Armenia facing cold reality as Moscow's messages to Yereven getting tougher

ANALYTICS  11 April 2023 - 11:42

Amid official Yerevan's rapid alienating from the Kremlin in recent days, the Russian diplomatic pressure on Armenia has clearly risen. Jumping ahead, we can conclude that the overall tone of the Kremlin's rhetoric reveals some of Moscow's confusion before emerging challenges. At any rate, the combination of vague language and blatantly manipulative techniques draws attention. Let us now proceed in order.

On April 7, the Russian ambassador to Armenia Sergey Kopyrkin gave an interview to the Armenian media. The diplomat began rather floridly: "There has been and is an understanding that our relations should develop in such a way as to meet the interests of our countries to the maximum extent possible, to facilitate the resolution of the problems facing our countries. I think it is difficult to speak of disagreements in this respect".

It is no exaggeration to conclude that such classical diplomatic rhetoric in its emphatically unconvincing denial of differences reveals nothing less than deep divisions.

However, the main thing, according to Kopyrkin, is not the existence of these challenges, but "the presence of political will on both sides to react properly to these challenges, to preserve the core of relations, the basic principles that have been forming for centuries and have more to do with the peoples, the relations between people".

Of course, we can be wrong, but here the ambassador seems to be cautiously approaching the prospect of possible reprisals against the Armenian diaspora in Russia in the case of the particular stubbornness of Yerevan.

He then finally makes the problem clearer: "If we take a concrete example of the difference in positions, it is the active involvement of third players in regional affairs. Here Moscow has its own view on these things, which it does not hide. In particular, the sides have different approaches to the activities of the EU observation mission in Armenia".

But then Kopyrkin goes back on his word: "We have unequivocally expressed our position, including at a high political level, but, I repeat, this is part of our relations between the two sovereign states, which, I am convinced, does not affect the basic principles of our relations".

And finally, as if making an excuse for the overly complimentary tone of his previous statements, he tries, as they say, to tighten the screws, but also hastens to stress that the military cooperation between Russia and Armenia is not a matter of doubt.

"The 102nd military base continues to operate, the number of our border guards has increased, there are observation posts in the areas of the Armenian-Azerbaijani border. Undoubtedly, our peacekeeping forces in Karabakh are an important factor for regional security. Unfortunately, there is criticism of the military force from time to time, but that doesn't change the fact that it is a key factor in ensuring the security and way of life of the Armenian population of Karabakh. Even now that the 'corridor' is closed, the peacekeepers play an extremely important role in preventing a humanitarian crisis by helping to deliver vital supplies and food.

There is a desire to scratch the sore point of all Armenians - the notorious "security issue". And if the ambassador did it very diplomatically, as he should, the next actor of the Russian pressure on Armenia simply left no stone unturned in the formal interstate piety. We are talking about the expert Alexander Artamonov. In an interview with one of the channels, he said that if Armenians do not want Russia's presence in the region, they must be prepared to live in the Iravan Khanate, on whose land the Armenian state was actually built. He also stated that in the absence of Russian peacekeepers, the Azerbaijanis will quickly remind Armenians of Khojaly.

Of course, this is a rhetorical device. Russian political analysts and officials in this country know that Azerbaijan is far from initiating a bloodbath among civilians, but they use this imaginary threat as a simple tool for exerting pressure on Armenian society. The message is simple - no one will save you but Russia, no matter what you are promised.

The sheer harshness of such a reception is perhaps evidence that Moscow has less and less leverage to retain its influence in Armenia. Such a conclusion is suggested by the statements made by Sergei Markedonov, a Russian political scientist and leading researcher at the Institute of International Studies at Moscow State Institute of International Relations, who arrived in Yerevan last week for a conference entitled "Diplomacy - Alpha: Challenges of the present and vision of the future". After the event, Markedonov made a number of somewhat apologetic statements in the Armenian press. The long-time lobbyist for Armenian interests seemed to apologise for his inability to promote them in the new realities.

The expert frankly lamented that considering the priority given to the situation in Ukraine, Russia could not "give Armenia what it wants". He also stated that "the state of Armenian-Russian relations should not be defined as a crisis or a deadlock, we are talking about problematic, attempts to differently assess both the situation in the region as a whole, and in bilateral relations and so on".

Specifying the thought, the political scientist said that Russia does not want to open a second front and involve Türkiye and Azerbaijan in some kind of anti-Russian coalition. "Armenia is solving more, maybe, modest tasks, and this is neither bad nor good. We are different in scope, we have different optics," Markedonov stated a sad reality for Yerevan.

