Category: 2023

The ANCA’s Alex Galitsky and Leo Sarkisian intern Artur Shekyan between congressional meetings advocating for Artsakh

As a child, I always believed that I would devote my time and energy to sports. I even envisioned my future career in the sports industry. But as I got older, I realized that I had a far greater and more significant passion: Armenia and Artsakh. This devotion became even stronger after war broke out in Artsakh in September 2020. I clearly recall gathering with my ungers at the AYF Toronto Simon Zavarian Chapter, planning protests and painting banners that were later hung on overpasses and bridges in Toronto to bring greater public awareness to the war. It is not hyperbole to say that the war in Artsakh consumed us, and we strived wholeheartedly to do whatever we could to spread awareness and help ease the suffering of our people besieged by war. 

The horror hit even closer to home when I learned that my dear friend’s uncle, Christapor Artin, died while defending our homeland. This tragic event changed me in ways I could never have imagined, as it was then that I decided to dedicate my future career to the preservation of Armenia and Artsakh. I don’t think the Armenian community has been the same since the end of the war in Artsakh. I know I haven’t been the same. 

ANCA Leo Sarkisian interns Artur Shekyan, Tara Ourfalian and Emma Lopez preparing for the next set of pro-Artsakh congressional meetings.

It was also around this time that I first heard about the ANCA Leo Sarkisian Internship (LSI) program. Initially, I was very nervous about applying to the program because I didn’t fully believe that I could do it. After all, it involved living in a different country for six weeks, interacting with new people and working harder than I had ever worked before. 

Looking back now, it is safe to say that it was one of the best decisions I ever made. The experiences, insights and friendships that I have gained from this internship program are almost indescribable. Over the years, the program has attracted many interns from Toronto and Montreal, but more of us—especially young people—should become involved. I firmly believe that as Armenian-Canadians, we must grab every opportunity to learn how to best help and support our homeland and contribute to Hai Tahd. 

Artur Shekyan, vice-chair of the AYF Toronto “Simon Zavarian” chapter, at the AYF Washington D.C. Ani chapter protest demanding an end to Azerbaijan’s Artsakh blockade.

My favorite parts of the program were the working visits on Capitol Hill and the networking opportunities. Since I live in Toronto, coming into the program I didn’t really think I would network as much, but to the contrary, I have found myself making connections every single day with people in different fields who might help me down the road when I start pursuing my career. 

The Capitol Hill visits have also been extraordinary. Talking with elected officials and their teams has improved my communication skills immensely. It has allowed me to witness how they operate and what their daily routines look like. Most importantly, it has given me a sense of, if I one day decide to seek elected office, what I should emulate and what I would change. 

The program also allowed us to engage in meaningful conversations with Hai Tahd advocates like Alex Galitsky, Aram Hamparian, Tereza Yerimyan and Yeghisapet Chouldjian, to understand the strategy behind pro-Artsakh/Armenia legislation and effective ways to move our cause forward. After completing the ANCA LSI program, wherever program alumni go—whether it is Canada or the U.S., France, Lebanon or the Armenian homeland—we can use the lessons we have learned to advocate for Armenian issues. The LSI program has affected me more than I can adequately put into words, and I shall be forever grateful for the experience.

The discourse around Armenian identity is one that oftentimes creates division within the Armenian community, as Western Armenians and Iranian Armenians tend to stand firm in the belief that Armenians are Southwest Asian and Middle Eastern, while some Eastern Armenians from the Caucasus lean towards the notion that Armenians are and should identify as European. Armenians, and even people from the Western world, are torn about the nuanced complexities of Armenian identity. But the geographic, genetic and historical identity of the Armenian people showcases an Asian and Middle Eastern heritage. 

In the past year there have been several significant instances where Armenia was regarded as a European country, most shockingly during a CNN segment on the show The Lead with Jake Tapper. While reporting on the blockade of Artsakh, Tapper called Armenia and Azerbaijan “two European countries.” Another significant moment was when a CBN News host deemed Armenians as part of Europe while reporting on the same issue. Earlier this year Armenia was even listed as one of the “most welcoming countries in Europe,” according to euronews.

These moments have ignited a long-simmering discourse around Armenian identity, as people on social media debate whether Armenians are European, Asian or if they can claim Middle Eastern heritage. Oftentimes, non-Armenians join the discourse and deny the nuanced perspective of the Armenian identity. When this happens, it becomes clear that Armenians must take control of their narrative before the Armenian identity becomes erased all together.

Geographic identity is a core part of nationhood and cultural identity. That is why the concept of the homeland is so sacred. By looking more closely at the geographical placement of Armenians, we can better understand why Armenians are an Asian and Middle Eastern peoples. 

The Middle East is a geographic region located in Southwest Asia and North Africa. It was first coined as a geopolitical term in the 1850s by the British. The British definition includes the Arabian Peninsula, the Levant, Iraq, Turkey, Iran and Egypt. The Middle East, soon after its inception, replaced the term “Near East,” which also was a British term used around the same time period. The Near East was originally created to differentiate West Asia, which shares borders with Europe, from the rest of Asia, which is further away from Europe and deemed the Middle and Far East. The old definition of the Near East also included the Balkans. 

Armenian Highlands (Wikipedia)

Armenians are indigenous to the Armenian Highlands, which spans Eastern Anatolia and the South Caucasus, spilling over slightly into northern Mesopotamia. Anatolia, also known as modern-day Turkey, has historically been known as Asia Minor, a strategic trade route of the Silk Road and home to some of the first farmers. The people of Anatolia played an instrumental role in the ancient Near East and the Neolithic settlement of the European continent thousands of years ago. 

With these geographic realities sorted out, one can conclude that, by using the British definition, Armenians who are indigenous to Eastern Anatolia and northern Mesopotamia are Middle Eastern. So what about Armenians from the Caucasus?

The Caucasus is a mountainous region between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea. This unique mountainous region spans parts of Eastern Europe and Southwest Asia. The South Caucasus consists of the modern-day countries of Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan, but the Caucasus mountains spill over into the southern tip of Russia (also known as the Northern Caucasus), eastern Turkey and northern Iran as well.

We know that the Northern Caucasus lies in Eastern Europe, so where does that leave the South Caucasus? The continents of Europe and Asia are one massive Eurasian landmass with no clear breakage, so the borders of the two continents are purely man-made and are based on history, ethnicity and culture, researched by geographers and historians over time. The concept of Europe, Asia and Africa dates back to ancient Greece, and definitions have varied over time. Even though the map around the Caucasus has been redrawn many times, historically, modern-day Armenia’s borders have commonly been considered to be part of Asia. 

