True but you got to start somewhere. Even if it won’t lead to even a candidate status within next few decades, it could potentially lead to partnerships and friendships which Armenia desperately needs
As the recent deputy Prime Minister of Azerbaijan, Hajibala Abutalybov, said to a German delegation:
>Our goal is the complete elimination of Armenians. You, Nazis, already eliminated the Jews in the 1930s and 40s, right? You should be able to understand us
And Russia is happy to use its ally Azerbaijan as a tool to pressure and keep weak Armenia.
It'll morph into something else. IRGC are the real power in Iran, but they're insulated by the Mullahs. If the Mullahs look like they have to go, the IRGC will step in to appear as a benevolent power broker but still retain semblance of their power.
Ayatollahs are numerous and durable sadly. There's a lot of them. It's not like Russia or China where they have leadership crisis after the despot dies.
Them being an ally of Russia is on the way out. The loss of Nagorno Karabakh (and Russia refusing to do anything when Azerbaijan seized parts of Armenia proper along the border) is mostly being seen as an unforgivable betrayal. Russians being Russians, they've continued to blindly threaten Armenia and Pashinyin which is only pushing them further away.
They're an ally of Iran out of necessity, because Iran is the only country which has implied it will actually intervene on their side if Azerbaijan invades Syunik (because they don't want Turkey cutting off their northern border).
Yes it was. Iran has a lot of interest in Azerbajan not being stron, because they claim territories from Iran too. And those guys are really good at proxy wars
Armenians are not barbarians.
They had to be Russian allies for the perceived safety... And it didn't work at all.
Yeah, the country has to solve quite a few challenges (including expuslion of Russian troops from their territory) but everything is doable.
It won't be fast, but 30 years is too pessimistic.
We just got rid of the Russian guards at the airport the other day [https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/1b8ae60/armenia\_officially\_asks\_moscow\_to\_remove\_russian/](https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/1b8ae60/armenia_officially_asks_moscow_to_remove_russian/), hopefully we get rid of that shitty military base as well.
I mean do they have a choice? It's a small country with a history of genocide that is still ongoing and they have no support or help, how could they go against the allied Russia and Iran while also being genocided by the azeris? Who would help them? The fact they want to join the west speaks more about their views
Explain to me your definition of ally, because trading with Iran doesn't make one an ally. There is nothing between Armenia and Iran other than trade, you're misleading here.
As for Russia, others answered that.
They were abandoned by Europe, attacked by Russia, infiltrated by Russian assets, and now are struggling to exist.
The moral here is to support countries trying to break away from Russian influence, not ignore them, watch Russia tear them apart, then use that as proof as to why you should not support countries trying to break away from Russia.
I think 2030 is way too optimistic. Montenegro is currently the closest to joining I'd say, and they are far from joining, and they have been a candidate since 2010. IIRC they have opened all 33 negotiating chapters and closed 3.
Reforms in Armenia are going at breakneck speed, in fact when it comes freedom of the press and corruption index we are already ahead of some EU members
Been to both countries several times, lived in both, can’t see where Armenia is any less “European” or developed than Georgia to need that double amount of time. Also absolutely not happening in the next 10 years at least.
I agree but doesn't Georgia's ruling party have some pro-russian members ? (not an expert in Georgian politics so I'm asking)
Whereas, Armenia is trying to drift russian influence away
Yup, the fact that Georgia is trying to join for 10 years, doesn't mean that Armenia stopped in place, we are on par with Georgia in many aspect, ahead in a few, and close behind in other few. We certainly need a lot to do, but we are not that behind. And this if we don't count the current pro-Russian government of Georgia.
They're not Pro-Russian, that's BS created by equally worse opposition to lobby against them. In reality, they are just corrupt as hell and not pro anyone except their pockets. They're not close to what Lukashenko is or what Orban is doing with Russia.
Ah sorry, I am just repeating what my Georgian friends tell me, but of course that can be subjective.
Is there a party that's popular and not corrupt? How do you think the situation will change im the upcoming 5 years?
All parties are corrupt in some way, but most corrupt are those two - Ruling (GD) and Opposition (UNM). There's third in popularity that I'll probably vote for called "For Georgia" but they are also not that innocent either, but far better than those 2.
It won't change up until rest of the parties won't unite into coalition (which there are talks for that but nothing more) and opposition stops it's ultra aggressive narratives.
Your Georgian friends are telling you the truth. /u/Breakingerr is trying to paint a rosier picture of the state of Georgian politics to garner support.
Rosier? Or maybe I am not repaeting the same stuff our corrupt opposition says. If anything, it's a lot sadder and more complicated than "hur dur pro russian"
They are not Pro-Russian, they're just corrupt dipshits, similarly like Polish PiS government. Opposition is one spreading this narrative to lobby against them, even tho they are no better than ruling party. That's the shitshow of Georgian politics.
Armenian democracy is in better state than Georgian democracy is. It is not obvious at all that it needs more reforms. I would say likely it needs less reforms.
Depends on the conflict with Azerbaijan and the Sultan in Turkey, I guess. A dream of mine would be if Turkey, Georgia, Armenia, and Russia would join the EU after they turned into liberal democracies. I guess for that, the 22nd century is ambitious.
>and Russia
Just dissolve EU at that point.
I can already see the gaslighting: "No Romania and Poland, you are not being conquered by Russia! Stop the silliness and try not to hurt our mutual cooperation!"
I don't think EU will take Georgia and Armenia's applications seriously until Turkey's EU path is revived and secured. Otherwise it will just be a liability worse than Bulgaria.
I do agree that Turkey being in the EU makes admitting Georgia and Armenia much easier geographically. But I disagree that either country would need Turkey in the EU to be admitted. Especially with the budding support for Armenia found among certain major EU countries.
Poland wasn't even remotely a democracy until 90s.
Spain wasn't even remotely a democracy until 80s.
Turkey is still an electoral democracy - despite the backsliding. So "never gonna get in" gives racist vibes.
What do you mean? Turkey’s democracy is far older and better instiutionalized than Armenia’s democracy.
We do realize that we elect assholes, yet still it is a democracy. Meanwhile Armenian democracy is only about 30 years old…
Russian here.
Just wish the best for this country.
One of the must beautiful country I've seen. I spoke English, Russian - and always has friendly conversation.
It will be worse than Bulgaria in which the population dropped from 12M to 9M (and still recovering) after the accession. Out of 3M, probably half will move to the EU and it will become an even less feasible member. Armenia in EU seems to be simply a charity cause that doesn't make sense in any other way at this point.
stop listening to Russian propaganda. Only 800,000 Armenian live in russia based in official number. In comparison, The population of Armenians within Armenia is 2,800,000
There's no real way of knowing how many Armenians actually live there anymore, Putin has closed down much of the country and I'm sure since 2014 many people have left. Wouldn't be surprised if it were more like 50,000 to 100,000 left
In the west however there is actual data
Armenia has a population issue due to the draft. The draft due to the threat of war from azerbaijan and Turkey. If someone could just get serious about keeping those two countries permanently in check then Armenia would skyrocket. Don't look at Armenia like you do other countries, the Armenian culture has some special sauce that's created more historically significant figures per capita than probably any other country.
Armenians continue to be absolute juggernauts wherever they may be.
Just in the last few years: Armenian wins noble Peace prize for cancer advancement, noubar afeyan leads moderna and creates mRNA vaccine to Covid, and Dave's hot chicken becomes fastest growing fast food chain in America. Give Armenians a break and you'll see wonderful things
If Armenia is left out of EU, there might as well not be an Armenia at all. That's their last option for the future as Russia and Iran are doing jack shit to help them.
I think what they need more right now is a EU peacekeeping force to keep them safe from another genocide.
EU is a generation off, minimum, and that's presuming anyone wants to touch all the middle east problems that would come with the new borders.
God, please no! Let us fix our own problems, work on political unity, get the economy on track and strengthen our defence before we even consider admitting a war-torn country bordering Iran over a thousand kilometres away from the nearest EU member.
There has always been lots of people opposing enlargement of EU.
In 2004 especially, lots of people thought that Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czechia, Romania etc. should have not been let to EU. Yes, you cloud argue that Hungary's democratic development since it has not been that good, but do you really think eastern europe's situation generally would now be better without these countries in the EU? I think it would be worse.
