The status quo established by the Russo-Azerbaijani tandem in Nagorno-Karabakh completely broke down after Baku launched a massive invasion of Artsakh while coordinating operations with Russian forces. This culminated in the collapse of the Artsakh Republic. Nerses Kopalyan presents an in-depth analysis of developments.

The madman theory is a strategy in coercive bargaining, where the perceived extremism of an actor is leveraged to achieve one-sided outcomes. Aliyev’s bargaining posture operates off of the logic that if his terms are not met, he reserves the right to wage war, thus anchoring the threat of destruction to force acquiescence from Armenia and the international community.

Russia is not simply abdicating its responsibilities towards Armenia; it is directly working against Armenia’s interests by aligning with Azerbaijan to strengthen the Russo-Azerbaijani axis and methodically discredit official Yerevan.

Azerbaijan’s approach to the Nagorno-Karabakh issue is a perversion of the concept of territorial integrity. It makes a mockery of legalism and constitutionalism, hijacking the law and using it extra-legally to violate civil, civic and human rights.

Critical self-reflection is necessary as Armenia overhauls its intelligence infrastructure. For national security strategy to be concrete, substantive and operationalizable, it requires strategic intelligence. Nerses Kopalyan explains.

In this security report, scenario planning is fused with contingency planning to prepare courses of actions and outcomes that may address unexpected situations and mitigate significant impact to Armenia due to the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict and its effect upon Russia’s domestic political order.

Armenia’s vast mines have never been part of its security architecture, nor has the potential securitization of this sector ever been considered a fundamental cornerstone of building alliances or strategic partnerships. Mining-for-security should not be qualified as a political act, but rather, a fundamental security act, Nerses Kopalyan writes.

Russia’s refusal to either enforce or impartially implement the terms of the November 9 tripartite statement that ended the 2020 Artsakh War has generated a growing cleavage between Armenia and Russia, revealing Moscow’s preference for frozen conflict persistence.

The region’s security arrangement remains in flux as Azerbaijan amplified its rhetorical aggression and engaged in expansive troop movements and build-up in border areas. Greater Western involvement has deepened the alliance between Azerbaijan and Russia. While Moscow and Baku have established a united front against the West’s presence in the region, Armenia has proceeded to reconfigure its strategic interests, advancing its democracy narrative, while aligning its preferences to the resolution of the conflict with the Western-led stabilization efforts.

Armenia's precarious security situation is compounded by its underdeveloped institutions and infirm infrastructure. For the February security briefing, Nerses Kopalyan writes that in this context, the entirety of Armenia’s social and governmental approach must revolve around building resilience.

Taking into consideration the security context in January and guided by a strategy of deterrence-by-denial, Armenia must develop a “porcupine doctrine” to deter Azerbaijan’s objectives and the destabilizing designs of the Aliyev regime.

The security context in December showed that regardless of negotiations or the general contours of a potential peace treaty, actual and sustainable peace with the Aliyev Government will remain elusive. This month’s security report introduces the concept of ontological security.

Baku does not want an equitable peace, the West struggles to advance the negotiations, and Moscow prefers freezing the process to create a new status quo it can control. Yerevan will need to enhance its bargaining abilities by engaging in asymmetrical aggressive bargaining.

The security context for the month of November demonstrates observable decline for Armenia as Azerbaijan intensified and amplified its hybrid warfare activities, attempting to neutralize Armenia’s growing attempts at the diplomatization of its deterrence capabilities.

The security context for the month of October can be better understood as the changing configuration between Armenia’s implementation of its diplomatization-of-security doctrine against Azerbaijan’s multi-tiered hybrid warfare doctrine.

Armenia’s security situation remains precarious, as Azerbaijan has exponentially increased its use of interstate conflict mechanisms, undertaking both large-scale invasions as well as incrementally utilizing hybrid warfare to justify violations of the ceasefire.

Azerbaijan has made an enormous strategic mistake, Russia has allowed for a sizable power vacuum in the region, and the United States has determined to capitalize on these developments, undertaking a policy pivot in the South Caucasus.

A recent IRI survey provides expansive empirical evidence in understanding political developments in Armenia over the last six months; the activities and stated objectives of the opposition have enhanced the current government's favorability.

As the Armenian villages of Aghavno, Berdzor and Sus on the Lachin Corridor were handed over to Azerbaijan on August 25, questions remain about why Yerevan was seemingly excluded from that process.

Baku’s oil economy is not sustainable, as diminishing revenues in the long-term increase the probability of domestic instability in Azerbaijan, potentially triggering militarized interstate disputes.

If those genuine activists who have genuine grievances want this government gone, then they must also get rid of the Kocharyans and Sargsyans from their ranks. Until this happens, the transition to mainstream legitimacy will be a Sisyphean endeavor.

The impossible situation that Armenia finds itself in because of the Russo-Ukraine conflict can be mitigated through a policy known as strategic shirking, argues Nerses Kopalyan.

The strategic limitations of the last 30 years are no longer tenable, and there is an acute need for innovation, creativity and sophistication in creating a new chapter in U.S.-Armenia relations.

This concept paper undertakes a reconfiguration of Armenia’s doctrinal policy on Nagorno-Karabakh, thus formulating the empirical and legal basis to develop a grand strategy on the concept of remedial sovereignty.

While Baku prepared for war, Armenia relied on overconfidence, willful ignorance and underestimated the enemy leading to its defeat in 2020. But Azerbaijan, intoxicated by its own victory, will also lose because of Aliyev’s strategic narcissism.

