Author: Jhanna Virabian

From June 14-17, 2023, I had the opportunity to participate in a program organized by the “Friends for Leadership” at the Saint Petersburg International Economic Forum. Thousands of delegates, primarily from Latin America, Africa and Asia, attended the forum alongside heads of state, diplomats and businessmen. The main objective of the forum was to network, witness the latest tech, agricultural, IT and infrastructural innovations, and attend different panels addressing Russia and its relations with the Global South. Notably, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) had “special guest” status, and its cultural, economic and political presence was felt by all in the forum. Many delegates were anxious for details of the new agreements signed between Russia and other countries, listen to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s speech, and attend dozens of sessions and panels related to BRICS (Brazil-Russia-India-China-South Africa), the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC) and north-south trade. During the forum, I had the opportunity to closely identify Russia’s post-Ukraine war foreign policy priorities, meet Russia’s foreign policy spokesperson Maria Zakharova and other officials, highlight Moscow’s geo-economic interests in the Middle East, Africa and the Caucasus, and finally, assess the challenges of the emerging multipolar world system. 

Multipolarity, de-dollarization and the future of BRICS

There were many panels and bilateral talks dedicated to the multipolar world system and its challenges, the de-dollarization process, and the coalition of BRICS. Most panelists agreed that we are moving towards a multipolar world order where no single hegemon dictates its terms; however, there were some differences of opinion when it came to the structure of this system among different players. 

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin during his live keynote speech at the forum on June 16, 2023

BRICS is becoming a rising de-dollarization coalition, with the group developing multiple de-dollarization initiatives to reduce currency risks and bypass U.S. sanctions. However, it is far from reality, at least for now, to argue that the group will initiate a common currency replacing the U.S. dollar. During the panel debates, many opposing ideas were presented from different representatives of member states. All member states aimed for de-dollarization, but none are in favor of a common currency to replace it, even though they aim to establish a “polycentric global monetary system by promoting the internationalization of the currencies of member states.” Further evidence of booming trade in de-dollarization is the progressive gains in market share of BRICS countries’ national currencies in the U.S. dollar-based global currency system. In his keynote speech at the economic forum, President Putin commented on de-dollarization, arguing, “We have never had, and do not have, the goal of de-dollarization of the Russian economy. And we have never had, and do not have, the goal of influencing the de-dollarization of the world economy. The influence of one or another currency on the world economy is connected with the economic potential of the country that is the issuer of that currency.” 

There were also divergent opinions between China and India. While the Chinese speakers appeared “calm,” the Indian speakers seemed “defensive,” raising concerns about the trade deficit with Russia and complaining that India should not be viewed as a “junior partner” and should be “treated equally”. As one of the Indian diplomats said, “We need Russia to consider us a full-fledged power with a sovereign economy.”

Finally, there were clear messages that now BRICS is not just an economic but also a geopolitical powerful actor, and the organization is looking forward to new partners and a new format of cooperation. 

The region, interconnectivity and the North-South corridor

What is the INSTC and why is it important for Moscow’s geo-economic interests in the South Caucasus and the Middle East? The INSTC is a 7,200 km model of ship network, rail and road project that was initiated in 2000 by Russia, Iran and India to facilitate trade between India, Russia and Europe. As mentioned in one of my previous articles, this transport corridor aims to reduce the delivery time of cargo from India to Russia and Northern Europe to the Persian Gulf and beyond. 

The project is planned to have three routes: 

• Western route: Connecting the Caucasus to the Persian Gulf.
• Central route: Connecting the Caspian Sea to the Persian Gulf via Iran. 
• Eastern route: Connecting Central Asia to the Persian Gulf. 

The Persian Gulf plays a crucial role as an import-export transit hub for Russia, connecting it to Asian markets or even the Eastern Mediterranean. Iran is also looking forward to constructing a railway connecting the Persian Gulf to the Syrian port of Tartus, aiming to bypass sanctions, though for now this seems to be a difficult project to implement due to a lack of foreign direct investment and the political situation in Syria. 

During the business dialogue session between the UAE and Russia, important matters were discussed (and Russia’s President Putin later met with UAE’s President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan). Russia and the EAEU have proposed that the UAE sign the Free Economic Zone and Trade agreements. Negotiations are underway, and we may witness an agreement by the end of the year. Trade turnover between the two countries has doubled over the past year and now amounts to $10 billion. 