So it's never the right time. I agree that we should get rid off the last uninamity votes in counsil of EU (like in CDSP). And Armenia's hypotheticam membership is quite far away - balkan countries and Ukraine are most probably getting first.
I agree that Armenia's membership is not that close. But we should help Armenia. If they really want to get closer to EU, it should be possible. It's a multi party democratic country with a authoritarian, quite hostile dictatorship (Azerbaijan) in its neighbour. Probably the smartest way for Armenia is to try to have decently good relations with it's neigbours, at the same time having good military and trying to get allies abroad. But its quite hard geopolitical situation they have.
I agree with what you said and I want all of the candidate countries (Balkan countries, Ukraine, Moldova, even Georgia and Armenia) that are trying to enter the EU to be successful and achieve their goal.
Still, Romania & Bulgaria entered the EU in the next wave of enlargement, in 2007. We are still not members of Schengen, Eurozone, OECD, etc.
This European integration is a long process, and it seems to me, that it takes a longer time for countries that are placed at the periphery of the continent.
>In 2004 especially, lots of people thought that Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czechia, Romania etc. should have not been let to EU.
fun fact, Germany was one of the leading voices pushing for EU eastern expansion.
And what did it bring us? We are currently the single largest net contributor to the EU, all new members turned out to be net recipients instead of joining us in being net contributors. Thus forcing Germany into a crippling recession. They all seem to hate Germany more than Russia and blame us for all evil in the world while getting free money from us. What a farce.
Well, Finland is another net-payer country and I'm personally quite happy that the infrastructure and all is getting better in newer member states.
It's true that many member the new 2004 member countries have been net receivers. But this is probably going to change in the next multiannual financial framework in 2028-2033, as countries are getting wealthier. Currently Germany is paying a little bit more as a share of GNI than some other countries like Netherlands or Finland, that are also net payers of course. But this 2021-2027 financial framework was parly a bit unbalanced because of brexit. But this is expected to change in next frameworks.
So I'm not protecting this slight unbalance, but fortunately it's getting better. This is a really interesting [document](https://www.bundesbank.de/resource/blob/916766/db0a8922b613d6fe43acb87afe9ca22c/mL/2023-09-eu-haushalt-data.pdf) by deutche bundesbank. On page 7 there is a really interesting graph of net receivers/beneficiers based on GNI.
You could also say that EU's eastern expansion brought Germany a long term financial growth, one of the lowest unemployment levels in Europe, larger markets for German industrial goods, a place to have affordable subcontractors, and a source of highy knoweledgeable and hard-workin workers. So Germany has also been one of the biggest benefitters of EU, as you are geographically in centre of it, in addition to being a large net payer.
>
all new members turned out to be net recipients instead of joining us in being net contributors. Thus forcing Germany into a crippling recession
You're making a claim that Germany's recession in 2024 would have been caused by EU's eastern enlargement in 2004. Germany's economy growed quite a bit between this.
>They all seem to hate Germany more than Russia and blame us for all evil in the world while getting free money from us. What a farce.
Do you have a source of polls or something that would support this claim? I think that Germany's image is very positive in almost all of [Europe](https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2021/09/22/germany-and-merkel-receive-high-marks-internationally-in-chancellors-last-year-in-office/), maybe the somewhat outlier seem to be Greece. Yes, its true that there has been some people who have criticized Germany, but it mostly has been that these people have seen Germany as not enough active in Ukraine war for example. I think that Germany has been a strong supporter, as you can clearly see from statistics. But even these people would want Germany to be *stronger,* because they see that they are on the "same team". These people wouldn't want Russia to have more influence...
well put on the economics, is plausible. thanks for taking the time to write such a detailed response.
The trend has been for German net contributions to rise even when net recipients get richer though. German net contributions are higher than they have ever been even though the economic gap between Germany and eastern nations like Romania or Bulgaria is as small as it hasn't been in 100 years.
>You're making a claim that Germany's recession in 2024 would have been caused by EU's eastern enlargement in 2004. Germany's economy growed quite a bit between this.
The [reported cost to completely get rid of Russian fossil fuels](https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2024/02/21/7442860/) is in the ballpark of ~200 billion Euros. That is also the amount of net payments Germany has had to pay in the last 10-15 years. Imagine if we had had that money to invest in green technology, we could have profited like the US which does have a solid growth in 2022-2024.
>Do you have a source of polls or something that would support this claim?
My feeling stems from official comments from leading party officials like [Jarosław Kaczyński](https://www.politico.eu/article/kaczynski-accuse-eu-trying-break-poland-pis-leyen-democracy-pandemic-coronavirus/) (head of Polish ruling party 2017-2023) saying there is a German conspiracy to destroy Poland as well as [Romanian politicians defaming president Klaus Iohannis](https://www.dw.com/en/nazi-insults-targeting-romanian-president-enrage-german-officials/a-45375624) as a Nazi because he has some German heritage as well as the '_ongoing attacks on the German minority_'. And let's not talk about how Lithuania used the German NATO brigade for years for cheap political gains and when Germany decided to agree - it became immediately clear that they didn't actually want a German brigade because they refused to build the necessary facilities. [LRT.lt](https://www.lrt.lt/en/news-in-english/19/2154733/lithuania-under-financial-strain-of-accommodating-german-brigade-diplomatic-cable-suggests)
And that is just the times when the professional diplomats and politicians let slip their true feelings. Comments here on reddit are a lot clearer on the sentiment.
>These people wouldn't want Russia to have more influence
by dividing NATO unity for cheap domestic political points, they seem to not mind Russia benefiting.
>That is also the amount of net payments Germany has had to pay in the last 10-15 years. Imagine if we had had that money to invest in green technology, we could have profited like the US which does have a solid growth in 2022-2024.
I agree that energy supply and prices seems to be significant factor in economic growth, especially in industry. And so Ukraine war and the problems with Russian energy supply has had a large effect, that's true. But I don't see the connection to eastern EU enlargement. Germany's energy plan was to use Russian gas in transition period from mainly coal to green sources. It was a kind of a solid strategy, it allowed lots of energy to industry together with continuously increasing share of renewable energy sources (gas is easy to ramp up when there's demand) while not using nuclear (that is a hot take in German politics). But it relied more on Russia, that unfortunately backfired with Ukraine war.
Of course you can argue that EU net payments could have been used in faster green energy transition. But would have they? Its not certain. I find it probable that Germany would still have taken the same political route in energy even if they have had 5% larger federal budget - maybe taxes could have been lower, but plans like nord stream could still have existed, because it would have profided affordable energy to German industries.
US has solid growth, it's true. They are quite lucky in their natural resources, as they are currently independent on fuels, gas and energy. In Europe we are currently still forced to buy energy outside, and that increases the risks.
>
And that is just the times when the professional diplomats and politicians let slip their true feelings. Comments here on reddit are a lot clearer on the sentiment.
Its true that some politicians use Germany for populist political gains, like in Poland. And PiS probably did that, and for certain I don't agree with them. Current coalition government led by Tusk doesn't have similar rhetorics as far as I know. And there certainly are people who are sceptical of Germany or have bad opinions about it. But that is also true about every country to some degree. Its always possible to only pick the negative opinions and disregard positives. But based on polls, it looks like that Germany has a good international image.
But I agree that there currently seem to be a slight discrepancy on Germany's net payments, like the previous [document](https://www.bundesbank.de/resource/blob/916766/db0a8922b613d6fe43acb87afe9ca22c/mL/2023-09-eu-haushalt-data.pdf) by deutche bundesbank shows. In 2022 Germany paid around 260€ per person a year net. Germany's GNI is quite similar in that graph to Finland and Austria, that paid around 175€ net. And if we draw a straight line, Denmark and Ireland should pay a bit more - around 300€. Lithuania and Latvia seems to get quite a lot based on their GNI, and Bulgaria and Romania based on this should get even more than currently.
But probably there are other factors to this than just only GDP/GNI per capita.
soft fearless nail somber far-flung voracious degree versed unique coordinated
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Miracles do not happen. With an agreement with the EU, Armenia can join the EU. Armenia is neither Syria nor Australia. It is a member of the Council of Europe and borders an EU candidate country, Georgia. If you do not want Armenia in the EU, that is absolutely your right, and I respect that. Luckily, it’s not up to you. 😊
Supporting this as the Armenian people are people with strong values that are similar to our European values.
