Anna Zhamakochyan 

Senior Expert at the Noravank Foundation’s Center for Information Studies

In the recent years the Republic of Armenia (RoA) has been involved in geopolitical integration processes. Since 2010 the RoA was involved in the negotiation process for Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement with the EU, while in 2013 the RoA president announced about Armenia’s readiness to join the Customs Union of Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus (and in future also the Eurasian Union). In such situation the intra-public discussions are important in grasping and defining our ideas about the vision for development of the country and achieving a public partnership and agreement for at least the main directions for the country’s future and fundamental values. Given the factor of Armenian Diaspora, apart from discussions occurring inside Armenia, the opinions and standpoints of various segments of Armeniancy regarding Armenia’s future position and role are also important. It is pertinent to study the Armenia-Diaspora dialogue and Diaspora’s involvement in discussions on the future of Armenia and related political problems. This article presents a generalized review of the data obtained by a study1 of 18 Diaspora media2.

 

In the discourse of Diaspora’s media on Republic of Armenia’s geopolitical orientations, it is visible that the discussions on integration processes of the Republic of Armenia are mostly based on opinions and comments found in the media-space of Armenia.

 

The decision to join the Customs Union and later also the Eurasian Economic Union has been discussed in Diaspora media both in positive and negative lights, in terms of RoA national interests, impacts on economy, energy and security issues. At the same time it has to be noted that among the materials of Diaspora media dedicated to political/economic developments in Armenia there are very few expert analyses. The circulating materials are more descriptive in nature, and sometimes are simply emotional.

 

It has to be noted that regardless of the pro or con stance on the policy of integration adopted by the RoA, the Customs Union as an ideologeme is usually perceived in the media-texts not as an idea of a union between members or equal entities, but rather is directly associated with Russia, sometimes even with the personality of the Russian president. The discourse of groups expressing themselves for and against RoA membership in Customs Union is most clearly manifested in several key topics, such as security of the RoA and NKR, socioeconomic situation and development (including energy problems) in Armenia, and concerns over the RoA sovereignty loss.

 

By and large, the membership in the Customs Union is viewed not so much in perspective of its positive effects, but in the context of averting the negative ramifications in case of non-membership. This is especially evident in the ideologized and value-ascribed notion of “security” for the RoA and NKR. Generally, the process of Armenia’s integration in CU/EEU is expected to maintain the “status quo” both in the areas of security and economy/energy. Consequently, adoption of this geopolitical course by Armenia is often viewed as the “least of all evils”.

 

The media-image of Russia is mostly that of an “inevitable ally”, the relations with which are highly asymmetric and which may easily wield leverages to achieve desirable effects. Interestingly, the rules of the game and such relationships between the entities are not seen as something that may change. Hence, the military, political and economic future of Armenia is contemplated in the context of this situation and is viewed in relation to Russia and its projects. The membership in EU is looked upon as something unrealistic/illusional, or is considered only in the domains of cultural, civilizational, legal, social, and values developments, leaving out the military one.

 

If one reviews not only articles related to the researched topic, but also the general media coverage, then it can be noted that the traditional agenda of the Diaspora formed around the matter of the Armenian Genocide continues to reflect this main issue and those associated to it. It is mainly the relations with Turkey that get local in the Armenia-Diaspora future prospects. Hence, the Armenian-Turkey relations and their possible developments are a dominating topic in analytical publications. As a result, as far as the internal political problems and/or external challenges of Armenia are concerned, Diaspora mostly assumes the role of a distant observer.

 

Thus, the Armenia-Diaspora relations appear to remain in “stereotypical” frames of the Genocide, lost homeland, traditional Armenian culture and genetic memory. Such models of viewing each other in no way help modernizing the relations and noticing the changes that occur in Armenia and various segments of Diaspora. Moreover, they prevent timely assessment of pending urgent problems, and building a common discourse arena. Perhaps, this is the reason why during a research often a general feeling appears that one is dealing with archives. For instance, the Moscow-based «Ноев Ковчег», often uses media language that abounds with unequivocal veneration of “force”, mythologized glorifications, and “must be done” formulations. The traditional Diaspora media, especially the cultural and community oriented mass media, often leave an impression of archived material, because there so are numerous references to the past. The contexts of the past and present are often hardly differentiated: the history is not presented with a due regard to its place and time. Consequently, viewpoints of Diaspora on many issues (including future prospects of Armenia) are substantiated by mythologized perceptions and remain in the purely emotional domain. Perhaps, this is a manifestation of a common “mythological” thinking, which can be observed in Armenia, too. In this respect, among the researched media Asbarez.com, Masis Weekly and «Ալիք» differ significantly from others, where the “rational” political language is a norm, especially with regards to the issue of the RoA integration.

