END OF TRANSITION International Conference Concludes in Yerevan

The Provost of the University of Southern California, Dr. Michael Quick, and 
Dr. Anthony Bailey, USC’s Vice-President for Strategic and Global Initiatives 
as well as dignitaries and over twenty scholars from Armenia and around the 
world participated in the second part of “The End of Transition: Shifting Focus 
a Quarter Century After the Soviet Collapse” international conference, held on 
May 23-24, in Yerevan, Armenia. 

Organized by the USC Institute of Armenian Studies, the conference’s first part 
was held on the USC campus April 9 and 10, and featured scholars and 
specialists from across the globe as they discussed Armenia’s trajectory since 
independence in 1991. 

Salpi Ghazarian, the director of the Institute, opened the conference. Provost 
Quick, Vice President Bailey, and Deputy Director of the USC School of 
International Relations and moderator of the conference, Professor Rob English, 
presented the opening remarks.

“This conference reflects our commitment to be that essential bridge between 
the problems and challenges facing Armenia and Armenians, and those with the 
intellectual and academic skill and passion to tackle them.” said Salpi 
Ghazarian, director of the USC Institute of Armenian Studies.

Provost Quick, who spent his first day in Yerevan visiting the American 
University of Armenia, TUMO, and CivilNet, as well as the Genocide Memorial and 
Museum and other sites in Yerevan, reflected on his experences. “The past is 
present in Armenia like no other place I have ever visited in the world, 
whether it’s around the issue of genocide, or whether it’s around the issue 
that we’re going to be talking about today and tomorrow about the 25 years 
since the break up of the Soviet Union. But I realize it’s not just about the 
past. It’s about how that past influences the future.” 

Vice President Bailey said, “Part of my role here today is to tell you that the 
USC Institute of Armenian Studies is the most important international center at 
USC.”  

The conference opened on the afternoon of May 23. In addition to the USC 
guests, special speakers included Ambassador Jack Matlock, the last US envoy to 
the USSR; Ambassador Ed Djerejian, director of the Baker Institute at Rice 
University and a former US diplomat with extensive experience in Russia and the 
Middle East; Tim Judah, a Balkans expert and writer for the Economist and the 
New York Review of Books; Professor Ronald Suny of the University of Chicago 
who has specialized in the Soviet and post-Soviet space, with a special focus 
on the Caucasus; Dr. Hans Gutbrod founder of Transparify, formerly with the 
Caucasus Research Resource Centers; Garik Hayrapetyan of the UN Fund for 
Population Activities on the demographics of transition, and finally, 
Russia-based author and journalist Anna Arutunyan.

Professor Ronald Suny presented the first talk of the conference, summarizing 
the relations between the the West, Turkey, and Russia. 

Suny noted that one of the most important factors to remember is how important 
and central Russia is to any of the problems in the South Caucuses. “What if 
Russia were the power that, in fact, could bring some kind of solution to the 
problems in the South Caucasus?” he said. 

Ambassador Matlock, who served between 1987 and 1991, discussed the evolution 
of US-Russia relations since the fall of the Soviet Union and the impact of 
this relationship on the South Caucasus region. Matlock noted that, as long as 
Russia continues to sense growing hostility and rivaly from the US, it will 
take reactionary steps to ascertain itself not only regionally but 
internationally. “What Putin, internationally, has reacted negatively to is 
what he considers an effort to put him down,” Matlock said. 

Ambassador Ed Djerejian took the stage next. He further expanded on the 
important role of US-Russia relations on Armenia. “Armenia’s future is linked, 
in an important way, to the way in which the US-Russia relationship is going to 
evolve,” Ambassador Djerejian noted.  

Following the individual presentations, Professor Suny, Ambassdor Matlock and 
Ambassador Djerejian engaged in a conversation moderated by Professor English. 
They focused on the impact of regional and global hegemons on Armenia’s 
transition since the collapse of the Soviet Union. 

The panelists agreed on the growing role of Russia in the region and the need 
for the US to take into account Russia’s regional interests. 

“Armenia should, of course, act in its own interests, but those interests 
involve the other great powers around it and the limits placed on it by those 
particular powers. And those interests have to maybe be more carefully defined 
at times. They go in all kinds of different directions,” Ron Suny concluded. 

The conference continued with the next speaker, Anna Arutunyan, a journalist 
and author of the The Putin Mystique. Arutunyan highlighted the focal points of 
transition for both Russia and the independent states during the last 25 years. 

She said, “In the case of Russia, when we look at it as transitioning, we think 
transition from point A to point B, from yesterday to tomorrow, from tyranny to 
freedom. It’s a binary issue. And that in itself, that view, has embedded with 
it a path dependency.”

Following the conversation on Russia, Garik Hayrapetyan of the United Nations 
Population Fund summarized the data related to the demographics of transition. 
Out-migration, sex-selected abortions, and an aging population are all part of 
this conversation. Talking specifically about sex-selected abortions, 
Hayrapetyan noted, “If we continue the trend like this, by 2060, Armenia will 
lose 93,000 girls.”  