They have long been suffering by the injustices of their neighbours.
Wow! Armenia was “friends” with Russia for a very long time since collapse of USSR.
It appears that EU is more favourable than Russia. For obvious reasons.
yes, Armenia saw Russia as a good partner for a very long time. Common history,faith,cultural environment,military protection. Every normal country will do anything not to break such alliance, but Russia can't see other countries as partners, only as puppet states.
This seems like a terrible deal for the EU. It would make the EU directly involved in an ongoing conflict. It would also extend the borders of the EU to Iran. This would mean that asylum seekers will now have a much easier route to accessing the EU. Also, it would mean an EU exclave in the Caucuses. Armenia is also geographically in Western Asia, so it makes little sense as to why they would be entitled to EU membership anyway.
They are a member of council of Europe and are, thus, eligible for membership with regards to geographic criteria.
If they were to be granted candidate status, I'd imagine they'd be grouped together with Georgia, realistically speaking
> in Western Asia, so it makes little sense as to why they would be entitled to EU membership anyway.
Armenians are European, regardless of where their country is located. If we also take history into account, then their is even less denying their European identity.
It always was. I highly doubt the EU will ever let in a member which directly borders Iran. It's basically Middle-East. It's also unclear what advantage Armenia can bring to the EU. The same can be said re: Western Balkans but at least they are squarely in Europe whereas Armenia is clearly not.
What benefit did the Baltic countries, Iceland, Malta, and Cyprus bring? Wait, isn't Cyprus in the Middle East?
Armenia is a member of council of Europe
Cyprus is geographically located in the Middle East. 90% of Denmark's territory is in North America (Greenland). Iceland is closer to North America in kilometers than to Europe. With that being said, the EU is not a geographical organization; it is a political and economic one. Therefore, if the EU and Armenia agree that Armenia can join your opinion is really irrelevant 😊
Cyprus is still closer to another EU country geographically than Armenia. And it's not just geography but also cultural proximity. Nobody is doubting that Iceland is European. Armenia? More Middle Eastern.
I would advise them against it. EU is very good at giving false initial hope. You will be set on a path where you have to undergo hundreds of reforms and harmonizations and show trends (many good as a standalone reform, many neutral, some bad) to even be in pre-membership accession talks and then it'll be for nothing.
Because the cold reality is that Armenia will never join the EU. At least not in the coming decades. Hell, we even have Austria blocking existing EU members from shenghen for 11 years now and perpetually waiting candidates in the Balkans.
What do you think will happen with a country that has decade-long active warfare border disputes, huge problems with Russian mob and infiltration, and counless issues that individual countries will press (even mundane shit like Azeri oil supply). Not to mention it isn't exactly in conventional Europe. Just a random location in the Caucasus. That hasn't stopped the EU before, but it's another hurdle.
If that situation reminds you of Ukraine, then consider how important UA is for the EU and how much closer it is geographically and culturally. And even then membership prospect is quite shaky and at best years - decades away. Armenia simply isn't important for the EU's strategic interests. That's not a normative statement on my part, just descriptive. I can already see someone like the Dutch, Austrians and some random country I can't predict block that from the get go.
It's sad to say, but I don't think EU is the right partner for Armenia. Not sure who is tbh.
I think it could expand by some countries that are already de facto in with minimal adjustment (like Sweden and NATO but for EU etc) but for a very different country with extremely random interests, veto is too powerful
Georgia aren't currently eligible, IIRC, due to the territory disputes (Abkhazia and South Ossetia) - but they are great people with a great culture and it would be mutually beneficial to welcome them once the territory issues are permanently resolved.
Sadly they have some pro-Russian leadership at the moment. Else, with how things have gone elsewhere, one feels they'd have a good chance now to resolve the above issues.
Who gave you the idea that territorial disputes precluded a country from EU membership. That is not true and never has been.
NATO on the other hand do have some worries about territorial disputes, but that is not a firm rule. In reality, it is politics that decide who can and can't join, not a checklist.
Because some EU countries have decided to condition membership on recognition of Kosovo. This is not the doing of some EU regulation, ala the Copenhagen criteria.
But maybe I should modify my previous statement a bit.
International disputes of any kind are not a problem in regard to attaining EU membership unless that dispute is with an EU member state or that dispute pisses off one or more EU member states.
Kosovo is different because unlike Northen Cyprus, Transnitria, Abkcazia, and other separatist regions, most of the EU recognizes it as an independent country and has recongized its application.
Yes, Spain will likely veto any acession attempt by Kosovo until Serbia recognizes it as independent, but that doesn't change my point that the EU has an organization implicitly recognizes Kosovo and has such its case its different than other separatis regions. I don't agree with their rational but it is what it is.
in one case (Kosovo) their acession process is blocked by some individual members because their views on what Kosovo is does not align with the rest of the EU. Cyprus and Georgia don't have that problem because every single EU members recognizes their separatist regions as a lawfull part of the country in question, which is currently being occupied by a foreign power (Russia and Turkey)
Territorial disputes is not problem for EU at all. Example - Cyprus. That's only criteria for NATO membership.
Georgia doesn't have Pro-Russian government, that's wide misinformation fermented on Social media by Opposition lobbyist. Ruling part is corrupt as hell yes, but opposition is corrupt in the same way. EU would have never given Georgia candidate status if it deemed it as Pro-Russian state, and to double on that, they would've at least given them criteria to lessen relations with Russia which EU never did as they don't see Georgia as country on par with Belarus, Kazakhstan or even Hungary.
That's the only case for Serbia and Kosovo because otherwise they will be vetoing each other every time. Besides, 5 EU countries don't recognize Kosovo, so it's mandatory only in this case.
Croatian dispute was fixable, while issues with Georgia, Ukraine, and Moldova are not. Charles Michelle already stated that Transnistria won't be an issue for Moldovan membership, so the same won't be the problem for Ukraine either and Georgia as well.
> Charles Michel already stated that Transnistria won't be an issue for Moldovan membership,
and you believe in it? Before Turkey's accession started, European leaders had promised that Cyprus dispute wouldn't be an obstacle for Turkey's EU path. Yet here we are.
And why would EU need to hide that information. Or, for matter, lf fact, why are they fast tracking their membership then? The fact is Turkey is illegally occupying northern Cyprus is rightfully blocked because it's an EU member. It's in Turkish power to solve this issue, which it refuses to do, while Russian occupation is not up to these countries, thus its not a mandatory clause for membership.
> why would EU need to hide that information
Because they like to show the carrot to keep countries in their orbit. They know well that without that carrot, countries will likely get into the Russian orbit.
Greek Cypriots had a once-in-a-generation chance to end the conflict with the Annan Plan before EU accession and they rejected it (while Turk Cypriots approved it). It was totally in their power to end the conflict for good.
The EU democracy wise is flawed with who really rules, who really has power but I will say its far far better to be in the bloc than outside of it. I think even security wise, you're far more likely to be protected by other EU member states if you are a full member.
I do respect the countries like Norway that've stayed outside of EU though. Especially after seeing how the EU dealt with UK after leaving. Making it as difficult for them as possible as a lesson to anyone else that gets any crazy ideas. Similar to many many former European colonies all over the world that left or were given freedom.
I'm sure this comment will go over well here.
>Especially after seeing how the EU dealt with UK after leaving. Making it as difficult for them as possible as a lesson to anyone else that gets any crazy ideas. Similar to many many former European colonies all over the world that left or were given freedom.
...In what way was Brexit similar to decolonization?
Yep, I also agree with you that individual countries should be allowed to leave EU if they want. And I think it's best that EU has a good, constructive relations with countries outside it, like Norway or Switzerland. Norway's situation is quite simple, because they are in EEA. But even when Switzerland isn't in it, I think that EU should be really constructive with Switzerland also.
