After the deterioration of relations between Russia and the West, and some disruption to Russia’s efforts to influence Ukraine’s European and NATO political course, the Kremlin activated its policy in the Caucasus and Caspian Sea region. The main goal of Putin’s policy is to preclude the political influence and activity of Western powers in unsettled conflicts like Nagorno-Karabakh between Armenia and Azerbaijan. The Kremlin’s purpose is to marginalize and to distance itself from the OSCE Minsk Group initiatives.
Russia believes that the time has come to resolve the Karabakh issue between Armenians and Azerbaijanis by compelling one of the sides of conflict. Moscow adopted the Eurasian doctrine to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh issue in favor of Azerbaijan, which seems more acceptable for its geopolitical and economic plans. Basically, as Russia assumed, the acceleration of negotiation around Nagorno-Karabakh is directly connected with Moscow’s goal to carry out military-political expansion in the South Caucasus.
Putin’s plan to settle the conflict is clear. Russian policy towards Armenia is highlighted by its comprehensive impact features:
First, Armenia’s sudden volte-face away from a closer relationship with the EU since September 3, 2013 was caused by Russian political pressure and threats. As the Ukrainian crisis started, the Russian leadership aimed to isolate Armenia politically from the Western states and Iran, constraining Armenia to relinquish its sovereignty in favor of Russia’s interests. Moreover, notwithstanding the fact that most of Russia’s gradually increasing demands contradict the interests of Armenia, its weak and hesitating leadership reluctantly fulfils them. Particularly, strengthening its intelligence and ideologically pro-Russian oriented individuals in the presidential administration and in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Armenia, Moscow achieved its purpose to deflect Armenia from the pro-Western path. In this plan Moscow relied on the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Eduard Nalbandyan, who certainly satisfies the orders from the Kremlin, having a comprehensive contribution from the Presidential administration and advanced political parties such as the “Republican” and oppositional “Prosperity” parties. The only state institution struggling for independent policy that still remains is the Ministry of Defense, due to the numerous high-ranking officers that are experts on various military institutions of NATO’s member-states. Meanwhile, it is absolutely clear that Moscow has no enthusiasm for the revival of the economy of Armenia, which is stuck in stagnation since 2009.
Second, Russia is continually undermining Armenia’s security system, propagandizing that the future of the people and the state depends on Russia’s will. Otherwise, Armenia has no alternative but to be drawn into Russia’s economic and political projects, as the South Caucasus is part of a traditional Russian sphere. Additionally, pro-Russian media and satellite organizations imply that if Armenian authorities or political opposition adopt the Western direction of development, like Ukraine and Georgia, they will instantaneously face Russia’s determined and formidable resistance. There is an assumption that Russians, in the case of Armenia’s political redirection, are going to use all possible means and methods to thwart those plans even by affording Azerbaijan to restart the conflict either towards Karabakh or Armenia.
To achieve the previously mentioned psychological consequences among Armenian society, Russian leadership conspicuously set in motion different large-scale military exercises with the participation of the entire personnel of the 102nd military base and airbase of “Erebuni”, situated nearby Armenia’s capital.[1] Overall, Russians conducted military exercises from the Russian base in Armenia from October 13 to 17. In addition, on October 16, Colonel General Victor Bondarev officially announced that Moscow is planning to expand its airbase in Armenia,[2] factually without the consent of Armenian leadership. This tactic is directed not only towards society, but first of all it had a certain effect of enforcement against President Serzh Sargsyan and his political team.
The third and final factor of the Russian policy towards Armenia is closely connected to Azerbaijan. In this case, Russia promotes a policy of continuous intimidation of Armenia by openly militarizing Azerbaijan and supporting the modernization of its military power. Moreover, from the political aspect Russia adheres to Azerbaijani positions, simultaneously, opposing Azerbaijan to the United States on the Nagorno-Karabakh issue. A case in point: during the current year some Russian experts, who have close ties with the Putin administration, repeatedly accused the US in their reluctance to return Karabakh to Azerbaijan and are interested in the persistence of the status quo.[3]
The known military contract between Russia and Azerbaijan, in which Russia is going to deliver until the end of 2014 offensive weaponry costing $5 billion, definitely affects the reaction of Armenia.[4] Meanwhile, Moscow is using this fact as a tool for disseminating additional tensions among Armenian society, and this is one of the reasons why Armenia’s parliamentary opposition announced the beginning of a protest movement but refused to criticize Russia’s expansionist policy.