Dr. Hans Gutbrod, director of Transparify, a policy research and advocacy 
organization based in Tbilisi, Georgia, discussed global and regional trends in 
democracy development, or what he called “ten years of backsliding of 
democracy.” Gutbrod’s presentation focused on local activism and policy changes 
that can have impact on the next stages of transition. He highlighted Georgia 
as an important example of transition. 

“Why was change possible? Small teams of people who trusted each other worked 
together, a mix of insiders and outsiders that brought relevant expertise, and 
an emphasis on delivery in the first six months so you could actually make 
change and have an impact. Georgia shows that change is possible, even in 
places where it seems like people have given up,” he noted.

Changing the topic from regional to domestic issues, Gutbrod discussed the need 
to tackle more specific domestic issues, such as immigration, women’s rights, 
and more. “We need to also have a transition in our thinking. It’s not only 
enough now to target fertility in our policies. What we need to target is more 
gender equality, increasing of women’s roles in our society because it’s women 
who decide if they should have more children or not.”

Tuesday’s final speaker was Tim Judah, the Balkans correspondent for The 
Economist. To offer a comparative element, Judah explained the transitional 
processes in the Balkans, noting that “In the former Yugoslavia, nobody had 
much time for expectations. And communism, unlike in Armenia, didn’t collapse, 
it just fizzled out.”

He mentioned that the Kosovo War was also important because it propelled 
Bulgaria and Romania into NATO and sooner, rather than later, into the EU. This 
significantly impacted the transition process in the Balkans. 

The conference continued on May 24.  The first panel – on The Beginning and End 
of Transition – was chaired by Anna Arutunyan. 

Professor Robert English opened the panel with a talk entitled, “Russia, Trump, 
and a new Détente.” He addressed Washington’s obsession with Russia’s potential 
meddling in US elections and the need to move beyond smaller issues into the 
larger picture of the relations between the two powers. “As long as this cloud 
hangs over the Trump administration, any progress or relations with Russia will 
be viewed as Kremlin manipulation; Congress will not provide any funding or 
support any initiative,” Professor English noted. 

Professor Ugur Ümit Üngör from the Netherlands addressed the evolving relations 
between Armenians and Turks. His talk was focused on the Armenian Genocide and 
its aftermath; evolving social and political relations in the past decades; and 
the issue of leadership in both countries. 

Referencing Professor Suny’s discussion on transitology, he noted that there is 
one element of this that is relevant to Armenian-Turkish relations, which is 
transitional justice. This is a burgeoning field that looks at the aftermath of 
mass crimes, such as genocide.

Pointing out the importance of the event in the present, Professor Üngör said, 
“There is no single interaction between any single Armenian or Turk, either at 
a café or at a university or in a business setting that the genocide does not 
cast a shadow on. The genocide looms large.”

Continuing the conversation, Director of the Armenian Communities Department at 
the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation in Lisbon, Dr. Razmik Panossian, asked in 
his presentation on Trends and Lessons from Transitions, “Where are we now, 
globally?” His talk addressed issues of electoral illiberalism, consolidation 
of elites in government, as well as ineffective or “tired” civil societies. 

Calling on the Diaspora, Dr. Panossian asked again, “The choice that we, as 
Diasporan Armenians, have vis-à-vis Armenia itself, given this rather bleak 
picture, is, do we accept it as it is with the occasional visit, do we engage 
with Armenia for change, or do we turn back and move on?”

Professor Georgi Derlugian from New York University in Abu Dhabi, focused his 
talk on the development of democracy in Armenia and all the various factors 
that affect this. 

Despite all the challenges in Armenia, Derlugian stressed that one should not 
take for granted the independence of Armenia. “We have a multilingual 
population…we have refugees now arriving from countries like Syria. This is a 
burden in the short term. This is, if we manage to keep them, a great 
investment. So the situation is actually begging for a developmental state.”

The second panel – on Civic Culture and Social Change – was moderated by 
Professor Don Miller, Director of the Center for Religion and Civic Culture at 
USC.

Professor Miller opened the panel by defining the term civil society, noting 
that, “Central to civil society are the values of free speech, the right to 
advocate for the public. A vibrant civil society typically has multiple 
contending voices that are a part of that.” 

The first presenter of the panel was Dr. Pål Wilter Skedsmo from the Fridtjof 
Nansen Institute in Norway. Dr. Skedsmo’s talk focused on environmental rights 
in Post-Soviet Armenia. Yerevan’s urban landscape since independence was 
discussed by Vrej Haroutounian, a graduate student at the University of 
Edinburgh in Scotland. The conversation turned to Georgia with Professor Anton 
Popov from the UK, who presented a talk entitled, “Rebabilitating Telavi: 
Politics of Historical Heritage in Post-Soviet Georgia.” The changing roles of 
Armenian churches was discussed by Sabrina Papazian from Stanford University. 
Dr. Antranig Kasparian addressed the changing motives and modalities of 
charitable assistance from the Diaspora over a quarter century. The Diaspora 
conversation continued with Eviya Hovhannisyan from European University at 
Saint-Petersburg in Russia. 

