2015年-CEPS欧洲政策研究中心_The_Rocky_Road_to_an_EU_3页_210kb

EU-Armenia Agreement: From U-turn to Detour

Core Content

This document, authored by Hrant Kostanyan, analyzes the challenges and implications of reworking the EU-Armenia Association Agreement following Armenia's decision to join the Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) on 2 January 2015. The article outlines the political and economic consequences of this decision, the EU's response, and the need for a more flexible and inclusive bilateral cooperation framework.

Main Points

• Background of the U-turn:
  On 3 September 2013, Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan unexpectedly announced Armenia's intention to join the EAEU, despite having previously concluded negotiations on the EU Association Agreement. This decision shocked the EU, which had invested significant resources in the agreement.

• EU's Response:
  The EU adopted a negative stance toward Armenia due to the abrupt nature of the decision and the lack of opposition from Armenian society. The EU rejected the idea of partial implementation of the Association Agreement, viewing it as a whole.

• Reworking the Agreement:
  The EU proposed reworking the Association Agreement into a new, less ambitious one that would align with Armenia's commitments to the EAEU. This would exclude certain areas such as energy, consumer policy, taxation, and trade-related chapters.

• Challenges in the New Process:

  • Kremlin's Influence: Russia remains a key security and economic partner for Armenia, and its pressure on the Armenian government continues.
  • Uncertainty of EAEU Commitments: Armenia's participation in the EAEU has introduced unclear obligations, making it difficult to define the scope of the new agreement.
  • Geopolitical Climate: The volatile situation, including the Armenian government's caution in its dealings with Russia, has hindered progress.
  • Lack of Civil Society Engagement: Civil society in Armenia has been excluded from the negotiation process, leading to concerns about human rights and democratic development.

• Need for a Roadmap:
  The article suggests that a pragmatic EU-Armenia roadmap is essential to complement the reworked agreement. This roadmap would allow for broader cooperation across multiple sectors, including mobility, environment, mining, transport, science, education, youth, and public health, among others.

• Inclusion of Civil Society:
  The roadmap is seen as a more inclusive approach, allowing for civil society participation. This is crucial for the EU to effectively support democratic reforms in Armenia, as national governments alone may not be reliable partners.

Key Information

• Date of the U-turn: 3 September 2013
• Armenia's Joining of EAEU: 2 January 2015
• Riga Summit: 21-22 May 2015
• Armenian GDP from Remittances: 9.1%
• EU's ENP Progress Report: Expected in March 2015, highlighting human rights concerns and possible financial repercussions for Armenia.

Conclusion

The EU-Armenia Association Agreement has been significantly affected by Armenia's decision to join the EAEU. The reworking process has faced numerous obstacles, including the influence of Russia, unclear EAEU commitments, and a lack of civil society involvement. To ensure continued cooperation and support for democratic reforms, the EU and Armenia must develop a comprehensive roadmap that transcends the limitations of the new agreement. This roadmap would provide a more flexible and inclusive framework for bilateral relations, even in the absence of a fully realized new treaty.