Armenia

In a nutshell, the current statistical situation on return migration to the Republic of Armenia (RA) can be described as a blank sheet of paper with only weak marginal spots on it, i.e. there are no precise and systematic data on the scope of return migration to Armenia.1 Like many other migration countries, Armenia does not record returnees. Neither the National Statistical Office, nor the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or the Migration Agency for Armenia's Ministry of Territorial Administration assesses return flows and stocks to Armenia. The statistical background of return migration to Armenia is weak and information about preand post-return conditions, return motivations or patterns of reintegration is non-existent (Bachmann et al. 2004, Johansson 2008).

Armenia first came to know the painful phenomenon of the refugee and IDP population in the course of its recent history, in 1998. It was at the end of this year that people escaping from the Armenian pogroms in the Azeri city of Sumgant arrived in Armenia. Given the deepening interethnic conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorno Karabakh, the refugee problem further intensified, resulting in an inflow that became massive in scope. From 1988-1991, Armenia received a total of more than 360 thousand refugees from Azerbaijan, not only of Armenian nationality but also of minority nationalities who had been living in the territory of Azerbaijan. At the same time, because of the sharp increase in interethnic distrust and tension from 1989-1991, approximately 170 thousand ethnic Azeris who had been living in Armenia were forced to flee the country.

Emigration is not separately emphasized in the “Concept for the Policy of State Regulation of Migration in the Republic of Armenia” (2010) as a priority direction. Issues related to emigration are captured in various emigration areas, such as labor emigration, illegal emigration from Armenia and etc. The emigration flows originating from Armenia are mainly composed of labor emigration flows therefore in this Note we have analyzed the policy pursued by the state on labor emigration. An immigration policy also is not set up in the Concept Paper as a separate issue, which is probably conditioned by the low immigration flows towards Armenia. Nowadays Armenian Government is doing great efforts on keeping ties with Diaspora. Constitutional amendments, approved by the referendum in 2005, abolished the norm to ban dual citizenship. In 2008 the Ministry of Diaspora was established. In 2009 the Concept Paper on Development of Armenia and Diaspora Co-operation was approved by the Armenian Government and the Draft of the Concept Paper on Organization of Repatriation Process has already been developed.

There is, for the last five years, virtually no reliable statistical and research data available in Armenia on emigrants returning to Armenia: much as in the case of other migration processes.The numbers and structure of returning migrants,the reasons and the nature of their return, and information about how well they reintegrate in Armenia are all obscure.

Since its independence in 1991, the Republic of Armenia has faced difficult challenges in its policies and legal framework for labour migration. In the last two decades many Armenians have left for overseas employment given the socio-economic situation at home. At the same time, Armenia has inspired a certain interest in foreigners who, themselves, have come to work in Armenia. Given these in- and outflows Armenia has experienced a raft of problems with legal regulations. In spite of the topicality of these problems, they have not yet been comprehensively studied. Problems have, to some extent, been touched upon by a number of authors. But the research carried out to date is mainly socio-economic or deals with the policy aspects of labour migration. Legal regulations for internal and external migrations is conditioned by the fact that, as in other areas, a relevant normative basis is a necessary condition for implementing state policy. In the absence thereof, it is impossible to talk about state policy in a given area. This study addresses the legal aspects of labour migration governance in the Republic of Armenia. It analyses the legal framework and institutional mechanisms for internal and external labour migration and examines legal problems related to regulating the in- and outflow of migrant workers. Certain conclusions and recommendations have been made, on the basis of research. These conclusions and recommendations can be used to improve the legal framework with a view to regulating labour migration in Armenia. In addition, they can also serve as a basis for further exploration in the field.

Seasonal labour migration has been present in Armenia since the 1960s and the times of the Soviet Union. During those years 50,000 people from densely populated rural areas annually left their country, above all going to Russia, in order to work in construction: this phenomenon was known as “khopanchiner” (labour migrants) and its Russian synonym “shabashniki”. As a rule, departure from Armenia starts in early spring, reaching its height in March and April, and the return starts in the autumn in the second half of October. Annually, 60,000-80,000 people leave Armenia for seasonal work due to low salaries, lack of work and poor prospects. The main destination countries are the Russian Federation, Ukraine and Belarus due to the visa free regime, lack of language obstacles and then comes the US and other European countries. Though there is no legal formulation for circular migration in Armenian legislation, circular migration is indirectly referred to in separate legal acts and a number of international agreements/treaties signed by Armenia. They contribute or can contribute to the establishment of circular migration. They can stimulate it, as well as coordinate, to a certain extent, circular migration. Legal aspects of circular migration should be observed from two angles: Circular migration in case of foreigners’ or stateless persons’ entry and residence in Armenia. Circular migration when Armenian citizens leaving the RA.

