Geopolitics

Pashinyan explicitly stated Armenia comprises 29,743 sq km, excluding Tigranashen. Expert analyzes this strategic territory’s importance and why Azerbaijan uses Jermuk occupation as leverage.

Pashinyan offers TRIPP stakes to Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan to isolate Russia while EU seeks Central Asian access. Expert analyzes broader European strategy in Central Asia and China’s role.

Matlock advises Armenia to avoid choosing sides in great-power competition and instead prioritize peaceful relations with neighbors and preservation of cultural identity.

Matlock contrasts Reagan’s respectful Cold War diplomacy with contemporary Western leaders’ public insults toward foreign counterparts, arguing the shift undermines conflict resolution.

Matlock, present at the negotiations, provides firsthand testimony that James Baker did assure the Soviet Union that NATO would not expand eastward, and explains how this pledge was later circumvented.

Matlock argues the U.S. and NATO applied double standards in military intervention, citing the Iraq invasion and Libya campaign while accusing Russia of violating international law.

Ambassador Matlock argues that internal Soviet weaknesses, not Western military or economic pressure, caused the USSR’s collapse, and that the Cold War had already ended before the Union broke apart.

Russia ultimatum: Armenia must decide by December 2026 whether to hold EU membership referendum or face EAEU suspension. Ambassador explains why both paths lead to economic devastation.

Ambassador Aghajanian breaks down the Mecca Joint Defense Agreement as a U.S.-orchestrated strategy to isolate Iran and position Turkey, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia for potential ground operations against Iranian interests.

Former Ambassador Aghajanian argues TRIPP is designed as part of a U.S.-led ground operation strategy against Iran, putting Armenia in an extremely vulnerable position.

Aliyev revealed that Azerbaijani technical teams have surveyed transmission line routes through Syunik for TRIPP, and he is now signaling that Armenia’s nuclear power plant could become a future demand.

A senior Iranian military advisor warns that Armenia will face the same treatment as US bases in the Middle East if TRIPP becomes a problem for Iran.

Experts argue Nakhichevan’s extreme militarization under Aliyev is primarily aimed at Iran, not Armenia, and reflects preparations for potential future conflict.

Russia has given Armenia until December 2026 to hold a referendum on EU membership or face suspension from the Eurasian Economic Union and potential sanctions.

Campbell proposes that Armenia’s landlocked position and fiber connectivity could make it a regional data hub, turning potential vulnerability into strategic advantage through trade and interconnection.

Richard Campbell argues that the comparison of AI development to the Manhattan Project is flawed, and that AGI promises are largely driven by investment incentives rather than scientific reality.

Hovik and Asbed discuss the Mecca Joint Deterrence Agreement between Turkey, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia-a major geopolitical realignment with serious implications for Armenia and the region.

Hrant Mikaelian argues that appeasement of aggressors, citing the pre-WWII Chamberlain-Daladier example, historically fails to prevent war and invites further aggression.

Hrant Mikaelian holds Pashinyan responsible for the 2020 war loss, alleging he dismantled the military rearmament plans developed by the previous government and failed negotiations.

Hrant Mikaelian explains that Russia’s demand for an Armenian referendum on EU/EAEU membership is designed to create a pretext for legally expelling Armenia from the Eurasian Economic Union.

Asbed explains how Pashinyan has committed Syunik’s transit corridor simultaneously to Russia via the 2020 ceasefire and to the US-backed TRIPP framework, creating an irresolvable conflict.

Hovik reveals that Pashinyan’s sudden claims of Russian railway mismanagement appeared only after unnamed Western countries pressured him to remove Russian control, signaling geopolitical rather than operational motives.

Hovik explains why Pashinyan’s proposed Gyumri-Kars railway through Nakhijevan is a fiction: Turkey already has a multi-billion-dollar direct line, and Aliyev has made clear no northern Armenian route exists.

Christine Arakelian argues Israel’s strategy is not peace but dominance through maintaining weak neighbors: Syria destabilized, Gaza in chaos, West Bank under settler pressure.

Christine Arakelian explains how NATO 3.0 represents a fundamental power shift: Europe’s increased defense spending will give it greater strategic independence, reducing US influence over European decision-making.

Arakelian argues that Pashinyan’s Western pivot lacks congressional support because it ignores the Armenian-American diaspora, capping Armenia’s influence in Washington and making the strategy vulnerable to changes in administration.

Christine Arakelian argues that the $400 million allocated to TRIPP is grossly insufficient compared to similar corridor projects, casting doubt on US commitment to Armenia’s western pivot.

Arakelian argues that Turkey was the real winner of the NATO summit, exploiting US strategic distraction to build parallel alliances with Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt while maintaining NATO membership.

Christine Arakelian argues the US has fundamentally broken alignment with its closest historical allies, citing tariffs on Canada, deprioritized UK trade deals, and divergence on Middle East policy.

Hovik explains the strategic pressure Russia is placing on Armenia through trade restrictions, including a dairy embargo, as Pashinyan is forced to call Putin to negotiate while Armenia seeks alternative energy sources from Iran.

Asbed describes how Aliyev publicly contradicted Merz’s denial of secret German-Russian talks in Baku, exposing the backchannels and leverage plays reshaping Ukraine peace negotiations.

