Yerevan–Minsk: Breakdown in relations Simonyan’s barbs and Tsikhanouskaya’s visit escalate tensions

Armenian Parliament Speaker Alen Simonyan made a series of unfriendly remarks toward Belarus. At the same time, representatives of the Belarusian nationalist opposition visited Yerevan. Simonyan effectively referred to Belarus as a “Russian province.” In addition, at the European Political Community summit in Yerevan, Belarus was represented by the self-proclaimed “democratic leader” Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya.

A peculiar understanding of democracy

On the eve of the opening of the 8th European Political Community (EPC) summit in Yerevan, Alen Simonyan stated that “Armenia is not a Russian province.” He added that “Armenia should not become a province and be governed like Belarus,” thereby directly implying that Belarus is a “Russian province.”

On May 5, the Belarusian Foreign Affairs Ministry  summoned Armenia’s chargé d’affaires in Belarus, Artur Sargsyan. “The Armenian diplomat was strongly protested to, and a corresponding note was handed over regarding recent unfriendly actions by the Armenian side,” the Belarusian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

Belarus does not need lectures and decides on its own how and with whom to maintain friendly relations, as well as how to develop its ties with Russia. When delivering the note, the Belarusian Foreign Ministry spokesperson also described Simonyan’s remarks as “pre-election populism” and an attempt to distract Armenian citizens from internal problems.

Yerevan, in turn, continued the verbal escalation, which suggests a deliberate course toward increased tensions. On May 6, commenting on the Belarusian Foreign Ministry’s protest, Simonyan accused Belarus of providing military assistance to Azerbaijan.

Responding to a question about whether his remarks could further worsen Belarus–Armenia relations, the speaker stated: “Disrespect toward Armenia, a CSTO partner, toward Armenia’s statehood—this is what worsens relations. Preparations for the 44-day war with Azerbaijan worsen relations.”

When asked about the undiplomatic nature of his statements, Simonyan replied that “this is his character.” According to the speaker, parliamentary activity, unlike diplomatic service, does not restrict him in his choice of wording.

Overall, the Chairman of the National Assembly of Armenia made it clear that what most concerns him are the political differences between Belarus and Armenia.

“Many factors worsen relations, and political course is a matter of choice for each state,” the speaker said philosophically. “For Armenia, the most important values are human rights and freedoms, and I believe that every state chooses its own model. We have chosen the path of Armenia’s democratisation; they have chosen a somewhat different path — not the one chosen by Armenia.”

Simonyan repeated this thesis like a mantra: “The Belarusian model of governance is unacceptable for my country and for me. Armenia is a free country with free media, human rights, and the rule of law.”

Moreover, Simonyan stated that he does not regret his remarks about Belarus, and in a tone considered inappropriate for his political position, he advised the Belarusian authorities to think instead “about growing more potatoes.”

Belarusian opposition figure champions France’s leadership in Europe

Another unfriendly step toward Belarus was Armenia’s invitation of the opposition “leader” Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya and her team to the EPC summit.

Tsikhanouskaya’s office described the trip as her “first official visit” to Armenia, noting that such visits had previously not taken place for security reasons. At the summit, Tsikhanouskaya was given the status of a “guest invitee” and also had the opportunity to meet on the sidelines with French President Emmanuel Macron, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. In addition, she held talks with Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan.

However, these meetings were very brief and largely symbolic, as Tsikhanouskaya is still not considered a serious political actor in the West. Nevertheless, her adviser Dzianis Kuchynski compared the visit to reaching the “play-offs” of a World Cup, stressing that one of the key issues remains the continuation of sanctions against Belarus.

It is also reported that in a conversation with Macron, Tsikhanouskaya expressed support for France’s leading role in Europe.

Belarusian nationalists also took part in the “Yerevan Dialogue” conference organised by the Armenian Foreign Ministry. The event was moderated by Tristan Aureau, director of a French Ministry of Foreign Affairs analytical centre.

During the “Yerevan Dialogue,” Tsikhanouskaya spoke about the use of digital technologies during the attempted coup in Belarus in 2020. At a meeting with representatives of 20 Armenian NGOs, she shared her “invaluable experience” of “colour revolutions,” although in her case it was largely unsuccessful.

The parties also agreed that Armenia could become a new “hub” for training Belarusian opposition activists.

Tsikhanouskaya’s advisers Dzianis Kuchynski and Anatoli Liabedzka also held talks in the Armenian National Assembly on the creation of a parliamentary group titled “For a Democratic Belarus.”

Ignoring international law

In the end, the situation amounts to one state — a member of the CSTO — hosting the leadership of an organisation that is recognised in Belarus as extremist, thereby effectively supporting activities aimed at overthrowing the government of a union state.

Indeed, criminal cases have been opened in Belarus against Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya and her associated structures, which are designated as extremist in the country.

Between Armenia and Belarus, there are agreements on the extradition of suspects in criminal offences, including the Chișinău Declaration. However, in this case, these norms were effectively ignored by those who often speak about the “rule of law.”

At the same time, some of Tsikhanouskaya’s statements in Armenia appeared openly contradictory.

“I would like our peoples to be friends, to trade, and to support each other as before. And no Lukashenko can destroy that,” the “democratic leader” said in Yerevan.

Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko has consistently advocated for friendly and good-neighbour relations with all states, especially former Soviet republics. Armenians in Belarus, like representatives of other nationalities, enjoy equal rights and freedoms.

Old accusations repeated by Alen Simonyan also appear unconvincing. Belarus did not assist anyone in preparing for war, and its cooperation with Azerbaijan, including in the military sphere, was not directed against third countries — just as joint membership in the CSTO with Armenia is not aimed against any state.

At the same time, Simonyan and the exiled opposition figure accuse Minsk of a lack of “democracy” and independence. The unfriendly statements voiced in Yerevan, against the backdrop of increasingly aggressive rhetoric from a number of other states, indicate a new stage of a coordinated hostile campaign against Belarus.

However, if the situation is viewed without political slogans, “the rule of law” in the interpretation of Brussels and its satellites increasingly appears to mean the dominance of the West itself. Belarus, like Azerbaijan, does not recognise neo-colonial dictates and instead demonstrates commitment to genuine sovereignty and the protection of its own people’s interests — which provokes such a sensitive reaction from foreign critics.