Labor Migration of Armenians into Russia: Problems and Prospects
Ashot Aleksanyan - Doctor of Politics, Expert of the Migration Competence Center, Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Faculty of International Relations, Yerevan State University. Address: 1 Alex Mannogian St., 0025, Yerevan, Armenia. E-mail: ashalex@ysu.amThis article provides a comparative analysis of the main factors of Armenian labor migration and the Indices of social development in Armenia (1990-2012). The article discusses the general trends of labor migration from Armenia. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia has become not only the «initial center» of labor migration, but a transit zone for labor migrants from Armenia. Since the establishment of the CIS, the mechanisms of the regulation of labor migration issues between Armenia and Russia have been formed. The integration of Armenian labor legislation began with the establishment of the Eurasian Customs Union (ECU), the Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC) and the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU). Armenia, after signing several agreements, also had the opportunity to actively participate in the development of a common labor market in the Eurasian space. In this context, the article discusses some statistics on labor migration.
The Prospects of the EU–Armenia Partnership within the ENP Review: Is a Eurasian Economic Union-EU balance feasible?
Armenia’s puzzling decision to join the Russian led Eurasian Economic Union (EEU), seems to devastatingly obstruct its long-desired profound rapprochement with the European Union. According to widely held views the path to the Eurasian Economic Union was predetermined for Armenia, given Russia’s increasing assertivenss towards the EU in the wake of Association Agreements profound advancement (Popescu, 2013; Terzyan, 2016). Notwithstanding recent ups and downs, the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) review and the European Council’s decision on granting mandate to the European Commission and the High Representative to open negotiations on a new, legally binding and overarching agreement with Armenia in late 2015, seems to breathe new life into EUArmenia scaled down partnership. This paper scrutinizes the prospects of the EU-Armenia further partnership in the face of Armenia’s membership in the EEU and ensuing dire constraints. It delves into the possibilities offered by the ENP review in terms of boosting EU – Armenia partnership. The study relies on a discourse analysis of the relevant speeches, statements of Armenia’s foreign policy-makers, as well as appropriate official documents. In turn, interviews with relevant officials from the European Commission are used to examine the prospects of the EU-Armenia partnership from the ‘norm–sender’ EU’s perspective. The paper concludes that a major breakthrough in bilateral ‘edited’ partnership cannot
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982, A Commentary
Volume VI is the sixth substantive volume to be published in the series. It deals with the work of the First Committee at the Third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea, namely the international seabed area. The volume thus embraces the deep seabed mining regime set out in Part XI of the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea together with the 1994 Agreement on its implementation. Completion of this commentary was delayed first by the consultations and negotiations that commenced in 1990 and led to the 1994 Agreement and the entry into force of the Convention. It was further delayed until the Assembly of the International Seabed Authority approved the detailed mining regulations in 2000. Additional supplementary material can be found at UNCLOS 1982 Commentary: Supplementary Documents.