European Union Establishes Longer-Term Monitoring Mission in Armenia

European Union Establishes Longer-Term Monitoring Mission in Armenia

European Union Monitoring Capacity in Armenia (EUMCAP) © EU

Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso has today published my piece on the new European Union Mission in Armenia (EUMA), a longer-term monitoring mission that will take over from the European Union Monitoring Capacity (EUMCAP) on the country’s border with Azerbaijan that ended its two-month deployment late last month.

On 23 January, the European Union’s Foreign Affairs Council (FAC) gave the final green light for the deployment of a dedicated long-term European Union Mission in Armenia (EUMA) that will monitor the country’s border with Azerbaijan. It will follow the temporary two-month temporary European Union Monitoring Capacity (EUMCAP) in Armenia that ended on 19 December last year.

 

“In response to Armenia’s request, EUMA […] will conduct routine patrolling and report on the situation, which will strengthen the EU’s understanding of the situation on the ground,” the EU said in a statement following the decision. It had already been preliminarily decided by the EU’s Political and Security Committee (PSC) on 10 January.

 

[…]

 

But though the original EUMCAP had been agreed with Azerbaijan, even if it would only informally cooperate with the mission when necessary, Baku was not of the same opinion when it came to EUMA. Instead, Azerbaijan especially raised concerns that the EU had not consulted it on any future deployment.

 

“It will not increase security,” Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev said earlier this month. “On the contrary, it will undermine the format of negotiation [with Armenia]. France has in fact completely isolated itself from the process.”

 

[…]

 

Despite these concerns, however, Jospeh Borrell, the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, had already stressed that EUMA’s main objective will be to “contribute to the mediation efforts in the framework of the [peace] process led by President of the European Council, Charles Michel.” Given the fragile and often volatile nature of Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, such a clear statement of intent was both important and necessary.

 

Regardless, the 23 January FAC decision anyway appeared to be simply a matter a formality. On 4 January, the European External Action Service (EEAS) had already started to recruit staff from EU member countries for EUMA with a deadline of 19 January. The mission will last two years and will employ up to 100 personnel.

 

[…]

You can read the full article in English or Italian and for my previous pieces on European Union Monitoring Capacity (EUMCAP) and the European Union Mission in Armenia (EUMA) see here.

 

CONFLICT VOICES e-BOOKS

 

Conflict Voices – December 2010

Short essays on the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict
Download in English | Russian

 

Conflict Voices – May 2011

Short essays on the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict
Download in English | Russian

Corridors, Highways, and Revisiting Key West

Corridors, Highways, and Revisiting Key West

Seven Mile Bridge, the longest on the Overseas Highway, Key West © PandoTrip

Eurasianet last week published a piece on what we anyway knew were long-standing disagreements over the construction of  a new highway that would connect Azerbaijan with Nakhichevan via Armenia as dictated by the November 2020 trilateral ceasefire statement. It also quoted an anonymous government official as saying that Baku expected a dedicated road in much the same way that the Lachin Corridor passes through Azerbaijan.

None of which is new, of course, but it did remind me of what was reportedly discussed at the meeting of then Armenian and Azerbaijan Presidents Heydar Aliyev and Robert Kocharyan in Key West, United States, in 2001. After seeing the Seven Mile Bridge, itself part of the 181-km Overseas Highway, both leaders appeared to have considered how technical solutions could resolve otherwise unassailable political problems.

“Key West is at the end of a very long bridge connecting it to the rest of Florida,” said Carey Cavanaugh, the former US co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group also at the meeting, in an interview held several years ago. “It’s somewhat reminiscent, and President Aliyev remarked on this on his arrival, of the question of how do you connect Nagorno Karabakh and Armenia and the question of corridors?”

Kocharyan also considered allowing similar for linking Baku with its exclave – a 40 km overpass from Azerbaijan to Nakhichevan. It is worth noting that in a podcast held in  October 2021, Richard Giragosian, Director of the Regional Studies Center (RSC) also hinted at something similar. “[…] the link from Azerbaijan to Nakhichevan may be a roadway and railway from point to point with no exit in Armenia proper,” he told me. 

That was then and this is now, of course, but the issue of how to prevent Armenia from being cut off from its own border with Iran remains a sensitive one, though there are clearly solutions. In the end, Kocharyan had considered an entire bridge to be too costly to construct at the time, but the idea of a combination of bridges, roads, and even tunnels, were considered as options instead.

Veteran journalist Tatul Hakobyan posted a piece on this in May 2021. 

