EurasiaNet Eurasia Insight - Armenia: Questions Surround French President’s Visit

EURASIA INSIGHT

ARMENIA: QUESTIONS SURROUND FRENCH PRESIDENT’S VISIT
Haroutiun Khachatrian 10/11/06

Opinions are divided about the purpose of French President Jacques Chirac’s recent state visit to Armenia, with some observers contending that the mission had more to do with Turkey’s candidacy for European Union membership than with the South Caucasus state itself.

Armenian officials presented the September 29-October 1 visit as a sign of the country’s growing regional importance; the country was the second Commonwealth of Independent States member visited by Chirac after Russia. "I believe that the visit of President Chirac was … a result of the fact that today Armenia is a factor of stability, a reliable partner in the region for France and [other] big countries," Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian was quoted by the Azg daily newspaper as telling reporters.

However, many experts did not share this outlook. Some have charged that opposition to Turkey’s membership bid for the European Union prompted the French leader’s visit. By visiting Armenia and discussing the Ottoman Empire’s 1915 massacre of thousands of ethnic Armenians, Chirac was, in effect, reiterating long-standing European skepticism about Turkey’s human rights record, a potential barrier to European Union (EU) membership.

"Judging by the deeds and the words of Jacques Chirac [during the visit], his thoughts were in neighboring Turkey rather than in Armenia," commented former Armenian Foreign Minister Aleksander Arzumanian in an October 6 interview with the Russian newspaper Izvestia. "And this is understandable, as now serious problems have emerged between united Europe and Turkey."

Chirac could not avoid addressing the topic of the 1915 massacre, which France recognized officially as genocide in 2001. European media showed Chirac during a Yerevan press conference exhorting Turkey to recognize the massacre as genocide in the same way that Germany has recognized the Holocaust. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. "I believe every country becomes greater when it recognizes its errors and crimes of the past," Chirac said when questioned if Turkey needed to acknowledge the Ottoman genocide in order to gain EU membership.

Chirac’s comments produced a sharply negative reaction from Turkey, including threats to expel the 70,000 Armenian citizens now reportedly living in the country. The backlash prompted a renewed discussion in Armenia about whether its call for the 1915 events to be universally recognized as genocide suits the country’s interests.

In an October 4 editorial, the Haykakan Zhamanak independent daily wrote that France is keeping the Armenian genocide issue as a "moral excuse" for not granting Turkey EU membership if political reasons do not work. Even if Turkey recognizes the massacre as genocide, the paper continued, Armenian President Robert Kocharian’s administration has affirmed that only the descendants of the victims, most of whom are Diaspora Armenians, could present material claims against Turkey.

"It turns out that the policy of the Armenian authorities serves, first of all, the interests of the citizens of France, whereas Armenian citizens [must] develop with blocked communication routes [with Turkey] for one more century, for the sake of the happiness of United Europe," the editorial read.

While Chirac’s comments may have stirred controversy among Armenians, the French leader made clear his support for the government’s refusal to transfer negotiations with Azerbaijan over the breakaway region of Nagorno-Karabakh to the United Nations General Assembly or the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, as Azerbaijan has proposed. Talks currently take place within the framework of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe’s Minsk Group, a tripartite body headed by France, the United States and Russia.

According to news reports citing Azerbaijan’s foreign ministry, Chirac is expected to visit Azerbaijan in early 2007, following a January state visit to Paris by Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev.

Other analysts see regional issues as motivating the French president’s trip. A desire to compete with Russia and, maybe, the United States for influence in the South Caucasus could be one explanation, said David Hovhannisian, a political scientist and former Armenian ambassador to Syria. Chirac is also interested in Iran, Armenia’s southern neighbor and a longtime ally, with an eye to participation in infrastructure and non-military nuclear projects, Hovhannisian added. Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian told reporters after Chirac left that the French president "was very interested to learn" President Kocharian’s opinion about Iran’s nuclear capabilities.

Richard Giragossian, a Washington-based political scientist, however, argued during a public lecture in Yerevan on October 5 that France’s influential Armenian community rather than any geopolitical factors prompted the trip. This opinion was partly shared by the 168 Zham daily, which said that the visit had acted as "triple PR" -- for Chirac himself, for Kocharian, and for Armenia, which used the opportunity to tout the country as a foreign investment destination. The trip included a concert for 100,000 in downtown Yerevan by French crooner Charles Aznavour, the son of Armenian immigrants.

Editor’s Note: Haroutiun Khachatrian is a Yerevan-based writer specializing in economic and political affairs.

The Central Eurasia Project aims, through its website, meetings, papers, and grants, to foster a more informed debate about the social, political and economic developments of the Caucasus and Central Asia. It is a program of the Open Society Institute-New York. The Open Society Institute-New York is a private operating and grantmaking foundation that promotes the development of open societies around the world by supporting educational, social, and legal reform, and by encouraging alternative approaches to complex and controversial issues.

The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily represent the position of the Open Society Institute and are the sole responsibility of the author or authors.