Thus, these three basic aims of Russia concerning Armenia form Moscow’s approach towards the Nagorno-Karabakh issue. Moscow applies different tactics and methods with Azerbaijan, trying to illustrate a reliable partnership and friendly attitude. Russia intends to control Azerbaijani oil and natural gas capacities and transportation infrastructure. Baku in certain circumstances may offer to supply its oil and gas to Europe through the Russian territory, accepting Putin’s rules and energy policy concerning Europe. In exchange for this political service, Ilham Aliev’s government may gain the patronage of Russia in the Karabakh issue. Furthermore, the Kremlin may convince Baku to join the Eurasian Union in exchange for several territories of Karabakh. Interestingly, for the ideologists of the Eurasian doctrine, Azerbaijan is more valuable than Armenia, and this is why Russia is deeply interested in developing a close relationship with Azerbaijan. Additionally, another benefit that Moscow emphasizes is the significant capacities of the Azerbaijani minority in Georgia, which can be used with the support of Baku after the final deterioration of Armenia and the Armenian factor in the South Caucasus.
Putin strongly believes that settlement of the South Caucasian conflicts and particularly Karabakh issue resolution are Russia’s prerogative only. And now, for the future development and expenditure of the Eurasian Union, Moscow is interested in the quick resolution of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. To accomplish this goal, Russia attempts to monopolize the right of intermediary, with the purpose of imposing its own position on the OSCE Minsk Group. From the other side, after Armenia’s involvement in the Eurasian Union, there are the first signals that Russia is going to coerce Armenia to relinquish the seven territories around Nagorno-Karabakh in order to deepen its influence in Azerbaijan. Furthermore, some Russian officials believe that 2015 will be the time of great changes in the Caucasus. This means that Putin will pursue the goal to eliminate the recent status quo in the South Caucasus, implementing the policy of coercion against Armenia and the policy of conviction towards Azerbaijan. All the changes will be directed to mitigate Western impact on the region. Such a disposition suggests that Karabakh will be used as a tool of Russian domination in the region.
Because of insufficient participation by NATO, the United States, and the EU in the military-political integration of the South Caucasian states—particularly in Armenia—Russia is able to dictate to the region as Putin wills.
Some representatives of the Russian political elite, sympathizers of the Soviet might of the past, and Russian hegemony adherents do not rely on Armenia as a sovereign state. And now, from the background of Russian military-political expansion in the South Caucasus, Putin’s leadership has a strong reason to liquidate Armenia as an independent political factor. In 1991, during the agony of the USSR, Moscow decided to organize a referendum for the future of the Union, and the question put to voters was “Do you consider necessary the preservation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as a renewed federation of equal sovereign republics in which the rights and freedom of an individual of any nationality will be fully guaranteed?”[5] Armenian local authorities boycotted this referendum and undertook the organization of a national referendum in order to re-establish the Armenian Republic, occupied by the Soviets in 1921. Ninety-nine per cent of Armenian voters were for national independence, whereas Azerbaijani authorities organized the referendum dictated from Moscow and 94.12% of registered voters gave their consent for saving the Soviet Union.[6] These different paths adopted by neighboring Caucasian states had a considerable effect on Russian social and political elites in prospect. These are the roots of the Putin administration’s attitude nowadays. Recently, Russia feels more comfortable with Azerbaijan. The bilateral relations are benefiting a political convergence than relations with Armenia, which is traditionally orientated towards the West on par with Georgia.
From the global point of view, Russian-Azerbaijani rapprochement is determined by the political aspirations of Turkey to have close ties with Russia. Specifically, Azerbaijan might become a convenient factor for Russia to contain both the West and Iran. In this point the interests of Turkey and Russia may coincide; Azerbaijan as a restraining factor may be used concurrently either by Russia or Turkey. Subsequently, Moscow would like to see Azerbaijan and Turkey enter the Eurasian Union.
