Author: Emil Lazarian

Among the options for a new NPP in Armenia, the project for a Russian unit of 1,000-1,200 MWe is the best developed, according to Karen Sargsyan, Advisor at the Ministry of Territorial Administration & Infrastructure (MTAI). He was speaking at a panel discussion on the prospects for nuclear energy in Armenia organised by Rosatom and the Ministry. Sargsyan recalled that at the beginning of this year, a pre-feasibility study (preliminary feasibility study) was prepared for Armenia for the construction of a plant with a VVER-1200 reactor. Armenia and Russia signed an interstate agreement to build a 1,000-1,200 MWe plant and in May, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Rosatom Director General Alexey Likhachev held talks in Yerevan on the possible construction of a new NPP.

We are talking about a new modification of this type of station – a generation 3+ design with four levels of protection against emergencies and accidents, he specified. There is very little time to make a decision, he noted, because the construction of the station will take at least 10 years, and a lot of work needs to be done meanwhile to further extend the life of the existing station. The first stage of the extension made it possible to extend the life of the NPP from 2016 to 2026. Another 10-year extension until 2036 is now being considered.

The currently operating Armenian NPP (ANPP) at Metsamor was built in the 1970s with two Soviet-supplied VVER-440-V230 units, but was closed following a devastating earthquake in 1988. However, unit 2 was recommissioned with Russian help in 1995 following severe energy shortages. In March 2014, the Armenian government decided to extend the plant’s service life to 2026. Most of the overhaul (until 2019) was funded by an interstate loan from Russia. Construction of a new nuclear plant has long been part of Armenia’s overall plan, although finance has proved to be an obstacle. Likhachev confirmed Rosatom’s continued support for co-operation and extension of the operating life of the NPP was viewed as a priority.

Before the start of any construction, significant design work will be needed. "I think that a decision may be made in the near future. Moreover, the pre-feasibility study is already ready from the Russian side, I have not seen anything from other parties yet," Sargsyan said. However, other projects are being considered in parallel. A working group has been set up under the Ministry, which is discussing the advantages and disadvantages of French, South Korean, American and other possible technologies, he specified.

ANPP Director Movses Vardanyan said Armenia should begin considering the construction of a new power plant today. “In this regard Armenia is a specific country and has several demands,” he said. “First of all, the issues related to safety and seismic resistance are important to us, we also consider financial and logistic issues and many other aspects. As you know, in February 2023 our partners at the Rosatom Energy Projects submitted the preliminary technical-economic substantiation of building two 1200 MW reactors in Armenia. They take into consideration all our demands and issues, and we already have that project on hand. We are also working with our South Korean partners who have offered 1,000 and 1,400 MWe reactors, as well as small modular reactors (SMRs). We are also studying a French variant as well as American SMRs. I once again emphasise that we will prioritise safety, financial expediency and logistics.”

MTAI has set up a working group “for the purpose of discussing the matters related to the expediency of deploying small modular reactors, as well as to carry out analyses and define the sequence of further steps in order to select the necessary technologies”. According to Minister Gnel Sanosyan, there is a lot of work to be done: “About two years is needed for preparatory work, from 8 to 10 years for construction.” He added that it is necessary to understand what capacity the new NPP should have, and this must be decided by taking into account many factors – not for a short period, but for the next 100 years.

“For example, we must calculate how much electricity we will supply to Iran, whether we will supply it or not, whether we will supply electricity to Georgia. We need to understand what the relations between Armenia and Turkey will be like, whether Turkey will buy electricity from Armenia, because now the eastern regions of Turkey need it,” he added. Sanosyan said it is also necessary to calculate volumes of local consumption to assess the scale of dependence on the NPP. While the Russia project is well advanced, the USA is now proposing the construction of SMRs. The Minister said this proposal has not yet been studied from a technical point of view, it may take several months. However, he gave assurances that by the end of the year the Armenian government would “decide on the issue of capacity”.

