Perspectives on
Armenia
Iran Daily plans to discuss the important issues of Iran's neighboring countries in special pages from now on. In this issue, due to the importance of Armenia's issues and its relationship with Iran and other countries in the region, the issues of this country have been discussed. It is emphasized that Iran Daily is not responsible for the content of the notes on this page and only the authors are responsible for this. Iran Daily only reflects the views of these people as experts on their country's affairs. All media activists, politicians and those interested in discussing the issues of their country are invited to cooperate with this publicatiom.
The development of Armenian-Iranian cooperation is a necessity
By Zhanna Vardanyan
Iranologist
After the end of the 2020 war in Nagorno-Karabakh (Armenian: Artsakh), the region did not achieve peace; instead, new challenges arose, which are now common to both Armenia and Iran.
First of all, the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict remains unresolved, and in addition, Azerbaijan violated the November 9, 2020 agreement by closing the Lachin Corridor, which connects Armenia and Artsakh, and has kept Artsakh under blockade for more than seven months. As a result, Baku does not even allow humanitarian cargo transportation to Artsakh, depriving Armenians of basic living conditions and deepening the humanitarian and energy crisis in the country.
Moreover, Azerbaijan extends its territorial ambitions to Armenia and Iran. To legitimize its actions against these two countries, Azerbaijan promotes the so-called West Azerbaijan and South Azerbaijan theses, claiming that the territory of Armenia and the northwest of Iran belong to Azerbaijan and should be “returned”. The issue of the so-called “Zangezur Corridor” was put forward as the first action on the way to achieving that goal.
“The Islamic Republic of Iran and the Republic of Armenia have common interests and common concerns in the field of national security,” emphasized Iranian Ambassador to Armenia Abbas Badakhshan Zohuri in a recent interview with the Armenian think tank Orbeli. It is evident that the so-called ‘Zangezur Corridor issue’ is one of those common concerns for Armenia and Iran.
This corridor idea, sponsored by Turkey and Azerbaijan, aims beyond merely connecting Nakhichevan and Azerbaijan, which already have an existing connection through Iran. Instead, the actual objectives are to conquer Armenian territory, particularly Syunik, to eliminate the Armenian-Iranian border, to present territorial ambitions to the north of Iran, and pursue the unification of the Pan-Turkic world.
Many observers were surprised as to why the two governments of Azerbaijan and Turkey are insisting so much on the possibility of rising tensions among related parties. Gradually, the realities became known and the understanding of experts is that the intention behind these extensive links that connect Nakhchivan to the Republic of Azerbaijan is that, first, they would divide Armenia into two parts and, secondly, they disconnect Iran and Armenia, severing a link that dates back to the era of the Achaemenid and Parthian Empires.
Third, it would limit Iran’s connection to the outside world, and from then on, we would be neighbor to 14 countries, instead of 15, and the Islamic Republic of Iran’s free connection with the North Caucasus, Russia and the European Continent will be disrupted. Any change in regional borders will cause long-term tensions.
Ali Akbar Velayati, a senior adviser to Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei pointed out in his last article.
Despite Armenia’s repeated statements that it is ready to provide rail and road communication between Azerbaijan and Nakhichevan through its territory, it insists that these routes must be under the exclusive control of Armenia.
Unfortunately, Azerbaijan continues to employ threats of force to obtain the “corridor”. Periodic attacks on Armenia’s borders are aimed at oppressing Armenia and extracting concessions. In September 2022, Azerbaijan even launched a large-scale operation, attacking the borders of RA Syunik, Vayots Dzor, and Gegharkunik. It should be mentioned that the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Armenia clarified that Iranian actions helped to stop a further deterioration of the September 2022 attack from Azerbaijan.
Nevertheless, Azerbaijan persists in escalating the situation to this day. It continues to arm itself, with significant purchases from Israel, and further strengthens relations with Israel through high-level visits, including the president and the minister of defense. Additionally, Azerbaijani-Turkish military exercises continue, and Azerbaijan undergoes a wide process of integration with Turkey’s NATO army. All these developments indicate Azerbaijan’s preparation for another potential war.
Given these circumstances, the development of Armenian-Iranian cooperation, especially in the security sector, becomes imperative. The longstanding Armenian-Iranian relations in the region must be placed on a qualitatively new basis to prevent any threat to the interests of both countries. Armenia and Iran serve as the main barriers to disrupting Pan-Turkic plans. Moreover, Armenia is considered an important route for Iran, while Iran acts as a gateway to the outside world for Armenia. This connection between the two countries must remain uninterrupted to avoid potential disaster in the region.
Armenia-Azerbaijan: Even a
zero-efficiency process can be important
By Armen Petrosyan
Expert on regional issues
On July 15, the second meeting of the current year between Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan and President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev took place in Brussels through the mediation of the president of the European Council, Charles Michel. After the meeting, Michel made a final statement presenting the results of the negotiations. The Azerbaijani and Armenian sides also issued official statements regarding the meeting.
