From Ter-Petrossian to Kocharian: Explaining Continuity in Armenian Foreign Policy, 1991-2003

Abstract

Although foreign policy seems somewhat beyond the democratization and liberalization (leitmotiv) present in the addresses made to the Newly Independent States (NIS), it is actually a relevant observation in studying the evolution of the republics. Foreign policy is situated at the crossroads of development, regional stability, and globalization. Since gaining independence, the Republic of Armenia has been trying hard to impose its sovereignty on the definition of foreign policy.This brief research is based on two political science approaches, usually disjoined. On one hand, foreign policy is studied in its content, in terms of international relations, focusing on the role of the state.1 On the other, it is explained through its functions, which means focusing on the building of internal politics and actors engaged in this process. While the description of Armenian foreign policy has often been reviewed, the decision-making process related to it is practically uncharted territory. This article is not intended to completely cover the decision-making process; rather they are intended to outline its significance. This has a two-fold advantage: First, it provides a method for studying micro-foreign policy which, in the case of a small and constrained state as Armenia, is more often than not seen through the interests of external and more powerful states. second, focusing on the actors and institutions of foreign policy permits emphasizing the link between the choices made and the internal forces determining them.During the first years of independence, Armenia was regarded as the only stable state in the South Caucasus. Levon Ter-Petrossian, who joined the Karabakh Committee in May 1988, soon appeared as the leader who, entrusted by the will of the majority, was taking Armenia toward independence. This became a reality three and a half years later after an exemplary constitutional process. The Armenian National Movement (HHSh), a coalition succeeded the Karabakh Committee, ran the country for a decade and laid the foundation of the Armenian state. Reelected in 1996, Ter-Petrossian was forced to resign in 1998. The prime minister, Robert Kocharian, replaced him as president. For most observers this change of leadership has meant a change in foreign policy. Thus, they adopted a void rhetoric that usually overrides internal crises, such as the one that lead to Ter-Petrossian's resignation. Nevertheless, continuity, surprisingly, has been the prime feature of foreign policy between 1991 and 2003. Although nuances do exist, the questions of classical foreign policy-defense, alliances and definition of priorities-have remained unchanged. This is due to a lack of choice, given the unchanging nature of the main issues facing Armenia and the caution of decision makers, rather than to a long-term political vision. The government's lack of accomplishment in domestic affairs, along with the lack of capital in Armenia, limits the scope of Armenia's foreign policy.A change in leadership has no impact on the conditions in which foreign policy is implemented. On the contrary, it is foreign policy that weighs more on Armenia's internal politics. The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, which has been at the center of foreign policy since independence and in the minds of all Armenians since the late 1980s, has been a major determinant in the formulation of foreign policy. To a certain extent, the Karabakh issue is linked with every other item on the agenda, conferring on it this main feature: the security priority. The consequences of this particular foreign policy question weighed substantially on the new administration. But this change resembles a substitution more than an alternation. The two kinds of elites, though different in personality and image (the military versus the intellectual, the manager versus the charismatic leader), share an ideological proximity. The second Armenian adminisration, whose members were allies of the first government before opposing it, has been running Armenia since 1998. …