In between the panels, the audience enjoyed a brief presentation by filmmaker 
Eric Nazarian on the transitioning of post-Soviet cinema in Armenia. He 
mentioned the urgent need to present Armenia and Armenians in cinema with its 
new, 21st century identity.


“The first time audiences around the world were exposed to the concept of an 
Armenian was of a destroyed, victimized, repressed, brutalized, raped race…as 
they say, you don’t get a second chance to make a first impression. This was 
the first impression the world got of Armenians—as a victimized nation, aka the 
starving Armenians.”

Following Nazarian, philanthropist Ruben Vardanyan, took the stage to discuss 
approaches to the next stage of transition in Armenia. He talked about his 
desire to do something more systemic to address development in Armenia. “Let’s 
try to go from the vision to execution, which is sometimes the more difficult 
part of transition,” he said. 

Mr. Vardanyan discussed the impact of his initiatives, taken by his family 
foundation, or with the collaboration of friends and other investors. Those 
initiatives range from development projects which focus on advancing education, 
expanding tourism, and developing local economies through the IDEA Foundation. 
In turn, the Aurora Humanitarian Initiative aims to put Armenia in a global 
context. 

Dr. Irina Ghaplanyan moderated the third panel on Governance and Economy. 

Professor Armenak Atinyan from Tianjin University in China opened the panel 
with a presentation on the impact of temporary migration in the South Caucasus. 
Dr. Taline Papazian discussed the role of the Yerkrapah in the institutional 
development of democracy. Discussing ‘hybrid regimes,’ Babken DerGrigorian 
presented Armenia as a case of anocracy. The conversation changed to healthcare 
as Shant Shekherdimian of the University of California, Los Angeles, discussed 
the efficiency, or lack thereof, of the Diaspora’s efforts in healthcare in 
Armenia.

Building on previous research done by Professor Don Miller, Dr. Karena 
Avedissian presented a talk on her current research on post-Soviet perceptions 
of poverty and unequal wealth. Arsen Stepanyan addressed the transition in 
legislative processes in Armenia since the collapse of the Soviet Union. 

The last panel of the conference, entitled Foreign Policy and Regional 
Integration, was moderated by Dr. Hans Gutbrod. Presenters focused on Russia, 
Iran, the European Union, and Georgia.

Professor Mikayel Zolyan of Yerevan’s Brusov University addressed the paradoxes 
of Russian-Armenian relations. Iran’s relationship with Armenia was covered by 
Iran-based scholar Robert Markarian. Armen Grigoryan of the Cental European 
University in Hungary presented on Armenia and the European Union, with a focus 
on lessons from Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine. Georgia-Armenia relations were 
addressed by Tamar Kutsishvili. 

“Apart from the evident value of bringing together the experiences of these 
scholars and diplomats, this conference is proof of the need to support deeper 
research into all aspects of development in the Republic of Armenia. The 
Institute has embarked on supporting research in and about Karabakh; we 
continued with offering assistance for research on aspects of the transition 
process. We intend to continue to identify critical areas of research needed to 
address national challenges,” said Salpi Ghazarian. 

The entire two-day conference in Yerevan is available online at 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3Din2sHsLPSOA-26list-3DPLrV5tKkl8-2DJiJW-2DrqAywZEyHjMknY5kkv&d=DwIGaQ&c=clK7kQUTWtAVEOVIgvi0NU5BOUHhpN0H8p7CSfnc_gI&r=LVw5zH6C4LHpVQcGEdVcrQ&m=IZJbtkuXaB7TgyEbKsU7PwsJ5AcJ80k-7YITQcYqC0Y&s=Dras84ueK0oYumnN5Jl0YDEanIa-G-q6fz4zcRkMPYA&e=
 

The two-day conference in Los Angeles is available at
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3DlzBaxX6Xnsg-26list-3DPLrV5tKkl8-2DJjqnAiIza10BHv2PZ8FVIy4&d=DwIGaQ&c=clK7kQUTWtAVEOVIgvi0NU5BOUHhpN0H8p7CSfnc_gI&r=LVw5zH6C4LHpVQcGEdVcrQ&m=IZJbtkuXaB7TgyEbKsU7PwsJ5AcJ80k-7YITQcYqC0Y&s=VHAR0Rni0nBchUM71MIeg-FCxjcBtiy95zQybx0kRbw&e=
 


About the Institute

The Institute of Armenian Studies promotes research, scholarship and 
programming that address national and global challenges and seek to contribute 
to policy that impacts the development of Armenian communities and the Armenian 
Republic.


# # #

For information:
3518 Trousdale Parkway
VKC 351; MC 0043
Los Angeles, CA 90089-0043
213.821.3943
armenian@usc.edu