This complicated space has always been a topic of debate. The Soviet Union placed the entire Caucasus in Asia, and very rare, unofficial alternative maps place the South Caucasus entirely in Europe. Other experts refuse to categorize the region altogether, calling it a space “between” Europe and Asia. 

Calling a region “in-between” doesn’t fare well in a globalized society and can cause confusion amongst people, especially when almost every other country in the world has a clear indicator of which continent it belongs too. Therefore, it makes sense that the most widely accepted and used division between Europe and Asia is the Greater Caucasus, which spans northern Georgia and Azerbaijan, and the Ural Mountains, which splits Russia into European and Asian portions. This places modern-day Armenia in Asia and ends a complicated and socially constructed debate. 

So if modern-day Armenia is generally accepted to be a part of Asia, why is it cut off from the British definition of the Middle East? Armenia borders two core Middle Eastern countries: Iran and Turkey. The definition of the Middle East is constantly changing, with continual disagreements on the world stage of what countries should make up the Middle East. 

Some newer definitions include the modern state of Armenia; some don’t. Others argue that the term should be replaced completely by Southwest Asia/North Africa (SWANA) in order to be more inclusive of surrounding countries with historical and cultural ties, since the British definition of the Middle East viewed West Asia and North Africa through the outdated 19th-century European lens. 

Map of the Greater Middle East (orthographic projection) (Wikimedia Commons)

In 2004, the United States attempted to redefine the Middle East and replace it with the term “Greater Middle East.” The Greater Middle East was part of a reformation of the Middle East led by President George W. Bush and his administration. This sought to reframe how the Western world viewed the Middle East and desired to unify the Arab and Islamic world. Though this new definition was applied with ulterior motives and led with a stereotypical view of West Asia and North Africa, it still helped bring nuance to the region by including formerly excluded neighboring countries with historic and cultural ties. The Greater Middle East includes modern-day Armenia as part of the newly-updated American definition of the Middle East and is used by the Central Intelligence Agency.

Armenians who still cling to the notion of being European must understand that geographic reality is different from cultural influence. Since the modern-day borders of Armenia are near Europe, it is evident that there will be European influence in the region, particularly since Armenia just recently became independent after nearly 200 years of Russian occupation. Having European influence in a post-colonial Armenian state does not mean that Armenians are geographically, genetically or historically European. 

One must also remember that the Middle East is extremely diverse both ethnically and religiously. It is not a race, nor is it solely the Arab or Islamic world. It is a geographic region with many different peoples, customs, cultures and religions. They simply have historic ties to one another as neighbors, and therefore have influenced one another culturally because of their shared geographic region. Some non-Arab ethnic groups from the Greater Middle East are Armenians, Assyrians, Persians, Kurds, Turks, Azeris, Afghans, Pashtuns, Amazighs, Yezidis, Jews, Copts, Greeks, Georgians and much more. 

Now that we’ve covered geographic identity, let’s take a look at the genetic identity of the Armenian people. During the Bronze Age, there was significant population mixing that took place, laying the foundations of the Armenian identity. 

The genetic components that mixed to create the Armenian identity are mainly made up of the Anatolian Neolithic Farmer. It makes up roughly half of the average Armenian genome, similar to the Assyrians, an indigenous ethnic group of Mesopotamia. The other half of the average Armenian genome usually comprises of the Caucasian Hunter-Gatherer, which is shared with other Caucasians and Assyrians, the Iranian Neolithic Farmer and the Levant Natufian Hunter-Gatherer, which is shared with Levant Arabs. Though the average Armenian will share a similar genome with their ancient ancestors, Armenians are very diverse and individual genetic make-up of a person will vary.

Armenians have maintained genetic continuity since the sudden collapse of the Bronze Age, with the last significant epoch of genetic admixture occurring around that time. Due to their geographic location and later adoption of Christianity, Armenians have managed to maintain their genetic identity since then. Modern-day Armenians and Assyrians look more like the ancient Anatolian and Mesopotamian Near Easterners than many of the modern-day majority populations of the region. Armenians are descendants of the original inhabitants of the Near East. 

Some people point out the genetic affinity Armenians have to some Europeans as proof that Armenians have European origins. But this genetic affinity is due to the Anatolian Neolithic Farmer gene, which some Europeans, like southern Italians, Spaniards and Romanians, share with some Middle Eastern ethnic groups due to migrations that took place during the Neolithic period thousands of years ago. 

During this time, Anatolian farmers spread into Europe, likely sharing their languages along the way. This is also where Indo-European languages like Greek, Albanian, Armenian, Farsi and Kurdish originate from. Armenians are not descendants of Europeans; rather, some Europeans are descendants of former Near Eastern populations. Indo-European does not mean of European origin. There is no doubt that the Near East has had a massive impact on modern Europe, whether it be genetically, linguistically and even culturally. 

The conclusion here is that Armenians are genetically, historically and geographically West Asian and Middle Eastern, not European. The rhetoric that Armenians are European continues the genocidal language of the Turkish and Azerbaijani governments, which seek to erase Armenians from Anatolia and the Caucasus and choose to ignore our immense impact in the creation and foundation of the modern Middle East. If we allow this rhetoric to continue, we will lose the historic Armenian identity completely. This false rhetoric also perpetuates the impact of Russian colonization, under which Eastern Armenians begin to believe the notion that they too are Eastern Europeans just like their colonizers. One can strive to adopt Western ideals and still recognize one’s geographic, historic and genetic identity. The two can co-exist. May we remove the distorted lens that occupation has left us with, and may we never forget our roots, our ancestors and our affinity to the cradle of civilization. 

The question posed in the title of this article is important because the wealth created from a strong economy is vital for the well-being and prosperity for any nation, particularly for its defense and security. Security is the paramount concern for Armenia, and wealth is a necessary but not sufficient condition for assuring it. The issue of security and defense is complex and separate from this discussion. 

By “economy,” I mean the word in its simplest sense, which is the creation of wealth in an open market-based system because that is what Armenia’s economy is trending toward. 

