but what steps we took in that direction?
Even in the framework of the EU’s Eastern Partnership we observe impassively how some countries-participants of the program are trying to restrict the opportunities for regional cooperation. For instance, Azerbaijan, inspired by its longstanding attempts to limit Armenia’s participation in TRACECA program, is trying now to extend the same policy to the Eastern Partnership.
Dear Friends,
In conclusion, I would like to underline that Armenia committed itself to the goal of building a civil society based on democratic principles and pledges to create in the region the environment of stability, security, solidarity and economic development sealed by mutual interests and commitments.
As Martin Luther said, “All which happens in the world happens through hope.” I hope that one day, gathered around one table we will start a genuine and practical dialogue with our neighbors and friends – it is required by the logic of the “same horizon”. I am confident that the day will come when the question “Is it possible in our region?” will be answered with a resolute “Yes”.
Thank you.
Dear Friends,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I am grateful for the opportunity to be here today, at this reputable Foundation which is named after the first Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany. I greet all the participants of today’s meeting, the leadership of the Foundation and particularly Mr. Pottering with whom I had a chance to work. I am glad to see you, Mr. Pottering, again and to learn that you continue to maintain interest toward our region. Konrad Adenauer’s vision, which defined the post-war Germany’s political orientation and made possible the implementation of the idea of a united Europe, is a brilliant example of political wisdom, which has not diminished even decades later.
Dear Friends,
Today, I will talk about the South Caucasus, about its role, significance, about its past, and, what’s even more important, about its future. Our region has been defined in different terms – a bridge between Asia and Europe, an energy security knot, a factor of stability or instability, a transit zone for communication routes, a stage where forces compete and interests are juxtaposed – the list goes on and on. All these definitions are impersonal, aloof and unconcerned since they do not reveal but rather conceal differences existing among the inhabitants of the region, differences among the peoples – bearers of collective national identity and culture, differences among the vectors and trends of their development.
Moreover, perceptions shaped by such definitions are obstructive for us too and create a situation when, as Konrad Adenauer said, “We all live under the same sun, but we don’t all have the same horizon.”
Certainly, there are not too many places in the world where one can find such a diversity of nations, ethnic groups, cultures, religions and civilizations. But all of it combined constitutes our real wealth. We should be able to rise and move forward, working not against this diversity or rejecting each other but rather complementing and mutually enriching each other – just like other European states have done and continue to do so.
International borders in the Caucasus run for 3000 kilometers, and I note with regret that these borders divide rather than unite us. It is also true, that there are not too many places in the world where the inhabitants have similar historical problems, anguish and even animosity towards each other. However, the example of Konrad Adenauer is indeed relevant in this context – he was the one that saw Europe’s future and Germany’s place in that Europe.
Is it possible to build a similar future for our region? Of course, it is possible. It is possible if there is a political leadership able to see far and deep, to set the goal, to show unified approach, proper rationalization, strong will to accept it and move toward that goal together. Does it sound like a too difficult task? Probably, yes, it does. But not here, in Europe. Achievements of those who passed that road are obvious to everyone. These achievements are inspiring, the manner in which the road have been passed – exemplary.
The end of the Cold War brought peace and stability to many places in the world. But there are still places, including the South Caucasus, where the end of Cold War heralded the era of fierce conflicts. State-building of newly independent countries has been accompanied by wars, coups, severe economic crises, militarization of societies, xenophobia, intolerance and hatred. Almost two decades have passed. Have we learned the lessons of our not so distant past? I think, no.
In a post-crisis society the easiest and the most tempting solution for a politician is to employ chauvinism. For the society which is emerging from wars, crises, economic recession it could be perceived as a promise of salvation: “I will save you because we are of the same kind.” Even though it can in short-term mobilize the society’s internal forces, this is an erroneous solution, this is not a solution aimed into the future. It cannot be. To repair your own apartment in a crumpling building, hoping that you are taking care of your personal safety, is useless. Moreover, it is inadmissible to build your own security at the expense of your neighbors. The neighbors won’t easily forget that. A couple of pipes running to the neighboring building can provide neither security, nor prosperity, nor increase upon the level of significance of a given landlord in the eyes of the others.