"What does Yerevan want? Yerevan wants certainty, clear support from Russia for the Armenian side's actions and protection when left alone with Baku and Ankara. What does Russia want? Certainty, too, so that Yerevan does not try to pursue a diversified policy and compensate for some of the problems that, from Yerevan's perspective, arise in Armenia's national security, so that Armenia is only with Russia and does not look towards the West in the first place. There are certain divergences in positions," Markedonov tried to gently parrot the Armenians.

However, he stressed that after the recent meeting between Ararat Mirzoyan and Sergei Lavrov, which took place after a pause due to the cancellation of the Armenian minister's visit to Moscow (in December 2022), there was still some progress. "The CSTO mission, for example. A month ago, some kind of barbs were spoken from both sides, but now some of the accents of rhetoric have softened," the Moscow expert believes.

However, referring to the issue of the CSTO, Markedonov made an interesting reservation: "This is an interstate organization. Besides Russia and Armenia, there are several countries with their own approaches, each of them has its own serious load," the political scientist specifies. Markedonov did not rule out that in the absence of their own difficulties, the member countries of the CSTO might have undertaken the obligation to solve Armenia's problem, "but they do not want to, they try to distance themselves from it".

Interestingly, this is the first time that Russia's representatives, albeit unofficial, but certainly close to the Kremlin, have voiced problems with consensus among the CSTO countries.

One might well allow for the assumption that, probably on the sidelines of the CSTO, Russia is exhorting other member states to persuade them to send their military to Armenia in order to supplement the Russian contingent, which is likely to be lacking in the context of the war in Ukraine. And this is where Russia faces a problem. Belarus is not likely to consider such action, both because of its friendly relations with Azerbaijan and because of the need to maintain its army in a state of maximum combat readiness, including the quantitative factor, in the context of the Ukrainian conflict. Of the remaining CSTO countries hypothetically capable of sending troops, two - Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan - are Turkic. It is unlikely that Armenia, and indeed Russia itself, would want a Turkic contingent present, as this would mean creating with its own hands the groundwork for a future Turkic military presence in Armenia. Thus, by way of exception, the only CSTO country whose military presence Russia and its satellite could tolerate on the border with Azerbaijan would be Tajikistan. Here we will allow a cautious assumption that among other issues discussed by Ilham Aliyev and Emomali Rahmon during the recent visit of the Azerbaijani president to Dushanbe, the levelling of this prospect was probably considered.

To summarise Markedonov's statements, here is his advice to the Armenian authorities that 'there should be frequent meetings'. "When there are pauses, they are often filled not by the first persons, not by officials, but by different players who have their own interests, their own customers, and a not very pleasant information environment is formed. It is formed not by Yerevan, not by Moscow, but by the bloggers, Facebook and Telegram users, various current politicians, Türkiye, and Azerbaijan, kind of annoying sidelight. There are always problems, we will overcome them together," the expert extends a friendly hand.

Once again using Türkiye and Azerbaijan as a major threat to Armenians, Markedonov kind of put Yerevan in front of the fact - "we will overcome them together". Time will tell whether this turn of phrase is a manipulative pressure or a simple statement of the fact of unspoken agreement between Moscow and Yerevan. However, in general, the tone of the Russian expert's statements rather expresses uncertainty about Russia's ability to persuade Armenian society to be loyal to it. This was clearly felt by an Armenian journalist from one of the TV channels (we do not have information about the name of the journalist and the channel, because the video circulating in the network is a short episode and lasts less than two minutes), who, contrary to all principles of journalistic ethics, rudely pressed the expert, showing that he "rubbished and had nothing to say" and "in general came to tell us lies". Under such circumstances, the journalist tried to expose the interviewee by interrupting him halfway through and trying to force him to answer in a "yes or no" spirit, as if the MGIMO professor was authorised to answer such questions.

As noted above, the rhetoric of the Russian experts and diplomats vacillates between a recognition of the interests of Yerevan and open intimidation of the Armenian side. It demonstrates, however, the apparent absence of a concrete plan of action against Armenia's unfriendly policy. It remains to be assumed that the latter, having grasped this nuance, will continue to move towards third players. However, words are often just necessary to conceal intentions. What means is Russia using to ensure the loyalty of its Caucasian vassal, we will know in the near future.

While by no means agreeing with Russian diplomats and experts on the "Turkic threat", we note that the flirting of Pashinyan's team with European missions, as well as with Iran, only heats up the already difficult situation in the South Caucasus, which in the case of the explosion will turn Armenia into a battlefield, end its statehood and, unlike the imaginary "existential Turkic threat", will actually put hundreds of thousands of ordinary Armenians on the edge of survival.

Caliber.Az