There are probably as many ideas, opinions, measures and wish lists that can answer the question of the Diaspora’s role in assisting Armenia’s economy as there are Diasporans arriving at Zvartnots International Airport. Many of these solutions may include the use of capital in the form of investment or charity applied directly by the holder of the capital or indirectly through a third person or organization. Another resource which is abundant in the Diaspora is human capital in the form of knowledge and expertise which may still be in short supply in Armenia, though that gap is narrowing. These are simple and obvious solutions readily available in an introductory macroeconomics course. It is also fair to say that the Diaspora has seemingly been generous with both resources for the past three decades. 

If this is so simple, why is the Armenian economy still so small and weak. There are multiple metrics which can readily attest to this, but the most painful, and perhaps the one that energizes Diasporans most (notably those who visit Armenia), is the high rate of poverty. 

Following are some thoughts and answers to the question of what the Diaspora can do to improve the economy of Armenia.

We may be overestimating the Diaspora’s capacity to make a transformational difference like the one brought about by the massive repatriation following World War II. The resources in the Diaspora may be vast, but what counts is whether they are available. The most striking evidence of stinginess is the trivial amount that was raised in the Diaspora during the 44-day war, which was nothing short of an existential threat. An estimated total of $180 million was raised. This represents less than one-percent of Armenia’s GDP, which is approaching $20 billion and growing nicely, but still very small and impoverished on a per capita basis. The estimates for the number of Armenians in the United States varies, but the U.S. Census captures about 500,000. With low estimates and U.S. GDP per capita of about $70,000 (though for Armenians it’s surely higher), approximately $35 billion of income is created annually by these self-identified Armenians. These very rough but conservative estimates answer both questions. There is enormous potential but it’s not available.

Human capital in the form of knowledge and expertise is a much softer resource and far more difficult to quantify, both in terms of investment and return. Arguably, such investment in the form of Diaspora assistance was more valuable in the immediate aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Thanks to a vast network of training, education, experience and simple Armenian entrepreneurship, the gap between home grown talent and that from abroad has narrowed significantly, particularly in Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM). The role of women in this realm is enormous, and in many ways, offsets the demographic trends and the ever-present brain drain. Despite these advances, the value of Diasporan human capital should not be underestimated. 

Although this personal experience is from three decades ago, it still illustrates the point. When the U.S. Department of Treasury sent me to Armenia in 1995 to advise the country on establishing a Treasury debt program, I arrived with little knowledge of the inner workings of a Central Bank, a Ministry of Finance, or a Treasury, which Armenia did not yet have. Even mid-level officials of the Central Bank could run circles around me when it came to the quantitative fine points of central banking. I was a seasoned analyst at a major Wall Street bond rating agency and not a banker. Within four months of my arrival, we issued our first series of Armenian Treasury (Government) Bonds. We had no Treasury but did have a well-functioning government; hence the term in the parentheses to make the securities legal and enforceable. They were 28-day discount bonds sold through an auction held at the Central Bank. As such, the interest yield on the bonds was the difference between the bid price of the purchaser and the par value of the bond. The auction was oversubscribed; as such, we could place the entire series. But the effective interest was about 45-percent. The Minister of Finance, who had the authority to reject all the bids, was appalled with the results and was seriously considering nullifying the entire auction. This would have been catastrophic. It would send exactly the wrong message to the market, since in banking trust and predictability are indispensable. The network of bankers would never again trust the system and the government’s credibility would take years to recover. Convincing the minister to accept the bids was perhaps my most important contribution in my two-and-a-half years of service, even though it was not based on my technical expertise but on more of a banking “cultural” experience. The fact that the most recent Russian auction at the time had yields twice as high also helped my case. In the following months, the interest rates continued a steady decline, and Armenia went on to have a highly successful Treasury Bond program. This is a simple but instructive example of how the Diaspora can contribute in simple ways that can make a huge difference in the long run. 

So, with these vast resources, why is the Diaspora not making a larger contribution to the Armenian economy? As an observer, I believe that the relationship is dysfunctional and both sides are to blame. But, based on my purely anecdotal experience and observation, there is fundamental disagreement on approach and a lack of understanding of one another. For too many Diasporans with good intentions, the fault lies in being oblivious to the ever-changing investment climate in Armenia and lacking the humility needed to learn and adapt.

None of this is to disparage the countless Diasporans who have made enormous sacrifices for decades and have made notable contributions to the economy with their financial and human capital. I’m only suggesting that the success rate would have been much higher but for these shortcomings. And the success stories are usually the results of efforts which avoided the aforementioned pitfalls, as the two examples that follow will suggest.

Armenia also has a great responsibility to shoulder in the general failure to attract more lasting and meaningful investment from the Diaspora. Its most benign failure is the lack of capacity to absorb the proposed investment or assistance. Sometimes an investment just does not fit for all sorts of reasons, and it falls by the wayside. But too often the Diaspora is viewed as an ATM. The expectation is to bring as much capital as possible and simply spend it without asking any questions or expecting anything in return. The privilege of simply being in Armenia is deemed sufficient reward, and any reasonable expectation of accountability is met with scorn. The shortcomings of the Diaspora previously mentioned are overstated, and too often good opportunities are dismissed, even if there was real benefit to be reaped. 

By all accounts, in the Diaspora or locally, corruption has been the single most damaging force to obstruct investment, foreign or domestic. Two points can be readily made. Corruption is a common problem throughout the developing world, but in Armenia the current government has done a decent job in reducing it with tangible results. But as they say, perception is reality, and, still too often, reality is reality. Corruption in some form or another persists. But just as damaging is the perception of corruption, which also persists because transparency is still in short supply, and legal and judicial reform continue to lag other reforms.    

All is not lost. There is a great deal that the Diaspora can do for the benefit of the Armenian economy. And a strong economy is vital for meeting all sorts of national needs, including a meaningful national defense. But what is the most effective path, in terms of efficiency and outcomes? The theoretical answer is the path that avoids, overcomes and navigates the pitfalls discussed above. 

To answer the question more specifically, and with the discussion above, the optimal path is direct private investment and perseverance.

Fortunately, we have been at this for thirty years and have the benefit of some real data. Following are two notable examples which share common characteristics. These entrepreneurs made a large direct private investment in Armenia years ago with a long-term commitment and have the results to show for it. They do not view their work as charity but as business investment. They are sensitive to cultural differences. They do not take obstacles, even irrational ones, personally but view them as a course of doing business. They are also tenacious and patient. They employ hundreds with good, living wages and pay their share of taxes. 

