The West Foments Chaos in the Caucasus
Wedged between Russia, Iran, and Eastern Europe the Caucasus are considered a crossroads in more ways than one. That can be an uncomfortable place to be nowadays as great power games pick up steam. Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and if we throw Türkiye in here as well, are all struggling in their own ways to navigate the pressure cooker.
While Armenia is allowing itself to be used by Western powers to destabilize the region, Georgia is attempting to stop Western meddling. Türkiye, too, is now considering clamping down on “foreign interests” in the country while Azerbaijan looks sturdy for now.
Armenia
For now, Armenia, whose government appears to have abdicated in favor of Western interests, looks to be the least stable and the most likely source of regional turmoil. What’s happening there is either the result of sheer incompetence or there are ulterior motives at hand. The latest from the West-led peace process has Armenia giving up more occupied land to its neighbor Azerbaijan with nothing in return, which continues a recent trend.
Many Armenians are predictably enraged by the deal, and large protests led by Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan are continuing into a second month and demanding the resignation of Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan. Their complaints:
During a massive rally on May 12 in Yerevan’s Republic Square, which was filled with tens of thousands of supporters, Archbishop Galstanyan articulated the movement’s stance, stating, “We are not opposed to peace, delimitation or demarcation. However, what is currently happening, with unilateral concessions forcing us to our knees, is unacceptable. There is no precedent for repeatedly giving in without guarantees against war, especially under the threat of force. We seek definitive peace, a peace that is worthy and lasting.”
We have now arrived at the point that was obvious months ago. Pashinyan government, led by the West, has humiliated itself by ceding contested lands with nothing to show for it, which is generating mass public outrage. The same happened with the region of Nagorno-Karabakh last year.
Against the backdrop of the new Cold War, mediating countries began to compete for the status of the main moderator of the Armenia-Azerbaijan negotiations. Yerevan began to favor the West, and talks mostly moved to Western platforms. It was during those meetings that Armenia agreed to officially recognize Nagorno-Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan.
Once Armenia did so (and PM Pashinyan declared so publicly), the die was cast. The region was (and is) recognized as Azerbaijani territory by the international community but was overwhelmingly populated by ethnic Armenians. Roughly 100,000 of them fled to Armenia after Azerbaijan blockaded the region for months and then moved militarily to assert control in September – an operation that resulted in hundreds of deaths.
Despite moving the negotiation process under the guidance of the West and publicly recognizing Nagorno-Karabakh as Azerbaijani territory, the Pashinyan government has sought to lay all the blame for its loss at the feet of Russia. And Pashinyan now largely refuses to participate in summits with Russia.
There has also been a step-by-stp poisoning of ties with Russia from Armenia’s side, including “freezing” its participation in the Russia-led Collective Security Treaty Organization, not allowing the head of the Russian Society for Friendship and Cooperation with Armenia into the country, and joining the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The ICC, which much of the world views as no more than a political tool of the West, has an outstanding arrest warrant for Putin for alleged war crimes in Ukraine. That now means that if Putin were to visit Armenia he should face arrest there. Moscow called the ratification by Yerevan a “hostile act.” It’s certainly interesting timing on Armenia’s part considering the statute came into effect all the way back in 2002. The souring of ties culminated in Russia recalling its ambassador to Armenia on May 24.
As negotiations continue on disputed territory, Armenia is negotiating from a position of severe weakness. Azerbaijan enjoys military superiority, Armenia has thrown away its Russian security blanket, its new friends in the West don’t have the capabilities to effectively intervene and they’re also reliant on Azerbaijan natural gas.
And so we have a Western-led peace process in which Azerbaijan demands more and gets it.
The result is a humiliated, angry population in Armenia while the government tries to shift all the blame onto Russia. That seemed to work for a time in the aftermath of Nagorno-Karabakh, but Armenians by and large are no longer buying it. This much is obvious:
To what end, though? Just to set another bonfire in Russia (and Iran’s) backyard? The fears of other countries are that the West’s ultimate designs are to make a bloody mess of logistics through the Caucasus that are playing a major role in Asian integration. Both China-led East-West routes and Russia- and India-led North-South routes rely on passing through the Caucasus.
That course of action would be suicide for Armenia, which is surrounded by countries interested in seeing those trade routes developed. Armenia was dependent on Russian for protection, and its economy is also mostly dependent on Russia and the Eurasian Economic Union and has been doing quite well acting as a reroute point around sanctions.
The protests in Armenia are led by Archbishop Bagrat Galstanian, a senior cleric of the Armenian Apostolic Church. It’s unclear if Galstanian has enough support to force a change in government. A few rallies he headlined have reportedly drawn about 30,000 people.