The integration of migrants is a complex and lengthy process, and it depends on a number of factors: socio-economic, psychological, legal and political. Research covering this issue, conducted in Armenia, mainly relate to the local integration of the refugees forcibly displaced from Azerbaijan in 1988-1992 and especially to socio-economic aspects of that process . This is due to the fact that since independence refugees were the most important numerically, and their socio-economic issues were acute. Research has covered a wide range of integration issues with special emphasis on legal acts ensuring the implementation of this process/procedure. In particular, the issues related to the integration of foreign nationals (who are ethnically Armenian) arriving in Armenia from the Diaspora, as well as new refugees, who have found asylum in Armenia since 2000, not to mention the refugees who arrived 1988-1992, were examined. The RA citizens returning from foreign states to Armenia have been considered as a separate migration flow and the issues related to their reintegration are also touched upon. Relevant legal acts have been analyzed in the light of challenges faced in their implementation. Some institutional decisions, case-law, findings of the International organizations, NGOs, etc. have been included in the paper.

This report sets out to describe the current statistical and institutional situation of return migration to and reintegration in Armenia. The author elaborates this situation from the Armenian perspective by -- explaining available statistical data on return migration, -- illustrating the priorities of the Armenian government and of international and national nongovernmental organizations and -- examining the extent to which the return issue is taken into consideration in the framework of their actions. In Armenia, there is no uniform and homogeneous definition of the term “return migrant”. Depending on the source, the term is used differently. Therefore, in this report the term “return migrant” is defined according to the respective sources. In most Armenian policy papers and legal acts “return migrants” are not defined.1 The first part of the report proposes a statistical overview of return migration to Armenia. The second part describes the main initiatives and programmes that have been implemented so far on the reintegration of return migrants.

Over recent years a lot of work has been done in Armenia by all official organizations and agencies that deal, to a lesser or greater extent, with human trafficking, as well as by non-governmental and international organizations. There are numerous programs, mostly joint ones, involving both official agencies, as well as non-governmental and international organizations, with the purpose of: training personnel of organizations and agencies; informing the population and especially the high-risk groups; offering necessary consultations and information, medical, psychological, legal and financial assistance to human trafficking victims; and contributing to their reintegration. Detailed and complete lists of these programs indicating the number of persons involved etc. can be found in official documents of the Armenian Government and its Council on Human Exploitation (trafficking).

With the aim of preventing trafficking, various programs are being implemented by both state and international organizations. The most important programs should be highlighted:

The projects are funded by the EU Return fund or by the individual EU countries. Projects involve limited categories of returnees, i.e. “voluntary”, “compulsory” and “forced” (these are mostly rejected asylum seekers and irregular migrants). The bulk of beneficiaries comprise returnees from the same countries. Different methods are used for organizing the activities of the appropriate entities (for example, the selection of a professional entity for all project components, and a legal contract with those entities). The working tools of the projects (e.g. needs assessment, statistical databases, etc.) for ensuring the effectiveness of the process and conducting analyses on different parameters also vary. ? Different types of support provided by reintegration projects (e.g. not all the projects have such components as educating children, social and psychological support and consultancy) Different levels of financing might not be sufficient for starting cost-effective businesses. Besides, returnees do not have their own funds to invest into businesses. In order to ensure the sustainable reintegration of returning migrants in Armenia, coordinated assistance should be provided to them. Otherwise, this deficiency can contribute to a situation where these people migrate from Armenia again.