Digital Pomegranate is a software development company located in Gyumri. Its founder and CEO is Todd Fabacher, a Louisianian married to an Armenian, who saw opportunities in Gyumri a decade ago when no one else did. Now, his company is the largest private employer in Gyumri with more than 100 high-paying jobs. Digital Pomegranate’s applications have a global reach, which has put the city on the map. Fabacher rejects the notion of investing for any reason other than meaningful return on investment. He chose Gyumri over Yerevan because of the lower cost of operating. According to Fabacher, Yerevan is quickly losing its competitiveness in many IT sectors due to rising costs (perhaps a sign of growing economy), and in the long run he believes only some clusters like chip design will maintain their advantage because of their size and entrenchment. He sees the lower cost of living in Gyumri as an opportunity to attract talent to fuel his growth plans. As a true entrepreneur, he speaks about all the difficulties which he has encountered over the years as opportunities on which to capitalize.    

Tufenkian Hospitality LLC Is the holding company for Tufenkian Heritage Hotels in Armenia. The chain of unique hotels is currently its founder James Tufenkian’s most recognizable endeavor in Armenia. Tufenkian was one of the first Diasporan investors in Armenia. His enormous capital commitment is matched only by his tenacity and unwavering dedication to the growth of the Armenian economy, from both the actual enterprises that bear his name and the ancillary benefits of his long-term presence in Armenia, such is being an example of excellence and developing expertise for the entire hospitality industry in Armenia. Tufenkian is perhaps best known, especially in the West for his unique artisan carpets, which was also his initial foray into the business world of Armenia; but his adaptability and commitment have allowed him to recognize and capitalize on emerging opportunities. Tufenkian’s companies now offer more than 300 well-paying jobs, and the company is among the largest corporate taxpayers in the country.

These are just two of the many private companies who are making measurable contributions to the economy, one representing the increasingly important tech industry and the other, the hospitality industry. The former represents the highest value addition to the economy on a per capita basis, and the latter, though not as high a value, contributes heavily to the brand of the country, whose indirect benefit to the economy is no less important.   

But what about smaller investors who lack the means for such bold interventions? For that, I have proposed and presented to the government of Armenia a plan which would allow smaller investors to invest in a fund with the purchase of securities. With these proceeds, the fund would extend loans to small Armenian enterprises which would otherwise be priced out of the capital markets. With the plan, Armenian companies would be able to borrow in Armenian drams at hard currency interest rates, which are typically several hundred basis points lower than domestic currency rates because of currency risk. But in this scenario, all the currency risk is shifted to the Diaspora investors, as they are required to make their investment in the fund in Armenian drams, and they are repaid, principal and interest, also in Armenian drams. In many ways, this plan is a substitute for the much-discussed Diaspora bonds, which may not be feasible for Armenia. There is only one example of a successful Diaspora bond program, and that is Israel’s. But that program has many unique features which are difficult to duplicate, most notably the United States guarantee for those bonds, which requires an Act of Congress.  

To conclude, the Armenian Diaspora has great potential to help grow the Armenian economy. But the Diaspora’s financial wealth and human capital have been largely unavailable or unproductive in making a difference relative to its potential. We should certainly analyze and think of ways to improve the existing paths and come up with new ones. But as things stand, direct private investment seems to be the most effective path.

Whether we know it or not, all of us are investors. Whether we are in the stock market or have another financial interest, all of us are involved in some kind of investment. The question is: Where do we invest? After we take care of the basics of food, shelter and clothing, where do we invest our time and substance? Certainly, where we invest tells what we are really interested in and where we think life’s best values are.

As for investments, money is not one’s most important investment. The pursuit of a meaningful life is more important than money. The people you love are more important than money as a long-term investment.

Although many people invest in material things, there are others who invest in intellectual, cultural and spiritual values. These types of investments are very important and life-changing. Below are some of them.

Investment in the family. Since the dawn of creation, the time of the very first family, God has chosen to trust earthly, frail human parents with the task of raising their children and molding their character. Undoubtedly, the well-being of a nation and its institutions is dependent on the integrity of its families.

We can invest in creating and strengthening the family by strengthening the ties of communication among family members. We can encourage parents and children to spend more time at home and maintain family unity through loyalty. Above all, we can help the family by enabling its members to surrender their lives to God.

Investment in knowledge and letting knowledge ripen to wisdom. The pursuit of knowledge is very important to society’s development. Knowledge is information that one possesses, whereas wisdom is good judgment or discernment for what is true and right, and one’s ability to put knowledge to good use.

In an age of increased specialization, our society needs people who will strive to cultivate the human side of their nature just as they push their mental horizons – people who educate their hearts as much as their heads. Thus, we must invest in education and Christian education for the sake of a sound and solid community life. Such an investment cannot be stolen, cannot be destroyed by fire and storms, and can never go bankrupt.

Investment in culture. Every nation is characterized by its culture. Culture is the physical, social and spiritual heritage of a people at a given time or over all time. It is the total body of material artifacts, works of art, collective, mental and spiritual ideas, beliefs, customs and values transmitted from generation to generation.

In all cultures, there is a multiplicity of elements, such as language, drama, architecture, painting, music and dancing. Sometimes if one of these elements is lost, the culture can survive on the strength of other elements. It is the cultural totality that preserves the culture of a people.

We are called to commit ourselves to the survival of our culture by preserving and perpetuating our heritage through our moral and financial support.

Investment in church. The church plays a very important role in the lives of people. Civilization depends upon its religious beliefs and convictions. No other institution can replace the church in cultivating and implementing the religious convictions needed in the civilizing process. The church offers the opportunity to worship God as revealed through Jesus Christ. It offers the opportunity to impart religious education for all ages. It also offers the opportunity to belong to a community of support and service.

We can invest in the church by our regular presence and participation, by recruiting others, and by our financial and moral support.

Investment in a good name. The Bible says, “A good name is rather to be chosen than great riches” (Proverbs 22:1). A good name is synonymous with good character. It is more important than all the college degrees, public titles or knowledge that one might accumulate in a lifetime. It is the one thing over which every adult has total, personal control in virtually all circumstances. It may be what others, friends and even foes, will remember about us more than anything else.

Building character is not an easy task; it is not something that can be accomplished overnight. It is a life-long endeavor to study, learn, emulate and practice. It is to be learned from literature and especially from the book of life, the Bible. It is to emulate the greatest master, Jesus Christ Himself.