Therefore, to summarize these factors we may suppose that 2015 is going to be a critical juncture for Armenia and its society, as well as for some institutions still maintaining their independence despite Russian pressures. In these conditions Armenia needs a concrete contribution from the West, which is rather real and can be quite effective in case of support and collaboration with the Ministry of Defense of Armenia. Also, it is important to be aware of the basic reasons for the failure of integration between Armenia and the EU, connected to the lack of concrete guarantees of security, which could have been given by NATO. Nevertheless, it is noticeable that sovereignty and independence of Armenia might be an obstacle for Russia’s newly adopted expansionistic policy in the Caucasus. Moreover, the Armenian military as a guarantor of state sovereignty and a crucial factor of stability in Nagorno-Karabakh vividly hampers Russia in carrying out its purpose. Furthermore, Moscow believes a significantly pro-western oriented Armenian military staff can easily become a supporter of the US, NATO, and EU interests in the Caucasus. Finally, the systematic deterioration of the Armed Forces of Armenia will open an additional avenue to shake democracy in Georgia.
Armenia needs technology from the influence of Russia and the newly acquired sovereignty. Successful, continued cooperation between Armenia and NATO in the defense sector can be an example and experience for the development of cooperation with the West in a wider range—economic, legal, and political. Armenian society is in certain confusion, but it will surely embrace acceptance of the initiative of the European Union and NATO.
Notes
[1] “A large-scale exercises the 102nd Russian base started in Armenia,” “Regnum” Russian Information Agency, 14 October 2014, http://www.regnum.ru/news/polit/1856601.html .
[2] “Russia to bolster military presence in former Soviet states,” The Guardian, New East Network, 16 October 2014, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/16/russia-bolsters-military-presence-former-soviet-states .
[3] Sergey Markov, “The United States and Azerbaijan will discuss Nagorno-Karabakh,” “Vestnik Kavkaza” News Agency, 01 April 2014, http://www.vestikavkaza.ru/video/Sergey-Markov-SSHA-i-Azerbaydzhan-obsudyat-Nagornyy-Karabakh.html .
[4] Sergey Markov, “Nobody will force Baku be against Russia” (Video), “Haqqin AZ” Azerbaijani Inform Agency, 5 May 2014, http://haqqin.az/news/21725 .
[5] Soviet Union Referendum, 1991, Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Union_referendum,_1991 .
[6] Ibidem.
I didn’t realize this author had a ph.d in BS from horse manure university.
It was expected that a lot of Russophobic articles would have been produced by some in the wake of the helicopter downing. It was also expected that many of the Armenian sheeple, especially those in the Diaspora, would once again be acting hysterical about Russian arms sales to Azerbaijan.
So, let’s go over this one more time:Russia gives Armenia cheep and often times free modern weaponry. Russia gives Armenia protection against Turkey, which is something that is PRICELESS. Russia gives Armenia diplomatic coverage in the UN. Russia gives Armenia very cheep gas and oil. Russia gives Armenia cheep nuclear fuel. Russia gives Armenia billions of dollars in investments, billions of dollars in aid, billions of dollars in trade. Russia gives HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of Armenia’s unemployed work opportunities VERY CLOSE TO THEIR HOMELAND. Russia allows these migrant workers to send back to Armenia billions of dollars annually. Russia does not carry out Social Engineering programs inside Armenian society. Russia has officially recognized the Armenian Genocide and every single Russian leader that has visited Armenia, including Putin, have payed an official visit to the Armenian Genocide memorial.
No matter how one looks at it, Russia is the SINGLE MOST POWERFUL political factor that has been keeping the Armenian nation-state alive against all odds in a nasty neighborhood like the South Caucasus.