Galstanian was educated in the U.K. and Canada and in recent years has risen to prominence due to his opposition to any land deals with Azerbaijan. He has the support of much of the political opposition, as well as the Sasna Tsrer organization, an extra-parliamentary force that is anti-Russian, pro-West, and has perpetrated political violence in the past.
So, while Galstanian’s opposition is clear to the course Pashinyan has the country on, where he would take Armenia should he gain more power is unclear. For example, I have yet to see Galstanian direct any criticism at Pashinyan’s puppet masters.
Under the Pashinyan government, Armenia has remained on bad terms with Azerbaijan and Türkiye, and relations with Russia have gone down the drain. The country is somewhat allied with Iran, but that is being strained by Armenia’s opening the doors to meddling from the West – including hosting military drills with the US last year.
What exactly is the strategy here – if there’s one at all? So far all that’s happening is a slow motion car crash in Armenia; meanwhile its neighbors (Azerbaijan, Georgia, Iran, Türkiye, and Russia) strengthen ties in order to fend off the Western foothold in the region.
Speaking of Georgia and Türkiye, both countries are pursuing variations of a “foreign agents” law intended to squash foreign meddling in the countries’ politics and prevent an Armenia-like situation or color revolution attempt.
Türkiye
New legislation in Türkiye would jail journalists and researchers working for foreign “interests.” According to Turkish Minute, that would apply to “anyone who carries out or orders research on (Turkish) citizens and institutions with the aim of acting against the security or the political, internal or external interests of the state, on the orders or in the strategic interests of a foreign organization or state.”
Those convicted would face three to seven years in prison. Since the 2016 coup attempt in Türkiye, tens of thousands of people suspected of links to US-based preacher Fethullah Gulen have been arrested, more than 140,000 fired or suspended from their jobs and nearly 3,000 sentenced to life in jail.
The US has refused to extradite Gulen who has always denied involvement in the coup attempt. The newly proposed foreign interests law could be a sign that despite the massive crackdown on Gulenists, Turkish officials still fear that Western NGOs are attempting to destabilize the country.
The latest “coup” intrigue in Türkiye revolves around high-ranking police officials allegedly attempting to ensnare members of Erdogan’s ruling coalition in graft probes. Of course, the possibility exists that the politicians are indeed corrupt and labeling any investigation of them as a coup attempt and arresting the officers is a way to make the investigations go away. In recent years Gulenists have frequently been accused of targeting officials by eliciting fabricated statements from “eyewitnesses.”
Türkiye joins a handful of other countries and breakaway regions also working towards foreign agents laws:
The usual criticisms are being aired about Türkiye’s proposed law – that it would be a blow to rights and freedoms and take a toll on press and civil society. That take isn’t necessarily wrong; the law could be used to crack down on legitimate criticism.
At the same time, what is government expected to do when a certain country or bloc of countries use this openness to fund foreign organizations to destabilize the country from within and attempt color revolutions?
Georgia
That’s what’s happening in Georgia, which just passed new restrictions on NGOs. Despite the law’s enactment, the tense situation is far from over as Western governments and NGOs are now expected to double down on efforts to topple the government in Tbilisi, and chances are it will get even uglier than it already is:
Zourabichvili is also promising to hold a referendum on the pursuit of EU membership.
“We must prepare a real referendum. This energy that is in you today should be spent on collecting signatures and bringing them to me. I will sign the order for the referendum – do we want a European future or Russian slavery,” she said.
The Georgian law requires NGOs and media outlets that receive more than 20 percent of their funding from foreign sources to register as organizations “carrying the interests of a foreign power.” It should be noted that the US has its own Foreign Agents Registration Act, and that Georgia’s law does not mean that these NGOs cannot operate; they just must register.
Tens of thousands of Georgians have protested over the government’s new law for days, claiming it is part of a pattern of assault against human rights in the country. Proponents say it is necessary to preserve the country’s sovereignty from constant meddling from the West. The Georgian oligarch Bidzina Ivanishvili who is a major kingmaker in Georgian politics says that the “global party of war” interferes with Georgia’s interests.
One of Ivanishvili’s fiercest critics is the incarcerated former president of Georgia, Mikheil Saakashvili, who accuses Ivanishvili of having him arrested.
In 2008, Saakashvili who was backed by the western NGOs and believed Georgia was soon to join NATO and that the alliance would have his back, started a war by bombing the breakaway region South Ossetia. Russia intervened and in five days Georgia was driven out of Ossetia.
Georgia is still mending ties with Russia, and as the West accelerates its efforts in former USSR countries, politicians and the oligarch Ivanishvili likely don’t want a repeat of 2008. That being said, they don’t claim to be “anti-West;” they just don’t want to be used as a battering ram against Russia.
Even Ivanishvili has said, “with sovereignty and dignity intact, by 2030, Georgia will join the EU.”
Yet, that begs the question: on those terms, would the EU even want them?