Armenia faces dilemma: EU mission or CSTO peacekeepers? It'd better opt for peace with Baku

In anticipation of the arrival of the EU mission to Armenia, the country's government circles are making inappropriate statements concerning CSTO, where Moscow, of course, plays a leading role. The statements of Armenian politicians and experts primarily refer to the option proposed by the Russian Federation to deploy the mission of this military bloc on the conditional border of Armenia and Azerbaijan. Relatively recently, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in an interview with TV journalist Dmitry Kiselyov that the proposal to deploy peacekeepers of the CSTO on the border between the two countries on Armenia's side remains relevant and can be implemented if Yerevan is interested within literally one or two days.

However, Armenian parliament speaker Alain Simonyan questioned Lavrov's statement, saying the CSTO could hardly send a mission to Armenia in a day or two.

"I am not sure there is such a possibility, as the CSTO has many different countries that pursue their own interests, and any of them may veto," Simonyan suggested while making it clear that Yerevan is offended that the CSTO has not responded to Armenia's demand to give "a political assessment of Azerbaijan's aggression" and will from now on act as it pleases, that is, without looking back to Moscow.

In turn, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan in his speech at the National Assembly of the country, cited stronger arguments, in his opinion, due to which he has allegedly decided to deploy a European Union mission on the territory of the country, and not peacekeepers of the military bloc, which still includes Armenia. According to Pashinyan, the country's authorities appealed to the CSTO to clarify the "zone of responsibility" of organisation's mission in Armenia, but the request went unanswered. The EU, on the other hand, has responded correctly.

"Sending an EU mission was possible because during the Prague meeting the EU clearly outlined its territory of responsibility in Armenia. Without that a monitoring mission would be strange, because if the territory is unknown, its impossible to define whether it is occupied or not," Pashinyan said, adding that "there is no geopolitical context in all this, but there is a specific agenda and a specific issue that Armenia is trying to resolve".

Pashinyan's statements suggest that, first of all, Armenia is trying to maneuver between Russia and the European Union to preserve its traditional dualist policy, based on the principle "run with the hare and hunt with the hounds". The double-dealing position is beneficial for Armenia as a member of the EAEU primarily from an economic point of view. After joining the Eurasian Economic Union, since January 2015 the republic has enjoyed the opportunity to export its agricultural products to other member countries of this organisation, which brings solid investment flows into the country. This is indeed a weighty argument for which, despite the rhetoric of some Armenian politicians about the need for the country to leave the EAEU (voiced amid general discontent in Armenian society with Russian policy), Armenia will never dare to leave it. In other words, Armenia will remain economically dependent on Russia, which is generally satisfactory to Moscow. Secondly, Pashinyan's claims about the CSTO are not very logical and are not convincing at all due to the lack of serious political arguments. In addition, Pashinian's vague formulation about the "CSTO zone of responsibility" in Armenia is not new at all - it was periodically floated in the Armenian corridors of power last autumn after the well-known September provocations of the Armenian side on the border with Azerbaijan. Then Armenia did not achieve military assistance and intervention by the CSTO, the organisation has limited itself to saying that the CSTO is not yet considering sending troops to Armenia and called for a political and diplomatic solution to the situation. Anatoly Sidorov, head of the CSTO Joint Staff, ultimately dispelled the illusions of the Armenians by categorically announcing that "the use of military force, also with the involvement of the CSTO, is not on the agenda, neither yesterday, nor today, nor in the near future". Frustrated Pashinyan responded in October 2022 by stating "the fear of withdrawal from the CSTO of some members of the bloc".

Initially, the Armenian prime minister referred to the fact that the organisation had allegedly assured Armenia that it perceived its borders as a "red line", but he later refused to sign the final declaration of the CSTO summit and draft aid to Yerevan in connection with the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict, showing his displeasure with the policy of the military bloc. Nevertheless, despite this demarche, the Kremlin stated that Armenia "will certainly remain a member of the CSTO, despite all the difficulties". Pashinyan's clear message was addressed not only to Yerevan but also to its Western allies.

Thus, the statement by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov about the readiness to deploy a CSTO mission on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border suggests above all that Russia will not let Armenia out of its influence zone and will keep it in the wake of its interests in the South Caucasus. Pashinyan understands this too and is trying to wriggle out of it in order not to lose either eastern or western patrons. However, taking into account the current geopolitical realities, it is obvious that Moscow cannot prevent the arrival of the so-called EU civilian mission in Armenia, although Moscow claims on various political and political levels that the NATO military contingent is likely to arrive in Armenia under the name of the civil mission and that this does not bode well for either the region or the Armenian-Azerbaijani negotiations. Moreover, at a press conference on Russian diplomacy in 2022, the Russian foreign minister firmly stated that the deployment of an EU mission without Azerbaijan's consent would be counterproductive, causing the expected resentment in Armenian society.

However, Pashinyan's announcement that an EU observation mission was coming to Armenia to monitor whether or not Armenia was preparing with Russian troops to attack Azerbaijan came as a shock to Armenians.

"An attempt was made in the West to portray Armenia as a participant in Russia's aggressive policy, while in the Russian Federation, an attempt was made to make Armenia a participant in a Western conspiracy. Since our Russian partners had representatives on the ground, our Western partners have already started looking at us suspiciously, saying that you are going to carry out aggressive actions since there are large concentrations of Armenian and Russian troops there, but we offered to come and find out more about the situation on the spot," he stressed.

That is if so far Armenia hoped that the "EU mission will strengthen the country's security and fix Azerbaijani aggression", according to Pashinyan, it turns out that Europeans come to Armenia to make sure that Armenians are not going to attack Azerbaijan, and to watch the movement of Russian troops in the region, which a priori contradict the interests of Russia. It also calls into question the view that the presence of a European mission is a positive factor for Yerevan. In the same context, it is noteworthy that at a recent meeting in Berlin between Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan and his German colleague Annalena Baerbock (he went there to speak once again "about Baku's aggression" in connection with the situation on the Lachin road), the forthcoming deployment of an EU mission to Armenia was discussed among other things. Remarkably, during the talks, Baerbock pointed out that the EU observer mission was designed to ensure greater stability and, above all, trust between Baku and Yerevan. Yerevan did not miss this nuance and became quite wary of Baerbock's statement that Berlin supports the sovereignty and territorial integrity of both Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Given all these details, it can be argued that the arrival of the European mission in Armenia will not only strengthen Moscow's claims against Yerevan but will also make the Armenian population doubt the need for such a European presence in their country.