With less than three months to go until Armenia completes its transformation to a parliamentary system, the Regional Studies Center (RSC) released a brief assessment of recent developments entitled, “Armenia 2018: Political Transformation and Transition.” The assessment looks at the recent developments over the indirect election of a now largely symbolic president and the selection of a new prime minister as the next head of state. For the latter and more significant issue of the next premier, the RSC analysis offers three likely scenarios.
In the seventh article in our “RSC Guest Analysis” publication series, entitled “Land for Peace: A Comparative Analysis of the Cases of Israel and Nagorno-Karabakh,” RSC Resident Fellow Lynette Hacopian offers an innovative comparative assessment of the concept of “land for peace” in the cases of Israel and Nagorno-Karabakh. Hacopian argues that “of the many aspects of the complex Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, the core issues of self determination and territorial integrity have presented a challenging clash or even contradiction of key principles of international law. Within the framework of diplomacy and mediation, there is also a related issue of the need for concession and compromise, largely defined by the surrender of Armenian-held, or ‘occupied,’ territories of Azerbaijan proper beyond the borders of Nagorno-Karabakh, in exchange for the self-determination of Karabakh through a referendum on final status.”
The Georgian Institute of Politics published the first issue of their new publication on 1 December 2016, entitled, “What Does the Russian-Armenian Joint Military Force Mean for Security in the South Caucasus?” In the first issue, at the request of the Georgian Institute of Politics, RSC Director Richard Giragosian joined a selection of experts from Italy, Georgia, and the United Kingdom for an analytical comment on the joint military force and its implications for security in the South Caucasus.
In an article for Global Risk Insights, RSC Director Richard Giragosian offered his analysis of likely shifts in American engagement in the former Soviet Union in an article entitled, “Trump’s plans: The outlook for U.S. foreign policy towards Eurasia.”
In the sixth article in our “RSC Guest Analysis” publication series, entitled “An Unnatural Nexus of Interests: The Israeli-Russian-Iranian Triad,” RSC Resident Fellow Lynette Hacopian presents a unique assessment of the convergence and conflict of interests in Syria and beyond between three major powers: Israel, Russia and Iran. Hacopian argues that in the wake of the Russian military intervention in Syria, the “future of Tehran-Moscow relations will be contingent upon gaining back and maintaining trust between the two countries, and uniting based on their shared interests, provided that a more structured and intensive relationship is established.” She concludes her analysis by noting that “while it is premature to tell where the long-term relationship between Russia and Iran is headed, their shared short-term goals will ensure the continuation of their temporary alliance and active engagement in joint military operations, at least until the power balance in Syria is determined.”