“In the case of encountering settlements in the Meghri region, it would become an overpass before descending to the ground again,” Hakobyan wrote. “This minimised the possibility of contact between the Azerbaijanis traveling between Nakhichevan and Azerbaijan with the Armenians of Meghri who were moving in the opposite direction. […] The construction of overpasses […] solved another problem – the land connection between Armenia and Iran.”  

Given this recent history, such solutions are worth contemplating at least, and even though few seriously think it is actually this concern that is holding up progress on the ‘Zangezur Corridor,’ itself now arguably responsible for the current impasse on the Lachin Corridor. Concerns about extraterritoriality also seem doubtful given that it has been constantly stressed that sovereignty will remain with those countries through which the corridors pass.

The issue could more be the stipulation in the November 2020 ceasefire statement that border guards of the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) would oversee it.

Nonetheless, whatever the reasons for the delay, the talks between Aliyev and Kocharyan at Key West did at least demonstrate that there were technical and engineering solutions available even over two decades ago. There are also, incidentally, technical solutions to allow for free or unimpeded transit, especially in this age of electronic scanning, as a September 2022 interview with Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexey Overchuk detailed.

But, to end, back to Key West. In 1982, when the United States Border Patrol set up a checkpoint on the Overseas Highway leading to the island city, its mayor symbolically declared independence as the Conch Republic, even going as far to, albeit tongue-in-cheek, ‘declare war’ on the United States. The mayor, who appointed himself ‘Prime Minister,’ soon ‘surrendered ‘ and no further checkpoints were ever reportedly established.  

 

 

CONFLICT VOICES e-BOOKS

 

Conflict Voices – December 2010

Short essays on the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict
Download in English | Russian

 

Conflict Voices – May 2011

Short essays on the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict
Download in English | Russian

Final confirmation of the European Union Mission in Armenia (EUMA) expected on 23 January

Final confirmation of the European Union Mission in Armenia (EUMA) expected on 23 January

Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) civilian mission © EUMM

As had been expected, a final decision on the deployment of a larger and longer-term Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) civilian monitor mission to Armenia will be made by the European Union’s Foreign Affairs Council (FAC) on Monday, 23 January. This follows a preliminary decision already taken by the Political and EU Security Committee (PSC). 

The proposed European Union Mission in Armenia (EUMA) will follow last year’s temporary shorter-term European Union Monitoring Capacity in Armenia that was deployed in October last year. There had already been calls for it to be extended or transformed into EUMA even before the mission had ended in late December.

While it has also been rumoured that EUMA would be deployed on 20 February, pending final confirmation, what remains unclear is how large it will be and for how long it will be present.

Though EUMCAP numbered just 40 on secondment from the European Union Monitoring Mission (EUMM) in Georgia, this will be an actual deployment and not a temporary capacity. Sources familiar with the process say that the Crisis Management Concept initially envisaged up to 100 unarmed civilian monitors for a period yet to be announced.

The recruitment announcement on the EU External Action Service (EEAS), however, is currently requesting applications for 69 listed personnel, and for a period of one year, but that could simply be a preliminary recruitment or secondment of personnel from EU member states and for contractual processes in terms of duration.  

Nonetheless, Armenian media today reported that it could be as large as 200 and last for 2 years, equalling that of EUMM in Georgia. Moreover, its area of deployment would cover the entire territory of Armenia though this seems unlikely given that Russian border guards are responsible for patrolling the border with Iran and Turkey. 

In reality, of course, its primary focus will be Armenia’s vulnerable border with Azerbaijan. There is so far no reaction from Baku about the likely move. It had previously complained about plans for EUMA to be deployed saying that it would increase security concerns rather than reduce them. It also said it cast serious doubts about the future of the EU peace process.

Some Armenian analysts have also called for a longer term EU CSDP mission in order to delay the signing of an anticipated peace deal between Yerevan and Baku as well as to allow the country to re-arm itself in case of future hostilities. Though EUMA would be unable to prevent a border incursion, it would at least make the international ramifications of one quite serious.

In the meantime, it is unclear how Iran and especially Russia will react to any deployment of a larger, dedicated, and longer-term mission to Armenia given that EUMA will likely be continued after its first term expires, no matter how long that might be. EUMM Georgia currently works on rolling two-year extensions since it deployed in late 2008. 

Adding more intrigue to what can be viewed as a possible shift in Armenia’s geopolitical orientation, EEAS today also published a statement reflecting on this year’s 20th anniversary of civilian monitoring missions in the framework of CSDP missions by EU Civilian Operations Commander Stefano Tomat. He also laid out expectations for the future. 