Suren Bznuni, a specialist in nuclear and radiation safety, considers the existence of an “economic justification” and safety issues to be the most important consideration. He said it is necessary to build a safe and economically profitable reactor, regardless of whether it is Russian or American. A nuclear power plant with a capacity of 1,000 MWe, in his opinion, could be problematic for Armenia in terms of grid stability, given that the current NPP is only 400 MWe.

ANPP Board member Vahram Petrosyan believes Armenia would do better with two smaller plants each with a capacity of 500-600 MWe. He noted that Armenia’s total electricity demand does not exceed 1,200 MWe and that hydro, solar and thermal plants can easily make up the difference. “A high-capacity nuclear power plant can become a headache for the country. We must consider all options and send the right order to the government," Petrosayn told Hetq.

However, UN National Expert on Energy Ara Marjanyan has said that building a new nuclear reactor at Metsamor is essential to enable Armenia to constantly generate nuclear power and that a new 1,000-1,200 MWe reactor would be required by 2036. He stressed that the new reactor must be completed before decommissioning the existing one. He noted that under the agreement concluded with Russia a roadmap is to be developed and a final decision is to be made on the type and other technical parameters of the reactor. The construction work will commence by the end of 2024 or early 2025 and the cost is estimated at $3-5bn. “I think this is a reasonable expenditure, and it is imperative for Armenia to have constant nuclear generation on its territory. I think the construction will take 10-12 years,” he said.

Russia Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin said recently that Russia is ready to discuss the financial issues and parameters of building NPPs in the territories of Eurasian Economic Union members, including Armenia. He was addressing the Eurasia Is My Home exhibition which was also attended by Prime Minister Pashinyan. The attendees were briefed on Rosatom’s two-unit VVER-1200 project in Belarus. The first unit is already operational while the second is undergoing tests. Mishustin told Pashinyan that Belarusian companies financed just over 40% of the costs. Pashinyan reportedly noted that Rosatom was not offering reactors with capacity lower than 1,200MWe. In response, Rosatom Director General Likhachev told Pashinyan that Rosatom can build reactors with capacities of 1,000, 600 or 400 MWe, but it would be more expensive.

Image: Metsamor nuclear power plant (courtesy of ANPP)

Raffi K. Hovannisian, Armenia’s first minister of foreign affairs, is the founding chairman of the Heritage Party.

YEREVAN — Meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow, followed by French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz this month, the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan keep announcing that a peace deal over the ancient but embattled territory of Mountainous Karabakh is imminent.

Whether or not a peace deal is ever reached, however, peace itself is condemned to fail.

I should know

In March 1992, as the newly independent Armenia’s first minister of foreign affairs, I negotiated the original international mediation for peace, security and status in Karabakh.

As the Soviet Union began to crumble, Karabakh — or Artsakh in Armenian — had declared its independence from Soviet Azerbaijan, and then the USSR in toto. And the deadly war that ensued, whereby Baku endeavored to reverse the rights to self-determination and sovereignty by force — rights that Armenians had exercised under controlling Soviet legislation as well as the Montevideo Convention on the rights of states — created a complex situation.

But we got to work.

At the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe’s (CSCE, later OSCE) 1992 meeting of foreign ministers in Helsinki, the summit decided — by consensus — to accept the charge of hosting the Karabakh peace process in order to determine, pursuant to the precepts of the Helsinki Final Act, the region’s ultimate status at a future conference in Minsk. 

Hammered out by required consensus and inspired by the specific mandate of achieving sustainable peace, the final document contained three key points:

The first was to take the conflict outside of the East-West axis — or, rather, place it neatly into a new cooperation zone — and, ultimately, bring in the United States, Russia and also France to co-chair what later came to be known as the Minsk Group.

The next was to respect human rights and dignity, bringing a halt to Azerbaijan’s ongoing land blockade between Armenia and Karabakh by opening a humanitarian corridor.

Finally, to guarantee the success of the peace process, was ensuring the participation of not only Armenia and Azerbaijan but also the elected officials of Mountainous Karabakh.

