From Bolton to O’Brien: Pashinyan’s Strategists

US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs James O’Brien said that the security architecture created by Russia and Iran is undesirable for the countries of the South Caucasus.

“A future built around the axis of Russia and Iran as the main players in regional (South Caucasus) security is unstable and undesirable, including for the governments of Armenia and Azerbaijan,” O’Brien said.

The American diplomat did not say anything new. In fact, we can only thank him for being more honest with the Armenian people than the Armenian authorities, and first of all, Nikol Pashinyan.

O’Brien’s statement, among other things, means that Tehran and Moscow offer Armenia security guarantees if Yerevan stops introducing non-regional geopolitical players into the region. However, since this contradicts Washington’s strategy, Nikol Pashinyan refuses not only Russian-Iranian guarantees but even tries to minimize Yerevan’s official and non-official contacts with Moscow and Tehran.

Speaking of strategy… The United States does have a strategy for Armenia. A strategy that can be titled as follows: “From Bolton to O’Brien.”

John Bolton was once an adviser to former US President Donald Trump on national security, one of the hawks of American politics. It was his visit to Armenia in the summer of 2018 that set the strategic tone for the policy of the Pashinyan government for the entire next period, up to today. The strategy of Bolton and the United States involved several theses: Armenia had to get rid of “historical stereotypes”, and that meant concessions on the Karabakh issue, “with the preparation of the Armenian society for peace,” and neutralizing Iranian and Russian factors in the region.

Bolton’s program envisaged not only the destruction of the Iranian factor but also a geopolitical plan for the transformation of the Middle East. In his perception, “Turkey is the most consistent US ally in the region.” It is logical that, as part of this plan, Turkey should fill the gap that has appeared in the region after the weakening of Iran.

For more than 6 years, this plan has been implemented, and O’Brien’s words are only part of this very plan. Pashinyan has already surrendered Artsakh, gives up part of the territories of Armenia under the guise of delimitation, and destroys strategic relations with Iran and Russia.

6 years of implementation of the Bolton plan is not only O’Brien’s statement but also Toivo Klaar’s words that “Turkey can help establish regional peace as a leading country in the region.”

6 years of American strategic planning for Armenia is not only Armenia without Artsakh and Artsakh without 120 thousand Armenians, but also the threat of war with Azerbaijan hanging over the Republic of Armenia (the possibility of which was openly stated on October 7 by Armenian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Ani Badalyan).

It is not difficult to imagine what a few more years of American strategic planning will do to Armenia…

In order to “free Karabakh from the Russian occupation”, Americans pushed Pashinyan to surrender Artsakh. Who said that they cannot push Armenia itself to dissolution? After all, if there are no Armenians in Armenia, there will be no grounds for the presence of the Russian troops, and thus the “centuries-old occupation of the South Caucasus region by Russia” will end…

Think about it…