Remarks By Serge Sarkissian at the Defense MInisters Forum, Harvard

Dear Colleagues and Friends,
Ladies and Gentlemen:

I am Armenia's Ambassador to the United States, and I am here today on behalf of Armenian Defense Minister Serge Sargsyan. Unfortunately, at the last minute, the Minister was unable to attend the conference. So, I am pleased to present his remarks.

I would like to thank the Harvard University Black Sea Security Program for providing an excellent opportunity for civilian and military security officials in the greater Black Sea Region to meet, discuss, and find common approaches to the regional and international security challenges.

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Armenia entered the world stage with a set of geopolitical realities and challenges stemming from the changing nature of the world politics, specific problems and constraints of the Caucasus region, as well as certain historical events. We were hopeful that the end of the Cold War and spread of democratic and economic reforms in the Eurasian region would usher a new era of international cooperation, integration, and peaceful coexistence. Indeed, some political scientists foresaw an 'End of History,' as exemplified by the end of the standoff between opposing social-economic systems and ideologies. However, the international situation at the beginning of the twenty-first century is still complex and new challenges, such as international terrorism, abound.

We acknowledge that the responsibility for the political, economic, and security affairs in the South Caucasus region lies primarily with Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia. At the same time, the regional powers also have legitimate concerns and interests in the region, with the varying degree to which the region directly affects the national interest of those powers. It is clear that the immediate neighbors of the South Caucasus countries, Russia, Turkey, and Iran, as well as the United States have a stake in ensuring stability and long-term development of the region, and development of its economic resources. We also acknowledge that the European Union views this region as the political if not cultural extension of the European region. Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, as well as Turkey and Russia aspire to join the European institutions.

The interactions between the regional powers and countries of the region, the ever-competing and interdependent nature of many of such interactions, and the complex history of the region are the foundation on which the security of the South Caucasus region resides now. I am convinced that there is no alternative to the full-fledged international cooperation to address the new challenges and dangers of the twenty-first century, such as international terrorism, WMD proliferation, organized crime, drug trafficking and criminal use of the international financial networks.

Increased regional cooperation can address those challenges and uphold international stability and security. Armenia's foreign policy agenda is based on the principle of complementarity, that is, the premise that all of its security arrangements in the context of the international environment are complementary and balancing components of the post-Cold War world order. The Armenian policy of complementarity is evident in our efforts to build a national security system based on friendly relations with all the nations, especially the neighboring countries, and active participation in the regional and international organizations.

One look at the map of the region can tell you how important peaceful coexistence and good relations with the neighboring countries are for Armenia. Landlocked, small, and with a difficult terrain, our country depends on the presence of transport corridors and communications. Regional conflicts present a threat to stability and economic development of the whole region. Nagorno Karabakh conflict is perhaps the most complex and unresolved issue in the South Caucasus. The cease-fire has been in effect since May 1994, and the parties have been in search of a peaceful settlement ever since.

As you know, the OSCE Minsk Group and its Co-Chairs -- France, Russia, and the United States -- remains the primary conduit of the international mediation efforts to resolve the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. In 2001, we had serious developments in the negotiations process that gave everyone grounds for optimism. Prior to the Key West talks, we had a number of bilateral meetings between the Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan. The meetings in Paris and Key West in the spring of 2001 concluded this stage of the process, and created a possibility of serious progress in the peace process. The Armenian side accepted the results of the Key West meeting and expressed its preparedness to continue the process of negotiations.

Armenia continues to support these very principles: other options simply do not exist today. We hope that the Government of Azerbaijan will adhere to its international obligations, and will make an effort to resolve the conflict peacefully. Armenia is committed to a peaceful solution of the conflict. We realize that the settlement will have to involve serious compromises by all parties. It is obvious for us that whatever solution we agree upon, it has to provide the people of Karabakh the same rights and guarantees it enjoys today, including existence of a land corridor connecting Karabakh and Armenia. We hope that the new mechanism of consultations of Deputy Foreign Ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan, which was suggested by the Co-Chairs, will reinvigorate the Minsk Group process. The Deputy Foreign Ministers are scheduled to meet in Prague in May.