During bilateral meetings, Russia’s industry and trade minister Denis Manturov said, “We are constantly expanding the range of areas in which we build joint work. We are implementing several industrial cooperation projects, and initiatives in the field of transport and services, energy and food security. We have started an active negotiation process on a free trade agreement between the UAE and the states of the Eurasian Economic Union.” This is another indication that Russia is moving southward and values the Persian Gulf as an import-export hub for the North-South Transport Corridor. On the other hand, the UAE president said he has been under Western pressure. Russia also is in negotiations with Egypt to sign a free economic zone agreement between the EAEU and Egypt. 

These agreements would have clear implications for our region, including: 

• For the first time, Russia and Iran will have railway access to the Eastern Mediterranean, thus consolidating their geo-economic and political position in the region. 
• Russia’s dependence on the Black Sea would decrease, and the Eastern Mediterranean will turn into a strategic area for Russia—a region that is also rich in energy resources.
• With the economy comes politics. Russia will become a key peace broker in the region, where trade interconnectivity will stabilize the region and may minimize the occurrence of new wars, as trade provides a win-win solution for everyone.
• By establishing the INSTC, Russia and the EAEU member states will have access to the Persian Gulf and the Levantine markets and vice versa. 

It is important for Armenians to identify Russia’s key objective behind “interconnectivity.” Russia has an interest in controlling the trade routes in the South Caucasus and linking them to the Middle East via Iran. By controlling the trade communication channels between Armenia and Azerbaijan, Russia will not only control the key routes in north-south trade, but also the key highways and railways connecting the west to the east via Syunik. This is why Russia wants to control the trade routes in Syunik through its border guards, as mentioned in the November 10, 2023, trilateral statement. 

During the launch reception with Russia’s foreign ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova, I had the opportunity to ask her the following question:

“Today Russia and other regional countries are pushing for regional trade interconnectivity linking the South Caucasus to the Middle East (Persian Gulf and the East Med) through highways and railways within the North-South Corridor context. What are the main challenges of this project? Do you think the ongoing Russian-backed peace talks between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and the normalization between Syria and its surroundings, may further facilitate the realization of this project? Or are there still major obstacles?”  

To sum up, Zakharova stressed certain key points. She gave huge importance to peace and dialogue between Yerevan and Baku, but she also argued that foreign countries want to destabilize the region and create new conflicts near Russia. She said Russia is doing its best as a “close friend” to both sides to end the conflict, but both sides still are in their positions. She also spoke about Syria, and said that a few years ago no one could have imagined that Russia could have brought Turkey, Syria and Iran together. Of course, the main obstacles were the foreign powers (mainly the West), but she clearly hinted that Russia views these two regions as one whole economic zone. These trade routes are important for Russia, and she implied that Russia’s aim is to have land access to the Eastern Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf within the context of trade interconnectivity with other regional countries.

Why is Russia interested in seaports?

This was another interesting question that I raised for discussion with Russian experts in the forum. In one of the panels that I attended, “Russian Fleet for New Maritime Transport Corridors,” the panelists argued that in terms of trade, a new “iron curtain” is being built with the West, and while trade with Europe is facilitated by a dense network of roads, railways and pipelines, routes connecting Russia to Africa, the Middle East, Latin America and many Asian countries are made via the sea. The growing importance of sea-based trade creates the material basis for Russia’s re-emergence as a maritime power, in addition to Moscow’s interest in naval power. 

Notably, Russia also plans to exploit the Northern Sea Route by transforming it into a strategically important cargo route linking Asia and the Pacific to Europe. Moreover, grain production is now crucial for Moscow. It is within this context we have to analyze the importance of the Tartus Port for Russia as a Russian grain storage hub in the future for Middle Eastern and African countries. Because grain exports are growing so rapidly, existing export terminals are undergoing modernization, and new capacity is being added. The Black Sea’s role as the gateway for food export markets across the world means that the ports of the Eastern Mediterranean as a transit hub will only grow in importance. As Russia’s maritime economic interests grow, as well as the importance of the sea to Russia’s maritime strategy, so does the need to guarantee sea communication lines and bolster Russia’s military presence around key seaports. 