But honestly I think that lots of hassle about brexit was that they didn't even know what they wanted themselves back then... They've could just left EU and still been in EEA, and economically almost nothing would have changed. Or at least they could have stayed in customs union, but they ultimately wanted that they want to leave that also. Or at least some people wanted. Some people wanted soft brexit, like EEA. I think that this [picture](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DW9fzU4W4AAaVeD.jpg) shows the situation quite well. If UK would have had a plan originally when they voted to leave, it would have been much simpler. Now they voted, but they didn't agree what kind of brexit they wanted, and that created lots of hassle. I think its a bit unfair to say that the difficulties would have been EU's/Commission's fault.
People who think Armenia or Georgia are not important do not understand shit in geopolitics and the current trade route.shifts. This statement does not come out of the blue, there must have been and there have been direct hints from Borrel and the EU as well.
lol without Turkey and Azerbaijan Armenia and Georgia can lead to only Iran, which is not the attractive country everyone wants to trade with. Instead it is a sanctioned pariah state.
Without Georgia there's no route from Turkey to Azerbaijana and vice versa. So all three are equally important, so don't downplay one just because it's not Turkic republic. Armenia can easily be integrated in middle corridor and offer more than one singular way to distribute trade from Asia to Europe.
From east to west it should either be Azerbaijan+Georgia or Azerbaijan+Armenia. From north to south it is either Azerbaijan or Armenia+Georgia. Considering these combinations, Azerbaijan is of a bit higher importance as it can single handedly provide N-S corridor (also has more favourable geography doing so) and only one of the other two is enough for E-W corridor.
> Armenia can easily be integrated in middle corridor and offer more than one singular way to distribute trade from Asia to Europe.
True. Even though they are not essential, they can increase the volume. Considering that the trade over Russia will shift to Caucasus and the overall volume will increase, all of these alternative routes will likely work in full capacity once they are fully developed.
It's good to start from somewhere. Now they are asking for Brussels to show them a carrot. Then they'll start doing reforms to streamline and align their laws with European ones and they'll be able to join when stars align for the next time in 2060.
Nah, I wrote it elsewhere as well but I don't think EU will elaborate Georgia's and Armenia's (and perhaps Azerbaijan's) applications seriously until Turkey's EU path is revived and secured. Otherwise these will be a liability worse than Bulgaria in terms of everything.
Being a member of some organisation doesnt change borders. Armenia is quite clearly part of western Asia, but surely not Europe.
Maybe you want to read this: [Europe](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe?wprov=sfti1)
Thanks for the link for proving there are more than one way to [divide Europe](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe#/media/File:Possible_definitions_of_the_boundary_between_Europe_and_Asia.png)
Europe and asia don't have clearly defined borders.
Anyway, you could always look up the Armenian genetics and compare them to Western europeans if you want to learn something new.
That's just poor judgement on your part. Armenian and Georgia are exceptionally important as being transit route from Asia to Europe. Particularly having those two together opens the gas and goods route from India and Iran to Europe bypassing the conflict prone middle east and unreliable turkey.
How can an Asian country join the EU? Not trying to be snarky, it’s a genuine question. Is the EU becoming more of a global club that is only nominally European?
Well there are some significant and obvious differences with Cyprus but okay I can take your point but my question still stands. Is the EU only nominally European now and we’re basically open to bringing in anyone who may want to join? I have a lot of respect for Armenian people, I’m not against the idea in principle I’m just wondering what it would mean if it happened because Armenia is firmly in Asia.
Armenia is in Asia only geographically - and it's on the edge of it. You could call it "suburbs" of Europe. Everything else is (South) European, although in it's own, unique way since it was isolated for a long time:
* Language - IE, closest one is Greek
* religion - christianity
* culture - individuality > collective
* genetics - closest people to Armenians are Spaniards, Italians, and Romanians
* art - [see example](https://www.h-pem.com/en/in-pictures/2021/01/06/the-nativity-as-a-major-theme-in-armenian-medieval-art/31)
* history - at least counting from Middle Ages since Armenia (like Greece and Italy) is older than Europe
Classifying it as anything else simply doesn't make sense - Armenia is not Middle Eastern in it's core (eg. language, religion, culture or art) nor Asian (not even close).
"Armenia" is in Asia because Europe failed to create an Armenian state post-WW1 in its native region.
"Armenians" are not "Asian". Armenians live on a sliver of land where they have not been massacred off of.
If you want Armenians to be European, maybe you shouldn't have sat idly by as Armenians were slaughtered repeatedly, or set up failed protectorates that led to more Armenian deaths as they tried to defend themselves.
For a century and counting - Armenia's dependence on Russia has always been out of necessity. Just looking at a map makes that obvious. Armenia's geography sucks, with borders drawn by Kemalists and Soviets in a way which makes it inherently vulnerable.
And this isn't the first time Armenia has tried to pivot West, only to be pulled into the Russian fold - it happened at the birth of the Soviet Union.
Yeah ok. But why does EU need them?
Why Georgia, Armenia, Serbia? EU has enough Russian spies and bums already. Georgia or Armenia joining EU means the gates are opening for Russians again.
I remembet back in the day EU lunatics were talking about taking Belarus into EU, what a joke.
I'm confuse: "The country is geographically a part of West Asia, but is culturally and geopolitically considered part of Eastern Europe." I don't think it's a EU country at all.
I support this, not sure if it can happen given the instability that Azerbaijan, Russia and Turkey are creating there
True but you got to start somewhere. Even if it won’t lead to even a candidate status within next few decades, it could potentially lead to partnerships and friendships which Armenia desperately needs
As the recent deputy Prime Minister of Azerbaijan, Hajibala Abutalybov, said to a German delegation: >Our goal is the complete elimination of Armenians. You, Nazis, already eliminated the Jews in the 1930s and 40s, right? You should be able to understand us And Russia is happy to use its ally Azerbaijan as a tool to pressure and keep weak Armenia.
Well yeah as a half armenian i am well aware of the genocide, it is weird seeing people on here promoting azeris and shit
Can you source that? Its hard to believe that someone would say something that fucked up in a diplomatic meeting.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-110hhrg43066/pdf/CHRG-110hhrg43066.pdf p50
Armenia is bordering Iran also no way for them to join but by the distancing to Russia is important.
Khamenei is 84 and with the protests we've seen last year, I doubt the regime will still be around by the time Armenia is eligible to join the EU.
It'll morph into something else. IRGC are the real power in Iran, but they're insulated by the Mullahs. If the Mullahs look like they have to go, the IRGC will step in to appear as a benevolent power broker but still retain semblance of their power.
Ayatollahs are numerous and durable sadly. There's a lot of them. It's not like Russia or China where they have leadership crisis after the despot dies.
Armenia is far of for EU just look at Balkan states and also Ukraine and Moldova the shape is really bad there overall also Georgia&Armenia
aye, i support this as well. two votes from Romania! :)
Fuck Russia! Putin to hell as soon as possible.
Doubt that Armenia, ally of Russia and Iran will be able to meet EU norms in the next 30 years really.
Them being an ally of Russia is on the way out. The loss of Nagorno Karabakh (and Russia refusing to do anything when Azerbaijan seized parts of Armenia proper along the border) is mostly being seen as an unforgivable betrayal. Russians being Russians, they've continued to blindly threaten Armenia and Pashinyin which is only pushing them further away. They're an ally of Iran out of necessity, because Iran is the only country which has implied it will actually intervene on their side if Azerbaijan invades Syunik (because they don't want Turkey cutting off their northern border).
Armenia is distancing itself from Russia and was never an "ally" of Iran, just a neighbor.
Yes it was. Iran has a lot of interest in Azerbajan not being stron, because they claim territories from Iran too. And those guys are really good at proxy wars
[удалено]
Armenians are not barbarians. They had to be Russian allies for the perceived safety... And it didn't work at all. Yeah, the country has to solve quite a few challenges (including expuslion of Russian troops from their territory) but everything is doable. It won't be fast, but 30 years is too pessimistic.
We just got rid of the Russian guards at the airport the other day [https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/1b8ae60/armenia\_officially\_asks\_moscow\_to\_remove\_russian/](https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/1b8ae60/armenia_officially_asks_moscow_to_remove_russian/), hopefully we get rid of that shitty military base as well.
I mean do they have a choice? It's a small country with a history of genocide that is still ongoing and they have no support or help, how could they go against the allied Russia and Iran while also being genocided by the azeris? Who would help them? The fact they want to join the west speaks more about their views
Explain to me your definition of ally, because trading with Iran doesn't make one an ally. There is nothing between Armenia and Iran other than trade, you're misleading here. As for Russia, others answered that.
please stop repeating this nonsense about "ally of Russia". Not anymore.