Investment in a personal experience of being in tune with God. Truth becomes effective and convincing at the level of personal experience. There is no substitute for personal experience. Having a personal experience with God is the most important investment. Jesus, the ultimate investment counselor says, “Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man gives you.” Jesus taught that the most basic investment of our lives is our commitment to God. He put it in these words, “Seek first His Kingdom and righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well” (Matt. 6:33). He summed up this whole matter of what we invest ourselves in with two searching questions: “What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul? Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul” (Mark 8:36-37). All of us are dealing with these questions daily, either consciously or unconsciously, as we build the investment portfolio of our lives and choose those things in which we invest our substance and ourselves.

During this summer, Artsakh is forever on our minds. Unfortunately, it is not a peaceful experience but one filled with the angst and anguish of uncertainty. It is too easy to blame others and that list is long: the duplicitous Russian peacekeepers, the European rhetoric, the American obsession with weakening Russia, and of course, the barbaric Azerbaijani/Turkish alliance. It is far more difficult to look in the mirror and ask ourselves the honest questions: Have we given this crisis our best effort collectively? Has our campaign been worthy of the incredible bravery of our people in Artsakh?

Too often, we measure our performance on effort and not results. Most Armenians profess an enduring love of Artsakh as a part of their patriotic portfolio, but again the effort (and emotion) is greater than the results. It seems that everyone is resolved to the fact that Artsakh will not only be an unprecedented (in the sense that it was an autonomous oblast during the Soviet times) part of Azerbaijan and that the so-called “reintegration” will be ethnic cleansing and cultural deprivation. These are softer terms for genocide used by Europeans and other pacifiers. If this is what people believe, then the “rights and security” agenda makes a mockery of the inalienable rights of the Armenians of Artsakh. What I find remarkable is the general acceptance of this prediction as if we are a victim nation only and must comply with what others dictate. This mentality seems pervasive with the exception of certain patriotic corners in the diaspora and Armenia and the most important in this crisis—the citizens of Artsakh.

 Two generations of Artsakhtsis have lived with the terror unleashed by the barbaric Azerbaijani government. These are the same people who were forced to exit Artsakh during the 2020 war (an estimated 45,000 refugees) and returned after the trilateral agreement. They returned, in some cases, to nothing but the land they are willing to die for. Others, from Hadrut for example, were completely uprooted and relocated to other areas of Artsakh. These are the same people who have courageously endured unspeakable hardships with the inhumane illegal blockade. Have there been any press reports in the last eight months of our brethren in Artsakh sounding like defeated victims? I have not heard any complaints about their personal well-being—only for the sake of the nation. This is remarkable and should inspire us to find new avenues. Meanwhile, in Yerevan, our increasingly sophisticated lifestyle continues with shopping, nightlife and happiness. One would hardly know that four to five hours to the east, our people are threatened in Syunik and Artsakh. 

The diaspora has devoted a significant amount of time criticizing the Armenian government. While the policies are controversial, the approach has two major limitations. First, the vast majority of the diaspora, particularly in Europe and the Americas, are not citizens of the republic. Although I have a different vision of a global Armenian nation, the current reality is that the citizens voted for a government in a democracy. Ranting about Pashinyan and his government has no real impact. Our present circumstances are the result of limited options in the 2021 election in the absence of an organized opposition. The other concern is that all of us gain credibility by delivering results. Effort is respected, but power and influence come from results. In the diaspora, we have not been able to use our significant capability to deliver results for Armenia and Artsakh. Despite overwhelming evidence for its enforcement, Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act continues to be waived by the administration and military assistance continues to go to Azerbaijan. How about NATO Turkey, Azerbaijan’s biggest supporter, and it’s substantial military aid and training? We have made noble efforts, but the bottom line is that we have not delivered. In fact, the Western/Russian Cold War has trapped Armenia in this convoluted three-level process on the issue of dialogue with Azerbaijan. With U.S. sponsorship and the EU and Russia working in some rotating fashion, it almost feels like a competition to see who can outflank the other—with the content of the deal becoming secondary. The diaspora has certainly succeeded in creating goodwill toward Armenia and Artsakh, but goodwill doesn’t stop Azerbaijani aggression. Aliyev is clever like his cousin in Ankara; they create violent chaos and then pose like good citizens, knowing full well that the ramifications for their behavior will be negligible. Other than certain legislative attempts and goodwill diplomacy, the diaspora has been far too decentralized and ineffective. The failure to coordinate resources between the homeland and the diaspora is certainly a contributing factor, but there remain divided loyalties from an international perspective. Armenia’s most reliable ally (Iran) is the mortal enemy of Israel and the United States. Even in the duplicity of self-interest, this is a huge limitation on the Western relationships. Israel does not trust the security of any arms from India going through Iran to Armenia. Certainly this influences the options for Armenia, yet this dilemma exists simply because Armenia cannot defend itself with Western reliance. How can the diaspora lobbying efforts address advocacy when the host countries’ interest and Armenia’s are not fully aligned? The diaspora is obviously reluctant to overtly focus on anything except where interests are aligned or where we attempt to influence those interests.   

I feel the pain and even shame that we (collectively) have not given Artsakh our best. While thousands of Artsakhtsis rally in Stepanakert, demonstrate in front of the Russian “peacekeepers” and pitch tents for a sustained protest this week, we seem to resolve ourselves to our failures. I am not referring to the official efforts but to the general attitudes from blogs, messaging, direct conversations and other forms of mass communications. If we have a large majority willing to advocate, then they have been silent. Most of the people I speak to feel disempowered or behave like a victim. Imagine the contrast of 120,000 people who have suffered more in the last few months than most of us will in a lifetime. Our people in Artsakh need to know every day that we are with them. So, while tents are being pitched to protest the Berdzor (Lachin) blockade, where are the comparable settlements on the Armenia side? Why can’t our clergy (I would nominate Archbishop Bagrat in Tavush) lead acts of civil protest at the border? If the people in Artsakh back away, this matter will be resolved. Their resistance is what is keeping this alive. We have a responsibility to protect, to speak, to hold lectures, to write and to resist. These Armenians in Artsakh possess the unique qualities that we have seen throughout our history—in Avarayr, Van, Musa Dagh, Sardarapat—that not only reverse the course of tyranny but inspire succeeding generations. We rightfully revere the heroes of Musa Dagh in our modern history. Artsakh is this generation’s example of another oppressed Armenian enclave surrounded by hostile Turks bent on genocide. We owe our survival as a nation to examples like this when they have chosen to resist. When I see the resiliency of these people, I feel ashamed when we do not give our utmost. Times of crisis bring out the best and worst attributes of our nation. We are not any better or worse than others, but this is our fight. We have seen unparalleled valor and also the Achilles heel of disunity. Successful nations know when to create national unity when external threats are imminent. Apparently, we are still on the learning curve. The diaspora has no right to say “I told you so” and take no responsibility. We have been part of the problem and are also a major part of the solution. Are we frustrated? Yes. Are we giving up? No.