“New missions on our Eastern flank are already under consideration,”he wrote, in what some insiders believe refers to Armenia and Moldova. “We can also expect that EU civilian missions will increase cooperation with their military counterparts in EU military missions and operations as well as with EU justice and […] the EU Border and Coastguard Force.”

“Civilian CSDP will be primed to continue to serve the EU’s foreign policy objectives and the security of its citizens in more turbulent times,” Tomat concluded. 

For more on EUMCAP and EUMA see my previous posts here.

 

CONFLICT VOICES e-BOOKS

 

Conflict Voices – December 2010

Short essays on the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict
Download in English | Russian

 

Conflict Voices – May 2011

Short essays on the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict
Download in English | Russian

Social, Economic, and Political Pressures increase in Besieged Karabakh

Social, Economic, and Political Pressures increase in Besieged Karabakh

Stepanakert, Nagorno Karabakh © Onnik James Krikorian 2009

Tomorrow, 17 January, residents of what remains of the besieged and breakaway Soviet-era Nagorno Karabakh Autonomous Oblast (NKAO) will be allocated ration coupons for basic and essential foodstuffs as control of the strategic Lachin Corridor by self-identified Azerbaijani environmental activists enters its second month. Despite their claims, however, most consider the effective but albeit partial blockade of the region, situated within Azerbaijan but populated mostly by ethnic Armenians, to be more than just about that.

Regardless, the rationing will include goods such as rice, buckwheat, macaroni, and sugar, all apparently distributed from Karabakh’s reserves, while coupons will be available at service points in schools and a university in Stepanakert or in rural administrative centres. Such a move was not unexpected in the current situation and many residents had reportedly already called for such a system to avoid missing out on disappearing supplies in shops while the local authorities likely wanted to prevent a black market from emerging.

The rationing system, incidentally, is on top of humanitarian assistance coming via Lachin through the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and the Russian peacekeeping mission as well as what other stocks or local supplies are available elsewhere. Karabakh, for example, is quite fertile and does have its own local capacity for certain goods such as wheat and flour while also having its own farms, including greenhouses. Nonetheless, in a recent interview, defacto State Minister Ruben Vardanyan warned that this was still insufficient.

“We will not starve, because there’s enough food,” Vardanyan told Reuters on 24 December. “But some products we cannot get on our internal market.”

Unfortunately, little reliable information is available on the full picture is in Karabakh, but the defacto authorities do at least present some to the public, as would be expected in order to avoid panic or desperation. There have also been social media posts showing that some restaurants and cafes are still operating while one young Karabakh Armenian has been updating her followers on TikTok as to the situation, including what food she is able to purchase in the shops.

This is not surprising given that keeping the economy afloat will be a key concern for Vardanyan and his team. Indeed, in a live Stepanakert-Yerevan bridge, Karabakh’s Minister of Economy, Hrant Safaryan, acknowledged this saying that, as I had speculated about in another post, there is an attempt to keep some eateries and other businesses dependent on various ingredients adequately supplied. Vardanyan had also already met with restaurant and cafe owners to discuss how the authorities could work with them and vice-versa. 

Despite this, however, the situation is changing. From what little is known, in the first few weeks of an effective blockade, the main shortage of goods in the shops were predictable – imported packaged goods from Armenia. It is also important to note that many residents had already likely stocked up for the New Year and Christmas season. However, as days passed by, shoppers were instead only able to buy limited amounts of locally produced goods and reportedly only if and when available.

The supply of vegetables and fruits were particularly hit.

On 15 January, however, video emerged, again on TikTok, of Russian peacekeeping troops handing out bags of oranges or mandarins and tomatoes and cucumbers to women outside a hospital in Stepanakert. Though it remains unclear to what extent the mission is helping, Vardanyan has said that 400 vehicles passed through despite the blockade. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has also been able to transfer medical supplies and other items such as infant formula from Armenia while also ferrying critically ill patients to Yerevan.

Even so, while 28 patients have reportedly been transported by the ICRC to Armenia, planned surgeries for 400 others have been suspended due to the lack of supplies or personnel.

Moreover, the situation is more complicated than that. On 10 January, electricity cables from Armenia to Karabakh were damaged, apparently by bad weather according to accounts from Stepanakert, and it has been impossible to pass through Lachin to repair the damage. Thus, Karabakh is also now experiencing a power shortage given that its locally hydro-electric power is far less than prior to the 2020 war when it controlled those seven regions of Azerbaijan since taken back or returned.