Uncertain future for an uncertain region 

The post-Ukraine conflict developments have shown us that the global order is heading toward an uncertain future. The age of the U.S.-led unipolar world system has ended. But it is still uncertain whether it will be replaced by multipolarity or if we are just living in a transitional period to enter into a new bipolar political and economic system. The difference between the Cold War bipolar and the possible future bipolar system is that there is a lack of ideological commitment, and under each pole, there are many actors that may move from one pole to the other based on their national interests. Will this trigger instability or will it balance the system? 

The war has pushed Russia to reprioritize its objectives in the Global South, mainly the Middle East. Meanwhile, the Arab monarchs in the Persian Gulf are diversifying their economies and political relations. While the Middle East is experiencing a cautious “normalization” period, trade and interconnectivity may shape its future political order. However, uncertainty is still the dominant factor both in the Middle East and the South Caucasus, as the Syrian crisis has not yet been resolved and the possibility of new military escalation by Azerbaijan in Armenia or Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh) is always high. Finally, these uncertainties have pushed the new rising economic actors in the Persian Gulf to monitor global events and act based on their national interests. The Middle East once again is becoming the center of gravity of global geopolitical and geo-economic developments.

Stephen Dalil (left) and Trey Davis (right) chant at a protest in front of the Embassy of Azerbaijan

Trey Davis and Stephen Dalil stand out at protests organized by the Armenian Youth Federation – Youth Organization of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (AYF-YOARF). The duo seems out of place among the crowd of Armenians and stumble through the pronunciation of complicated Armenian words during chants. Yet that doesn’t stop them from showing up and getting involved by consistently attending protests, posting on social media and donating to fundraisers. The average Armenian might think these two couldn’t even point out the nation on a map. I am proud to say that Trey and Stephen are two of my closest friends, and seeing them so involved and outspoken is heartwarming and inspiring. 

Both Davis and Dalil credit their friendship with Antranig Kasbarian and me as the primary catalyst for their support, but they also have deeper motives than the fraternal bond. For Dalil, commitment to the Armenian cause is just “the right thing to do.” This sentiment is echoed by Davis, whose “love of learning” and desire to “make a positive impact on the world” have driven him to work to correct “the gross negligence of the worldwide community” on the Armenian issue. Davis and Dalil are not only examples of good friends, but also of the impact that we, as representatives of our nation and people, can have on those around us by informing and activating them for the cause. By bringing in non-Armenian supporters and allies, the mission for a free, independent and united Armenia becomes much more attainable, as it will no longer be only Armenians who have that end goal in mind.

This same process can be seen whenever a celebrity speaks up for the issues that Armenia and Artsakh face. Most recently, French footballer Olivier Giroud pledged to donate a large portion of the proceeds from the sale of one of his World Cup jerseys to Artsakh, a statement that thrilled Armenian fans of the sport. Hollywood stars like George Clooney and Oscar Isaac have also released statements on Genocide recognition, with the latter doubling down on his support during the 44-day Artsakh War by describing the continued jeopardy of Armenians in the region as “heartbreaking.” Actors Michael B. Jordan and Sean Penn also made social media posts during the 44-day Artsakh War in support of Artsakh and its people. These big names have all helped spread awareness for the Armenian people and the Armenian cause. The discourse around their support seems to always vary from praise to pessimistic disregard because “this won’t change anything.” Yet having people with influence speak empathetically on Armenian issues can never hurt. 

Posting a video or statement on social media, however “easy” it may seem, has force behind it—Armenian leverage. Jordan specified that he was thinking about his “Armenian friends” during the war, and actor/director Mel Gibson made clear in his statement on the war that he has “many Armenian friends” who have “told [him] about the pains [and] loss of life.” Giroud also has Armenian connections, notably close friend Youri Djorkaeff, a French-Armenian football legend who also serves on the Armenian Sporting Board. If having a friendship with someone who is Armenian can elicit recognition and sympathetic responses from notable members of society, those of us living in the US, where we interact with non-Armenians on a daily basis, should maximize the implications of that knowledge every day. 

We are taught, and correctly so, to fight assimilation in our day-to-day lives and stay as “Armenian” as possible, with each individual (inevitably) having their own idea of what that entails. Increasingly deeper roots have been set in the United States, and Armenian families commonly find themselves on their second, third or even fourth generations in America. This settlement in the US, combined with the difficulty of repatriation due to war, housing crises and other factors, have forced diasporan Armenians to work to grow the communities existing around them. A large part of this is investing time and effort into local organizations, but another important and largely under-appreciated aspect of this process is the incorporation and encouragement of non-Armenian allies. 

