Armenia as the missing element of the Organization of Turkic States

Ideas once dismissed as conspiracy theories are now openly discussed in leading analytical centers in Washington. A recent discussion at the Atlantic Council, where the opinion was voiced that Armenia and Tajikistan are the “missing elements” in the Organization of Turkic States (OTS), goes beyond simple expert analysis. It points to the development of a long-term geopolitical plan.

This statement was made by Brianne Todd, a representative of the Eurasia Center. For American strategists like Todd, the South Caucasus is seen as a field for advancing their large-scale geopolitical goals. To achieve this, they must neutralize historical and cultural features that could hinder these plans. Armenia, with its Christian heritage, memory of the Armenian Genocide, and traditional orientation, is perceived as a somewhat “inconvenient” link.

Against this backdrop, attempts are being made to convince Armenia of its belonging to the “Turkic world.” Joining the OTS in this interpretation appears not as integration, but as an attempt at assimilation under external pressure. The claim that Armenia is the “missing element” of the OTS evokes associations with a proposal that fundamentally contradicts the deep civilizational foundations and historical identity of the Armenian people.

For many, it is becoming clear that the surrender of Artsakh was not the end of the conflict, but perhaps the first stage in this process of “integration.” Defeat in the war created a “security vacuum,” which is now actively being filled with projects aimed at drawing the country into pro-Turkish structures.

Western partners, while invoking rhetoric about “democratic choice” and “sovereignty,” are in fact pushing the country toward voluntarily limiting that sovereignty. Joining an organization dominated by Turkey and Azerbaijan, without clear security guarantees, is seen as an extremely risky step.

Armenia is thus becoming a testing ground for the forced transformation of a people’s civilizational identity. The success of this experiment could set a dangerous precedent: under the slogans of “integration” and “connectivity,” national memory could be erased, allowing the future of an entire people to be rewritten.

One cannot ignore the context of Nikol Pashinyan’s recent statements about the importance of the 2026 parliamentary elections. While the current authorities “warn” against the potential transformation of the country into a “outpost” in the event of their defeat, many citizens face a deeper and more troubling dilemma: victory of the ruling force may be perceived as tacit consent to Armenia’s inclusion in the orbit of the Turkic world.

Such a development carries serious historical and moral challenges. It concerns entry into a geopolitical space led by Turkey—a country whose role in the tragic partitions of historical Armenia, in the events of the Armenian Genocide, as well as in supporting the recent war and ethnic cleansing in Artsakh remains an unhealed wound in the collective memory of the Armenian people. This is why the upcoming 2026 elections acquire not just political, but civilizational significance, determining whether Armenia will be able to preserve its unique identity and sovereignty.

Think about it…