Asbed and Hovik dissect how Ukrainian drones reached the Caspian Sea undetected, exploring launch routes, NATO intelligence support, and the strategic implications for the region.

Archil Sikharulidze alleges that Brussels is waging a ‘full-scale Cold War’ against Georgia because Georgian Dream refused to align with EU pressure to confront Russia.

Archil Sikharulidze explains how Georgia evolved from radical anti-Russian stance to pragmatic balanced policy without abandoning European aspirations.

Archil Sikharulidze analyzes why Kyiv suddenly reversed course and engaged Georgian Dream after attempting to isolate it, revealing Kyiv’s shrinking alliance options.

Archil Sikharulidze argues that civil society organizations in Georgia, Armenia, and Russia are not independent movements but foreign-funded instruments operating under Western control.

Barsamian weighs Armenia’s foreign policy pivot to the West against the persistent threat from unrepentant neighbors: can true security come without Turkey’s acknowledgment and commitment?

Hovik explains Iran’s economic coercive leverage: by threatening the Strait of Hormuz and Gulf desalination plants, Tehran can pressure Washington into negotiations more effectively than military tactics alone.

Hovik argues the U.S. lacks a coherent strategy in the escalating Iran conflict, citing John Mearsheimer’s assessment that Washington is flailing without a clear path to victory.

Hovik details Iran’s formal request for TRIPP safeguards and Pashinyan’s dismissal, illustrating Armenia’s strategic pivot away from its longtime partner toward NATO.

Hovik explains Turkey’s expanded strategic importance in NATO, positioning TRIPP as a European long-term project to exclude Russia and Iran, not merely a transit corridor.

Dr. Suslov explains how drone dominance on the battlefield has transformed the Ukraine war into grinding attrition, making traditional maneuver warfare impossible.

Suslov argues that Russian military victory in Ukraine could be hollow if coupled with loss of influence in Armenia, Moldova, and the South Caucasus-but emphasizes that nothing is permanent.

Suslov warns that Europe is deliberately prolonging the Ukraine conflict to buy time for rearmament under NATO 3.0, potentially creating a more dangerous confrontation.

Suslov compares Pashinyan’s regime to Georgia’s Saakashvili, arguing Armenia is being systematically repurposed as a Western pawn against Russia.

Suslov explains Russia’s conflicted view of TRIPP: a strategic threat violating the 2020 agreement, but potentially negotiable as a way to preserve Russian influence.

Suslov explains Russia’s demand that Armenia hold a referendum to legitimize its choice between Eurasian integration and Western alignment, rejecting Pashinyan’s pivot as undemocratic.

Suslov warns that if Western-directed deep strikes into Russia intensify, Moscow may escalate not against Ukraine but directly against the West, crossing a dangerous threshold.

Suslov explains the paradox of Russian-Turkish relations: Moscow views Ankara as a regional rival across multiple fronts, yet maintains an official partnership framework.

Markedonov analyzes Israel’s Armenian Genocide recognition as geopolitical calculation rather than moral awakening, explaining why Pashinyan rejected it as weaponization.

Markedonov critiques the scale and sincerity of EU support for Pashinyan’s Western pivot, arguing that symbolic backing cannot replace Armenia’s deep economic ties to Russia.

Markedonov reveals Russia’s actual red lines in the South Caucasus, explaining why TRIPP matters beyond transportation logistics and what military escalation would mean for the region.

Armenia’s Constitutional Court upheld contested June 7 election results, opposition leaders pledged legal challenges to a new diaspora voting restriction, and Israel’s genocide recognition sparked regional tensions while drawing Armenia’s muted response.

Hovik and Asbed examine Israel’s historic recognition of the Armenian Genocide amid shifting geopolitical tensions, Russia’s escalating warnings toward Armenia, and the post-election standoff as the Constitutional Court prepares to rule on opposition challenges to the legitimacy of the June 2026 parliamentary elections. Ambassador Dziunik Aghajanian examines the Iran-US MOU, Armenia’s 2026 parliamentary election aftermath and Constitutional Court proceedings, Russian economic pressure on Armenia, and Israel’s recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

Ambassador Aghajanian explains why Russia has escalated restrictions on Armenian exports and issued warnings to Pashinyan, arguing Pashinyan has crossed Moscow’s red lines by pursuing a Western pivot while maintaining EAEU membership.

Ambassador Dziunik Aghajanian explains how Iran is militarily, politically, and economically preparing for an anticipated third phase of conflict with Israel and the US, including reconstruction efforts and logistics planning.

Ambassador Aghajanian argues that Israel’s cabinet vote to recognize the Armenian Genocide is not a moral act but a geopolitical pressure tool against Turkey regarding participation in planned military operations against Iran.

Armen Grigoryan’s participation in a Ukraine reconstruction conference in Gdańsk signals to Russia that Armenia may be considering freezing Russian assets, escalating tensions.

Hovik argues Israel’s Armenian Genocide recognition is a geopolitical move against Turkey, not a moral awakening, rooted in the Iran-US Memorandum and Trump’s regional realignment.

Asbed critiques Pashinyan’s silence on Israel’s cabinet recognition of the Armenian Genocide, arguing it hands Turkey new tools for denial.