As an Armenian diaspora, we have fought to create little corners of society where we can be Armenian, with local organizations and churches fulfilling the role of maintaining our Armenian identity in an American society. That being said, keeping this Armenian-ness in those little corners limits the interaction and impact our voices can have.

 This idea of “counter-assimilation,” where we actively spread the Armenian fire as opposed to focusing on keeping it lit, could prove fruitful for the Armenian diaspora in the United States. While not all of us know world famous football players or actors, we all have a community in our schools, jobs or hobbies that we can inspire and push to action. Increasing the standards for our friends from sympathy for our family backstories to tangible action is important and, in my opinion, necessary for a community as ours, especially in areas without a large Armenian population to begin with. 

Simply put, provided they have the means, if your friend has a free evening, they should be at the protest happening that night. If they give you an excuse, well, I guess I just have better friends than you.

For serious-minded Armenians, these are challenging times. We can divert our focus with the beauty of our culture and heritage, but a certain hollowness remains with our anguish for Armenia and Artsakh. Living in the diaspora as an Armenian is a life of choices. We can choose to retain our faith and heritage, or we can reject our hyphenated reality and blend into the great melting pot. Similarly, even if we commit our time respecting our identity as a member of the global Armenian nation, we can choose to ignore certain realities. There are times when I wish I had the ability to shut out certain aspects of our Armenian life and only choose from a portfolio of happiness. Such is not the fate for many Armenians who cannot deflect the pain and suffering of our brethren in Artsakh and in the border regions of Armenia. When we visit these areas and become acquainted with the citizens of these regions, it becomes very personal. These are our friends and colleagues, not simply faceless individuals who we read about being victimized.

Last weekend was one of the happiest of my life as we celebrated the marriage of our daughter. She was a beautiful bride and is an even better human being. It was the culmination of fatherhood to walk down the aisle of our parish before God and the hundreds of witnesses. It was my day to not think about our problems as a nation and simply reflect on the joy of her marriage. Later in the day, at the reception, my responsibility was to welcome our guests and offer words of love to our daughter and new son-in-law. That was the easy part. They are remarkable people deeply committed to each other, and it was natural to reflect on what was evident to all. The difficult part was the need to connect the gathering to our people in the homeland who, at that very moment, were challenged to maintain a sense of daily security and survival. We were all thrilled to be together, but it just did not feel right unless we mentioned something about those in the homeland who have a special place in our hearts. The contrast of our abundance and their deprivation was on my mind. I chose to connect this joyous day for our family with the responsibility to remember those of our greater family who are suffering simply because of who they are. When we attend weddings, it is natural to think of those who had a significant impact on our accomplishments but are no longer living an earthly existence. For my generation, the suffering and survival of our grandparents are always on our minds. We connect their challenges to our current generations in Artsakh and Armenia. After my comments about the relationship between the day’s celebration and never forgetting our brave brethren in the homeland, I felt a sense of inner peace to fully engage in the incredible day. 

Everything in our Armenian lives is connected. Leadership has been on many of our minds as we confront the issues facing our people. Unfortunately, most of the dialogue has been about the lack of leadership or the controversial issues that serve to distract us and dilute our effectiveness. The church leadership, which has a major responsibility to nurture and inspire our faithful, has been mired in controversy. We have four hierarchical sees in the Apostolic church. Holy Etchmiadzin serves as the Mother See of the church with the Great House of Cilicia in Antelias serving as the legacy of the historic Cilician seat in Sis destroyed by the Turks during the Genocide. In addition, we maintain hierarchical sees in Constantinople (Istanbul), established in the early days of the Ottoman Empire as the head of the Armenian community (millet), and the historic Patriarchate in Jerusalem where the Armenians have maintained an important presence in the Holy Land. All Armenians should respect and revere these four sees as a reflection of the depth and resilience of our nation. Unfortunately, all are facing monumental challenges that are consistent with external problems, or in some cases, self-inflicted ones. The Armenian community in America is not an island unaffected by the leadership crisis in our nation. 

