Eurasianet: The Armenian prime minister is selling his ‘peace agenda’ in Washington
Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan is making an extended visit to Washington hoping to solidify his country’s image as Eurasia’s new democratization darling in the eyes of the West. It is uncertain, however, whether his message is resonating with the Trump administration, Eurasianet writes.
Pashinyan’s government over the past 18 months has broken with Russia and moved to boost cooperation with the United States and the European Union. As noted, it is clear that Pashinyan’s message is designed to entice the United States into providing robust assistance. He is trying to seize what he perceives as an opportunity for Armenia to replace Georgia, the leaders of which have spurned Western values and moved in an authoritarian direction.
The foundation of Pashinyan’s democratization blueprint is a peace deal with Azerbaijan. Talks are presently at a standstill, but the prime minister emphasized that 15 of 17 articles of the draft peace treaty are already finalized, and agreement on the outstanding points just requires “political will.”
While Armenia and Azerbaijan remain intent on settling their differences bilaterally without mediation, Pashinyan stressed that “the attention and support of the international community would be very useful in creating a proper environment for achieving sustainable peace.”
It is far from certain that the Trump administration will heed Pashinyan’s appeal for the kind of diplomatic attention that can help push the peace deal past the finish line. And as for the broader topic of democratization aid, the administration’s efforts to overhaul USAID suggest the United States will not be a strong contributor in building out Pashinyan’s rule-of-law vision, at least over the medium-term.
It is noted that Pashinyan’s “peace agenda” is facing stiff opposition domestically and among Diaspora Armenians. A key element of Pashinyan’s plan to normalize relations with Azerbaijan and Turkey involves drawing a line on the past and focusing on the future, or as he put it, “to open a new era with a new, empty and clear page.” But he is finding that the notion of de-prioritizing historical grievances associated with the 1915 Armenian genocide at the hands of the Turks, or war crimes committed by Azerbaijani forces in Karabakh, or the very loss of Karabakh itself, is abhorrent to many Armenians, at home and abroad.