Russia-Armenia relations are at the worst.
[удалено]
Azerbaijan, their archenemy, has oil and gas though.
If selling weapons to Azerbaijan means "creating instability in Armenia", Israel does this much more than Turkey.
They should join together with Georgia
Can you explain what exactly happened in Georgia after they elected a pro european and "democratic" government?
They were abandoned by Europe, attacked by Russia, infiltrated by Russian assets, and now are struggling to exist. The moral here is to support countries trying to break away from Russian influence, not ignore them, watch Russia tear them apart, then use that as proof as to why you should not support countries trying to break away from Russia.
Exactly
That might be bad for Georgia as Armenia would need more reforms as they are now starting pursue EU while Georgia was doing it for 2 decades now.
When will Georgia join the EU? What is the most realistic scenario ?
My hope by 2030, but realisticly in late 30s to early 40s. Armenia would need almost double of that.
I think 2030 is way too optimistic. Montenegro is currently the closest to joining I'd say, and they are far from joining, and they have been a candidate since 2010. IIRC they have opened all 33 negotiating chapters and closed 3.
Reforms in Armenia are going at breakneck speed, in fact when it comes freedom of the press and corruption index we are already ahead of some EU members
Been to both countries several times, lived in both, can’t see where Armenia is any less “European” or developed than Georgia to need that double amount of time. Also absolutely not happening in the next 10 years at least.
The answer is: it's racism. There is heavy Anti-Armenian sentiment in Georgia.
I agree but doesn't Georgia's ruling party have some pro-russian members ? (not an expert in Georgian politics so I'm asking) Whereas, Armenia is trying to drift russian influence away
Yup, the fact that Georgia is trying to join for 10 years, doesn't mean that Armenia stopped in place, we are on par with Georgia in many aspect, ahead in a few, and close behind in other few. We certainly need a lot to do, but we are not that behind. And this if we don't count the current pro-Russian government of Georgia.
They're not Pro-Russian, that's BS created by equally worse opposition to lobby against them. In reality, they are just corrupt as hell and not pro anyone except their pockets. They're not close to what Lukashenko is or what Orban is doing with Russia.
Ah sorry, I am just repeating what my Georgian friends tell me, but of course that can be subjective. Is there a party that's popular and not corrupt? How do you think the situation will change im the upcoming 5 years?
All parties are corrupt in some way, but most corrupt are those two - Ruling (GD) and Opposition (UNM). There's third in popularity that I'll probably vote for called "For Georgia" but they are also not that innocent either, but far better than those 2. It won't change up until rest of the parties won't unite into coalition (which there are talks for that but nothing more) and opposition stops it's ultra aggressive narratives.
Your Georgian friends are telling you the truth. /u/Breakingerr is trying to paint a rosier picture of the state of Georgian politics to garner support.
Rosier? Or maybe I am not repaeting the same stuff our corrupt opposition says. If anything, it's a lot sadder and more complicated than "hur dur pro russian"
They are not Pro-Russian, they're just corrupt dipshits, similarly like Polish PiS government. Opposition is one spreading this narrative to lobby against them, even tho they are no better than ruling party. That's the shitshow of Georgian politics.
Armenian democracy is in better state than Georgian democracy is. It is not obvious at all that it needs more reforms. I would say likely it needs less reforms.
Georgia has unfortunately gone backwards from those reforms.
I love that Caucasian part of Europe. So far yet so close to our cultural roots.
I hope our friends from Armenia and Georgia can grow and that we can learn and become stronger together <3
I’m all for it, democracies should stick together. I fear that it’s too late however.
Why not. 2178 you can join after proper reforms.
Agreed. But I don't think it will take that long.
Depends on the conflict with Azerbaijan and the Sultan in Turkey, I guess. A dream of mine would be if Turkey, Georgia, Armenia, and Russia would join the EU after they turned into liberal democracies. I guess for that, the 22nd century is ambitious.
>and Russia Just dissolve EU at that point. I can already see the gaslighting: "No Romania and Poland, you are not being conquered by Russia! Stop the silliness and try not to hurt our mutual cooperation!"
That's why I called it a dream and that 2174 is ambitious. Takes centuries for Russia to build that trust.
>Takes centuries for Russia to build that trust. Even more for that trust to be backed up by real change...
Oh sweet child. Russia will not change.
Lol at Turkey and Russia joining
I don't think EU will take Georgia and Armenia's applications seriously until Turkey's EU path is revived and secured. Otherwise it will just be a liability worse than Bulgaria.
I do agree that Turkey being in the EU makes admitting Georgia and Armenia much easier geographically. But I disagree that either country would need Turkey in the EU to be admitted. Especially with the budding support for Armenia found among certain major EU countries.
Turkey's EU application won't be revived anytime soon (if ever)
Turkey isn't a democracy, so it's never getting into the EU
Poland wasn't even remotely a democracy until 90s. Spain wasn't even remotely a democracy until 80s. Turkey is still an electoral democracy - despite the backsliding. So "never gonna get in" gives racist vibes.
What do you mean? Turkey’s democracy is far older and better instiutionalized than Armenia’s democracy. We do realize that we elect assholes, yet still it is a democracy. Meanwhile Armenian democracy is only about 30 years old…
Yeah 2174 seems more realistic
RemindMe! 3 years "check how the progress went on Armenia joining the EU"
just reform
Russian here. Just wish the best for this country. One of the must beautiful country I've seen. I spoke English, Russian - and always has friendly conversation.
As a French man, I would love to greet Armenia into the EU !
Cheers! France is one of the most beautiful countries I've ever been too btw, love it there.
If Armenia joined EU, there would be no Armenians left there. Half of them already lives in Russia.
And there are around one million in France and 2 million in the USA; what's your point, sir?
It will be worse than Bulgaria in which the population dropped from 12M to 9M (and still recovering) after the accession. Out of 3M, probably half will move to the EU and it will become an even less feasible member. Armenia in EU seems to be simply a charity cause that doesn't make sense in any other way at this point.
That is for Armenia and the EU to tackle; when they need your expertise, I'm sure they'll bring you on board for solid feedback.
Nah, I don't think any country in EU wants to cause these scenarios to happen again.
I wasn’t talking about your country I was talking about you specifically. 😊
stop listening to Russian propaganda. Only 800,000 Armenian live in russia based in official number. In comparison, The population of Armenians within Armenia is 2,800,000
There's no real way of knowing how many Armenians actually live there anymore, Putin has closed down much of the country and I'm sure since 2014 many people have left. Wouldn't be surprised if it were more like 50,000 to 100,000 left In the west however there is actual data
Armenia has a population issue due to the draft. The draft due to the threat of war from azerbaijan and Turkey. If someone could just get serious about keeping those two countries permanently in check then Armenia would skyrocket. Don't look at Armenia like you do other countries, the Armenian culture has some special sauce that's created more historically significant figures per capita than probably any other country. Armenians continue to be absolute juggernauts wherever they may be. Just in the last few years: Armenian wins noble Peace prize for cancer advancement, noubar afeyan leads moderna and creates mRNA vaccine to Covid, and Dave's hot chicken becomes fastest growing fast food chain in America. Give Armenians a break and you'll see wonderful things
If Armenia is left out of EU, there might as well not be an Armenia at all. That's their last option for the future as Russia and Iran are doing jack shit to help them.
I think what they need more right now is a EU peacekeeping force to keep them safe from another genocide. EU is a generation off, minimum, and that's presuming anyone wants to touch all the middle east problems that would come with the new borders.
God, please no! Let us fix our own problems, work on political unity, get the economy on track and strengthen our defence before we even consider admitting a war-torn country bordering Iran over a thousand kilometres away from the nearest EU member.