So, when a tripartite ceasefire among Azerbaijan, Karabakh and Armenia was eventually agreed in May 1994, there was real hope in its longevity, hope that a final diplomatic solution would be had — and that the Minsk Conference might, indeed, at last be convened.

But alas, there were other plans.

After growing tensions and skirmishes along the border, under the cover of COVID-19 and the 2020 U.S. presidential elections, in September of that year, Azerbaijan unleashed a multipronged war not only upon what it considered its “breakaway” Republic of Mountainous Karabakh, but against the Republic of Armenia as well — something that, 105 years after the Armenian Genocide, many in the country feel would have been impossible without the military, intelligence, logistical and special-ops support of ethnic cousin and NATO ally Turkey.

Russia then brokered a ceasefire in November, introducing a peacekeeping operation and leaving Azerbaijan occupying nearly half of Karabakh and swathes of the sovereign Republic of Armenia.

This was a reversal of the first negotiation point — taking the conflict outside of the East-West axis.

Then, the Lachin corridor was shut down. And as a result, the Artsakh Republic and its 120,000 surviving residents — a quarter of them children — have been left in a choke hold, with Russian peacekeepers looking ambivalently on for nearly six months now.

This was a reversal of the second point — respecting human rights and dignity.

And this isn’t just a flagrant violation of the original CSCE/OSCE mandate either, it also flies in the face of a binding judgment by the International Court of Justice, which demanded Azerbaijan open the corridor and return it to its status quo ante, pending a final settlement of the matter.

Crucially, the recent turn of events has seen Karabakh’s Armenian administration lose its seat at the table too. Far from the right to self-determination and its guarantee, and respect for a nation’s legitimate path to sovereignty, today Mountainous Karabakh is under attack today from all sides.

And this final reversal was of the most vital negotiation point — the right of the Armenians of Karabakh to take part in decisions about their own destiny.

Yet, somehow, a deal over their fate is soon to be closed. And this deal is currently being negotiated on the one side by Ilham Aliyev — Azerbaijan’s dictator-president, who is using oil-and-gas leverage abroad to dictate terms — and on the other by Nikol Pashinyan, Armenia’s own democrat-turned-petty dictator who refused to abdicate after being defeated in the disastrous war, and is now preparing to cling to to power by capitulating to Azerbaijan.

If Aliyev and Pashinyan do not get prison, they will win a peace prize. Yet still, there will never be peace in Karabakh.

CYMRU and Armenia are set to lock horns at the Cardiff City Stadium on Friday, June 16. Both teams will be eager to secure a vital victory and boost their chances of qualifying for the prestigious tournament.

Cymru, led by manager Robert Page, started their campaign with a hard-fought 1-0 win over Latvia on March 28. The victory ended their nine-game winless streak, providing a much-needed morale boost for the team. Prior to their win, Cymru had suffered six defeats and three draws, including a 1-1 stalemate against Croatia in their Group D opener.

With four points from two matches, Wales currently sit at the top of the standings, level on points with second-placed Croatia. The Welsh team will be aiming to maintain their winning momentum and consolidate their position at the summit of the group.

Speaking about the upcoming clash, Robert Page expressed his optimism and emphasized the importance of building on their previous victory. He said, “The win against Latvia was a significant step for us. It gave us the belief that we can compete at this level. Now, we need to carry that momentum forward and secure another three points against Armenia. They are a tough team, but we are prepared and ready for the challenge.”

On the other hand, Armenia, managed by Oleksandr Petrakov, are still searching for their first win in the qualifiers. Having played just one match so far, they suffered a narrow 2-1 defeat against Turkey in March. However, Armenia showed resilience in their subsequent friendly against Cyprus, battling to a 2-2 draw.

Armenia’s winless streak extends to nine games, with seven defeats since their 1-0 victory over Ireland in June 2022. Despite the recent struggles, Petrakov remains optimistic and believes his team has the potential to turn things around. He stated, “We have faced some tough challenges lately, but our spirit remains unbroken. The players are determined to give their all and secure a positive result against Wales. It won’t be easy, but we are ready to fight.”