During the summary of negotiations, which lasted about two hours and 45 minutes, the most impressive circumstance was perhaps the enthusiastic attitude of a high-ranking EU official. It is natural in case of such situations, when there is an objective need to “save the face” of the negotiation format under the minimal effectiveness of the process. Since, according to Michel’s statement, all the acute issues of the settlement process were discussed: border delimitation, unblocking of communications, the humanitarian crisis created in Artsakh and the rights and security of Artsakh Armenians, as well as the issues of the roadmap for a peace treaty. However, no final agreement was reached on any of the deep issues in Azerbaijan-Armenia relations, which is the core of the process.
According to the president of the European Council, the meeting was “frank and important”. With the above-mentioned thematic division, regarding territorial integrity and sovereignty, the two sides reconfirmed their willingness to mutually recognize the territory of Armenia, which covers 29,800 sq. km and Azerbaijan’s 86,600 sq. km . Furthermore, they reconfirmed the implementation of the delimitation based on the 1991 Almaty Declaration. The leaders of the two countries agreed to accelerate the work of the commissions.
Regarding the unblocking of regional communications, the technical details of future transport agreements which will respect the principles of sovereignty, jurisdiction, equality and reciprocity. The promotion of railway construction has been encouraged, and the EU is ready to support it financially.
Regarding the humanitarian crisis caused by the blockade of Artsakh, Michel noted: “I emphasized the need to open the Lachin Road and also noted Azerbaijan’s willingness to provide humanitarian supplies via Aghdam. I see both options as important and encourage humanitarian deliveries from both sides to ensure the needs of the population are met”.
Regarding the issue of the rights and security of the people of Artsakh, the EU once again expressed its support for “direct dialogue between Baku and the former Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast.”
Regarding the peace treaty negotiations, Michel said that now is the most decisive stage and called on both leaders “to take further courageous steps to ensure decisive and irreversible progress on the normalization track.”
They also discussed humanitarian issues, particularly the topic of the fate of Armenian detainees and Azerbaijani criminals.
As it has already been mentioned, looking point by point at all the key directions of the Brussels negotiations, it is clearly seen that no progress has been recorded in the fundamental disagreements of the parties. The reason for this is very simple: under the current geopolitical and regional realities, Azerbaijan is not ready for even the slightest compromise. The position of the Azerbaijani authorities remains fanatical and uncompromising. The political officials of Azerbaijan believe that after the 44-day war in 2020, Armenia has completely capitulated, and they should not make even the slightest concession to establish peace in the region. The presence of competing Russian and Western platforms in the Azerbaijan-Armenia settlement process significantly contributes to Baku’s position, which provides an additional maneuverability opportunity for Azerbaijan, as well as the lack of mood of the international community to push Baku to concessions, which is due to the geopolitical situation caused by the Ukrainian crisis, Azerbaijan’s energy and infrastructure capabilities, and the nature of Baku-Ankara relations.
As a consequence, while using the continuous policy of force and threat of force in the direction of both Armenia and Artsakh, Azerbaijan is trying its best to disrupt the negotiation process and, what’s more, on behalf of Armenia, so that Yerevan would refuse the negotiation and Baku would present it as a manifestation of the Armenian side’s destructiveness. One of the most recent manifestations of “powerful diplomacy” was the aggression against Artsakh at the start of the US negotiations between the foreign ministers of the Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Azerbaijan in June, as a result of which four Defense Army soldiers were killed. Moreover, it should be noted that even prior to the last Brussels negotiations, simultaneously, Azerbaijan continued to escalate the situation both in Artsakh and on the border with Armenia. One of the most outstanding examples of the latter is the use of the Armenian prime minister’s willingness to recognize the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan as a justification for blocking the Lachin Corridor by Azerbaijan. Generally, as already mentioned, the reason for such positioning of Baku is that Azerbaijan currently sees opportunities to get the most from Armenia.
Moreover, these calculations of Baku are in the range of all key issues with Armenia. In case of Artsakh, Azerbaijan sees an opportunity to completely occupy the historically Armenian-populated region and to ethnically cleanse it, therefore, at least he considers it problematic to directly negotiate with Stepanakert under any “international mechanism” by the international community, thereby gaining a new dependence on various international actors. This is the reason why the Artsakh’s Road of Life, the Lachin Corridor, has remained blocked for more than seven months, resulting in the humanitarian situation in the region reaching disaster level.
