“Golos Armenii” dismisses the main arguments of those who strongly support the opening of Armenia’s border with Turkey. “Except for Armenian electricity and a small number of high-tech products, we hardly have anything to interest the Turkish market which is self-sufficient to a large extent,” writes the Russian-language paper. “Also, a number of experts reckon that with the opening of the border one should not expect an upsurge in the diversification of the Armenian economy. Furthermore, possibilities for the diversification of the Armenian economy could be further narrowed. Turkey’s cheap agricultural products, for instance, can create problems for Armenia’s agrarian sector.”
“The opening of the border will certainly enliven the country’s economic life, expand business activity, including in the capital,” Yerevan Mayor Gagik Beglarian disagrees in an interview with “Iravunk de facto.” “We will see that immediately after the border’s opening. The need for open borders for our country is beyond doubt.” Beglarian goes on to lambaste critics of President Serzh Sarkisian’s policy on Turkey. “Let nobody claim that they love our country or Karabakh more than the president of the republic does,” he says.
Political analyst Richard Giragosian tells “Hayots Ashkhar” that contrary to its leaders’ statements, Turkey does not expect the signing of an Armenian-Azerbaijani agreement on Nagorno-Karabakh soon. “That is, Turkey is not that frank in its demands related to Karabakh,” says Giragosian. “This is a test of sorts with which the Turkish side is trying to check Armenia’s resilience.”
“Chorrord Ishkhanutyun” claims that even an “ideal solution” to the Karabakh conflict is unacceptable to many Armenians and Karabakh’s leadership in particular. “The Karabakh authorities have said on numerous occasions that they have no liberated territories and that all they have is the territory of the NKR which can not be a subject of haggling,” says the paper. “So it means that Armenia is holding negotiations in vain. Even if it secures an ideal variant [of settlement,] it will still be unacceptable to Karabakh. And this in turn means that the only acceptable variant for the Armenian side is preservation of the status quo.”
“Levon Ter-Petrosian’s Armenian National Congress (HAK) has turned into a very interesting structure,” writes “Hraparak.” “Who makes decisions there? With what principles? Do parties making up the Congress participate in the decision-making process? The Congress won’t answer these questions.” The paper also sees “contradictions” in the HAK’s activities. It points out in particular that the HAK is not fully respecting its decision to boycott parliamentary by-elections.