The military conflict of the USA and Israel with Iran has created a new geopolitical reality on the southern borders of Armenia. In the conditions of an unprecedented regional crisis, official Yerevan is forced to play a complex diplomatic game, from maintaining pauses and operational contacts with Ankara and Baku to multi-vector rhetoric on European platforms. About what is hidden behind the foreign policy maneuvers of the authorities, will the country manage to avoid isolation, and is Armenia’s economy ready for inevitable logistical shocks? VERELQtalked to a political scientist and an economist Hrant Mikayelyan with.
In the photo: Hrant Mikayelyan, source: 168.am
VERELQ: In the very first hours of the American-Israeli operation, the death of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei was a shock for many. However, official Yerevan maintained a pause of almost three days before establishing direct contact with Tehran. How would you explain this silence? Was this political paralysis in the face of the unexpected scale of the escalation, waiting for a response from global players, or cold, calculated pragmatism?
Hrant Mikayelyan. The fact that Yerevan was late in contacting the Iranian side to express condolences could, of course, be partially attributed to unprofessionalism and the weekend. Although I believe that the authorities would have responded more promptly to a situation of such importance if they knew exactly how to respond. Therefore, most likely, it is really a matter of pragmatic calculation.
After the serious clashes in Iran in January 2026, many believed that the Iranian regime was no longer able to resist and might actually fall. Considering the very tough attitude of the Americans, this situation could have bad consequences for Armenia, especially since the Armenian government is now actively developing relations in the Western direction, including the American one. Besides, Armenia does not have its own security parity with Azerbaijan.
It seems to me that the Armenian side wanted to maintain a pause until it became clear that Iran will endure, and will definitely endure, at least in the foreseeable future. It is clear that we cannot make predictions for an indefinite period, but now we see that the initial goals of the Americans have not been realized and most likely will not be realized. It was not so obvious in the first two days, so the Armenian government pragmatically refrained from a clear response. In the end, however, condolences appeared.
VERELQ: Against the background of this “Iranian pause”, the actions of Armenian diplomacy in the Turkish-Azerbaijani vector look especially contrasting. Yerevan contacted Baku and Ankara very promptly after the incidents of the downing of Iranian drones on their territory. What lies behind this arrangement of priorities? Is this an attempt to insure Armenia against a regional fire, a gesture of loyalty to the Western coalition, or a signal to neighboring countries about Yerevan’s strict neutrality?
Hrant Mikayelyan. I think that in this case this is a gesture of loyalty to the Western coalition. It is not only Azerbaijan and Turkey. Yerevan MFA has also established contact with Bahrain, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and the Emirates. All these are the countries that were subjected to the Iranian strikes. It is clear why this is done. if Yerevan strictly maintained neutrality, it could simultaneously reach out to both Iran and Azerbaijan, urging both sides to de-escalate and expressing its concern or hope for regional stability. But that was not done, contact was established only with the Azerbaijani side. Moreover, I do not think that the Armenian side should have maintained neutrality in the situation of conflicts between Iran and Azerbaijan.
VERELQ: Meanwhile, as soon as the identity of the new Supreme Leader was clarified in Tehran, the slowness of Yerevan immediately disappeared. the Armenian authorities reacted quite promptly, congratulating him on the occasion of his election. How would you explain such a sudden change in tempo? Does this mean that Armenia was simply waiting for the intra-elite turbulence in Iran to end, for fear of making the wrong bet?
Hrant Mikayelyan. I think the answer to this question follows from my first answer. From the moment it became clear that the Iranian regime had resisted, there was no longer any need to pause before taking sides. It became clear that Iran and its current system, the Islamic Republic, are preserved, and good relations with it must be maintained. Not to mention the fact that immediately before the American-Israeli attack, the dialogue between Armenia and Iran in the field of strategic relations was actively developing. It is interesting, of course, how it will develop in the future. it is possible that the dialogue will resume as soon as this war is over. It is possible that the process will be delayed, but most likely we will only have a pause, not a complete cessation of contacts.
VERELQ: On March 11, in the European Parliament, Nikol Pashinyan demonstrated diplomatic equilibrium. He called Iran a “good neighbor”, but immediately curtsied to the USA and the Gulf countries. And he positioned Armenia itself as a “small state”, which can only pray for the wisdom of the leaders of world powers in order to end the war diplomatically as soon as possible. How viable is such a strategy of total egalitarianism and abstraction? Does Yerevan, trying to please everyone, not risk ending up in isolation?
Hrant Mikayelyan. The policy of “low profile” is justified in the case of Yerevan, and there is nothing surprising here. Advancing against someone makes sense only when you can influence something. With its anti-Iranian, anti-American or any other actions, Armenia will not affect the outcome of the war between America and Iran. Moreover, Armenia can suffer from it, but it cannot gain anything, so such a policy is completely logical.
But I would not call it complete neutrality. Pashinyan accused the clerics of working for the KGB (KGB) without any evidence, and his speech had an implicit anti-Russian character. Conventionally speaking, trying not to take sides in the conflict between Iran and the USA, he took an anti-Russian position, for which the European audience thanked him. It is not neutrality. That is why Yerevan will not remain isolated. The anti-Russian position is in the greatest demand today from the collective West. As for the isolation in the format “for no one”, Armenia was in such a situation until 2018, and it was not a big problem.
Another question is: how well is this policy being implemented, and are the levers supporting diplomacy developing? Diplomacy does not exist in a vacuum. it relies on military-political instruments, a system of alliances and a network of contacts, including economic ones. There are questions about how well this is done.
The statement that if you do not take any specific position, you will end up in isolation, is not very true. Especially taking into account that today they do not pay for the position with strategic support. they can only express thanks and provide hidden political assistance. Instead, you can pay very dearly for a certain position. we see that many Gulf countries paid for their evasive stance, and Iran made them the target of its strikes in the framework of the conflict with Israel.
Therefore, Armenia definitely does not need to position itself on one of the sides of the Iranian-American confrontation. Although at some point, when the situation stabilizes, Armenia should provide charitable and humanitarian aid to Iran, as Azerbaijan did. In addition, it would be advisable to send specialists to clean up the rubble and provide technical assistance, which is not military, but will help maintain a friendly image in the eyes of the Iranian partners.
VERELQ: Let’s move on to the economy. Iran is not just a neighbor for Armenia, it is a logistical and energy hub of critical importance. In the conditions of a large-scale war near the southern borders, what macroeconomic risks threaten Armenia in the first place? And the main thing. Do you see a real anti-crisis plan for diversifying those risks in the government’s current actions, or is Armenia just hoping for the best for now?
Hrant Mikayelyan. It is very difficult to develop an anti-crisis program in one week. Armenia’s logistics do not allow to redirect flows so easily and quickly. Iran is not only a source of goods or a consumption market, but also a logistic route through which the products reached Armenia. Another logistics destination is the emirate of Dubai, which has also been badly affected, and I cannot say with certainty that supplies from there are now continuing at full volume. Therefore, at the moment there is no such plan, and there is nothing surprising in this, because the situation is developing very quickly.
Is such a program necessary? I think that in the future, strategies should be developed in different directions, including the Iranian one. But it is difficult to assume that this war will continue for months. This is not a contact, but an air war with a large number of expensive missiles. On both sides, that stockpile has already been depleted in huge quantities, and the military potential diminishes as munitions are used up or stockpiles are destroyed. Already after a month, the ability of the parties to continue combat operations with the same intensity will be many times lower, so the crisis will begin to fade one way or another. at least that’s how it seems now.
I don’t think that at this moment it can lead to a large-scale economic crisis, but it should be assumed that Armenia is starting to live in the realities of the post-globalized world. That world will be much less connected to long logistics chains, and they need to be optimized. Today it is the Iranian crisis, tomorrow it may break out in another place. Իրանը, Իսրայելը և ողջ Մերձավոր Արևելքը լարվածության կետ են տվյալ պահին, բայց նման կետեր կան ամենուր՝ Լատինական Ամերիկայում, Հարավարևելյան Ասիայում, Արևելյան Եվրոպայում։ Not to mention the fact that similar points also exist in Armenia itself and on its borders. Therefore, the state should first of all increase the level of self-sufficiency, self-sufficiency and food security, as well as create large strategic reserves in case of communications failure.
—