 

As for the survey we conducted with 20 Diaspora experts regarding their opinions on the RoA integration policies, most of them found it desirable to have “deep cooperation” with both CU/EEU and EU, but “not full membership” in either.

 

Characteristically, in the expert opinions an evident relation can also be traced between the expressed viewpoints and experts’ country of residence. In particular, the opinions of ethnic Armenian experts that are Russian residents or nationals differ from others. Given this circumstance, some questions were viewed from the perspective of the experts’ country of residence. CU/EEU membership prospects for Armenia’s future were one thing for which the experts’ perceptions were clearly different depending on the groups of their permanent residence countries. For instance, the overwhelming general majority considered that after joining the CU/EEU, the chances for sustainable development of the country, its attractiveness for Diaspora as a place to live and invest, and peaceful resolution of the Karabakh problem would be less likely or unlikely. Similarly, Armenia’s chances of becoming an influential country in the region were seen as less likely in such case, while the chances of the country to remain in the same sociopolitical condition were assessed to be high. However, very few of the experts living in Russia shared this opinion. They have been mostly a lot more optimistic about the expectations from Armenia’s membership in CU/EEU. They anticipated that after joining the CU/EEU the future Armenia will have high chances of becoming a sustainably developing country, attractive for Diaspora to move to and invest in, better chances to resolve the Karabakh problem favorably for Armenians, as well as although somewhat smaller, but still a likelihood for sociopolitical changes to come.

 

The balanced approaches of Armenian Diaspora’s public figures and experts in the West regarding RoA integration processes are evidenced not only by our research, but also by their publications. For example, after the agreement to join the Eurasian Economic Union was signed on October 10, 2014, Harut Sassounian, Publisher, The California Courier (www.TheCaliforniaCourier.com) published an article3, where he viewed the RoA-RF relations in the context of “geostrategic and economic interests” and “realities”. He noted that there are some “compelling reasons for Armenia's decision to join EEU”, at the same time adding that “no one should conclude that Yerevan has to remain exclusively in the Russian economic zone.” He also calls on the West to help reduce Armenia’s dependence on Russia by applying tax privileges and other incentives: “Western countries would be better served to use carrots rather than sticks to help steer Armenia toward a more balanced relationship between East and West.”

 

In summary, the results of the research of a segment in Diaspora media and a survey of some experts/community leaders show that the expectations of Diaspora for improvement of socioeconomic situation in Armenia are not high with regards to Armenia’s membership in CU/EEU. On the other hand, generally it is considered that this membership will help maintain the status quo in Armenia and the region, will increase the security of the RoA, which however, does not imply any significant positive effect in resolving the problem of Karabakh conflict.

 

1 The study includes a quantitative content analysis of thematic articles published in September-December 2013 in 18 Diaspora mass media a qualitative analysis of the articles published in January-October, 2014 and a remotely conducted survey of 20 Armenian Diaspora experts. The results will be published in December 2014 as a book. The field investigations and primary analysis of the study were conducted by by Arpi Manusyan, Diana Galstyan and Lilit Hakobyan, experts of the Noravank Foundation’s Center for Information Studies.

 

2 The fillowing mass media were studied: «Ալիք», «Լույս», «Արաքս» weekly, «Ազդակ», «Արձագանգ», Gibrahayer (Armenian Cypriots) weekly, «Ազատ օր», «Գանձասար» weekly, «Եվրոպական անկախ ամսագիր «Օրեր», «Ախալցխայի տեղեկատվական կայք», «Հորիզոն» weekly, «Ноев Ковчег», «Еркрамас», Analitikaua.net, Nouvelles d’Arménie, «Հայրենիք», «Մասիս» weekly, Asbarez.

 

3 The article can be found at http://www.azatutyun.am/content/blog/26636167.html

 

“Globus” analytical bulletin, No. 11-12, 2014

  -   Articles and Analyses