Migration of the population is the most pressing issue in Armenia. It is a widely discussed, and it is an extremely sensitive topic for the Armenian society. Migration and especially emigration-related issues are always in the focus of Armenian mass media. On average, dozens of articles on migration issues are published each month, some of them are solely informative, others are both informative and analytical. This paper reviews the publications on migration issues that have appeared in electronic media during July 2011- May 2013. This period is distinguished by two most important political processes in Armenia: elections to the RA National Assembly in May 2012, and presidential elections in February 2013. Below is the analysis of both pro-governmental and opposition media1 The purpose of the study was to analyze the most important migration themes covered by the media during the period mentioned. The information obtaining methodology included the review of the publications dealing with emigration, repatriation and other migration issues. The underlying methodology for publications review was the analysis of headlines and contents, as well as the visual design of the publications, etc.Migration of the population is the most pressing issue in Armenia. It is a widely discussed, and it is an extremely sensitive topic for the Armenian society. Migration and especially emigration-related issues are always in the focus of Armenian mass media. On average, dozens of articles on migration issues are published each month, some of them are solely informative, others are both informative and analytical. This paper reviews the publications on migration issues that have appeared in electronic media during July 2011- May 2013. This period is distinguished by two most important political processes in Armenia: elections to the RA National Assembly in May 2012, and presidential elections in February 2013. Below is the analysis of both pro-governmental and opposition media1 The purpose of the study was to analyze the most important migration themes covered by the media during the period mentioned. The information obtaining methodology included the review of the publications dealing with emigration, repatriation and other migration issues. The underlying methodology for publications review was the analysis of headlines and contents, as well as the visual design of the publications, etc.Migration of the population is the most pressing issue in Armenia. It is a widely discussed, and it is an extremely sensitive topic for the Armenian society. Migration and especially emigration-related issues are always in the focus of Armenian mass media. On average, dozens of articles on migration issues are published each month, some of them are solely informative, others are both informative and analytical. This paper reviews the publications on migration issues that have appeared in electronic media during July 2011- May 2013. This period is distinguished by two most important political processes in Armenia: elections to the RA National Assembly in May 2012, and presidential elections in February 2013. Below is the analysis of both pro-governmental and opposition media1 The purpose of the study was to analyze the most important migration themes covered by the media during the period mentioned. The information obtaining methodology included the review of the publications dealing with emigration, repatriation and other migration issues. The underlying methodology for publications review was the analysis of headlines and contents, as well as the visual design of the publications, etc.Migration of the population is the most pressing issue in Armenia. It is a widely discussed, and it is an extremely sensitive topic for the Armenian society.

The asylum system in Armenia was created based on international human rights laws. There are two basic documents regulating this field: the Law on Political Asylum and the Law on Refugees and Asylum.

Although migration legislation in Armenia has been developed based on existing international human rights standards, there is still a need for consolidation and transparency in order to remove contradictions and inconsistencies in the laws and other legal acts.

This paper looks at the economic impact of remittances for Armenia and also for CIS countries more generally. For Armenia regression analysis shows that, over the short run, 10 percent remittance growth positively affects GDP growth by 0.3 percentage points through its multiplying effect on domestic demand. It is also an undeniable fact that remittances have a poverty-reducing effect and that 10 percentage point growth in remittances should lead to a 1.7 percentage point decrease in the poverty rate. However, a key question is whether remittances also serve to promote long-run economic growth. Empirical results show that a 10 percentage point increase in remittances negatively influences GDP growth by 0.2 percentage points over the long run. This negative effect can create moral hazard in recipient households and, therefore, a contraction in labor supply. Another factor is that remittances do not sufficiently promote productive investments. So remittances have an important influence in terms of aggregate supply meaning the development of the construction and service sectors. Finally, remittances can lead to Dutch disease, as they increase the effective exchange rate and, therefore, non-tradable sector of economy are changed. Countries like Armenia that receive significant remittances need to develop appropriate policies to deal with possible negative consequences. Remittances tend to be relatively stable over long periods so the appropriate policy response should be to learn to live with them.

The impact of labour migration on the demographic situation of Armenia” is an interesting research report describing issues relating to the demographics of labor migration in Armenia in the last 40 years. The paper contains worthwhile discussions, rich statistical material and interesting conclusions. However, there are parts of the paper which deserve, in our opinion, to be contested. Also, several of the author’s judgments are not sufficiently objective and the paper neglected some important aspects, which we would like to bring up below. The methodology used by the author did not address the actual impact assessment of migration on the demographic situation and on demographic processes. The author described the demographic situation through assumptions. Therefore, we ack a realistic impact analysis in the paper. Another weak side of the paper is the fact that the author assesses the impact of labor migration on demographic processes (marriages, births, deaths…) from a quantitative perspective, neglecting qualitative effects. In the following, we comment on each section of the aforementioned paper.

