Author: Raffi Khondkarian

By David Davidian

While the collective West appears to be run by diplomatically and strategically challenged leaders, there are some states in the world which should not emulate such nonsense. Two of these states include Armenia and Azerbaijan. The former has put itself under existential threat. Since coming to power in 2018, Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan has changed Defense and National Security Ministers five times each, forcing incessant policy discontinuities that preceded and continued through Armenia’s loss in the 2020 Second Karabakh War.

Since Azerbaijan was given the proverbial green light in the fall of 2020 to invade the self-proclaimed Armenian Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh, it has gone from engaging in a maximalist negotiation position to a post-war occupation of over 40 sq. km of internationally recognized Armenian territory. Azerbaijani President Aliyev’s most outrageous claim is that most of Armenia, if not all, is Azerbaijani. If peace is ever to be achieved between Armenia and Azerbaijan, Azerbaijan must consider diplomacy, other than the caviar variety.

Armenia appears unable to differentiate between transactional children’s games and skilled diplomacy. The latter is nearly nonexistent, as evidenced by the lack of any Armenian diplomat publishing thought-provoking ideas. Armenia’s announcement that it could ratify the International Criminal Court’s Rome Statute and be bound to arrest Russian President Putin if he visits Armenia since the ICC has issued an arrest warrant for Putin. Due to the lack of transparency in Armenia’s government, its people must conclude why such a diplomatic position was even considered. If pushed, Armenia’s government could admit that the ICC is a political institution. Yet, it never bothered to engage in due diligence to investigate if the charges against Putin have any basis. Instead, it preferred to shoot itself in the foot and make an enemy out of Putin. Let’s point out a few realities.

1 – “The International Criminal Court can only intervene where a State is unable or unwilling to genuinely carry out the investigation and prosecute the perpetrators.” The ICC has no army or police force. Thus, if a state wishes to adopt the Rome Statute, the ICC cannot protect a state against any third-party repercussions if the state actively enacts tenets of the ICC. It is naive of Armenia to think anything different.

2 – If Russian President Putin is arrested, that state will have effectively committed an act of war against Russia. 

3 – There is no guarantee that the ICC will support any Armenian case against Azerbaijan.

 4 – Finally, the ICC charges against Putin have been seriously challenged and appear baseless.

Suppose Armenia claims it will adopt the Rome Statute and threatens to arrest Putin. In that case, Russia could act in kind and as a minimum:

– Shut down much of Armenia’s infrastructure, including its nuclear power reactor, supplying about half of Armenia’s electrical power.

– Shut off gas supplies to Armenia, leaving Armenia virtually with no gas.

– Forbid any transfer of remittances from Russia to Armenia.

– Expel all temporary Armenian workers from Russia.

– Pull any cash it may have in Armenian banks and end all economic activity with Armenia.

– Unilaterally withdraw its peacekeeping forces currently stationed between Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh and an Azerbaijani military aiming to eliminate them.

Such actions would be just the tip of the iceberg, as Russia could cause an overnight regime change or pull out all of its troops and military equipment from Armenia, leaving Armenia at the mercy of its two hostile neighbors, Azerbaijan and Turkey, each claiming all of Armenia as their own. 

Within weeks of Armenia’s threat against Putin, various Armenia announced that it would not arrest Putin. However, Russia retaliated by banning the import of dairy products from Armenia. This lack of direction and foresight represents the aforementioned transactional, kindergarten games.

Suppose Armenia’s government and diplomacy are engaged in a nuanced game, playing off both sides of the emerging multipolar world, that many of us – barking dogs – cannot understand. Given this, why would Armenia’s Parliament Speaker, Alen Simonyan, engage in ‘nuanced diplomacy’ by spitting in the face of a local Armenian who saw him on the street and called him a traitor just a few days ago? The pastime of Armenia’s controlled opposition is calling Armenian government officials, such as their Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, traitors.

Armenian diplomacy is as puerile, unsophisticated and naïve as is Azerbaijan a dynastic militaristic dictatorship.

Yerevan, Armenia

Author: David Davidian (Lecturer at the American University of Armenia. He has spent over a decade in technical intelligence analysis at major high technology firms. He resides in Yerevan, Armenia). A collection of his work can be seen at shadowdiplomat.com

(The views expressed in this article belong  only to the author and do not necessarily reflect the  views of World Geostrategic Insights).

For my two past visits to Armenia, I crossed into the country via the border of a third nation, Georgia, despite the fact that Armenia is one of Turkiye’s immediate neighbors. This was due to the fact that the border between the two countries was closed. While crossing the border, my Armenian colleague emphasized the importance of relations between the two nations and said that, even though there are land borders between countries, minds have no borders. He added: “Two nations can still be close, but before opening the closed border we have to open our mental borders.”

In 1993, during the first Nagorno-Karabakh war, Ankara closed the border and cut relations with Armenia out of support for Azerbaijan, Turkiye’s main ally in the Caucasus. The Turkish-Armenian border remained closed until the aftermath of the devastating earthquake that hit southern Turkiye and northern Syria last month.

The sole land border crossing linking the two countries opened for the first time in more than 30 years to allow Armenian aid and rescuers into the disaster zone. This exceptional opening of the border on Feb. 7 was symbolically very important because the two countries still do not have formal relations, although there is an ongoing normalization process. The same border crossing was also used in 1988, when a big earthquake hit Armenia and the Turkish Red Crescent Society moved aid to the affected areas. As part of the recent earthquake diplomacy, Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan visited Turkiye to meet with the 27-member Armenian search and rescue team operating in Adiyaman.

