Professor Douglas Shumavon opened the Round-table discussion as a moderator. He presented the panel speakers and stated that this is the first event of its kind providing a forum for discussion with active participation of the more than sixty PSIA students.
Dr. Vasilyan started by telling a ‘sandwich’ story with Armenia as the ‘meat’ positioned between Russia as the lower slice and the European Union (EU) as the upper slices of the ‘bread.’ She juxtaposed the EU’s and Russia’s policies by qualifying the former as relying on a combination of external/regulatory/technocratic logics and the latter on foreign/border/domestic ones. Dr. Vasilyan argued that the drawback of the Union’s policy has been the underestimation of Russia’s conception of its role as a great power and the perception of the EU as trying to undermine its role in the neighborhood. By underlining the collision between the Customs Union/Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement as one of technical incompatibility as stated by the Union, she referred to the potential political compatibility of the Eastern Partnership and the Eurasian Union as frameworks for cooperation mentioned by the EU and Russia, respectively. Dr. Vasilyan stated that, provided its current foreign policy course, Armenia seems to have moved from the policy of ‘complementarity’ to ‘supplementarity.’
Dr. Ter-Matevosyan talked about the security dimension of the recent developments by focusing on the internal debate in Armenia after September 3rd. He said that the presidential decision came as a surprise not only to the public but also to many key officials since the issue had not been on the Armenian political agenda before the meeting between President Putin and President Sargsyan. Dr. Ter-Matevosyan stated that in the aftermath of the visit ‘securitization’ started taking place with the choice being presented as a security issue, whereas no ‘politicization’ had taken place before. He referred to the statements articulated by the officials of the Security Council, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Presidential administration, as well as political parties, namely, the Republican Party, Prosperous Armenia, Rule of Law, to illustrate the political stances.
Dr. Aleksandr Grigoryan presented a game theoretic model involving the EU, Russia and Armenia. Explaining such issues as credibility of threat posed by Russia to Armenia, possible costs of internalization of a punishment imposed by the EU on Russia, defection and cooperation tactics, he demonstrated how such a game can be applied to understand the pre-September 3rd and post-September 3rd developments. The outcome of the game captures much of the reality, related to feasible options of the three countries. In particular, limitations of the EU’s responsiveness to a new situation have been highlighted, suggesting the EU to enrich the current set of policy instruments, with more stress on the strategic component. Also, the game shows that whenever the EU and Russia agree on strategies which entail a win-win situation for the parties, Armenia can exercise its complementary foreign policy.
The floor was then open for a vibrant Q&A session.
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.