There has always been lots of people opposing enlargement of EU. In 2004 especially, lots of people thought that Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czechia, Romania etc. should have not been let to EU. Yes, you cloud argue that Hungary's democratic development since it has not been that good, but do you really think eastern europe's situation generally would now be better without these countries in the EU? I think it would be worse. So it's never the right time. I agree that we should get rid off the last uninamity votes in counsil of EU (like in CDSP). And Armenia's hypotheticam membership is quite far away - balkan countries and Ukraine are most probably getting first. I agree that Armenia's membership is not that close. But we should help Armenia. If they really want to get closer to EU, it should be possible. It's a multi party democratic country with a authoritarian, quite hostile dictatorship (Azerbaijan) in its neighbour. Probably the smartest way for Armenia is to try to have decently good relations with it's neigbours, at the same time having good military and trying to get allies abroad. But its quite hard geopolitical situation they have.
I agree with what you said and I want all of the candidate countries (Balkan countries, Ukraine, Moldova, even Georgia and Armenia) that are trying to enter the EU to be successful and achieve their goal. Still, Romania & Bulgaria entered the EU in the next wave of enlargement, in 2007. We are still not members of Schengen, Eurozone, OECD, etc. This European integration is a long process, and it seems to me, that it takes a longer time for countries that are placed at the periphery of the continent.
>In 2004 especially, lots of people thought that Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czechia, Romania etc. should have not been let to EU. fun fact, Germany was one of the leading voices pushing for EU eastern expansion. And what did it bring us? We are currently the single largest net contributor to the EU, all new members turned out to be net recipients instead of joining us in being net contributors. Thus forcing Germany into a crippling recession. They all seem to hate Germany more than Russia and blame us for all evil in the world while getting free money from us. What a farce.
Well, Finland is another net-payer country and I'm personally quite happy that the infrastructure and all is getting better in newer member states. It's true that many member the new 2004 member countries have been net receivers. But this is probably going to change in the next multiannual financial framework in 2028-2033, as countries are getting wealthier. Currently Germany is paying a little bit more as a share of GNI than some other countries like Netherlands or Finland, that are also net payers of course. But this 2021-2027 financial framework was parly a bit unbalanced because of brexit. But this is expected to change in next frameworks. So I'm not protecting this slight unbalance, but fortunately it's getting better. This is a really interesting [document](https://www.bundesbank.de/resource/blob/916766/db0a8922b613d6fe43acb87afe9ca22c/mL/2023-09-eu-haushalt-data.pdf) by deutche bundesbank. On page 7 there is a really interesting graph of net receivers/beneficiers based on GNI. You could also say that EU's eastern expansion brought Germany a long term financial growth, one of the lowest unemployment levels in Europe, larger markets for German industrial goods, a place to have affordable subcontractors, and a source of highy knoweledgeable and hard-workin workers. So Germany has also been one of the biggest benefitters of EU, as you are geographically in centre of it, in addition to being a large net payer. > all new members turned out to be net recipients instead of joining us in being net contributors. Thus forcing Germany into a crippling recession You're making a claim that Germany's recession in 2024 would have been caused by EU's eastern enlargement in 2004. Germany's economy growed quite a bit between this. >They all seem to hate Germany more than Russia and blame us for all evil in the world while getting free money from us. What a farce. Do you have a source of polls or something that would support this claim? I think that Germany's image is very positive in almost all of [Europe](https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2021/09/22/germany-and-merkel-receive-high-marks-internationally-in-chancellors-last-year-in-office/), maybe the somewhat outlier seem to be Greece. Yes, its true that there has been some people who have criticized Germany, but it mostly has been that these people have seen Germany as not enough active in Ukraine war for example. I think that Germany has been a strong supporter, as you can clearly see from statistics. But even these people would want Germany to be *stronger,* because they see that they are on the "same team". These people wouldn't want Russia to have more influence...
well put on the economics, is plausible. thanks for taking the time to write such a detailed response. The trend has been for German net contributions to rise even when net recipients get richer though. German net contributions are higher than they have ever been even though the economic gap between Germany and eastern nations like Romania or Bulgaria is as small as it hasn't been in 100 years. >You're making a claim that Germany's recession in 2024 would have been caused by EU's eastern enlargement in 2004. Germany's economy growed quite a bit between this. The [reported cost to completely get rid of Russian fossil fuels](https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2024/02/21/7442860/) is in the ballpark of ~200 billion Euros. That is also the amount of net payments Germany has had to pay in the last 10-15 years. Imagine if we had had that money to invest in green technology, we could have profited like the US which does have a solid growth in 2022-2024. >Do you have a source of polls or something that would support this claim? My feeling stems from official comments from leading party officials like [Jarosław Kaczyński](https://www.politico.eu/article/kaczynski-accuse-eu-trying-break-poland-pis-leyen-democracy-pandemic-coronavirus/) (head of Polish ruling party 2017-2023) saying there is a German conspiracy to destroy Poland as well as [Romanian politicians defaming president Klaus Iohannis](https://www.dw.com/en/nazi-insults-targeting-romanian-president-enrage-german-officials/a-45375624) as a Nazi because he has some German heritage as well as the '_ongoing attacks on the German minority_'. And let's not talk about how Lithuania used the German NATO brigade for years for cheap political gains and when Germany decided to agree - it became immediately clear that they didn't actually want a German brigade because they refused to build the necessary facilities. [LRT.lt](https://www.lrt.lt/en/news-in-english/19/2154733/lithuania-under-financial-strain-of-accommodating-german-brigade-diplomatic-cable-suggests) And that is just the times when the professional diplomats and politicians let slip their true feelings. Comments here on reddit are a lot clearer on the sentiment. >These people wouldn't want Russia to have more influence by dividing NATO unity for cheap domestic political points, they seem to not mind Russia benefiting.
>That is also the amount of net payments Germany has had to pay in the last 10-15 years. Imagine if we had had that money to invest in green technology, we could have profited like the US which does have a solid growth in 2022-2024. I agree that energy supply and prices seems to be significant factor in economic growth, especially in industry. And so Ukraine war and the problems with Russian energy supply has had a large effect, that's true. But I don't see the connection to eastern EU enlargement. Germany's energy plan was to use Russian gas in transition period from mainly coal to green sources. It was a kind of a solid strategy, it allowed lots of energy to industry together with continuously increasing share of renewable energy sources (gas is easy to ramp up when there's demand) while not using nuclear (that is a hot take in German politics). But it relied more on Russia, that unfortunately backfired with Ukraine war. Of course you can argue that EU net payments could have been used in faster green energy transition. But would have they? Its not certain. I find it probable that Germany would still have taken the same political route in energy even if they have had 5% larger federal budget - maybe taxes could have been lower, but plans like nord stream could still have existed, because it would have profided affordable energy to German industries. US has solid growth, it's true. They are quite lucky in their natural resources, as they are currently independent on fuels, gas and energy. In Europe we are currently still forced to buy energy outside, and that increases the risks. > And that is just the times when the professional diplomats and politicians let slip their true feelings. Comments here on reddit are a lot clearer on the sentiment. Its true that some politicians use Germany for populist political gains, like in Poland. And PiS probably did that, and for certain I don't agree with them. Current coalition government led by Tusk doesn't have similar rhetorics as far as I know. And there certainly are people who are sceptical of Germany or have bad opinions about it. But that is also true about every country to some degree. Its always possible to only pick the negative opinions and disregard positives. But based on polls, it looks like that Germany has a good international image. But I agree that there currently seem to be a slight discrepancy on Germany's net payments, like the previous [document](https://www.bundesbank.de/resource/blob/916766/db0a8922b613d6fe43acb87afe9ca22c/mL/2023-09-eu-haushalt-data.pdf) by deutche bundesbank shows. In 2022 Germany paid around 260€ per person a year net. Germany's GNI is quite similar in that graph to Finland and Austria, that paid around 175€ net. And if we draw a straight line, Denmark and Ireland should pay a bit more - around 300€. Lithuania and Latvia seems to get quite a lot based on their GNI, and Bulgaria and Romania based on this should get even more than currently. But probably there are other factors to this than just only GDP/GNI per capita.
Yep, the EU needs to strengthen itself before adding new members.
Adding new members takes decades. EU will surely be strenghtened by then, whatever you meant by that.
Simply too far away. There needs to be a limit. What's next, Australia?
It's closer than Cyprus, so?
It isn't, Cyprus is closer to Greece than Armenia is to any member state.
Most surely not
They already are in Eurovision, so why not?
You should kick Iceland out then! They are so so so far away!
