PSCRP-BESA Reports No 59 (May 22, 2024)
Mass protests have been ongoing in Armenia for the past few months – the opposition began bringing demonstrators to the streets after it became known that on April 19, Yerevan and Baku agreed to start the process of border delimitation in the Tavush region. The agreements are based on the Alma-Ata Declaration of 1991, according to which the post-Soviet republics agreed to preserve the borders of the Soviet period. Armenia’s leadership agreed with Azerbaijan’s authorities to return four virtually uninhabited villages that Armenia had occupied in the early ’90s.
Following Armenia’s defeat in the Karabakh war in November 2020, the government addressed the issue of border demarcation and delimitation and planned the transfer of these territories. However, the opposition, taking advantage of the unpopularity of the agreement, which they themselves were inflaming, began mass protests demanding the government’s resignation. Although the majority of the population of the Republic of Armenia is tired of the conflict and political upheaval, the protest is gaining momentum.
The Apostolic Church, which had previously declared its distance from politics and preferred covert influence over overt involvement, is now leading the protests for the first time in history. The main leader of the protests is Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan, head of the Tavush Diocese of the Armenian Apostolic Church. He has led the movement “Tavush in the Name of the Homeland,” which has been joined by politicians from the “Armenia” alliance (a bloc of the “Dashnaktsutyun” (ARF), “Reborn Armenia,” and “Unified Armenia” parties) and former leaders of the separatist enclave in Karabakh.
Under Galstanyan’s guidance as a “spiritual leader,” previously opposing anti-Russian and pro-Russian forces have united, a process that has proven to be a peculiar one. They have managed to rally together with the help of the church as a unifying factor. However, several experts believe that foreign states and organizations, harmed by the resolution of the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, are behind the protest. In particular, these are Russia, Iran, and the Armenian lobby abroad.
As noted by J. Epstein, a fellow at the Yorktown Institute, in Newsweek, one of the main regional players for whom the end of the conflict is disadvantageous is Russia:
“Russia has historically been the security guardian of the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict. For more than three decades, Moscow played peacemaker while selling weapons to both sides and preventing true settlement to keep both countries beholden to it. But Russia’s influence in the region has diminished in recent years”.
Armenian Prime Minister N. Pashinyan plans to completely eliminate Russian dependence by ending the conflict, specifically aiming to achieve the withdrawal of all Russian bases from the country’s territory.
As Epstein notes, “some church dissidents have even claimed that the head of the Armenian church, Karekin II, was chosen in 1999 under pressure from Russian intelligence. Two years ago, Putin awarded Karekin II with the Order of Honor for his contribution to Russo-Armenian relations. Karekin II has called Russia the “second homeland” of Armenians… According to Armenian Parliamentarian Gagik Melkoyan, more than half of Armenian priests sent abroad during the Soviet era were KGB agents and many today are still connected to Russian intelligence. Earlier this month, Pashinyan said Robert Kocharyan, the second president of Armenia, largely seen as a Russian patsy, was behind the protests. In 2022, Robert Kocharyan, called for a new leader of Armenia to be chosen from the church. Kocharyan previously advocated for Armenia to “totally integrate” with Russia”.
Kocharyan, an old friend of Putin’s, was Armenian president from 1998 to 2008. He has handed Russia a significant slice of the Armenian economy and the country’s resources. Another former pro-Russian President, Serzh Sargsyan, removed in 2018, has his own political party, also joined the protests against the agreement.
Israeli analyst Lt. Col. (Res.) Dr. M. Kedar reaches a similar conclusion, but believes that behind the church-led protest is not only Russia but Iran, and to a greater extent. Kedar cites Iranian analyst and ideologue Dr. Ehsan Movahedian, an international relations specialist at the Tehran International Studies & Research Institute, known for his anti-Israeli and anti-Azerbaijani stance. Movahedian “has stated that there are two powers that can help Iran fight off “Zionists” and NATO in the Caucasus: the Husseiniyyun movement and the Armenian Church”.
Husseiniyyun is an analogue of Hezbollah, created by the former Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force chief Qassem Soleimani, the architect of Iran’s terror strategy. Husseiniyyun recruits ethnic Azerbaijanis to conduct subversive actions against the legitimate government, including espionage and attempted terror attacks on the Israeli embassy in Baku. Kedar explains that «Iran fears that a peaceful settlement of the almost 200-year-old conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan will deprive Iran of regional influence. In particular, Azerbaijan is pushing to create a Zangezur Transport Corridor that will connect it with the Azerbaijani enclave of Nakhichevan, which Iran sees as a threat to its border with Armenia”.
“For years, Armenia was its primary means to circumvent sanctions. But the current leadership of Armenia has decided to “go West” because of Russia’s waning influence in the region. “A peace treaty between Armenia and Azerbaijan looks increasingly imminent because the discussion of permanent borders has begun,” emphasizes the analyst. The agreement will deal a real blow to Iran’s interests in Armenia. Therefore, the church is an important tool for Iran.
There are numerous confirmations of direct contact between the Armenian Church’s leadership and the Iranian leadership. Earlier this month, Mohammad-Mehdi Imanipour, who leads Iran’s Islamic Culture and Relations Organization, engaged in dialogue with Karekin II with the aim of strengthening ties between their respective nations. Over the course of the previous year, Karekin II has not only interacted with the Iranian ambassador but also extended his support to the late Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi in the aftermath of an earthquake in northwest Iran. The degree of access granted to a regional religious leader such as Karekin II is without precedent. There are no known instances of either the Grand Mufti of the Caucasus, Allahshukur Pashazadeh, or the Patriarch Ilya II of Georgia having interactions with Iranian ambassadors or reaching out to Raisi.
Armenian sources indicate that practically all key participants of the protests in February this year took part in the 15th “Hay Day Today” conference in Tehran. The Iranian “Armenian Committee” invited Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan, the leader of the Tavush Diocese of the Armenian Apostolic Church; Kiro Manoyan, a member of the ARF Dashnaktsutyun Bureau; Lilit Galstyan, the deputy of the National Assembly, and Artur Mosiyan, the leader of the ARF Dashnaktsutyun faction in the National Assembly of Artsakh.
The main issue of discussion was “the capabilities of the Armenian Apostolic Church in coping with the national crisis” and “adjustment of new targets of the struggle for the Armenian cause, development of strategy and tactics”. Galstanyan and others also held closed meetings to “exchange ideas” with Iranian experts on South Caucasus issues at the Caucasus Studies Institute of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The Armenian Diaspora is the third force behind the protests. The interests of the Diaspora are vastly different from those of the Armenian people and its current government. For major diaspora structures in the USA and France, the resolution of the conflict and reconciliation with Azerbaijan and Turkey signify a loss of leverage and lobbying tools for their own interests. The diaspora is not interested in normalizing the situation in Armenia; it is captive to the myth of “Great Armenia” and the perpetual conflict between “Christians and Muslims” in the region, through which it can expand its own instruments of influence on the authorities of the USA and France.
For instance, the largest Armenian lobbying structure, ANCA, adopts a position identical to that of the Armenian Church. They quote and spread through social media Galstanyan’s accusations, “We are marching to Yerevan to end the unconstitutional and unilateral surrender of our land», they claim that US taxpayers money is being used by Pashinyan for «toxic attacks» against the church, publish and promote articles in the US media smearing the Armenian government.
The opposition will continue to protest nationwide through at least late May, demanding the resignation of Pashinyan. If the forces behind them manage to oust the Prime Minister, the peace agreement between the countries will not be possible, so the region will definitely plunge into another military confrontation.
PSCRP team