Another humanitarian issue, that is, the issue of Armenian POWs forcibly kept in Baku, has not recorded any significant change since the war. More than three dozen Armenian servicemen remain in captivity: moreover, Azerbaijan continues to criminally kidnap new servicemen, regularly terrorizing the civilian population in Artsakh and in various regions of Armenia. In the process of delimitation and demarcation, Baku tries to avoid the option of moving the process forward based on the 1970s maps of the USSR, while talking about some fictitious maps. It is within the framework of this logic that although the Armenian side has repeatedly mentioned its willingness to recognize the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan even numerically in the Almaty Declaration, while the Azerbaijani side has not yet made a similar statement. The aim of such positioning of Azerbaijan is to get opportunities to solve the Artsakh problem with its own agenda through manipulative diplomatic practices, using the recognition of Armenia, as well as unilaterally, without exchange, to get the so-called “enclave” territories from Armenia, and not leave the sovereign territories of Armenia occupied in May 2021.
Baku adopted the same position in the process of the unblocking of regional communications, not giving up the notorious Turkish-Azerbaijani “Zangezur Corridor” project. And, although the universally accepted principle in the issue of unblocking in almost all negotiation platforms is to bring the process under the sovereignty and jurisdiction of the states, nevertheless, the Azerbaijani side refuses the final agreement in every possible way, since for now it sees an opportunity to get the Azerbaijan-Nakhichevan connection through the “corridor” logic.
The above-mentioned realities are the reason why it has not been possible to establish peace in the South Caucasus over two and a half years following the bloody war of 2020. Moreover, enjoying the comprehensive support of Turkey, Baku continues to act from an extremist position, constantly creating instability in the region and even expanding its geography. During this period, the Azerbaijani authorities purposely escalated the situation with Iran as well, wanting to neutralize the latter’s principled policy in regional developments.
In the face of new realities, a purposeful attempt is being made to weaken as much as possible the levers of Iran’s influence in the region and in Azerbaijan, especially the Yerevan-Tehran resistance in the issue of implementation of the “Zangezur Corridor” project.
Under the aforementioned circumstances, Armenia’s position is aimed at encouraging the negotiation process on all possible platforms to exclude a new military escalation, despite its near-zero effectiveness. By ensuring the continuity of the negotiation process, it is possible to keep the attention of the international community constantly focused on our region, thereby keeping Azerbaijan’s aggressive behavior as manageable as possible. At the same time, in the complicated geopolitical situation, amid the security system shaken by the 44-day war, the main problem for Armenia is coping with the non-stop challenges through various and new mechanisms.
Among such mechanisms are the preservation of the previous systems with Russia, despite the significant decrease in their effectiveness, cooperation with Iran, especially in the part of Syunik, the deepening of relations with India in the military and political fields, the diversification and deepening of cooperation with the US and the EU, especially with France and other western countries, the process of normalization of relations with Turkey, meetings with Azerbaijan in various negotiation formats, etc. That is to say, in such a crucial period of history, the actual processes are often important even in the face of zero efficiency.
The need to prevent the destruction
of the Armenianness of Artsakh
By Artak
Khachatryan
Cultural anthropologist, ethnographer
The rhetoric of some political officials of Azerbaijan, particularly, the statements about the disintegration of state institutions in Artsakh, are not new in the context of Azerbaijani politics. Since the Soviet times, Azerbaijan has conducted and currently continues to conduct a policy of destruction of Armenianness in Artsakh. This policy has been particularly active since the 1930s, within the framework of the so-called ‘korenization’ policy. Soviet korenization in the case of Azerbaijan created institutions: Academy of Sciences, Turkic Studies Centers, and Theories about History. Institutions created processes, with the end result of forming mobilized nation. From an anthropological point of view, the important existential basis of a mobilized nation is the creation of history. Contrary to Azerbaijan, which was just on the way to creating these institutions, they already existed in the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast (NKAO): The territory as a compact collective existed, history, language, cultural continuity, educational centers existed, in terms of statehood, the institutional memory about the merits of khamsa was present. There was also an important fact, that both during the Democratic Republic of Azerbaijan (1918-1920) and during the first years of the Soviet Union, the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh were not defeated. It should be noted that NKAO is not an entity created by the will of the Armenians living there, but is a coercion. Therefore, on the one hand, the above-mentioned mobilization is supposed to be pro-Azerbaijani, since an attempt is being made to establish the Azerbaijani nation; on the other hand, it is condemned to be anti-Armenian and anti-Artsakh, since by creating institutions, Azerbaijanis try to enter into competition with already existing institutions. Secondly, there is a hierarchical difference: It was “embarrassing” for the Azerbaijanis to compete and lose to a lower hierarchically subordinate entity, Nagorno-Karabakh, during the USSR years. What Azerbaijan has done and is doing is a series of actions aimed at making a political nation. The creation, or rather the appropriation of culture and history, has been a continuous chain of actions by Azerbaijan since Soviet times, as it was an imperative requirement for Baku, alongside Iran, Georgia and Armenia, neighbors with a rich history and culture in the region. Cultural appropriation for Azerbaijan is done at the expense of the peoples of the region. This creates the basis which will allow Azerbaijan to position themselves side-by-side with Iran, Armenia and Georgia. The Azerbaijanization of Iranian culture goes parallel to the process of declaring the monuments of Artsakh as Aghvanian. By Azerbaijanization of Nizami and Aghvanization of Armenian culture of Artsakh, Azerbaijan creates/invents the complex of spiritual and material culture. Accordingly, if looking at the conflict from an anthropological point of view, Azerbaijani policy gradually limits the cultural inclusion of Artsakh (in Soviet times, NKAO), and there will come a moment when Azerbaijan will try to say that the current population of Artsakh is also Armenianized Aghvans.
