This week, the visit of the delegation led by Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan to the United States was the first since the election of the new US administration. It was initially announced that the visit was a working one, and the main reason was participation in the International Religious Freedom Summit in Washington and the US National Prayer Breakfast held at the Capitol. In other words, the visit was not initially planned at a high level, but at the current stage, it is of non-secondary importance for tactical reasons.
"Searches" in Washington
The point is that the Prime Minister's participation in the above-mentioned events sent a significant message to the new Trump administration, which claims to be the guardian of Christian conservative values.
The Armenian delegation's visit pursued an important "exploratory" goal: to get a feel for the US government's policy towards Armenia and, more broadly, the South Caucasus region from the inside. This is significant, given the close relations with the previous US administration and the noticeably cold relations with the Trump team against the backdrop of the unfulfilled expectations of the Democrats' victory and the fact that neither during the pre-election period nor during the post-election period did President Trump or any significant representative of his team influencing US policy decisions speak about their doctrinal approaches to this region.
The new US administration's policy toward the South Caucasus region and its security challenges is a "dark forest" for Armenia. The sooner Yerevan can shed light on it, the more predictable US expectations will be, and a more balanced regional and international diplomacy will be built on them.
First, in the official news about the visit, meetings with representatives of two US think tanks were at the forefront: the Atlantic Council, a prominent American think tank specializing in international relations, and the Heritage Foundation for American Strategic Studies. No matter how eccentric Trump's current domestic and foreign policy decisions may be, the United States remains one of the most institutionalized countries in state governance. The advice of such centers and the expert opinions generated in them are of key importance in the decisions made in that country. These centers must understand Armenia's interests, challenges, and Yerevan's visions for regional development and international political agendas. This is not a way to directly influence decisions made by the US, but rather to make Yerevan's interests count in those decisions.
Nikol Pashinyan's meeting with four members of Congress can also be included in this series. At first glance, one might get the impression that it was an ordinary, routine meeting for members of Congress closely cooperating with the Armenian lobby, and it has no practical significance, also taking into account the fact that the legislative chambers of that country do not have a significant influence on US foreign policy. However, the fact that 3 out of 4 congressmen participating in the meeting represented the Republican Party that took power makes such a dialogue an additional opportunity, a "conduit" for conveying to the US Republican establishment and through them to the administration Armenia's expectations and the rational expectations that the US may have from Yerevan.
Second, especially against the backdrop of the signing of the Armenia-US Strategic Partnership Charter, Yerevan urgently needs to understand the value of this document and, in general, the declaration of such a level of relations with Armenia for Trump and his administration. Currently, this is more important than the protocol details since it is already apparent to all regional players that Yerevan is trying to use American involvement equally as a balancing and counterbalancing factor.
The hidden dual messages of the meeting with the Vice President
In this sense, the introductory meeting between Nikol Pashinyan and US Vice President James David Vance at the White House has symbolic and confidential significance without overestimating or underestimating it. It is obvious that the meeting was predominantly protocol. The parties did not pursue serious, deep-rooted agendas at that meeting. However, such a meeting itself contains two subtextual messages.
First, the fact that the Vice President receives the Prime Minister proves, on a purely protocol level, that Armenia's role in the Trump administration is not yet perceived at such a strategic level that would allow one to be confident in Washington's unconditional support and make long-term and bold political calculations based on it. Second, the meeting had a demonstrative effect, proving that the new American administration was responsibly approaching the legacy left by the previous one, in this context, the bilateral commitments arising from the signed Armenia-US Strategic Partnership Charter. In other words, this document is not just a piece of paper as it is being tried to present it. In this sense, the short meeting between the Armenian Prime Minister and the US Vice President also has a symbolic but deterrent potential for Azerbaijan, Turkey, and Russia.
Will the visit eliminate the risks arising from Trump's decisions for Armenia?
However, such meetings cannot raise exaggerated expectations, considering the possible threats to Armenia that may arise from Trump's successive decisions that shocked the international community.
In particular, Donald Trump signed a decree to withdraw the country from the UN Human Rights Council and the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East. At the same time, the White House has warned about the possibility of the US withdrawal from UNESCO. In parallel, the initiative to seriously reform the US Agency for International Development (USAID), aimed at strengthening democratic institutions abroad, is evidence of the Trump administration's tendency to abandon the American policy of "exporting democracy." This circumstance significantly weakens the political value of Armenia's "democratization brand" or similar image. The reason is that, willy-nilly, the US is forming an international perception that democracy does not need to be defended in the world and that democracy as a factor or tool of policy no longer has significant value against the background of the dominance of the "nothing personal, just business" logic. This is a serious challenge for Armenia, which has no natural resources and uses democratization as a political capital or starting point in foreign relations.
In addition, Donald Trump recently signed a presidential memorandum on national security to apply "maximum pressure" on the Iranian government. It is aimed at preventing Iran from enriching uranium to create nuclear weapons by imposing stronger sanctions. Although the US president later clarified in his microblog post that "maximum pressure" does not mean a military attack on Iran, it is evident that to bring the latter to a "field of constructiveness," the US will exert enormous pressure on Tehran, which may affect Armenia-Iran economic and logistical ties and whet the appetite of Turkey and Azerbaijan for Armenia's southern borders.
From this point of view, it is hoped that Yerevan will make maximum efforts to make the Armenian-American dialogue continuous and turn them into more tangible results. Moreover, in the person of the Iranian Ambassador to Armenia, Mehdi Sobhani, Tehran has already sent a message that it does not currently view the deepening of Armenian-American relations as a process directed against its interests and does not yet see serious risks.
Gor Abrahamyan
