Editor’s note: Abulfaz Babazadeh is a scientist, a scholar of Japanese studies, a political observer, and a member of the Union of Journalists of Azerbaijan. The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of News.Az.
As reported yesterday by Armenian, Russian and European media, the Council of the European Union has approved the temporary suspension, for a period of two years, of tariffs on 80 per cent of Armenian goods imported into the EU. The measure is reportedly intended to support Armenia amid trade restrictions imposed by Russia.
The concessions will cover nearly 99 per cent of Armenia‘s exported fruit and vegetables, as well as more than 90 per cent of beverages and alcoholic products. As is well known, Russia had previously rejected these products. On Friday, it also emerged that Belarus had rejected Armenian brandy bearing the high-profile name “YEREVAN 2800”, declaring it unsafe.
In exchange for these concessions, Armenia will have to comply with a number of requirements. These include rules of origin for goods, participation in administrative co-operation with the EU, and an obligation not to impose restrictions on imports from the European Union.
Credit: jam-news.net
The European Parliament now has the final say. However, there is little doubt that the document will be approved without difficulty.
It has not been reported which types of products will be excluded from the concessions. Judging by Armenia’s export profile, these may include dairy products, meat products, mineral water, fish and flowers. It remains unclear, however, whether Armenia intends to export these products to the European Union.
The preferential arrangement also includes measures to protect the European market from possible negative effects, as the reaction of European farmers is unlikely to be favourable. Anticipating this, the European Commission has incorporated safeguard mechanisms into the agreement.
As experience has shown, European farmers are extremely sensitive to duty-free imports, as was the case with Ukrainian and Moroccan products. To reassure the local agricultural sector, Brussels built strict safeguard measures into the regulation from the outset. If a sharp increase in imports from Armenia begins to cause economic harm to producers within the EU, the European Commission has the right to promptly reinstate tariffs or limit import volumes.
However, the threat to the interests of European farmers is minimal, as Armenia’s production capacity is in no way capable of competing with them. The country’s agricultural sector cannot match those of France, Italy, Spain and other major producers. In addition, unlike Ukraine, Armenia is geographically distant, which will make large-scale exports more difficult. The logistical costs are disproportionate to the benefits Armenian producers will gain from the temporary removal of tariffs, because transportation costs will inevitably increase the price of the goods, even if they are imported duty-free. This means that Armenian apricots, for example, will not be significantly cheaper than Spanish ones.
By and large, European markets do not need Armenian vegetables and fruit. The European market is already oversupplied with such products; the niches are occupied and the roles have long been assigned. It is clear to everyone that the reason for this decision was the desire to support a country seeking to move under the EU’s wing in its confrontation with Russia. This was a political decision, just as the decision to abolish tariffs was.
Armenian goods will, in any case, remain relatively expensive because of the long transportation distances. In order to make them somewhat competitive, the EU has devised this lenient mechanism. After all, once supplies of Armenian products began, the media repeatedly reported that they were not in particularly high demand among European consumers.
In any case, according to media reports, European agricultural producers will closely monitor customs statistics, particularly in Southern Europe for stone fruits and vegetables. At the same time, they do not view Armenian fruit and tomatoes as posing any serious threat in the foreseeable future.
Questions about competition and equal conditions for all are being raised less by European farmers than by countries that have long and productively co-operated with the European Union but have never enjoyed preferential treatment in the European market.
From an economic standpoint, there is little logic to the EU’s decision. This is pure politics, with traditional double standards spilling over into the economic sphere. In effect, we are witnessing a situation in which the European Union is rewarding Armenia for turning away from Russia and moving into the European camp. In other words, preferences in the European market are linked not to WTO principles, but to the foreign-policy course chosen by a particular state.
Incidentally, Armenia has been a member of the WTO since 2003.
Credit: cato.org
Since 2014, all products of Georgian origin exported to the European Union, with the exception of garlic, have been exempt from tariffs. The EU and Georgia, which was seeking to join the European Union, signed a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area Agreement (DCFTA), which largely explains these measures. Meanwhile, in 2025, exports to the EU accounted for only 12 per cent of Georgia’s total exports.
There is only one independent player left in the South Caucasus — Azerbaijan. It is not seeking to join the EU and insists on an equal partnership. Therefore, it pays the full price.
As of 1 January 2014, Azerbaijan was removed from the GSP+ scheme, under which Azerbaijani goods had previously entered EU countries without quotas. This system allows economically less developed countries to export their products to the EU on preferential terms. After Azerbaijan was classified as an upper-middle-income country, it was automatically removed from the scheme, and since then Azerbaijani products have been subject to tariffs in the EU market, which, of course, affects their competitiveness.
Zero or minimal tariffs apply mainly to raw materials that Europe itself needs. First and foremost, these are oil and gas. Agricultural products such as fruit, vegetables and nuts, as well as finished industrial goods from Azerbaijan, are subject to the EU’s established import duties. Agricultural products also face strict non-tariff barriers.
As Agriculture Minister Majnun Mammadov previously stated at a public hearing of the Milli Majlis Committee on Agrarian Policy, Germany and Italy are among the top five European countries to which Azerbaijan exports agricultural products. Hazelnuts account for the largest share of exports to these countries.
“The European Union protects its markets and products that are of interest to it. Among the goods exported from Azerbaijan, only those that are in demand in Europe are exempt from tariffs. The rest of the products are subject to duties, which creates difficulties in terms of competitiveness,” he said.
The European Union actively uses non-tariff barriers for political and geopolitical purposes, although officially they are most often justified by consumer protection, environmental concerns or safety issues. Russian experts point to this. It should be noted that Russia uses these methods for the same purposes. Its rejection of Armenian products was justified precisely on the grounds of non-tariff barriers.
These barriers are a convenient tool for punishing “disobedient” countries. They make it possible to regulate import flows without violating WTO rules. This is a form of political pressure often used during diplomatic disputes or to protect domestic farmers.
It is noteworthy that these methods are applied only to countries deemed undesirable or overly independent, such as Azerbaijan. They are forgotten when it comes to loyal exporters. Armenia is a loyal exporter. Georgia has already fallen out of this circle, but for now the EU is merely threatening to revoke its benefits and preferences, apparently unwilling to hand the country over completely to Russia. Azerbaijan alone stands apart from the rest.
As for how the adopted measures will affect the Armenian economy, there is little reason to expect miracles. Armenian producers are ordinary farmers, and the costly phytosanitary procedures required to access the EU market are often beyond their means. In other words, there is little reason to expect Armenian products to fully comply with EU standards.
The temporary preferences will not produce any significant effect on Armenia’s economy; they will merely serve as a temporary painkiller. Once the painkiller wears off, the pain will return because the underlying causes have not been addressed.
Moreover, Yerevan should understand that these preferences can be revoked just as quickly as they were introduced. The moment Armenia does something wrong and ceases to be regarded as “one of their own”, this will inevitably happen.
(If you possess specialized knowledge and wish to contribute, please reach out to us at [email protected]).