The incumbent regime employs two propaganda concepts—peace and sovereignty—to justify its anti-state and anti-national actions.
This rationale is built upon the following premise: during the Soviet era, the Russian Empire aimed to maintain control over us by instilling certain concepts of Armenian nationalism and patriotism, notably emphasizing territorial claims and genocide. The former fueled hostility towards Azerbaijan and Turkey, while the latter elevated this enmity to an existential and sacred level. Thus, Armenian self-perception was shaped by these two discourses.
According to the regime’s narrative, we were destined to be perpetual enemies of Azerbaijan and Turkey—a state of affairs that the Russian Empire exploited to maintain perpetual dependency. This leads to the second aspect of the argument in the discourse. When building its relations with Turkey and Azerbaijan, the Russian Empire does so at our expense. It does not “hand us over” completely but rather in parts, allowing it to continue its policy at the expense of the remaining part.
During the second Artsakh war, the regime’s leader disrupted this scheme by rejecting the so-called Lavrov plan, refusing to halt the war, and, by all accounts, intentionally conceding Artsakh through war. The chief foreign affairs advisor to Levon Ter-Petrosyan, Gerard Libaridian, can be seen as the architect of this strategy.
Read also
Subsequently, the regime initiated an assault on institutional organizations that espouse these two ideas: the Armenian Apostolic Church and the Armenian Revolutionary Federation – Dashnaktsutiun. Furthermore, they aimed to rewrite history, literature, and other Soviet-era Armenian studies textbooks. These actions were underway before 2020, providing further evidence that the surrender of Artsakh began long before the 2020 war.
In practice, this is how they perceived the two concepts under discussion: sovereignty and peace. This served as the cornerstone of their policy. However, judging by the subsequent course of events, we see that the depopulation of Artsakh of Armenians, our retreat from state symbols and the demand for recognition of the Genocide did not lead to either peace or sovereignty. And the reason is simple: we disturb Turkey and Azerbaijan not because we are the bearers of the idea of genocide or land claims. No.
In fact, the reason, though it may sound strange, lies in Armenia’s geographical position, or as the Turks term it, the “Armenian wedge,” wedged between Turkey and Azerbaijan, hindering their unification, land connection, and the realization of the dream of a Turkic world.
Therefore, irrespective of our concessions, they are not prepared to live peacefully with us; instead, they perceive the destruction of Armenia as a more viable option.
ACNIS (The Armenian Center for National and International Studies)