FIRST WARNING

Tensions between Moscow and Yerevan are escalating. The verbal skirmish, once aptly described as "chronic lethargy with exacerbations," is intensifying. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has issued unprecedentedly stern statements. In retort, Yerevan has begun to "beat pots," as Sergey Viktorovich notably phrased it. Let us examine the details sequentially.

Border Guards Out?

The most vociferous incident in the Russian-Armenian dialogue was certainly the declaration by Armen Grigoryan, Secretary of the Armenian Security Council. He stated that Yerevan had dispatched an official letter to the Russian authorities, requesting the removal of Russian border guards from the Zvartnots airport.

Here's the context: In the early nineties, amid the disintegration of the USSR, Moscow advocated for the internal borders of the CIS to remain as permeable as possible, while Russian border guards maintained control over the external frontiers. Analysts posited that the departure of Russian guards from the erstwhile USSR borders, particularly in the southern republics, would lead to an immediate influx of illegal migrants, terrorists, and the like. Concurrently, the Moscow press empathetically reported on the fragmentation of the borders of the nascent independent states, which severed connections between friends and relatives, and the hardships their citizens faced due to the newly instituted border guards, customs officers, and so forth. Meanwhile, these new states were progressively asserting their "border sovereignty." Azerbaijan was among the pioneers in forming its own border troops and assuming control of its frontiers, save for the segment along the border with Iran under Armenian occupation. Subsequently, other nations commenced safeguarding their borders.

Until recently, Armenia and Tajikistan were the only exceptions. However, even Dushanbe eventually began substituting Russian border guards with its own. In Armenia, Russian soldiers continue to safeguard the frontiers with Iran and Türkiye. They also oversee the checkpoints at the Zvartnots International Airport. Credible sources indicate the existence of Russian no-entry lists for individuals in Armenia.

Now, Armen Grigoryan has broached the "sacred," discussing the retraction of Russian border guards from Armenia's principal air gateway.

Forced Opposition?

Numerous theories speculate on why Armenia signalled its intent to expel the Russian military from the airport. One might even concoct a conspiratorial narrative. For instance, the November 10, 2020 Trilateral Statement stipulates that Russian border guards are to secure the Zangazur corridor. Yet, Yerevan seems averse to even acknowledging this corridor. To thwart the execution of these accords and maintain absolute control over the route, they opted to eject the Russian border guards from the nation. The pronouncement regarding the airport might merely be a test of the waters.

Alternatively, one could contend that, irrespective of such intricate manoeuvres, Armenia is declining to fulfil the transport communication agreements between the core territory of Azerbaijan and Nakhchivan. It's noteworthy that adherence to reached agreements has not traditionally been Yerevan's forte. Experts observe that although a potential pivot westward remains a prominent subject in Armenian politics, Yerevan has yet to take any decisive actions. The missive concerning the withdrawal of Russian border guards marks Armenia's inaugural significant stride towards the West.

Adding to the intrigue, on the eve of Grigoryan's statement, Russian presidential spokesperson Dmitry Peskov confirmed that the withdrawal of Russian border guards was not under consideration and that the Russian authorities had not received any pertinent official letter. It's conceivable that the letter Grigoryan referenced was dispatched subsequent to Peskov's remarks. It's conceivable that Armen Grigoryan is merely disseminating misinformation, mistaking desires for reality.

Armenia's situation today is notably precarious. On one side, Nikol Pashinyan is broadcasting various messages to Western leaders, cataloguing a litany of alleged transgressions by the Kremlin, seemingly signalling a desire to escape Russia's overwhelming influence. Conversely, the West seeks tangible actions to diminish Moscow's sway over Yerevan. Pashinyan's diplomatic balancing act has been prolonged, and patience is waning in Moscow, Paris, Brussels, and Washington. Armenia is acutely aware that Russia's current military engagements have strained its resources, making it unlikely to receive the same level of armament support as in the past (one billion, then $800 million). However, the affluent nations of the West are capable of generosity, provided they are sufficiently motivated. This necessitates bold pro-Western gestures, particularly following the cancellation of Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky's anticipated visit to Armenia. The proposed expulsion of Russian border guards from the Zvartnots airport could serve as such a gesture.

Yet, the situation is more complex than it appears on paper

Analysts assert that Armenia's approach to challenging Russia may not be the wisest. Azerbaijani specialists emphasize that airport border control is a complex operation, requiring skilled personnel, comprehensive databases, and seamless coordination. Whether Armenia possesses these capabilities remains uncertain. While Armenian border guards have been stationed at the airport, they have traditionally deferred to their Russian counterparts in times of difficulty. Should Russian border guards be withdrawn, the implications for entry into Armenia with a Russian internal passport, which has facilitated a significant influx of relocations to Yerevan, are unclear.

Moreover, should Moscow assert that the presence of Russian border guards at Zvartnots is part of broader accords, dating back to an agreement signed in 1992, and declare that their withdrawal requires mutual consent, Armenia must then assess whether it has the capacity and resources to independently secure its borders with Iran and Türkiye.

Moscow might disregard a request from Yerevan to remove the border guards, as it did with Georgian parliamentary resolutions during the Shevardnadze era. Yet, given the current tensions with the West, Moscow is unlikely to leave Yerevan's overtures unaddressed.

Waiting for a reply

Moscow's stern tone towards Yerevan predates the recent developments. Grigoryan, a prominent pro-Western figure in the Prime Minister's circle, previously stated that fostering close ties with Russia was a strategic error, a comment that elicited a sharp rebuke from Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. Lavrov's response implied that if Grigoryan's statement reflects the collective stance of the Armenian leadership and the will of its people, it necessitates a thorough reassessment of Russian-Armenian relations. Furthermore, Lavrov pressed Yerevan to clarify its stance regarding the CSTO.

While the specifics of any potential Russian countermeasures remain undisclosed, experts are confident that Moscow possesses sufficient means to assert its position, regardless of whether Pashinyan remains in power. The intricacies of these geopolitical dynamics continue to unfold.

Until now, only the propaganda figures such as Margarita Simonyan, identified with Russian state media, have issued severe critiques of the current Armenian Prime Minister. However, the Kremlin has not exhausted its options and could exert economic pressure. This tactic recalls Russia's intervention in thwarting Yerevan's bid to sign an association agreement with the European Union in 2013, setting aside any conjecture about military insurrections or coups.

Moscow might also anticipate support from Tehran in its efforts to refine Armenia's political landscape. Moscow's annoyance with Armenia's overtures towards the European Union and the United States is palpable, and it has not hesitated to caution Yerevan that the involvement of external entities will not foster peace and stability.

Domestically, Moscow enjoys political backing. The debate over whether these supporters genuinely believe Russia is Armenia's optimal ally, or if they merely aspire to ascend to power with Russian assistance, is ongoing. Nonetheless, the existence of such political actors within Armenia is indisputable.

Regardless, Azerbaijan will not serve as a tool for Russia to exert influence over Armenia. Baku maintains a cautious approach, avoiding unnecessary risks when the potential rewards are uncertain. The direction Armenia chooses to take is a matter for its long-standing and emerging partners to determine. Whether Yerevan's preferences will be considered, or if Armenia will be relegated to the role of a mere pawn in geopolitical negotiations, remains to be seen in the unfolding future.