People’s diplomacy

Arbak Shaumyanovich Khachatryan, former adviser to the president of the Republic of Armenia, former adviser to the Human Rights Commissioner in the Russian Federation and independent human rights defender, is a regular commentator for our newspaper and an expert in geopolitics. All his forecasts come true sooner or later. For example, back in 2003–2004, imprisoned in Lefortovo on a fabricated charge initiated by Armenia’s political leadership of the time, he predicted worsening relations between Russia and Georgia and Ukraine, and the emergence of ISIS.

Therefore, on the eve of the Day of Remembrance of the Victims of the Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire, our website published a lengthy interview with Arbak Khachatryan on 23 April, “Ukraine–Armenia–Russia–Third World War?” In it he warned that the direction chosen for Russia’s relations with the countries of Southwest Asia was wrong:

“…And now a failure in Russian-Armenian relations like the one in Russian-Ukrainian relations is next in line.

…Clearly, Russia cannot cast aside contacts with Azerbaijan. But one must understand that Baku’s orientation is not Moscow and never will be. Azerbaijan is oriented toward Turkey! Turkish Stream, presented to Russians as an enormous victory, is in fact a time bomb. Yes, it promises economic benefits. But the difference between a wheeler-dealer and a statesman is that the latter looks beyond the next cash receipts. Russia’s fraternization with Turkey caused pain in Armenia. People there feel betrayed and sense a growing threat.

What use will that pipeline—which still has to be built—be to Russia if war begins in Armenia? Russia will not be regarded as a friend or ally in that war, because its own actions will have spurred it. Could Russia sustain a ‘war on two fronts’ then? Or would it have to leave the South Caucasus, handing this strategically important region entirely to its opponents?”

The interview appeared on 23 April. Just three days later, on 26 April, at the height of mourning commemorations in Armenia, Turkish President Erdoğan reacted disproportionately harshly to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s speech, criticizing Russia over Crimea and Ukraine. Officials and deputies responsible for international affairs immediately became more restrained in assessing Turkish Stream’s prospects. After Arbak Shaumyanovich returned from Yerevan, we asked him for another forecast of developments in the world:

“Bet on Turkish Stream in a region rich in gas cheaper than Russia’s? This information-political game not only yields no strategic dividends for Russia, but adds hatred and chauvinism to an already heated region. Having chosen Turkey as the new pipeline’s strategic partner, we will repeatedly encounter difficulties that seem to arise from nowhere but have clear historical roots. Why does analysis omit such an important historical detail as the perpetual confrontation between Russia and the Ottoman Empire on the Crimean Peninsula?

Yes, Putin had no alternative course in the circumstances of the ‘Crimean spring,’ but it was preceded by 20 years of policy in Ukraine that we now see was a failure. All those Kolomoiskys and Poroshenkos were nurtured by us, by our policy and diplomacy, yet somehow the levers of influence over them ended up in US and EU hands. Why?

Geopolitics must not be measured by the yardstick of business interests. Geopolitical decisions must not be taken to please businessmen and bankers: their own pocket is always more important than the state’s. They cannot be re-educated, and one must not ‘bet’ on such people.

On the other hand, I am glad some conclusions have nevertheless already followed. I responded very positively to the news that Russia’s representative in the contact group settling the situation in Ukraine was being replaced. An experienced representative of the great diplomatic school of the USSR—I am not afraid of that word, great—has taken this important post.

And turning toward the strategy and principles of the USSR’s great diplomatic legacy inspires optimism. I always called what had been happening until today in Russia’s diplomatic relations with the rest of the world ‘puppet diplomacy’—‘neither yours nor ours.’ With Turkey, we have sunk to ‘diplomacy full of holes’; the ship is riddled with breaches. I want to warn immediately: unless we change course, similar disappointments await in relations with China. Recklessly aligning with China without attempting to exploit known contradictions and problems is mistaken. Paradoxical though it sounds, Erdoğan did a good deed by reproaching Russia over Crimea and Donbas. Crimea is the cornerstone vector of a change in the global legal order, bringing the people’s real expression of will to the fore rather than the business interests of the oligarchic elite of the global capitalist lobby.

All international flashpoints—ISIS, Iran, Turkey, Nagorno-Karabakh, Syria, Israel–Palestine, Ukraine–Novorossiya—are consequences of policy ‘from capital.’ Russian diplomacy and the Russian special services ‘after Crimea’ simply must turn these political games toward ‘people’s diplomacy.’

We must play on contradictions between the poor and the rich, soberly assess the inevitable confrontation between people and capital, and skillfully use it. But, as I have already said, this also requires a fundamental purge of state servants’ ranks of the greedy and grasping.

The time for bloody surgical operations has passed. Wounds are better healed with folk remedies.