Eurasia Insight:
ARMENIA: US SUPPORT FOR KOCHARIAN HOLDS FIRM
Haroutiun Khachatrian: 2/22/05

When a top US diplomat recently referred to Nagorno-Karabakh leaders as
“criminal secessionists,” policymakers and pundits in Yerevan worried that
the White House was rethinking its support for Armenian President Robert
Kocharian’s administration.
Armenia’s ties with the United States have long been a subject of vigorous
discussion in Yerevan. While the United States ranks as the country’s main
foreign aid donor, Armenia has traditionally hinged its foreign policy on a
strategic partnership with Russia, the only country in the South Caucasus to
do so. Maintaining equilibrium between the two powers has not been easy for
Armenian authorities, and recent events have strained the policy still
further.
The January 2005 deployment of 46 Armenian military personnel to Iraq was
met by strong public opposition, mainly caused by concerns that the move
might spark anti-Armenian reactions in Iraq and other Middle Eastern
countries with Armenian minorities. Opposition members claimed that the
troop deployment was an ill-calculated maneuver by Kocharian and Defense
Minister Serge Sargisian to curry favor with Washington. [For background see
the Eurasia insight archive]. Government officials, however, have denied
that support for US Iraq operations was ever named as a condition for aid to
Armenia.
After the so-called Orange Revolution in Ukraine, in which opposition
demonstrators in late 2004 reversed the results of a rigged presidential
election, some regional political analysts suggested Armenia might be next
in line for a political make-over, noting some similarities in the political
mood in both Yerevan and Kyiv, in particular the bitter relations between
government and opposition forces. They went on to suggest that the United
States might welcome any regime change in the region that was viewed as
accelerating the pace of democratization.
Not all analysts agree. “I do not see a reason why the American
administration, which has cooperated with Kocharian so far, should take any
moves to remove him now,” Alexander Iskandarian, a Caucasus analyst and
director of the Caucasus Media Institute in Yerevan said. Tevan Poghosyan,
executive director of the International Center for Human Development, a
Yerevan-based think tank, agreed. For the United States, stability in
Armenia and the South Caucasus is the most important factor, he said.
Conjecture about Washington’s intentions reached its peak in late January,
when reports circulated that US Assistant Secretary of State Elizabeth Jones
had used the term “criminal secessionists” to describe ethnic Armenian
leaders of the unrecognized Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. [For background see
the Eurasia Insight archive]. Despite Jones’ later apology, many analysts
and opposition politicians in Yerevan saw the comments as a sign that
Washington’s stance on Nagorno-Karabakh was becoming “anti-Armenian.”
Aid numbers tell a different story. Armenia remains one of the world’s
largest recipients of US financial assistance, in per capita terms. Although
the US draft budget for fiscal year 2006 would leave the country $20 million
less than was allotted last year — $55 million – the document also contains
the first humanitarian assistance for Nagorno-Karabakh, some $3 million.
More assistance could also soon be in the works. As part of Washington’s
Millennium Challenge program for developing democratic countries, Armenia
could receive up to $350 million in the next two years.
Despite the aid commitment, some political observers believe that Armenia is
a comparatively low foreign policy priority for Washington. “For the USA,
the key countries in this region are Azerbaijan, for its oil, and Georgia,
for its role as a territory needed for the stable [transport] of this oil,”
said Poghosyan. “Armenia presents an interest for the American government
mainly due to the 1.5 million ethnic Armenians who are American citizens.”
Even as Armenia struggles to balance its relations with Washington and
Moscow, it continues to look to diversify its policy options. In recent
years, Yerevan has cultivated relations with Iran, which plans to build a
gas pipeline to Armenia that would allow the country to break its dependency
on Russian natural gas. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].
Tehran has also indicated a willingness to broker a resolution to the
standoff with Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh. In addition, Yerevan has
begun talks to gain observer status in the League of Arab States and the
Organization of the Islamic Conference, while exploring an expansion of
trade ties with the Persian Gulf states of Kuwait and Bahrain.
So far, Washington has not publicly responded to the strengthening
Yerevan-Tehran relationship. Armenian leaders are thus treading carefully,
hoping to avoid angering the Bush administration. For now, though,
Washington appears ready to accentuate the positive – at least in public.
Speaking at a February 11 meeting in New York City with representatives of
the Armenian Diaspora, Ambassador John Evans was succinct: “Armenia today is
on the right track.”
Editor’s Note: Haroutiun Khachatrian is a Yerevan-based writer specializing
in economic and political affairs.