Now, for added perspective, let’s look on the other side of the equation:
Azerbaijan is a former Soviet republic. Azerbaijan sells energy to Russia. Azerbaijan has normal diplomatic relations with Russia. In fact, Moscow is doing its best to keep Azerbaijan within its orbit while making sure Artsakh stays under Armenian control. What Russian officials are managing in this regard is not an easy or pretty task to say the least. Nevertheless, due to its Soviet pedigree, it’s natural that most of the arms Baku possesses will be Soviet/Russian made. Therefore, logic dictates that anytime Baku decides to fire-off any of their weaponry, chances are it will be Russian made.
So, allow me to also say that whether Armenians like it or not, Azerbaijan is a sovereign republic that has the right to maintain a military. More importantly, Azerbaijan has the petrodollars (via Western powers) to purchase whatever it wants, from whomever it wants. If not from Russia, Baku will get their war toys from Israel, Turkey, Britain or America… What right do Armenians have to tell Russian officials to forgo their billions in arms sales to Baku merely for symbolic reasons? Do Russian officials have the right to tell Yerevan to stop cooperating with Western powers?
I personally wish they did. But they aren’t.
I also shouldn’t be explaining this to grown adults but those who sell weapons in accordance to international laws CANNOT be held accountable for the crimes committed by those who use such weapons.
And in conclusion:
Let’s recall that Baku has also been doing its best to draw Armenia into a serious border skirmish with the intention of derailing Armenia’s membership in the Eurasian Union.
Nevertheless, blaming Russia for any of this is UTTER STUPIDITY and self-destructive peasant behavior. Stuff like this in fact reinforces the troubling notion that agents of influence are doing all they can to disrupt the growing ties between Armenia and Russia.
The last sentence summarizes how ridiculous the whole article is:
“Armenian society is in certain confusion, but it will surely embrace acceptance of the initiative of the European Union and NATO”
Actually over two-thirds of the Armenian population wholeheartedly support joining to the Eurasian Union. Even all the main political opposition groups in parliament support the joining. This is not confusion my friend, this is democracy in action. It’s only confusion to you and your colleagues when things don’t go your way. Armenia can never join an entity (NATO) whose second largest member (Turkey) blockades Armenia’s border illegally. The only thing preventing Turkey from militarily invading Armenia is the Russian military presence. I think the author of this article is confused.
Nagorno Karabagh is firmly in Armenia’s hands despite the billions Azerbaijan has been spending on military hardware. They are getting it mostly from Russia but also billions are purchased from Israel, as well as other countries. It is reality that Russia sells export versions of weapons to Azerbaijan, but at the same time gives domestic versions and more sophisticated weapons to Armenia either for free or at rock bottom discount prices. I seriously doubt NATO will do the same for Armenia. The EU, NATO and the United States will happily turn a blind eye if Turkey invades Armenia should the Russian presence be removed. Northern Cypress should be fresh in everyone’s memory. Truth is that Armenian leaders have chosen the best strategic policy given the geopolitical realities and the Armenia population knows it. The west has had many chances to show support for the tiny embattled Christian Armenian nation, from the pre-genocide era until today, and each time they have chosen to side with their Turkish allies instead. Nothing more needs to be said on the matter.
The author failed to mention that Armenians in Armenia feel very close to Russians (culturally, religiously and historically). They also trust Russia more than any Nato country. Most polls show that more than 60% support more integration with Russia. Not counting that our borders with Turkey is protected by Russians. To keep it short I can only name the author a traitor of his nation if he is against deepening of Russia-Armenia ties.
Comprehensive. especially the end of article about referendum results and Russian behavour are really informative.
I doubt the author is confused, he didn’t get a grant to study in London for nothing. He is knowingly representing UK/USA/NATO line and their interests. He sure can but given he is Armenian maybe he should not use Armenian Issues for his agenda.
The article is so full of standard Russophobic Neocon code-phrases, that the author doesn’t even make a modicum of effort to hide his extreme bias. Other posters have touched upon many holes in author’s prepositions. I will discuss some others:
{“…connected to the lack of concrete guarantees of security, which could have been given by NATO.”}
Are you serious ?
NATO, which includes the Islamic, virulently Anti-Armenian state of Turkey, guarantee security for Armenia ? Surely you jest.