Armenia: The new tourism hub of the region
By Meri
Hovsepyan
Head of Economic Research Department, Orbeli Analytical Center
In the first half of 2023, Armenia was visited by nearly 1.9 million tourists, which exceeds the historically highest result of the comparable period of 2019 by about 30%. In Armenia, as well as all over the world, among the most affected fields by the coronavirus pandemic was tourism, which was not only fully restored, but also stands for record scores. Following the pandemic, the war and other regional developments, in 2023, all prerequisites were created to reach and even surpass the 2019 indicator. Actually, Armenia changes its current positioning in the global tourism market and aspires to become a tourism hub of the region, for which it tries to create prerequisites by providing diverse offers.
On the one hand, Armenia attracts tourists from the point of view of cultural, entertainment, adventure, medical, and nature tourism; while on the other hand, due to the fact that it is a transit zone.
In fact, one of the most important prerequisites for tourism development is the presence of developed infrastructure, the availability and quality of services, for the provision of which active works are currently being carried out, such as through modernization of the transport network, the introduction of new routes from airports, etc.
Private tourism companies, in turn, offer diversified inbound packages, not only in the capital, but also throughout the country. The main destinations are Gyumri, as a colorful and cultural city, Jermuk as a resort destination, Garni-Geghard, with historical and cultural places, Syunik and Dilijan with beautiful nature, Yenokavan for extreme leisure lovers, Tsakhkadzor for winter sports, etc.; and all of these are united by an important component of gastrotourism, which will please any demanding tourist.
The culture of festivals, such as wine days, workshops (especially in rural areas) has also started to develop in Armenia.
Actually, the Russian-Ukrainian conflict has changed long established air routes, creating new opportunities for other countries, including Armenia. Currently, more than four dozen airlines operate flights from Armenia to various destinations, both to Europe and Asia. Especially, following the Russia-Ukraine war, both the destinations and the number of flights have increased. Moreover, in the last few years, there has been a lot of activity in the market, both with the increase of national airlines and the entry of European budget airlines. This, in turn, contributed to the increase in the offer of budget tickets and diversity of destinations, used not only by Armenians, but also by citizens of Russia, Ukraine and other countries. Thus, due to geopolitical developments, the entry of national air carriers and budget airlines, Armenia has also begun to be considered as a transit destination. Emphasizing the presence of developed transport infrastructures with neighboring countries, direct flights in this direction are also increasing. For instance, two Armenian airlines have announced the launch of the Yerevan-Tehran-Yerevan route, which can give an impetus to the Armenia-Iran passenger flow.
The geographical distribution of tourists arriving in Armenia is quite concentrated. This year, more than half of the 10 countries which provided the main tourist growth are the Russian Federation, with 519,163 tourists, Georgia, with about 11%, Iran is in the third place, with 6%, or with 58,494 tourists. Moreover, about 64% of tourists prefer to visit Armenia by air (Zvartnots and Shirak airports, which had a record number of 3,697,000 passengers in 2022), and the most popular among the five land routes is the Bagratashen border checkpoint on the Armenian-Georgian border, 21.6%, followed by Bavra, 9%, and the Meghri border checkpoint on the Armenian-Iranian border, around 4%.
Tourism in Armenia attracts visitors with its accessibility, safety and diversity. In general, according to calculations of the Central Bank of Armenia, the average spending in 2022 was $1,100-1,200 per tourist.
Based on various international rating scales, Armenia is on the list of the safest countries in the world; it is a country of low risk, where the safety of tourists is at a fairly high level. Statistical data prove that the field has a great potential to make Armenia a regional tourism hub, including developing a component of being a transit country connecting Asia with Europe.
It is noteworthy, that regional tourism also has an important component in the development of tourism in Armenia. It is estimated that 42% of tourists come to Armenia within the framework of regional visits. The number one tourists to Armenia are Russians, followed by Georgians.
Iran ranks third in Armenia by a number of tourist visits, especially the number of tourists increase during the Nouruz holidays. However, the tourism potential between the countries in the region is not fully realized; it is possible to make the field more active by developing awareness campaigns and marketing interactions as well as offering joint tourist packages.