New blackouts of two hours will now be extended to four.

And there are other concerns as well. As I highlighted here, and as already mentioned above, the economy will be a matter of huge concern to the local authorities and today Karabakh’s Information Centre reported that 726 businesses, or 17.7 percent of the total number operating, have had to suspend their activities too. In human terms, that means 3,400 people, presumably including those from the mines ostensibly at the centre of the crisis that were recently closed,  are now unemployed.

The authorities did, however, prevent a run on the banks by limiting how much currency could be withdrawn from ATMs, advising residents to use cards.

Political intrigues this past weekend, however, have surprised many, though some had expected them given a recent warning from local activist Tigran Petrosyan after comments Vardanyan made about certain Karabakh residents using alleged connections to pass through Lachin and even to bring back food and fuel to sell. “Mr. Vardanyan, this is Karabakh. Be a little careful,” the activist, who was a main force behind the 27 December march on the Russian peacekeeping base to demand they open the Lachin Corridor, wrote.

The replacement of then Security Council Secretary Vitaly Balasanyan just days before on 7 January also irked some in Karabakh who alleged there had been a falling out with Vardanyan. But the real problems emerged when the Armenian Prime Minister, Nikol Pashinyan, was criticised for comments made on 10 January directly implying that the international community does not consider the region to be anything other than an integral part of Azerbaijan. Vardanyan did not react calmly.

In response, on 12 January, Pashinyan urged Karabakh’s leadership to tone down such statements but also to negotiate directly with Baku,  something the opposition and other nationalist forces believe means Armenia had ‘washed its hands’ of the region. Rumours then emerged that Karabakh’s defacto president, Arayik Harutyunyan, might dismiss Vardanyan. Supporters of the State Minister accused him of working in cahoots with Pashinyan and some even alleged he had received offers of security and financial benefits from Baku.

Rumours also circulated that Harutyunyan might call early parliamentary and presidential elections, something that National Assembly Speaker Artur Tovmasyan did not rule out on 14 January. “Talking about elections and dismissal is treason and serving the enemy’s agenda,” Vardanyan advisor Mesrob Arakelyan wrote on Facebook in response. “I am not going to resign, especially in the existing situation,” Vardanyan also shared on social media, adding that early elections were also unacceptable. 

But in a late night meeting on Sunday, however, it was reported that some kind of compromise had been reached. Vardanyan would remain in his position but with the caveat that he would no longer make any further political statements unless in consultation with Harutyunyan. His focus would also be no more directed towards economic issues. Nonetheless, adding to the intrigue, Balasanyan’s replacement, Ararat Melkumyan, was also replaced earlier today as Security Council Secretary just nine days after being appointed. 

In the meantime, the impasse on the Lachin Corridor continues with no apparent end in sight and even though a peace deal after over three decades of an unsustainable and misperceived ‘status quo’ remains as pressing as ever.

Incidentally, for more on work on Lachin itself from 2001-2006 see here, here, here, and here.

Market, Stepanakert, Nagorno Karabakh © Onnik James Krikorian 2009

CONFLICT VOICES e-BOOKS

 

Conflict Voices – December 2010

Short essays on the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict
Download in English | Russian

 

Conflict Voices – May 2011

Short essays on the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict
Download in English | Russian

Ration Coupon system to start operation in Karabakh on 20 January

Ration Coupon system to start operation in Karabakh on 20 January

Not unexpectedly, on 20 January, certain food products in Karabakh will only be available via a rationing coupon or voucher system. This had already been announced by defacto State Minister Ruben Vardanyan on 8 January before it was then announced yesterday that it would start operating on 20 January. This is something anyway anticipated when stocks in shops started to increasingly disappear or sell out quickly. 

Some residents had already been quoted by media calling for such a system as the effective siege of Karabakh on the Lachin Corridor enters its second month. The coupons will be distributed on 17 January.

According to reports, those items rationed will includes rice, pasta, buckwheat, sugar and vegetable oil which are reportedly from the state reserves. Vardanyan had also already warned businesses that price increases of more than 15 percent would be deprived of supply. A system of ‘service points’ will be set up in public schools and at the main university in Stepanakert while in the regions in district administrative buildings and community halls.

This post will be updated when more information is available.

CONFLICT VOICES e-BOOKS

 

Conflict Voices – December 2010

Short essays on the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict
Download in English | Russian

 

Conflict Voices – May 2011

Short essays on the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict
Download in English | Russian