In 1993, when NKR’s heroic warriors had thrown out genocidal Turkbaijani invaders, and were chasing them out of historic Armenian lands, Turkey massed an invasion army at the border of RoA in a desperate attempt to save their Turkic kin from the impending massive defeat.
Guess which country was it that told the Turks to get.
No it wasn’t US; wasn’t France; wasn’t UK….
Yep, Russia (Shaposhnikov) publicly announced that
any attempt to invade Armenia would start WW3.
Turks got the message and ran back to their barracks.
As was already pointed by others, where was NATO when Islamic Turkey invaded and gobbled up 40% of Christian Cyprus ? Turks are till there.
Only reason EU or the West would be interested in Armenia, would be to cause damage to Russia.
Armenia has absolutely no value for the West other than that.
Neocon plant Saakashvili believed the BS he was being fed by his Neocon handlers, and decided to attack Russia.
As soon as Russians counterattacked, Misha’s Neocon and Israeli advisers took off and went home:
why get killed for no reason ? So much for ‘guarantees of security’.
With NATO ‘guarantees of security’, RoA and NKR will be attacked by Azerbaijan and Turkey, while
NATO will conveniently be on vacation.
If West/NATO care anything about Armenia, why aren’t they telling Turkey to end the blockade of Armenia: like, Now. A blockade is an act of war: where is NATO ?
{“…Russia’s newly adopted expansionistic policy in the Caucasus.”}
What expansionistic policy are you talking about ?
How about we talk about NATO expansionistic policies in East Europe.
West promised Gorbachev that NATO would not expand East.
Have a look-see at Ukraine: that is what Turkophile Neocons have in mind for Armenia too, if they can manage to pull it off.
Armenia has had a very close relation hip with Russia since its Independence.
All for a very good cause: survival.
Even the main opposition parties’ leaders supported RoA Gov’s policy vis-à-vis EEU in a recent rally.
Only a delusional fringe of two dozen people in Armenia oppose EEU.
The decision for Armenia to join the Eurasian Union was a practical one. The EU/West was simply not ready to give Armenia the security assurances that it would lose if it had gone through with the EU Association Agreement. That being said, Armenia has tried its best to maintain warm relations with the West, Russia, and Iran. It continues cooperation with EU and NATO, but Russia remains the only power willing to give Armenia security guarantees and sell advanced weapons at dirt low prices. Russia protects Armenia’s border with Turkey and is a major deterrent to Turkish aggression. Furthermore, there are a large number of Armenian migrants that work in Russia and send money back to their families in Armenia. This is a major source of income for Armenians. We are deeply connected with Russia, and having Russia go against us, would be catastrophic, and the West, at this point, would not be able to take Russia’s place. That is why the West understands our position, and is still willing to cooperate and invest in Armenia – they know we have no other geopolitical choice right now.
A majority of arguments and all conclusions made by the Author of this piece are not even wrong – they are idiotic.
Please note that I am NOT questioning Dr. Abrahamyan’s academic achievements, intellectual capacities or familiarity with the subject matter: I am sure he is a smart man, and so writes precisely what he is paid to write. The sad truth about Political and Social Sciences in academia, both in Europe and North America, is that all researchers must prostitute themselves to the political dogmas pushed by government-run funding agencies – or else they will quickly find themselves out of work. (The only ones immune from this sad reality is a small number of the most prominent tenured or retired professors at the richest of universities.)
For 25 years now, Russia has been going through extreme pains to remain even-handed in the Nagorno Karabakh conflict, to cultivate all sides in this conflict as reliable economic partners and geopolitical allies. I do not believe for a second that Russia would permit a military solution to this conflict, let alone encourage one. Indeed, Russia’s immense arms sales to Azerbaijan may seem paradoxical in this context; however, I think it’s just business and find more paradoxical Azerbaijan’s willingness to spend so much money on advanced weapons it knows full well it will not be allowed to use.
I partly agree with the Author and as a native Caucasian strongly share his concerns on Putin’s policy. It is rather tricky to understand the motives of Russian political elite to disrupt the integration processes of Caucasian states with EU/NATO. Accordingly, their newly evolving imperial ambitions are reflected in Russia’s policy features towards Georgia or Armenia.