A few days ago, I read with sorrow that the Azeris had opened fire at Armenian positions in Paruyr Sevak, which is located on the southern border with Nakhichevan near the Ararat Marz border with Vayots Dzor. These types of incursions by the Azeris are common and designed to intimidate the border communities. This one hit me harder because of our relationship with the people of this village. They are our colleagues, our friends, and they bring joy to our lives. After pondering the implications of what I read, it occurred to me that perhaps that was the difference. When Armenia and Artsakh become more than names, but rather friends and colleagues, it takes on a higher meaning. This is one of the reasons that I advocate connecting with the people of Armenia and Artsakh as the key to a sustained relationship with the homeland. In the diaspora, we all start off as tourists, but we must evolve if we wish to establish that special bond. Some work there, some repatriate, others are in an immersion program—for my family, it was establishing a relationship with a border village. There are many paths, but once you follow your chosen road, the future of Armenia and Artsakh becomes much more personal. Just as the beloved people of Artsakh are resisting, it has become a natural response for them. They are not naive. They face incredible danger every day. They simply are defending their homes. If we call this the homeland, then perhaps we should start taking this more personally. The diaspora seems to be operating the best it can given its very decentralized silo structure. It is long past the time to make adjustments to more optimally connect with the homeland. These conflicts cannot be a hobby for us in the diaspora. We need to be “all in.”

Diana (left) and Tatevik (right) together in Cascade. Yerevan, Armenia. July 7, 2023.

Seven months have passed since the start of the blockade of Artsakh (Nagorno Karabakh). Food, vital medicines and fuel supplies are scarce or unavailable, and hundreds of citizens wait in line each day to see what goods they can acquire. We have all heard the stories—the dire need for the international community to condemn Azerbaijan’s blockade of the only lifeline connecting Artsakh with Armenia, loved ones separated with no ability to return home and no end in sight. Earlier this month, I spent some time with two of several dozen students from Artsakh who are now essentially stranded in Yerevan after their studies ended.

Diana and Tatevik are medical students in their first year at Mkhitar Heratsi Yerevan Medical University. The blockade began during their studies, and they have not been able to return home since. They have not been able to see their friends, their family or their homes. Every day, they keep in touch with their families through phone and video calls, if lucky with the connection, witnessing their families’ pain and feeling helpless.

They share their personal stories with the Weekly.

Tatevik Samvelyan, 18 from Stepanakert. Yerevan, Armenia. July 7, 2023.

Eighteen-year-old Tatevik Samvelyan is from Stepanakert. She originally considered going to school to become a translator. But after the 2020 Artsakh War, she came to the decision that the country needs more doctors and felt it was the obligation of every citizen to do something for their homeland.

“Last time I was at home everything was much different and much warmer”

The last time Tatevik spent at home was in October 2022 for her birthday. She says it was the most impressive birthday, because she didn’t think she would get the opportunity to travel home on that day. It was a surprise organized by her father who, along with her mother and younger brother, kept it a secret until the last minute. “It was such an emotional moment when I knew about it because I was worried that it would be my first birthday away from the family,” Tatevik says. One particularly memorable moment was a surprise photoshoot her parents organized, in which she took photos in the white coat of a doctor. 

“I love my birthday a lot. And I don’t know why, but last time I was at home everything was much different and much warmer. And the day I was coming back to Yerevan I was so emotional,” recalls Tatevik, overcome with tears.

A tearful Tatevik

“On my birthday in 2020, I was in Gyumri, and obviously I wasn’t in the mood to celebrate anything. But my dad, who was still in Karabakh, was encouraging me to do something nice on that day. So I spent the day with my relatives, and on the same day in the evening I received a present—flowers and a stuffed animal—and I was told that it was from my dad although he was on the front,” recalls Tatevik. 

While Tatevik has been in Yerevan, she has kept in contact with her father, although he’s not that talkative. She asks him about the current situation back home and tells him about her classes and how she spends her days to lighten the mood. As a military doctor, he also helps Tatevik with her lessons, and sometimes they prepare lessons together. 

When the blockade started, Tatevik like many others thought that it would only last a short period of time and that the road would open soon; however, the more time that passed, she began to lose hope that it would ever open again.

Tatevik (left) and Diana (right) walking together in Yerevan. July 7, 2023.

“Other students are dreaming about going abroad for vacation—our dream is simply to go home” 

Tatevik reiterates what hundreds of residents of Artsakh say on a daily basis—that they have a serious problem with food deliveries. However, she hopes that something will change “because it simply cannot remain in this status.” “After exams, other students in the group were discussing their vacation plans like going to the beach, Egypt and other countries. At that moment my friend and I (again from Artsakh), were just looking at each other because our dreams are so different. We simply dream of going home, to hug our parents and loved ones.” 

While the citizens of Artsakh desperately wait for the road connecting to Armenia to open, Tatevik says that if there is a chance to go home she will do that, even knowing that it will be much harder to come back to Yerevan again.  

“I think that we, the people of Artsakh, do not deserve what we’ve been going through. I was wondering why regular people can dream about going abroad for a vacation, but we are dreaming about simple things, like going home or having electricity or eating fruits and vegetables.” 

When asked if she’s going to try to convince her family to move to Yerevan with the situation worsening in Artsakh, she replies, “I don’t want to think that one day I won’t live in Artsakh or something bad will happen to Artsakh. No, I don’t want to think about bad things. I would say the opposite. I want to go back home, instead of convincing them to move here. And I want to live in our pre-war Artsakh.”  

Diana Arakelyan, 19 from Lernavan (Askeran region). Yerevan, Armenia. July 7, 2023.

Diana Arakelyan, 19, is from Lernavan in the Askeran region, not far from Stepanakert. She lived in a large house surrounded by gardens with her parents, grandparents, two sisters and her six-year-old brother David. Her older sister currently studies in Artsakh, while her younger sister came to Yerevan to pass her exams at the American University of Armenia and remains in Yerevan with Diana.

“Mom, you’re cutting out, change your location” 

Diana says that the white coat of the doctor is a “completely different world” for her, and she was inspired by her grandmother when choosing a career in medicine. After the 2020 war, her desire to become a doctor “doubled and even tripled,” she says, because doctors are needed more than ever in Artsakh. 