The greatest economic project implemented in our region so far, was the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline. Some even called it a “world project”, the “project of the century”, and so forth. During the August 2008 war in Georgia, when the pipeline ceased operations, the world oil market didn’t register any fluctuations. For me personally that was the best indicator of the project’s “world” caliber. What brought the project to the region? Deepening dividing lines, arms race, sharp increase in bellicose rhetoric… Was it the anticipated “security and prosperity”? God forbid the region to taste all the “benefits” of that project.
With this regard, it is important that all the future projects and scenarios maintain balance and do not instigate disagreements or heat up temptations to resort to force for the resolution of the problems.
From time to time I hear a representative of a country to boast that his or her nation is situated on the “crossroads of civilizations”. To be frank, I have used the same definition myself on a number of occasions. I am indeed a representative of the nation which through the millennia of its existence has always been positioned on such a crossroads. And not only geographically. We were at the crossroads of religions, imperial ambitions, languages, different types of Weltanschauung, and in the 20th century – also on the crossroads of ideologies. That reality advanced the spiritual and cultural development of our nation. But it had also become a source of horrendous catastrophes for my people. Other small nations at the crossroads can appreciate what I said.
We are swiftly entering a historic phase which assumes a multipolar world. I think apprehensions that even the slightest manifestations of North-South-East-West confrontation would “dissect” our region at the “crossroads” are justified, and the stability can be maintained only until the first shot is fired. In 2008 the spillover of the military confrontation was averted only due to great efforts and restraint that had been exercised. It may not be possible to do it for the second time. After all, a hundred years ago nobody would imagine that the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, would result in the death of 16 million people and impair another 31 million.
If we are to choose among the depictions of our region mentioned above, the people of South Caucasus have only one way to avoid a disastrous scenario such as that one – to see and recognize the future, our “same horizon for all”.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Condensed human experience proves that nothing stimulates nations to reach agreement more than the anticipated economic profit. There are multiple examples which prove that integration through economic cooperation and political solutions guarantee long-term stability.
The South Caucasus is a place where interests of all parties – partner states, regional leaders, and interests of investors – can coalesce. And the one who would try to stir things up could be kept at bay only if all actors – superpowers, regional frontrunners and other interested parties – had the opportunity to complement each other and efficiently serve their interests.
I realize that against the backdrop of the sanctions against Iran, some skeptics will doubt my approach, but I am confident that with regard to regional solutions Iran cannot be overlooked or neglected. It is very important for the region to dissipate the Iranian perception of being endangered. Otherwise, there will be no solution – neither for the next day issues nor even for the current nuclear problem.
Will the South Caucasus “economic pie” satisfy everyone’s appetite? Probably, partition of a small pie will not satisfy everyone’s craving, however the decision to hand the pie to one or two actors is not a right one either since it will only instigate the problem. It is simply necessary to bake a larger pie.
If we speak about energy, it means that the region instead of being a source of energy should become an energy knot. If we speak about dead-ends and closed borders, it means that the region should become a transportation knot, connecting North and South, East and West. It is necessary to diversify the programs. Oil and gas pipelines and communications running solely from East to West cannot ensure security, stability and prosperity of the region.
In recent years, we have initiated a number of major programs.
We have tangible developments in the energy area. We have concluded the construction of a new thermo-energy station and continue to operate the old one. We have also undertaken the construction of a new, more powerful bloc of the Armenian Nuclear Power Station. As a result, our country can become an important supplier of electric power in the region.
We are also commencing works on the construction of a highway which will connect the Georgian sea ports via Armenia with the Iranian border. We are also planning to kick off the Armenia-Iran railroad project development. These infrastructure development projects may hold revolutionary significance for transport communications connecting the Black Sea to Persian Gulf and the Indian ocean, running through Iran to Central Asia and beyond - to Pakistan and India.
Searching for supporters and sponsors for these projects we have been looking at a very wide range: from Washington to Moscow, from Brussels to Beijing and Tokyo. And we are not limiting ourselves by merely looking for investors. In our perception the issue is larger than that: To create a wide network encompassing interested parties and consequently to coalesce as many interests as possible. We would love to see the European giants – such as Germany and France – to have a more sound participation in this project. After all, it’s not about whether you’re ready or not to invest in this or that area. The question is larger than that – are you ready to invest into the future of the region?
Approaching the issue from the viewpoint of economic benefit only, we are overlooking its most important component – considerable increase of security and proportionate development level. Eventually, the claim that region’s internal problems are nothing more than region’s internal problems and if necessary they can be contained in the region still needs to get proved.