The Patriarchate in Jerusalem has been impacted by a significant decline in a native Armenian population with emigration motivated by the hope of a better life. The Israeli government does not seem overly concerned with the challenges facing the local Christian population. The conflicts in the Holy City go beyond the oppression of the Palestinians. The entire Christian population is at risk. These are external factors. A self-inflicted example is the current crisis caused by the Patriarchate led by Archbishop Nourhan Manougian agreeing to lease a large tract of land to a businessman for development. This decision was announced outside of the approval process and has caused significant turbulence in the community. A priest responsible for the real estate of the Patriarchate was defrocked but claims he is the scapegoat. The Patriarch himself has been vague on his approval. The question remains: How can decisions like this be made without the direct consent of the leader and the supporting bodies? The Palestinian community, which has been a friend of the Armenian community, has rescinded its recognition of the Patriarch, claiming that the Australian businessman who secured the deal to lease nearly 25-percent of the Armenian Quarter’s land is working with the Israeli government to continue incursions into the Old City. 

In Istanbul, the Patriarchate of Constantinople is led by Archbishop Sahag Mashalian who has been apologetic and patronizing to the Erdogan government. We all understand the difficult position of the Armenian community living under a government that is racist, but Garo Paylan has provided us with an alternative model of leadership based on a clear conscience, courage and focus on critical issues. Certainly the Patriarch has even more protection as a religious leader whose immunity cannot be removed like that of politicians (a favorite tactic of Erdogan to suppress the dissent of Kurds and Turkish opponents). His apologetic tone for genocide recognition and Armenian rights is nauseating and provides no leadership to the community.

The situation in Etchmiadzin is not much better. During this seemingly endless political and security crisis, the Vehapar has been mostly invisible except for carefully-timed statements. His recent public statements have taken on a decidedly anti-government tone, which may be more a reflection of his feud with the Pashinyan government rather than providing much-needed inspiration and encouragement to our beleaguered people. From a US diaspora perspective, it has been many years since a pontifical visit was made to the US diaspora. During this void, the Vehapar has made several “private” trips to the US for selective meetings with benefactors and supporters. This is not acceptable. The faithful are worthy of the blessings of the supreme Patriarch. It has been suggested by many that the absence is an avoidance of public criticism. Regardless of the reasoning, leaders have a responsibility to serve their people. We need a more visible presence to inspire the people of Armenia during this time, and the American Armenian community should be respected with a presence.

Catholicos Aram I

In this sea of controversy, there is some hope. The recently announced pontifical visit of Catholicos Aram I this October offers the eastern US the opportunity for much-needed inspiration. The general public has asked two things from its church leaders: visible and accessible presence and wisdom to lead the church forward. Aram I has an established record of consistently providing both. Mentored by the late Karekin I of blessed memory, Aram I is both a dynamic public figure and visionary. The Great House of Cilicia has a tradition of providing highly-trained and dynamic clergy to the diaspora through its seminary and outstanding programs in spiritual, ecumenical and communal affairs. One of the tragedies of the jurisdictional conflict in our church is that large segments of the community have little access to some of our church leaders. This was illustrated in 2015 during the Genocide centennial commemorations when Aram Vehapar spoke at the gathering in Washington. Many in attendance were impressed with him despite having little knowledge of him. His pontifical visit reminds us that these shortcomings negatively impact our church. We need to focus on his role as a valued leader in our global church. The administrative division in the US has been reduced to official status, as sacraments, badarak and observances are conducted regularly with clergy from both dioceses. We were honored last weekend to have four clergy, including two sets of fathers and sons from both the Prelacy and Diocese at my daughter’s wedding. 

For this reason, it would be appropriate and consistent with our Christian values for the diocese to invite Aram I to conduct a hrashapar service at a diocesan parish. It is not about jurisdiction but respect for our hierarchical sees at a time when many are mired in controversy. Our people desperately need a sign that our church understands their needs and that our values are based on love and respect, not irrelevant power issues. Why is it that we can regularly invite ecumenical clergy to our parishes and cathedral but not invite visiting leaders of our established sees? The Great House of Cilicia is the continuation of the seat in Cilicia, which was the place of the Catholicos of All Armenians for more than two centuries until 1441  and has continued its critical role to this day. All Armenians should understand and revere its presence as they should Holy Etchmiadzin. I look forward to welcoming Catholicos Aram I to these shores and pray that the entire Armenian community seeks his blessing during these challenging times.