Like Tatevik, Diana was also planning to travel home after the end of the semester in January. When the blockade started, she thought it was something temporary. As it continues, her only contact with the family is through phone calls, rarely video calls, which are frequently interrupted due to the poor Internet connection. “Mom, you’re cutting out, change your location,” quotes Diana, the most frequently used sentence when talking to her mother. 

While Diana is trapped in Yerevan far from her family, her parents sometimes joke by saying, “You are the one who is under blockade, not us, because you are the one who cannot come back home.” 

“See, Din, I painted this heart for you”

David, Diana’s six-year-old brother, is the one she misses the most. “I miss my parents differently, but in the case of Davo, I can’t explain, it’s something special. He resembles me a lot, and we share a unique and close bond. I often joke that, you know mom, he is my son, not yours,” says Diana.

As her family recounted, during the first period of the blockade, David was upset with their mother for not buying him bananas, something he has always enjoyed eating. “When they told me that story, I couldn’t help myself and got emotional, because before the blockade we would

“See, Din, I painted it for you.”

buy him literally whatever he wanted, and now as the stores are empty, there is nothing they can do. So I urge my mom, ‘Don’t keep him in Artsakh because he’s not used to the situation. Send him to me and I will take good care of him,’” says Diana. 

She says that she always asks David how he spends the days in school and what new things he has learned. During one of Diana’s video calls, he showed her a heart that he had painted for her: “See, Din, I painted it for you.”

“He always asks when I’m coming back. I used to say, you know, I have classes here and I cannot come right now. And recently when I was talking to my mom and told her that I finally passed all the exams, he cheered up thinking that I can manage to go home now. ‘Din, you will come home, won’t you? I’m waiting for you.’ I was trying to change the subject because to be honest, I have no hope that I will manage to go home anytime soon.”  

“I was dreaming of sitting outside at night and enjoying the lights of Stepanakert, but now there are no lights, neither can I go”

Diana says that she usually speaks with her father on Sundays and asks him about the agricultural work he does on their land. “Near our land, there is a spot from which there is a magnificent view of where Stepanakert, Shushi on the hill and Askeran on the other side can be seen, and it feels like you are embracing all of Karabakh. I used to tell my Dad that in the summer I would come back, we would celebrate many things, and he would make samovar tea for me. I was dreaming of sitting outside at night and enjoying the view and the lights of Stepanakert. But now neither can I go, nor can you see any lights in Stepanakert,” says Diana. 

Diana believes that all of this is being done to break the Artsakh people, but Azerbaijan must understand that it’s not possible. “My grandparents always say that they have seen even worse days in 1992 and it couldn’t break them. They say that we will find the strength to go through this situation without food, without taking a shower, and without electricity, with one candle. The only important thing is that we live in peace, that our soldiers come back safe and healthy. The rest is not important; the rest we can handle,” Diana says. “I have so many thoughts in my mind, all kinds of scenarios are running through my head, but I’m trying to think that everything will be okay. I am trying to think that some solution will be found for this situation. I’m not sure what scenario will happen. What I am sure of is that this situation will come to an end as soon as they [Azeris] understand that they cannot break us and force us to leave our homes.” 

Diana in front of Zoravor Surb Astvatsatsin Church in Yerevan, Armenia. July 7, 2023.

Diana says that after the war in 2020, when they returned back to Karabakh, she was depressed and one of her only coping methods was to pray. “That is what helped me to find the strength to try to go back to the pre-war lifestyle. Although I cannot forget all the feelings I went through, I’m trying to pass that. But it’s impossible to forget that because it’s not over and we are now in kind of a ‘passive war,’” she says.

Towards the end of our conversation, I asked Diana about her plans and the plans of her family. “We have put aside all the plans we had made before. Everything has changed now, and our plans for the future have changed too. I will put it this way. People living there don’t even make plans. They live their days trying to enjoy every single moment and to appreciate that nothing bad happened on that day and their beloved ones are safe. And every morning each of us prays that nothing bad happens on that day,” she answers. 

Diana and Tatevik together at Cascade, Yerevan, Armenia. July 7, 2023.

All of Florida’s Homenetmen members and participants

As I was growing up, attending the Homenetmen Navasartian Games was an annual event, one my parents, aunt and uncles began years before I came along. The Homenetmen games was one of the first significant Armenian events I attended as a youngster. I was excited about this year’s games, because it’s the first year that the Florida chapter had a PeeWee soccer team participating. This meant that the PeeWee team members would be experiencing the Homenetmen games for the very first time. 

Florida PeeWee soccer team on day 2 after playing the New York B Team

For the first time in 13 years, the games were held in New Jersey. The Florida chapter brought over 30 members, with 27 athletes participating in various sports such as basketball, chess, track and soccer. 

Our PeeWee soccer team consisted of eight players: Gabriel Balaban, Arshak Boyajian, Adam Danielian, Ara Jamgochian, Joseph Kochkerian, Narine Tokatlian-Maltez, Nadya Yaghjian and Razmig Yaghjian. Before the Navasartian Games, the team met and practiced every week, and their efforts paid off on the fields! As a first-time team attending the games, they made it to the semi-finals against the New York chapter’s PeeWees.

Narine Tokatlian-Maltez and Ara Jamgotchian during the chess matches

Florida also had four senior men, including Souren Badikyan, Gor Badikyan, Karen Rezikyan and Vahe Boyajian, participate in soccer, joining the New York A team and making it to finals in second place against Boston. 

Meanwhile, in chess, Ara Jamgochian, Alec Samra, Sevag Tokatlian and Narine Tokatlian-Maltez participated, and Alec Samra and Ara Jamgochian were winners! 

In basketball, brothers Shant and Shiraz Bardakjian joined the Boston team, and Alec Samra and Khatchig Boyajian played on the Detroit team. 

Florida track winners

Finally, in track, Florida had multiple athletes participate in various races. The PeeWee group results included Arshak Boyajian winning the gold in the 100 meters, Nadya Yaghjian racing to a gold in the 800 meters, Jasmin Kochkerian running for a silver, and Narine Tokatlian-Maltez and Razmig Yaghjian each winning bronze medals in the 200 meters. As the senior track participant, I won gold in the 100, 200, 400 and 800-meter races. Running the 800-meter, Florida veterans Raffi Yaghjian and Sevag Tokatlian won gold and bronze, respectively. 