The present paper explores the phenomenon of return migration and reintegration issues for Armenian citizens returning to their country of origin. It also discusses some aspects (institutional, economic and social), as well as factors (migration projects, human, financial and cultural capital) in the reintegration of returnees in Armenia. Various patterns of reintegration, as well as the institutional framework and Armenia’s experience in dealing with returnees are identified and analyzed. The research focuses on the following issues: Why do migrants return to their country of origin? What is the profile (socio-demographic traits) of return migrants? What challenges do they (and their families) face while successfully reintegrating after their return? What is government policy for their reintegration into society? How effective is government policy and what gaps are there?

Migration, and emigration in particular, is one of the most debated topics in Armenia. Since Armenia became independent after the collapse of the USSR, a multi-party system has been established. During these years the legislative developments in the migration sphere and adopted laws were not the initiatives of the political parties represented in the National Assembly but the legislative initiatives of the Government. The legal developments and rhetoric on the migration issues of political parties in the National Assembly of the fourth convocation (2007-2012) and the pre-electoral campaigns/programs/rhetoric of the political parties of the National Assembly of the fifth convocation (2012-2017) are declarative and general and do not touch upon the details of the regulation of migration issues and the realization of the programs suggested by them. Thus parties in their rhetoric seem to appeal emotionally rather than by trying to win the votes of the electorate through offering concrete change.

The current migration management model in the Republic of Armenia (RA)is decentralized, in the sense that various functions and operations ? such as control over entry, stay, residence and exit of foreigners, emigration of nationals, labour migration, asylum, etc. ? are performed by different governmental entities.

Armenia became independent as a result of the Soviet Union’s collapse in 1991, accompanied by a number of severe economic and political crises. As with many other former Soviet republics, it was exposed to numerous socio-economic problems related to the decline in industry and the fundamental structural shifts in the economy during the transition period in the post-Soviet era. Moreover, the country faced additional difficulties as a result of a devastating earthquake and the economic blockade due to ethnic conflicts in the region. From 1990 until 2005 it is estimated that between 700,000 to 1,300,000 Armenians left their homeland and settled abroad. Unlike the emigration in the pre-transition period, when migration decisions were well thought out, migration during the transition period was an immediate response to rapidly deteriorating socio-economic and political realities. Only a minority of Armenian migrants choose European countries as a destination, while the absolute majority go to Russia. This is most probably due to the existing barriers and the absence of mechanisms facilitating migration from Armenia to Europe rather than the unattractiveness of these destinations.

This report covers migration in 18 EU neighbouring countries, including: Algeria; Armenia; Azerbaijan; Belarus; Egypt; Georgia; Jordan; Lebanon; Libya; Mauritania; Moldova; Morocco; Palestine; Russia; Syria; Tunisia; Turkey and Ukraine. Each country report provides the most recent update on the demographic, legal, and socio-political aspects of both inward and outward migration stocks and flows.

This report analyses contemporary citizenship laws of 17 countries from Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), including 11 new EU member states (Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia) and 6 post-Soviet states (Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, Russia, and Ukraine).

Issues related to the situation of asylum seekers, refugees and IDPs in the Republic of Armenia (RA) are discussed in this paper. State policy implemented in this direction is analyzed, and recommendations with the view of filling the gaps are made. This paper is based on policy documents of the field, researches and publications of mass media.

Das Projekt setzt sich zum Ziel, die Migration aus Armenien und Georgien vergleichend zu analysieren. Durchgeführt werden umfangreiche Befragungen in beiden Ländern und in Moskau (als wichtigster Destination von Arbeitsmigranten aus dem Südkaukasus), um Motive, Anlässe, Formen, Verläufe, Ergebnisse, Potenziale und Wahrnehmungen der jeweiligen Migrationen zu erfassen. Kooperationspartner sind: Prof. Dr. G. Poghosyan, Institute of Philosophy, Sociology and Law, National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Armenia; Dr. I. Badurashvili, Georgian Centre of Population Research, Tbilisi; Prof. Dr. G. I. Osadchaya und Prof. Dr. T. N. Judina, Russian State Social University, Moskau.