In a brief commentary for “Vocal Europe,” Regional Studies Center (RSC) Director Richard Giragosian offered a look at “The 3G of Armenian-Russian Relations: Guns, Gas and Goods.”  In the piece, Giragosian noted that “of the various states of the former Soviet Union, Armenia has long been seen as the most loyal, and perhaps most subservient, to Russia.  For Russia, its leverage over Armenia has depended on a “3G” approach, consisting of a combination of guns and discounted weapons, below market gas supplies, and goods, as both a major trading partner and as the dominant force of the Eurasian Economic Union.”

In an interview with Aram Sargsyan for the “” electronic news site, RSC Director Richard Giragosian offered his assessment of major developments in Armenian security and foreign policy in 2017.  Conducted in English but dubbed into Armenian, the interview also focused on the relationship between domestic issues and foreign policy.

As part of our longer term “media support” activities in support of Armenia-Turkey “normalization,” our latest in a regular series of contributions to the Agos newspaper in Istanbul looks at the risk of renewed hostilities over Nagorno-Karabakh: “Dağlık Karabağ: ‘Kazara savaş’ riski büyürken,” Agos, 11 September 2017.

As a guest on the weekly Sunday talk show hosted by Hrair Tamrazian, the director of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty’s (RFE/RL) Armenian Service, RSC Director Richard Giragosian assessed the lingering risk of renewed hostilities over Nagorno-Karabakh, and offered his analysis of developments related to the Karabakh peace process.

Appearing as a guest on the “Crossroads of Opinions” talk show hosted by journalist Anna Israelyan for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty’s (RFE/RL) Armenian Service, RSC Senior Analyst David Shahnazaryan commented on recent developments in the mediation of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Noting the recent statement by OSCE Minsk Group’s U.S. Co-Chair Ambassador Richard Hoagland on the elements of the mediation effort, Dr. Shahnazaryan stressed that although “there is nothing new in the document,” what “is most important is not what Ambassador Hoagland said, but what he did not say.”