At the end of the games, the Florida chapter came in fifth place overall and was awarded “Most Improved Chapter” this year. There was an overwhelming amount of love and excitement over the weekend for everyone who attended. The Florida chapter has high hopes for next year to come back even stronger. 

After the weekend’s events, I asked the Florida PeeWee athletes for their impressions.

Victory night with our trophy for most improved chapter and plaque for 5th place overall

What was your favorite part of the weekend? 

Nadya Yaghjian: “The victory barahantes.”
Razmig Yaghjian: “Whenever my team won a game.”
Gabriel Balaban: “The soccer games.”

What do you look forward to next year? 

Adam Danielian: “Bouncing back to win it all!”
Narine Tokatlian-Maltez: “Improving our team and hopefully making it to finals.”
Razmig Yaghjian: “Looking forward to seeing all my friends again and winning the soccer cup in Providence.”

What is something that happened that you weren’t expecting over the weekend? 

Gabriel Balaban: “Going to one of the largest malls in the U.S.”
Adam Danielian: “Losing the semi-finals in the last few minutes of the game.”
Nadya Yaghjian: “Getting first place in track.”

The sea in Russian strategy
Edited by Andrew Monaghan and Richard Connolly
Publisher: Manchester University Press (August 2023)
272 pages, English
$21.95

Understanding Russia’s foreign policy or strategy in the post-Ukraine war era may be complex to most of us. Reading a few articles in western media on Russia, or traveling a few times to Russia, won’t make us experts on Russian politics. Andrew Monaghan and Richard Connolly are two of the few western experts who write objectively on Russia by analyzing reports and literature published by Russian political and military experts. In their recent edited volume, The sea in Russian strategy, they provide a very timely contribution regarding Moscow’s maritime capability and intent. 

For those who are interested in Russia’s foreign policy, the book is valuable for two reasons. First, it helps us to compare Russian strategy and shipbuilding plans within the context of the war in Ukraine. Second, while it argues that Russia’s land and air forces received a heavy blow in the Ukraine war, its naval force is stronger than ever. 

The sea in Russian strategy is also the first well-written examination of Russia’s maritime power after the fall of the Soviet Union. The book brings together leading experts (with history, military and security backgrounds) to reflect on historical and contemporary aspects of Russia’s naval strategy and capacities. The authors also provide special attention to the Arctic region at a time of mounting tensions between Russia and NATO which some experts call the “Fourth Battle of the Atlantic.” The experts also sketch a trajectory of Russia’s power at sea and consider current capabilities and problems, as well as the Kremlin’s strategic planning for the future. 

In the book, the term sea power, which is relatively used to encompass military and non-military dimensions, is a significant component of Russia’s wider strategy and is likely to rise in importance. The sea is seen as vital to domestic industrial and regional development. To develop Russia’s Arctic and offshore natural resource base, huge investment is being made in Russia’s domestic shipbuilding industry and in building capabilities to extract and transport oil and gas. 

By the year 2000, as the experts mention in the book, there were debates in Moscow that “Russia may lose its status as the world’s second strongest naval power,” where in the Baltic, Russia would become inferior to Germany and Sweden, and in the Black Sea region, it would be inferior to Turkey. However, this has changed in the last two decades as President Putin heavily invested in Russia’s naval forces.

According to the authors, it is increasingly important to have a nuanced grasp of the sea in contemporary Russian strategy for three interconnected primary reasons. First, there is a wider “maritime turn” in international affairs of which Russia is a part. Second, the sea is more significant in the Russian leadership’s thinking and activity—the Russian naval activity in the Black, Caspian and Mediterranean Seas, in addition to the Arctic Ocean reflects this thinking. Finally, throughout the ages, Russia’s perception of the sea has changed based on certain geopolitical and geo-economic developments. One needs to explain these three reasons.

First, the sea serves as a connective fiber of global power, with growth in global trade by sea. Analysts suggest that some 80 to 90-percent of global trade by volume is seaborne. This has led to a dramatic increase in spending on navies. In Asia, China, India, Japan and Australia started upgrading their naval forces and investing in key ports. This fact has led to a “paradigm shift” in naval matters with the development of new submarines and carrier-killer missiles. For this reason, Russian ports are used as “secure hubs,” not only to prevent long-ranged attacks against the Russian navy or key coastal cities, but also to secure maritime trade routes as an alternative to land routes that can be easily exposed and vulnerable to security risks (sanctions, terror attacks, wars, etc.). 

Second, the sea has economic importance to the Russian leadership. While Russia’s imports from Asia have grown since 2014, largely by sea, the Russian economy depends on the ability to exploit and export hydrocarbons and agricultural products by sea. Logistical and transport infrastructure is being built to support this. For this reason, Russia is developing its infrastructure in the North to facilitate the Northern Sea Route (NRS) and the Black Sea to export grain to the Middle East and North Africa. The linking of railways and highways to ports aiming to create a cross-continental bridge between seas and oceans is a prominent feature in speeches by senior Russian officials who are concerned about their country’s geo-economic interests. This is why when the Suez Canal was blocked (March 2021), Moscow seized the opportunity to emphasize the advantages that the NRS would bring to global trade. 

Third, geography and history mean there are a number of noteworthy specificities in the way Russia looks at the sea. Geography imposes significant challenges on the way Moscow determines strategy at sea, creating specific ambiguities in the heat of thinking about power at sea. While Russia is usually known as a continental (Eurasian) power, it also has the longest seaboard in the world. It is worth mentioning that within the Russian collective historical memory, it is always emphasized that most military defeats have been brought from the sea, such as the Crimean War (1854-1856) and the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905). Hence, historically, Russia has been challenged by power projected from the sea; therefore, it prioritizes its ground forces. Meanwhile, the navy is a junior service and used as a deterrent force. 

Moreover, despite its long seaboard, as the book argues, Russia has few outlets for its own naval deployment. Its bases are separated by thousands of miles, and access to the seas and oceans is only possible through narrow exits and choke points. This is what drives the Russian navy’s division into four fleets and a flotilla and automatically puts it at a serious disadvantage compared to other major powers, since it generates logistical problems and difficulties in reinforcement. 

Hence, Russia’s strategy at sea illuminates a key feature of contemporary national power and long-term trajectory of growth, and, within this, Moscow’s priorities and choices as well as the concepts that underpin its activities. Importantly, as the authors of the book mention, as Russia’s maritime economic interests grow, and with it the importance of the sea to its grand strategy, the need to guarantee sea lines communication and to bolster Russia’s military presence abroad will increase.