I must also disagree with the viewpoint or approach which maintains that initially it is necessary to achieve some kind of political solution, which later will be “sugar-coated” with generous economic assistance. I have serious doubts that such approach will be viable in our region. Approaches such as this one work in the situations when the “enforcing” party for an agreement is a very well-known actor, whose authority is not and will not be challenged by anyone involved. Such approach works in the Balkans; however, in the absence of an “enforcing” party it doesn’t work in many other places, most notably – in Palestine.
Anyway, I don’t believe there will be comprehensive political solutions in our region in the nearest future, while the enhancement of the economic regional cooperation will by itself compel to reconsider the status quo of closed borders and contained relations and will create the atmosphere of mutual trust conducive to the resolution of the conflicts.
I would like to depart a little from the topic and speak about the experience acquired as a result of the developments concerning our initiative to normalize relations with Turkey. In asserting our initiative to normalize relations with Turkey, we were also guided by the concerns regarding the security of the region, which I expressed today. It was a concern about our common future in the region, about the need to remove the dividing lines, about the need to establish atmosphere of trust, about enhancement of economic cooperation as a guarantee of setting a favorable outline for the solution of political problems. Why our initiative didn’t succeed? Turkey backed out of its commitments and not only failed to ratify the signed Protocols but also got back to its pre-negotiation position, to the language of preconditions, diktat and even threats. And today, the last closed border in Europe, the Armenian-Turkish border remains closed.
Undoubtedly, the obstruction of the normalization process by the Turkish side can be explicated by the inability and unwillingness of that country’s political leadership, probably also by their various political calculations. The analysts will probably add the factor of the Azeri pressure. Some Western analysts have been trying to convince me that it is a temporary matter, for the internal, pre-election consumption. Perhaps it is, the time will show. However, a deeper analysis brings about one conclusion: In our region the approach of solving one’s problem at the other’s expense is deeply enrooted, the approach “I am strong, I will be setting the terms” is still very much alive. Turkey’s “zero problems with neighbors” policy yields zero results. This will continue as long as Turkey will be searching for the benefits in the clash of interests in our region rather than in their coalescence.
I am convinced that the time has come for the regional leaders to transcend parochial political agendas and concepts and display the qualities of true leaders aimed at shaping the future, and not the revival of the past. I hope that this generation of leaders will be able to adopt such changes.
Armenia has appealed for many times to its Eastern neighbor Azerbaijan to employ the capacities of our countries for the benefit of stability and development of the region. Arms race and bellicose statements cannot promise a good future to our children. I make this statement as a person, who had gone through the crucible of an imposed war, enjoyed the raptures of victory but will never forget the bitterness of war. At the end of the day, when the region will see the processes of economic integration, we will be able to solve the Karabakh issue with less difficulty and ensure a safe and secure, prosperous existence for our nations, in conditions different from current – from existence in the atmosphere of distrust and suspicion. I am confident that our Georgian colleagues share our approaches regarding regional integration.
We are entitled to expect similar approach from our partners engaged in the region. We are talking constantly about encouraging integration and interdependence but what steps we took in that direction?
Even in the framework of the EU’s Eastern Partnership we observe impassively how some countries-participants of the program are trying to restrict the opportunities for regional cooperation. For instance, Azerbaijan, inspired by its longstanding attempts to limit Armenia’s participation in TRACECA program, is trying now to extend the same policy to the Eastern Partnership.
Dear Friends,
In conclusion, I would like to underline that Armenia committed itself to the goal of building a civil society based on democratic principles and pledges to create in the region the environment of stability, security, solidarity and economic development sealed by mutual interests and commitments.
As Martin Luther said, “All which happens in the world happens through hope.” I hope that one day, gathered around one table we will start a genuine and practical dialogue with our neighbors and friends – it is required by the logic of the “same horizon”. I am confident that the day will come when the question “Is it possible in our region?” will be answered with a resolute “Yes”.
Thank you.
- Remarks by President Serzh Sargsyan at the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung
- Remarks by President Serzh Sargsyan at the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung
- Remarks by President Serzh Sargsyan at the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung
- Remarks by President Serzh Sargsyan at the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung
- Remarks by President Serzh Sargsyan at the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung