Tensions between Yerevan and Moscow reached a new threshold following high-level exchanges over the fate of Russia’s 102nd Military Base in Gyumri. Speaking in a broad-ranging political broadcast on Noyan Tapan, Armenian Council expert and political scientist Robert Ghevondyan outlined how economic leverage, hybrid warfare, and shifting security guarantees are redefining Armenia’s sovereignty and the broader geopolitics of the South Caucasus.
The debate surrounding the 102nd Military Base resurfaced after Russian President Vladimir Putin signaled at a Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit that Moscow could withdraw its forces if Armenia requested it. Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan responded bluntly, indicating that if Russia wished to leave, it was free to do so.
According to Ghevondyan, this exchange represents a nuanced game of diplomatic counter-shantaj (counter-blackmail). Historically, Armenia has borne substantial financial and logistical costs to maintain the Russian base on its soil. If Yerevan were to halt these provisions, the financial burden would shift entirely back to Moscow—freeing Armenian budget resources for key strategic vulnerabilities.
• Financial Reallocation: Funds saved from base maintenance could be redirected to repurchase or secure critical infrastructure, such as the concession management of the South Caucasus Railway network.
• Energy Independence: Budgetary flexibility gives Armenia greater leverage when dealing with Russian natural gas pricing and state-monopolized supply chains.
• Geopolitical Realignment: Financial independence weakens Moscow’s traditional levers of institutional control over Armenia’s domestic governance.
“I consider this counter-blackmail,” Ghevondyan stated during the broadcast. “Russia views it as blackmail when Armenia indicates it may no longer be able to maintain the base, so Moscow counters by threatening to leave. But Pashinyan did not fall for it—he simply made clear that if they want to leave, they can sit down and talk.”
The Outpost Fallacy and the Ghost of 1921
The geopolitical friction has sparked intense debate among Soviet-era military figures. Retired Lieutenant-General Norat Ter-Grigoryants recently announced he would renounce his Armenian citizenship, claiming Armenia is risking total “Turkification” by distancing itself from Moscow and failing to join the Russia-Belarus Union State. Ter-Grigoryants notoriously described post-Soviet nations as Russian “buffer zones” and characterized Armenia as an indispensable Russian outpost.
Ghevondyan firmly rejected this framing, pointing out that Moscow lost Armenia as a strategic outpost between 2021 and 2023 when Russia failed to honor its binding security obligations during critical border crises and regional conflict.
“Russia lost Armenia as an outpost between 2021 and 2023 when it failed to fulfill its obligations,” Ghevondyan emphasized on Noyan Tapan. “Until 2022, we were indeed Russia’s outpost. We must accept that reality, evaluate it, and decide what to do next. But we no longer wish to be an outpost for anyone—we want to govern our own state.”
The Referendum Dilemma and Hybrid Operations
While domestic sentiment in Armenia increasingly leans toward European integration, the Pashinyan administration has refrained from holding a formal referendum on joining the European Union. Ghevondyan noted that while the Armenian public predominantly favors closer ties with Europe, an immediate referendum could hand Moscow a formal pretext for aggression under the guise of halting Western expansion.
In parallel, hybrid operations against Armenia have intensified. Recent disinformation campaigns attempted to fabricate diplomatic friction between Armenia and Kazakhstan over bilateral railway agreements—a tactic designed to isolate Yerevan economically and prevent regional partnerships outside Kremlin control.
Mechanisms of Hybrid Warfare in the South Caucasus:
1. Information Manipulation: Manufacturing fake statements attributed to regional leaders to cause diplomatic ruptures.
2. Media Insulation: Restricting internal information flows within Russia to project false narratives abroad.
3. Economic Sabotage: Manipulating energy pricing, border checks, and transport concessions to force political compliance.
A Changing Regional Order
As relations between Moscow and Yerevan cool, the Kremlin has attempted to deepen bilateral contacts with Baku. However, Ghevondyan argues that Moscow’s attempts to swap regional partners reflect past illusions rather than current political reality. Neither Baku nor Tbilisi has any interest in ceding sovereignty to become Moscow’s new regional proxy.
Despite deep historical conflicts between South Caucasus neighbors, a quiet structural shift is occurring: Armenia, Georgia, and Azerbaijan increasingly recognize instances where their sovereign interests diverge from Moscow’s dictates. While regional integration remains distant, the collective resistance to external hegemony is redrawing the geopolitical map of the region.
Կարդացել են
անգամ