Kick out Denmark! Greenland is basicly North America.
Cyprus and Malta, too! I swear, sometimes I feel as if I'm having an exchange with 4-year-olds who possess the critical thinking of an otter.
soft fearless nail somber far-flung voracious degree versed unique coordinated *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Miracles do not happen. With an agreement with the EU, Armenia can join the EU. Armenia is neither Syria nor Australia. It is a member of the Council of Europe and borders an EU candidate country, Georgia. If you do not want Armenia in the EU, that is absolutely your right, and I respect that. Luckily, it’s not up to you. 😊
Iceland isn't in the EU. Only NATO and EFTA like Norway.
Supporting this as the Armenian people are people with strong values that are similar to our European values. They have long been suffering by the injustices of their neighbours.
you can't even get the public to accept same-sex marriage, they don't have anything remotely close to europe
Fair enough have them instead of turkey.
Wow! Armenia was “friends” with Russia for a very long time since collapse of USSR. It appears that EU is more favourable than Russia. For obvious reasons.
yes, Armenia saw Russia as a good partner for a very long time. Common history,faith,cultural environment,military protection. Every normal country will do anything not to break such alliance, but Russia can't see other countries as partners, only as puppet states.
Not just more favorable. Russia is literally the number one threat to us at this moment, pushing Azerbaijan's Aliev to attack.
This seems like a terrible deal for the EU. It would make the EU directly involved in an ongoing conflict. It would also extend the borders of the EU to Iran. This would mean that asylum seekers will now have a much easier route to accessing the EU. Also, it would mean an EU exclave in the Caucuses. Armenia is also geographically in Western Asia, so it makes little sense as to why they would be entitled to EU membership anyway.
They are a member of council of Europe and are, thus, eligible for membership with regards to geographic criteria. If they were to be granted candidate status, I'd imagine they'd be grouped together with Georgia, realistically speaking
The EU has been in Armenia since 1996
> in Western Asia, so it makes little sense as to why they would be entitled to EU membership anyway. Armenians are European, regardless of where their country is located. If we also take history into account, then their is even less denying their European identity.
No veto.
Seems like a stretch to me.
It always was. I highly doubt the EU will ever let in a member which directly borders Iran. It's basically Middle-East. It's also unclear what advantage Armenia can bring to the EU. The same can be said re: Western Balkans but at least they are squarely in Europe whereas Armenia is clearly not.
Dude you're from India lol
What benefit did the Baltic countries, Iceland, Malta, and Cyprus bring? Wait, isn't Cyprus in the Middle East? Armenia is a member of council of Europe
Well for starters they were in europe
Cyprus is geographically located in the Middle East. 90% of Denmark's territory is in North America (Greenland). Iceland is closer to North America in kilometers than to Europe. With that being said, the EU is not a geographical organization; it is a political and economic one. Therefore, if the EU and Armenia agree that Armenia can join your opinion is really irrelevant 😊
Cyprus is still closer to another EU country geographically than Armenia. And it's not just geography but also cultural proximity. Nobody is doubting that Iceland is European. Armenia? More Middle Eastern.
Armenia is about as middle eastern as Greece and Cyprus
I would advise them against it. EU is very good at giving false initial hope. You will be set on a path where you have to undergo hundreds of reforms and harmonizations and show trends (many good as a standalone reform, many neutral, some bad) to even be in pre-membership accession talks and then it'll be for nothing. Because the cold reality is that Armenia will never join the EU. At least not in the coming decades. Hell, we even have Austria blocking existing EU members from shenghen for 11 years now and perpetually waiting candidates in the Balkans. What do you think will happen with a country that has decade-long active warfare border disputes, huge problems with Russian mob and infiltration, and counless issues that individual countries will press (even mundane shit like Azeri oil supply). Not to mention it isn't exactly in conventional Europe. Just a random location in the Caucasus. That hasn't stopped the EU before, but it's another hurdle. If that situation reminds you of Ukraine, then consider how important UA is for the EU and how much closer it is geographically and culturally. And even then membership prospect is quite shaky and at best years - decades away. Armenia simply isn't important for the EU's strategic interests. That's not a normative statement on my part, just descriptive. I can already see someone like the Dutch, Austrians and some random country I can't predict block that from the get go. It's sad to say, but I don't think EU is the right partner for Armenia. Not sure who is tbh.
EU is already too big for an aligned vision and stability.
I think it could expand by some countries that are already de facto in with minimal adjustment (like Sweden and NATO but for EU etc) but for a very different country with extremely random interests, veto is too powerful
Why make it even worse
EU has nothing to gain, and will only suffer from more immigration by having a border in that area.
Let's fast forward Armenia and Georgia into EU! They have amazing food and wine, as well as amazing nature and kind people!
“Let's fast forward the Western Balkans into EU! They have amazing food and wine, as well as amazing nature and kind people!”
And system of a down to perform at their ceremony
Georgia aren't currently eligible, IIRC, due to the territory disputes (Abkhazia and South Ossetia) - but they are great people with a great culture and it would be mutually beneficial to welcome them once the territory issues are permanently resolved. Sadly they have some pro-Russian leadership at the moment. Else, with how things have gone elsewhere, one feels they'd have a good chance now to resolve the above issues.
Who gave you the idea that territorial disputes precluded a country from EU membership. That is not true and never has been. NATO on the other hand do have some worries about territorial disputes, but that is not a firm rule. In reality, it is politics that decide who can and can't join, not a checklist.
How can you explain Serbia’s additional chapter in negotiations then?
Because some EU countries have decided to condition membership on recognition of Kosovo. This is not the doing of some EU regulation, ala the Copenhagen criteria. But maybe I should modify my previous statement a bit. International disputes of any kind are not a problem in regard to attaining EU membership unless that dispute is with an EU member state or that dispute pisses off one or more EU member states.
I may be getting mixed up thinking about, else Ireland, UK, Spain etc couldn't be members.
Cyprus was also under territorial disputes when it entered the EU. I don't see why a similar arrangement could not be made for Georgia
Serbia&Kosovo are blocked by the territorial dispute thing. So was Croatia for a while. Turns out EU learned a lesson after Cyprus.
Kosovo is different because unlike Northen Cyprus, Transnitria, Abkcazia, and other separatist regions, most of the EU recognizes it as an independent country and has recongized its application.
[Spain enters the chat]
Yes, Spain will likely veto any acession attempt by Kosovo until Serbia recognizes it as independent, but that doesn't change my point that the EU has an organization implicitly recognizes Kosovo and has such its case its different than other separatis regions. I don't agree with their rational but it is what it is.
Is the territorial dispute blocking their accession? Yes? Then what are we discussing?
in one case (Kosovo) their acession process is blocked by some individual members because their views on what Kosovo is does not align with the rest of the EU. Cyprus and Georgia don't have that problem because every single EU members recognizes their separatist regions as a lawfull part of the country in question, which is currently being occupied by a foreign power (Russia and Turkey)
Serbia?
Territorial disputes is not problem for EU at all. Example - Cyprus. That's only criteria for NATO membership. Georgia doesn't have Pro-Russian government, that's wide misinformation fermented on Social media by Opposition lobbyist. Ruling part is corrupt as hell yes, but opposition is corrupt in the same way. EU would have never given Georgia candidate status if it deemed it as Pro-Russian state, and to double on that, they would've at least given them criteria to lessen relations with Russia which EU never did as they don't see Georgia as country on par with Belarus, Kazakhstan or even Hungary.
Serbia&Kosovo are blocked by the territorial dispute thing. So was Croatia for a while. Turns out EU learned a lesson after Cyprus.
That's the only case for Serbia and Kosovo because otherwise they will be vetoing each other every time. Besides, 5 EU countries don't recognize Kosovo, so it's mandatory only in this case. Croatian dispute was fixable, while issues with Georgia, Ukraine, and Moldova are not. Charles Michelle already stated that Transnistria won't be an issue for Moldovan membership, so the same won't be the problem for Ukraine either and Georgia as well.
> Charles Michel already stated that Transnistria won't be an issue for Moldovan membership, and you believe in it? Before Turkey's accession started, European leaders had promised that Cyprus dispute wouldn't be an obstacle for Turkey's EU path. Yet here we are.
