With the demise of the CFE Treaty and lack of replacement there is a political need for a redefinition of Euro-Atlantic security that provides for mutual self-interest as opposed to a "Cold War" confrontational view of security. This "Cold War" mentality still influences the thinking of many states in the Euro-Atlantic area (for understandable reasons). Therefore the Draft should be welcomed as a positive move and thoroughly analysed and discussed in the public domain. The Draft may well form a basis for the development of a workable and acceptable Treaty. Let us treat it as a consultative document in an adult manner...

..Analyzing nature of EP purposes, the majority of the Russian experts consider that, those of them, which have been declared as official, are mainly carrying the declarative character. Thus, in documents on the EP there is a hint on possibility of joining of these countries to the EU in the long-term future (under condition of successful performance of the EP program). However, in practice Brussels is not going to keep this promise. By the way, European politicians and experts expressly or by implication admit this fact. So, Ruprecht Polents, chairman of Foreign Affairs Committee of Bundestag of Germany has directly declared that EP is not a replacement of membership of the specified countries in the EU or an alternative way to it. "Purpose "of Eastern Partnership "- to bring eastern neighbors close as it is possible to the European Union. We are not talking about the prospect of membership or about "substitution" of such prospect", - Polents has declared." After the big expansion of the EU in 2004, EU will not cope with joining of new members. Instead, we offer such countries, as Ukraine, programs, which in the future can facilitate discussion of a question on the EU membership. The question on prospect of membership can become topical in 5 - 10 years ", - he has also stated.

The European Union - represents the important priority of foreign policy of Russia's strategy, and the relations between Moscow and Brussels are one of the most substantial components of the all-European system of safety. The recent initiative of the EU and of some of the Post-Soviet states on creation of the "Eastern Partnership" (EP) has raised many questions concerning its purposes, content and consequences in Moscow as for the Russia itself, as well as for its relations with the EU and the CIS countries.

The current state of arms control is precarious if not already moribund. Current practice is for everyone concerned to blame others, especially for the demise of the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty. The old cold war mentality of block against block accusation and counter-accusation still dominates thinking, to the detriment of regional and global security. Many points of contention existing between states need to be resolved and some have behaved worse than others, but no single member state is responsible for the demise of the CFE Treaty. Arms control is being killed off by negligence, political short-sightedness or maybe even by deliberate and coordinated action... Unfortunately, because of its nature (NATO versus Warsaw Pact) it was based on a geopolitical state of affairs that had already ceased to exist before it came into force. It was right and proper to continue with implementation until the reduction phase had been completed and the benefits were tangible. The fundamental error made at the very beginning was to fail to take the new geopolitical reality into account and start working towards a completely new treaty, using all the experience gained, to meet the challenge. Instead a fudge was concocted - the Adapted CFE - that completely failed to address the challenge...

..against the backgournd of the new status-quo formation in the Big Caucasus - Moscow and Yerevan have to be more realistic in evaluation of motivation towards each other in order not to feel deep disappointment by the end. For example, they have to accept that Moscow shall never recognize independence of Karabakh as well as Armenia shall not make such decision in regards of the two Georgian separated regions. Kremlin shall not refuse cooperation with Baku, shall not make final choice between Azerbaijan and Armenia, but Yerevan also shall not refuse profitable relations with Western countries and Georgia (that makes 2/3 of foreign trade of Armenia), so, convergence of Yerevan and Tbilisi is based only on the pragmatic national interests... Georgia and Iran are "the two windows into the World" in conditions of the ground blockade from Turkey and Azerbaijan, since there is no ground border between the Russian Federation and Armenia...

part 1)Nowadays Russia and Iran are deemed to be the main allies of Armenia. In fact, this is an indubitable reality and in recent years there have been a lot of striking examples, however, in a certain, but not numerous circles, this reality is found not to be that undoubted that is based upon the historical background, where there were a lot of such information which contradicts to generally recognized myth of Russian and Armenian steadfast friendship.
Western-oriented Armenian experts, as a rule, blame Russia in this obscure situation and regard that metamorphosis of friendly feelings between the Armenian and Russian people depend on many circumstances, and they believe that the mainstream one is a geopolitical component...