However, Turkiye and Armenia now want to go beyond this disaster diplomacy and unlock the border between them permanently. Yerevan announced this week that Turkiye and Armenia plan to allow crossings between the two countries. Mirzoyan said the land border would open only for diplomats and citizens of third countries until the beginning of the tourist season. In early 2023, Turkiye lifted a ban on cargo flights between the two countries.

While both capitals agreed to open the land border, in the meantime there was “football diplomacy 2.0” taking place between Ankara and Yerevan. A UEFA Euro 2024 qualification match between the Armenian and Turkish national teams took place in Yerevan last Saturday. The Turkish sports minister went to Yerevan to attend the match, making him the first Turkish official to visit the Armenian capital in almost two decades.

The two countries want to go beyond disaster diplomacy and unlock the border between them permanently.

Sinem Cengiz

In 2008, ahead of Turkiye’s World Cup qualifier against Armenia, Turkish coach Fatih Terim said: “This is only a football game, it is not a war.” Indeed, it was just a football game, but not an ordinary one.

Back then, it was the first time the two neighboring countries, which have historical animosities toward each other, had come face to face. The Armenian and Turkish presidents visited each other’s capitals to watch the matches played between the two national teams. This move was later described as “football diplomacy,” which served as a bridge between Ankara and Yerevan at that time. This famous football diplomacy paved the way for the signing of the 2009 Zurich Protocols, which were aimed at improving diplomatic relations and reopening the border. However, those protocols were never ratified and they remained as one of the missed opportunities between the two countries.

On Saturday, Armenian football fans gathered at the Republican Stadium, years after the two countries first resorted to football diplomacy, to heal their historical bitterness. Citing security concerns, UEFA had banned Turkish fans from attending the qualifier in Yerevan. The Turkish national anthem was booed by the Armenian fans in the stadium right before the match kicked off. It was a saddening, yet significant, signal, showing that the society is still not ready for normalization, never mind reconciliation.

Normalization and reconciliation are two different processes, which are often confused. While normalization requires the opening of borders and establishment of diplomatic relations between states, reconciliation is a thorough process that requires the establishment of positive relations between two societies. This is tougher than just inking deals at the diplomatic table.

The current phase of normalization between the two countries began with the appointment of special envoys to carry out negotiations, not diplomatic envoys. This itself was a clear indication that normalization will take time. A sincere dialogue based on mutual trust and the necessary confidence-building measures will eventually accelerate the normalization phase, which will be followed by a reconciliation phase. Even if, one day, Turkiye and Armenia do establish diplomatic relations, the tougher task will be the reconciliation of the two nations. While Ankara and Yerevan gradually and reciprocally approach normalization, both leaderships need to pursue successful public diplomacy to consolidate their efforts.

Turkish-Armenian relations are considered to be a “history of missed opportunities.” Both sides should benefit from the ongoing positive climate that has been created, so that history will not repeat itself and the two neighbors can consign their record of missed opportunities to the dusty pages of history.

Although a challenging road lies ahead, a new era appears to be dawning. The change of heart of the two sides could be key to not only unlocking the closed land border, but also the closed mental borders between the two nations.

• Sinem Cengiz is a Turkish political analyst who specializes in Turkiye’s relations with the Middle East. Twitter: @SinemCngz

San Francisco community leaders plan to dig up a 90-year-old time capsule buried near the base of Mount Davidson's towering cross this weekend.

What's happening: The Council of Armenian Americans of Northern California plans to unveil a time capsule that a Boy Scout troop buried at the cross in 1933 to commemorate the inaugural Easter sunrise service on April 1, 1923.

• The time capsule is expected to hold old editions of the Bible, water from the Jordan River, city and telephone directories from 1933, and issues of the leading newspapers of the time.

Why it matters: The cross atop Mount Davidson has a long, complicated history in San Francisco involving legal battles and ballot measures.

• Despite threats to its existence, the cross has served as a community-gathering place since the Great Depression, including for Easter services and to commemorate the 1915 Armenian genocide.

Flashback: Between 1923 and 1934, the cross evolved from a 40-foot wooden structure to the 103-foot-high concrete structure with reinforced steel you see today.

• The first cross was built for the 1923 ceremony, which attracted about 5,000 attendees, Friends of Mount Davidson Conservancy co-founder Jacqueline Proctor told Axios.
• In 1934, President Franklin D. Roosevelt pressed a button in D.C. that lit the permanent cross atop Mount Davidson for the first time. More than 50,000 people attended that event.

What they're saying: Proctor noted that the concrete version of the cross was built in the middle of the Great Depression, when "people were feeling pretty hopeless."

• "But they came together to be together and to find hope."

Of note: In 1992, the American Civil Liberties Union, along with other plaintiffs, sued the city, arguing it was illegal to have a religious symbol on public property.

• The city lost the suit and was required to either remove or sell the cross.

• In 1997, the Council of Armenian Americans of Northern California became the legal owner of the cross, following a voter-approved measure allowing the sale.

Between the lines: San Francisco became a refuge for Armenians who were able to escape the genocide nearly a century ago, Roxanne Makasdjian, the executive director of The Genocide Education Project, told Axios.

• Armenians in San Francisco wanted to become custodians of the cross as a thank you to the city for providing the Armenian community with a haven, Makasdjian explained.

What's next: The time capsule unveiling is planned for Saturday from 11am-12:30pm. It will be followed by the placement of a new time capsule, featuring an iPhone, an Armenian Bible, a face mask, issues of the San Francisco Chronicle, and more.

• One hundred years from now, the council hopes someone will unearth the new capsule.