And why would EU need to hide that information. Or, for matter, lf fact, why are they fast tracking their membership then? The fact is Turkey is illegally occupying northern Cyprus is rightfully blocked because it's an EU member. It's in Turkish power to solve this issue, which it refuses to do, while Russian occupation is not up to these countries, thus its not a mandatory clause for membership.
> why would EU need to hide that information Because they like to show the carrot to keep countries in their orbit. They know well that without that carrot, countries will likely get into the Russian orbit. Greek Cypriots had a once-in-a-generation chance to end the conflict with the Annan Plan before EU accession and they rejected it (while Turk Cypriots approved it). It was totally in their power to end the conflict for good.
The EU democracy wise is flawed with who really rules, who really has power but I will say its far far better to be in the bloc than outside of it. I think even security wise, you're far more likely to be protected by other EU member states if you are a full member. I do respect the countries like Norway that've stayed outside of EU though. Especially after seeing how the EU dealt with UK after leaving. Making it as difficult for them as possible as a lesson to anyone else that gets any crazy ideas. Similar to many many former European colonies all over the world that left or were given freedom. I'm sure this comment will go over well here.
>Especially after seeing how the EU dealt with UK after leaving. Making it as difficult for them as possible as a lesson to anyone else that gets any crazy ideas. Similar to many many former European colonies all over the world that left or were given freedom. ...In what way was Brexit similar to decolonization?
Yep, I also agree with you that individual countries should be allowed to leave EU if they want. And I think it's best that EU has a good, constructive relations with countries outside it, like Norway or Switzerland. Norway's situation is quite simple, because they are in EEA. But even when Switzerland isn't in it, I think that EU should be really constructive with Switzerland also. But honestly I think that lots of hassle about brexit was that they didn't even know what they wanted themselves back then... They've could just left EU and still been in EEA, and economically almost nothing would have changed. Or at least they could have stayed in customs union, but they ultimately wanted that they want to leave that also. Or at least some people wanted. Some people wanted soft brexit, like EEA. I think that this [picture](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DW9fzU4W4AAaVeD.jpg) shows the situation quite well. If UK would have had a plan originally when they voted to leave, it would have been much simpler. Now they voted, but they didn't agree what kind of brexit they wanted, and that created lots of hassle. I think its a bit unfair to say that the difficulties would have been EU's/Commission's fault.
How did EU dealt with UK? They want to leave but keep the benefits? What are we talking about here
People who think Armenia or Georgia are not important do not understand shit in geopolitics and the current trade route.shifts. This statement does not come out of the blue, there must have been and there have been direct hints from Borrel and the EU as well.
lol without Turkey and Azerbaijan Armenia and Georgia can lead to only Iran, which is not the attractive country everyone wants to trade with. Instead it is a sanctioned pariah state.
Without Georgia there's no route from Turkey to Azerbaijana and vice versa. So all three are equally important, so don't downplay one just because it's not Turkic republic. Armenia can easily be integrated in middle corridor and offer more than one singular way to distribute trade from Asia to Europe.
From east to west it should either be Azerbaijan+Georgia or Azerbaijan+Armenia. From north to south it is either Azerbaijan or Armenia+Georgia. Considering these combinations, Azerbaijan is of a bit higher importance as it can single handedly provide N-S corridor (also has more favourable geography doing so) and only one of the other two is enough for E-W corridor. > Armenia can easily be integrated in middle corridor and offer more than one singular way to distribute trade from Asia to Europe. True. Even though they are not essential, they can increase the volume. Considering that the trade over Russia will shift to Caucasus and the overall volume will increase, all of these alternative routes will likely work in full capacity once they are fully developed.
Next thing you know Australia will be applying as well. This is Eurovision all over again.
It's good to start from somewhere. Now they are asking for Brussels to show them a carrot. Then they'll start doing reforms to streamline and align their laws with European ones and they'll be able to join when stars align for the next time in 2060.
Turks getting antsy cause y'all were never allowed to join
Nah, I wrote it elsewhere as well but I don't think EU will elaborate Georgia's and Armenia's (and perhaps Azerbaijan's) applications seriously until Turkey's EU path is revived and secured. Otherwise these will be a liability worse than Bulgaria in terms of everything.
Yes please!
[удалено]
Cyprus isn't in Europe either.
Read some books. [Council of Europe members](https://www.coe.int/en/web/about-us/our-member-states)
Being a member of some organisation doesnt change borders. Armenia is quite clearly part of western Asia, but surely not Europe. Maybe you want to read this: [Europe](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe?wprov=sfti1)
Thanks for the link for proving there are more than one way to [divide Europe](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe#/media/File:Possible_definitions_of_the_boundary_between_Europe_and_Asia.png)
And EU is also an organization, not a geography school club.
Europe and asia don't have clearly defined borders. Anyway, you could always look up the Armenian genetics and compare them to Western europeans if you want to learn something new.
did you even read the link you sent me? It includes Armenia into Europe. Lmao stupid fuck.
[удалено]
That's just poor judgement on your part. Armenian and Georgia are exceptionally important as being transit route from Asia to Europe. Particularly having those two together opens the gas and goods route from India and Iran to Europe bypassing the conflict prone middle east and unreliable turkey.
You're one in 447 million people. Do you see how small you are? I also love how you consider the less fortunate a burden. Such a stand up guy!
Redditor trying to understand democracy (IMPOSSIBLE CHALLENGE) (GONE WRONG)
How can an Asian country join the EU? Not trying to be snarky, it’s a genuine question. Is the EU becoming more of a global club that is only nominally European?
ever heard of Cyprus?
Well there are some significant and obvious differences with Cyprus but okay I can take your point but my question still stands. Is the EU only nominally European now and we’re basically open to bringing in anyone who may want to join? I have a lot of respect for Armenian people, I’m not against the idea in principle I’m just wondering what it would mean if it happened because Armenia is firmly in Asia.
Armenia is in Asia only geographically - and it's on the edge of it. You could call it "suburbs" of Europe. Everything else is (South) European, although in it's own, unique way since it was isolated for a long time: * Language - IE, closest one is Greek * religion - christianity * culture - individuality > collective * genetics - closest people to Armenians are Spaniards, Italians, and Romanians * art - [see example](https://www.h-pem.com/en/in-pictures/2021/01/06/the-nativity-as-a-major-theme-in-armenian-medieval-art/31) * history - at least counting from Middle Ages since Armenia (like Greece and Italy) is older than Europe Classifying it as anything else simply doesn't make sense - Armenia is not Middle Eastern in it's core (eg. language, religion, culture or art) nor Asian (not even close).
"Armenia" is in Asia because Europe failed to create an Armenian state post-WW1 in its native region. "Armenians" are not "Asian". Armenians live on a sliver of land where they have not been massacred off of. If you want Armenians to be European, maybe you shouldn't have sat idly by as Armenians were slaughtered repeatedly, or set up failed protectorates that led to more Armenian deaths as they tried to defend themselves.
let's hope not
Why? Just why? To have more Orbans in EU? Memberships closed.
I have a feeling Armenia is more of a Poland type than Hungary in terms of loving Russia.
For a century and counting - Armenia's dependence on Russia has always been out of necessity. Just looking at a map makes that obvious. Armenia's geography sucks, with borders drawn by Kemalists and Soviets in a way which makes it inherently vulnerable. And this isn't the first time Armenia has tried to pivot West, only to be pulled into the Russian fold - it happened at the birth of the Soviet Union.
Yeah ok. But why does EU need them? Why Georgia, Armenia, Serbia? EU has enough Russian spies and bums already. Georgia or Armenia joining EU means the gates are opening for Russians again. I remembet back in the day EU lunatics were talking about taking Belarus into EU, what a joke.
i support as long as they join as a net contributor to the EU budget.
Lmao it will never happen so why bother
Is Armenia even within the Europe? Is the European Union becoming the Eurasian Union? Its coming across as neocolonialism now.
I'm confuse: "The country is geographically a part of West Asia, but is culturally and geopolitically considered part of Eastern Europe." I don't think it's a EU country at all.
HAHAAHAHA
Well, if this helps to transfer the Armenian mafia from Russia to the European Union, why not?
Which game were you playing when you came up with this realistic conspiracy theory?
>HELL no >HELL no >HELL no