West votes no confidence in Armenian prime minister Rating by The Economist

The Economist, a British weekly newspaper, recently published an analysis that divided Russia's friends into three primary categories based on the kind of support they provide to the nation.

The publication claims that as a result of this backing, 39 nations declined to approve a UN resolution denouncing Russia's invasion of Ukraine on February 23, the day before its first anniversary. Russia's economy and trade have surprisingly fared well in the face of sanctions from the United States and its allies.

Numerous people in the West are shaking their heads at Russia's diplomatic tenacity. Anger at the West and exorbitant energy costs, according to Oxford University history professor Peter Frankopan, are altering the international system in Russia's favour.

Newspapers, think tanks, and commentators bemoan the West's inability to isolate Russia or win over a sizable portion of emerging nations. The “Putin’s pals index” created by The Economist, which compiles data on a wide range of military, economic, and diplomatic activities, paints a murkier picture.

The index looks at 11 different measures of support or potential for coercion in three broad areas. The first is diplomatic. Have they voted against Russia or abstained on key un resolutions, or voted with Russia at least twice on these resolutions?

The second is military. Are they treaty allies with Russia? Do they have Russian troops or mercenaries on their territory? Have they supplied arms to Russia since the war began? Do they depend on Russian arms? Have they done manoeuvres with Russia since the start of the war?

The third looks at energy and economics. Do they rely on Russian gas, and do they depend on Russian nuclear power stations or technology? Is trade with Russia a large share of their total trade? Have exports to Russia risen since the war?

This rudimentary index offers a framework for evaluating how nations choose to behave toward Russia and if they may be susceptible to its pressure.

The half a dozen countries that score most highly are those bound to Russia mainly by politics, history and geography, such as Armenia, Belarus, Iran and Kyrgyzstan. Beneath these is a long list of countries with looser links to Russia, including giants such as China and India and tiddlers such as Bolivia and Mali.

The Economist suggests that the world's nations with ties to Russia can be divided into three groups for conceptual purposes: a “coalition of the failing”; the “Soviet remembrance society”; and an “axis of opportunists”.

On paper Russia has five formal allies in the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO): Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. All are bound by treaty to come to each other’s aid if attacked. Yet not one CSTO member has backed Russia’s war in Ukraine with troops. Belarus has let itself be used as a military base, but has sent no troops of its own.

Instead, some CSTO members are trying to distance themselves from the war. Armenia is angry that the 3,500 Russian troops on its territory did not come to its aid during a war with Azerbaijan in 2020. It has refused to host this year’s CSTO war games, and now seems to be hedging its bets when it comes to political patrons, by inviting an EU mission to monitor its border with Azerbaijan.

Nevertheless, according to the totality of facts, Armenia still remains one of the closest friends of Russia. In other words, despite all the efforts of the Prime Minister of the "country of rocks" Nikol Pashinyan to appear in the West as its friend, Armenia is assessed as an appendage of Russia.

As expected, Belarus was in first place in The Economist's "friends of Putin" rating (11 points), while Armenia was in second place (9 points). Kyrgyzstan closes the top three friends of Russia (8 points). Also in the rating were Iran, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan (6), Syria, China, Venezuela (5), Nicaragua, India, Uzbekistan (4).

As you can see, all Pashinyan's attempts to "bring" Armenia out of Russia's influence did not find understanding in the West, where they perfectly understand the dual game of the walking prime minister.