Another impediment to the establishment of a sound security system in the South Caucasus region is the unresolved nature of the Armenian-Turkish relations. This asymmetry is unique because no other two countries in this region have such an antagonistic relation with neighboring powers. Russia has diplomatic relations and embassies in all three South Caucasus countries, and so does Iran. The United States enjoys good relations with Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia. Turkey is the only country that has refused to establish diplomatic relations with Armenia, and has not attempted to even pretend to be even-handed. This is unfortunate because the re-establishment of an independent Armenia in 1991 presented a fresh opportunity to smoothen the historical antagonism between Turkey and Armenian peoples. Armenia has on numerous occasions offered to establish normal relations with its neighbor Turkey without any preconditions.

As long as the last section of the Iron Curtain, the Turkish-Armenian border, remains closed, this will impede development of the Caucasus region, will introduce a constant element of instability, and will prevent the integration of all countries of the region into the European institutions. We also look forward to the positive role the United States can play in helping Armenia and Turkey find common ground for a dialog. We are encouraged by the statement of President George W. Bush on April 24, 2002, in which he also called on Turkey to restore political, economic, and cultural relations with Armenia.

Another phenomenon for our region is Iran, with a difficult history of relations with its neighbors. Iran has its own potential, which the Caucasus countries cannot objectively discount. Iran has legitimate interests in our region and has pursued them in a responsible way, with utmost respect for internal affairs of each country. Armenia shares a common border with Iran, and has good economic and commercial links with that country.

Armenia enjoys friendly and firm relations with Georgia, enforced by the presence of a large and well-established Armenian community in Georgia. The amicable Georgian-Armenian relations will be one of the pillars of the emerging South Caucasus security framework. Strengthening of military cooperation is the latest new component of bilateral relations. Both Iran and Georgia provide the only outlet to the world for Armenia.

Armenia, as any other sovereign nation, is free to determine its national security priorities, its defense arrangement, and mode of cooperation with other nations, as long as its security is not augmented at the expense of any other nation. In this regard, Armenia has a defense cooperation with Russia, including a Russian military presence, which, of course, is not aimed against any third country. This cooperation is based on shared interests of both countries, and is fully consistent with current geopolitical realities of the Caucasus.

We are also engaged in partnership activities with the NATO through its PfP program. We appreciate our relations with NATO and we will continue to work to expand them, as well as pursue our cooperation with individual NATO members to develop serious cooperation in security- and defense-related matters, in such a manner that best serves our interests. NATO has been our neighbor for the past 50 years, and its critical role in helping maintain responsible security relationships is hard to discount. In general, European security arrangements define Armenia's broad security priorities. Next year, Armenia plans to host a PfP military exercise, dubbed "Best Effort 2003." We also have successful cooperation programs with individual NATO members, such as Greece, and Armenian-Greek military cooperation, in terms of content, is second only to Russia. Greece provides an important educational and training opportunity to the Armenian officers.

Another element of Armenia's security architecture is our participation in the Collective Security Treaty, comprised of Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Russia, and Tajikistan. In addition to collective defense, combating international terrorism and drug trafficking are very important priorities for the members of the Collective Security Treaty. The Treaty is open to other countries that are interested in developing cooperation with the member nations in those regions.

This year marked the beginning of intensive U.S.-Armenian military cooperation. You are probably aware of Section 907 of the FREEDOM Support Act, which was passed by U.S. Congress in 1992 in response to Azerbaijan's blockade and offensive actions against Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh. As a matter of policy, the U.S. Government did not engage in military cooperation with Armenia either, as long as Section 907 had been in place. In the wake of September 11, and in the context of the international campaign against terrorism, the United States national interests required a waiver of Section 907 to allow some anti-terrorism cooperation with Azerbaijan. With no policy obstacles in place, U.S.-Armenian military cooperation quickly expanded. During the recent visit of Defense Secretary Rumsfeld to Armenia and my visit to Washington, DC in March, the U.S. and Armenia reached an understanding on the priorities and directions of the bilateral military cooperation.
Underlying the bilateral cooperation was Armenia's unconditional support for the United States in its efforts against the international terrorism. From day one of the U.S.-led military campaign in Afghanistan, Armenia provided its airspace, refueling and landing for U.S. aircraft, and other tangible assistance. We will continue to support the United States efforts to uproot this evil.

Armenia views all of the main directions of its international cooperation and partnership efforts as harmonizing elements of its national, regional, and global security systems. We are convinced that modern challenges and threats can only be addressed by active participation of our partners and friends in helping the nations of the greater Black Sea region join the community of prosperous and secure societies. The materialization of this vision is the only viable guarantee of peace and stability in the Caucasus and the surrounding region.

Thank you.