Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Armenia Author Richard Giragosian

1. Armenia Adapts to New Postwar Realities

Author:
Richard Giragosian
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Baku Dialogues
Institution:
ADA University
Abstract:
To many observers, Armenia’s non‑violent change of government in 2018 represented an unusual victory of “people power.” In what became heralded as Armenia’s “Velvet Revolution,” Armenian opposition leader Nikol Pashinyan surprised many with the relative ease with which he displaced an entrenched elite and emerged as the new Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia. After an important free and fair election in December 2018 cemented Pashinyan as Armenia’s new leader, the country ushered in a new period of democracy and reform. Endowed with a rare degree of legitimacy bolstered by popular support, the new democratically‑elected government promised a critical reassessment of a number of critical issues, ranging from Armenian relations with Russia to its policy regarding the conflict over Karabakh. Yet despite these important gains in democratic change and advances in reform, the Armenian leadership faced a looming challenge that was largely obscured by a legacy of arrogance and complacency. With a focus overwhelmingly devoted to domestic reform priorities, the Pashinyan government seemed increasingly ill‑prepared for the inescapable geopolitical and foreign policy demands that loomed large over Armenia. And through much of the period between mid‑2018 and early 2020, Armenia embarked on a foreign policy course characterized more by overconfidence than any realistic reassessment, marked by sporadic mistakes and missteps in its approach toward Russia but also Azerbaijan. Although somewhat explainable by a combination of inexperience and simplistic idealism, Armenia greatly overvalued the advantages of democracy and reform while also overstating its strategic significance. Against that backdrop, such diplomatic overconfidence only exacerbated a mounting crisis over Karabakh, as tensions increased and vulnerability intensified.
Topic:
Conflict, Violence, Peace, and Nonviolence
Political Geography:
Europe and Armenia

2. Russian Crisis Behavior, Nagorno-Karabakh and Turkey?

Author:
Richard Giragosian, David G. Lewis, and Graeme P. Herd
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies
Abstract:
On September 27, 2020, Azerbaijan initiated a war to retake the disputed Armenian-populated enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh and seven districts of Azerbaijan held by Armenian forces.1 The forty-four-day war resulted in a resounding defeat for the Armenian forces and only halted with the acceptance of a Russian-imposed agreement for a cessation of hostilities on November 9-10, 2020. Although the war was initially expected to unfold as a war of attrition with an eventual stalemate based on the advantages of terrain of the Armenian defenders, reality differed in terms of duration, intensity, and outcome.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Territorial Disputes, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Armenia, and Azerbaijan

3. Paradox of power: Russia, Armenia, and Europe after the Velvet Revolution Richard Giragosian

Author:
Richard Giragosian
Publication Date:
08-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
Abstract:
Armenia’s 2018 Velvet Revolution swept old elites out of power, but, unlike Ukraine’s Maidan revolution, had no broad effect on relations between Russia and the West. Armenia lacks friendly neighbours in its immediate region, and it remains heavily reliant on Russia. Russia is a dominant presence in the country but finds itself in a ‘paradox of power’: it wishes to avoid turning Armenian opinion against it, especially since 2016 revelations about Russian arms sales to Azerbaijan. The government and public wish to loosen ties with Russia, strengthen them with Europe, and improve relations with neighbouring countries, including Iran. Europe should break out of its self-imposed ‘ring of restraint’ with Armenia by increasing its technical support, something it can do without provoking Russia.
Topic:
International Relations, History, Geopolitics, and Revolution
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Armenia

4. EU-Armenian Relations: Charting a fresh course

Author:
Hrant Kostanyan and Richard Giragosian
Publication Date:
11-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)
Abstract:
The EU-Armenia Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement (CEPA), initialled in March 2017, presents a fresh start for the deepening of relations between the two parties in the wake of Armenia’s abortive Association Agreement and related Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement (DCFTA). Despite a difficult and complicated context, both the EU and Armenia have demonstrated the necessary political will to negotiate a new compromise agreement that takes into account Armenia’s commitments and limitations as a member of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). CEPA retains a considerable amount of content from the sacrificed Association Agreement, as seen in the areas of political dialogue, justice and freedom, and even security. The new agreement also includes a substantial amount of the EU acquis in legally binding provisions across a range of sectoral areas of cooperation, although the effectiveness of CEPA’s essential degree of conditionality remains an open question. The issues most affected by Armenia’s EAEU membership are core trade policy elements and the consequential loss of any DCFTA. CEPA may be viewed in EU policy terms as an example of ‘differentiation’ and greater flexibility, as advocated by the 2015 European Neighbourhood Policy review, although this was prompted by Russian force majeure. The ultimate impact of CEPA remains a test of implementation, which still poses undeniable challenges for Armenia.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, Regional Cooperation, European Union, and Free Trade
Political Geography:
Europe and Armenia

5. Recent Trends in Security and Stability in the South Caucasus

Author:
Richard Giragosian and Sergey Minasyan
Publication Date:
01-2012
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Connections
Institution:
Partnership for Peace Consortium of Defense Academies and Security Studies Institutes
Abstract:
After twenty years of independence, the three counties of the South Caucasus-Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia-continue to struggle with a daunting set of challenges. In light of several unresolved conflicts and profound deficiencies in efforts directed at democratic and economic reform, the South Caucasus continues to be a "region at risk." As if this rather bleak landscape was not enough, three more recent trends have emerged to further threaten the region's security and stability. The first trend, and one that is likely to have the most profound effects over the long term, is evident in a subtle shift in the already delicate balance of power in the region, driven largely by a steady surge in Azerbaijani defense spending and exacerbated by a lack of progress in the mediation of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Since the 1994 ceasefire that resulted in the suspension of hostilities over Nagorno-Karabakh (but that did not definitively end them), this unresolved or "frozen" conflict has been subject to an international mediation effort conducted by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe's (OSCE) so-called Minsk Group. This tripartite body co-chaired by France, Russia, and the United States seeks to engage and prod the parties to the conflict toward a negotiated resolution of the conflict.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution and Security
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Europe, Caucasus, France, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia