In the coming weeks, the promises of peace may be accompanied by new demonstrations of force, and the negotiations by tougher pressures. After the American elections, the world may not become calmer, but more unpredictable.
“Will the midterms make the world more dangerous?” published by The Economist on October 28. the model presented in the article gives the Democrats a 94 percent chance of controlling the House of Representatives and a 53 percent chance of the Senate. However, the main geopolitical issue of the November 3 election is not arithmetic, but how Trump will react to a possible defeat.
A president constrained in domestic politics can seek quick success abroad through negotiation, pressure, or military action.
Activation of attempts to reach a quick ceasefire in the direction of Russia-Ukraine is possible. But a ceasefire and lasting peace are not the same thing. Without effective security guarantees and sanctions in case of possible violations, the agreement could turn into a pause to prepare for the next war. The opposite scenario is the failure of negotiations and deepening of the confrontation. The positions of Ukraine and Europe can also change these calculations.
A possible US-Iran deal and the use of force are not mutually exclusive. the article discusses the new strikes as an opportunity, not a decision. However, a limited strike does not necessarily mean or imply limited consequences, as retaliatory actions could damage energy infrastructure and communications, exacerbating the crisis.
These directions can develop simultaneously. Moreover, reaching agreements with Russia does not necessarily soften the American policy towards Iran. Relationships between adults are not immutable maps of friendship or enmity.
For Armenia, this is not a distant debate. Escalation over Iran could hit southern communications, freight, energy cooperation and prices. Changing Russia-West relations: reshaping the environment of trade, transfers and sanctions. Shifting the attention of the elders can also change the calculations of Turkey and Azerbaijan.
A reduction in tension can open up new opportunities. But, of course, new opportunities do not mean security guarantees.
This is where the question of the responsibility of the current authorities of Armenia lies. Cooperation with the USA, relations with Iran or having working relations with Russia are not wrong in themselves. The mistake is to present any of them as salvation that removes all dangers.
What will Armenia do if the southern road is disrupted, the border is strained or the partner’s priority changes? Where are preparedness, alternatives and responsibility verifiable and measurable?
The poor and helpless appearance of the government is not due to the smallness of the country, but to the policy of concealing the difference between promises and real guarantees. And adventure can also speak the language of peace, when the security of the country is built on the hope of the unchanging kindness of others.
Great powers can explain their reversals with new interests. Armenia cannot justify its unpreparedness with the new world order.
Former SRC Chairman Davit Ananyan
—
Disclaimer: This article was contributed and translated into English by Hovhannisian John. While we strive for quality, the views and accuracy of the content remain the responsibility of the contributor. Please verify all facts independently before reposting or citing.
Direct link to this article: https://www.armenianclub.com/2026/10/30/verelq-after-the-us-election-the-world-may-become-more-unpredictable/