The Aliyev regime is profoundly frustrated, writes Nerses Kopalyan, however, this frustration is an inherent byproduct of Baku’s illusions of grandeur and the awkward hubris that has consumed Ilham Aliyev.

Today marks the one year anniversary of the Tavush clashes. This article looks into the chronology of events as they developed, the subsequent narrative that was perpetuated in Armenia and Azerbaijan, and the consequent reactions of regional and international powers.

Armenia’s defeat in the 2020 Artsakh War was a collective failure of all state bodies and institutions. The new Armenian government must construct a foreign policy doctrine defined by “strategic engagement.”

A new poll casts the electorate as largely pessimistic about the candidates and largely undecided. The findings demonstrate that acting PM Nikol Pashinyan’s Civil Contract would win the plurality of the votes but fall short of securing a single-party majority government.

Armenia’s security infrastructure requires a robust defense doctrine, expansive reforms, rearticulation of geopolitical and geostrategic realities, closing the gap in power disparity with regional actors and competent institutional structures.

Political efficacy has been replaced with a wave of voter alienation among a large percentage of Armenia’s electorate. With snap parliamentary elections set for June 20, these issues will be front and center.

The demand for the Prime Minister’s resignation by the Army’s General Staff is a violation of the civilian-military doctrine that has served as an institutional and normative standard within Armenia’s state system and establishes a highly dangerous precedent.

Will the formation of a Truth Commission on the 2020 Artsakh War make it possible to rectify persistent and systemic errors that led to such military and geopolitical failures?

The narrow geopolitical framework of the three-decade-old Karabakh conflict is now threatening to become a Eurasian nightmare: Turkey's involvement has sensationalized the war, Iran’s unease has reinforced the confusion, while Russia's perceived passiveness has created much regional anxiety.

On this day of independence, the Armenian people celebrate their defiance of history and injustice. Every September 21, Armenians celebrate their will-to-power, their indestructible will to Struggle.

The contours of Armenophobia presuppose the dehumanization of an entire people, where hatred and aversion towards an Armenian is embedded in Azerbaijan’s political culture, writes Nerses Kopalyan.

That the same people who made a mockery of democracy are now lamenting an imaginary backsliding, is intellectually insulting to the Armenian citizen, writes Nerses Kopalyan.

During an extraordinary session, Armenia’s National Assembly initiated and unanimously approved a set of Constitutional amendments to address the crisis of political and institutional legitimacy of the Constitutional Court.

Gagik Tsarukyan is a remnant of the previous system. The era of oligarchs is over, and Tsarukyan must make his peace with that. Armenia is no longer a country for corrupt old men, writes Dr. Nerses Kopalyan.

The Armenian government has initiated a broad set of cases against the oligarchs and Robber Barons of the former regime composed of the upper echelon of the previous-pyramid hierarchy. Nerses Kopalyan looks at a number of high-profile cases.

The experience of combating the coronavirus pandemic in Armenia can and should serve as an important foundation to develop long-term and institutionalized mechanisms of crisis management with the support of Diasporan experts and professionals.

Toxic masculinity is not only an attack on femininity, it is also an attack on manliness, on the cultural precepts of Armenian society and it is an assault of ontological proportions, writes Nerses Kopalyan.

How should Armenia-Diaspora relations develop moving forward? This new White Paper argues that relations must be defined through state-centered institutions and transnational governance.

The International Republican Institute recently published its fourth public opinion survey since the Velvet Revolution. The survey found that a healthy majority of Armenians believe the country is heading in the right direction.

If we are to develop and build a functional relationship between the Homeland and the Armenian Diaspora, we need to understand the discrepancy between the Diaspora’s devotion to Armenianness and the Republic of Armenia’s vision for the Armenian world.

Can the popularity of the National Security Service be sustained after the dismissal of Artur Vanetsyan? It can, but only through one mechanism: rigid institutionalization and the complete alleviation of the personalization of politics in Armenia.

As an instrument of transitional justice, vetting is designed to “cleanse” state institutions that are tainted by systemic corruption, nepotism, and incompetence. Vetting of personnel is the first step toward the broader goal of institutional reform, writes Dr. Nerses Kopalyan.

Should Armenia implement the tools of transitional justice? This White Paper, developed by Dr. Nerses Kopalyan is a comprehensive transitional justice agenda for the Republic of Armenia.

While taking the reader through the complexities of international law, Dr. Nerses Kopalyan writes that when Armenia and Azerbaijan speak about peace, they mean completely different things. What they are actually saying is that they seek peace on their own terms.

When the Ministry of Diaspora was eliminated, many believed it went against the interests of the Armenian Diaspora. Nerses Kopalyan provides an alternative approach that alleviates bureaucratic bloating, enhances legislative efficiency offering the Diaspora a healthy dosage of political capital and a culture of reciprocity.

Dr. Nerses Kopalyan provides an in-depth analysis of the parties and coalition of parties that are running for the Dec. 9 snap parliamentary elections. Of the 11 political forces preparing for the campaign, Kopalyan writes, only six are competitive and have the capacity to influence and effect the policy discourse during the campaign.

With snap parliamentary elections around the corner and if all indicators hold true, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s Civic Contract party remains poised to sweep the vote. The question that the prime minister will have to consider is whether he wants to rule or govern.

Dr. Nerses Kopalyan writes that the municipal election was not about Yerevan, the Council of Elders, or the Mayor: it was about reifying Pashinyan’s dominance of the Armenian political universe.

Formulating the compatibility of transitional justice with Armenia's laws and constitutional statutes shouldn't be problematic, writes Nerses Kopalyan. However, the Pashinyan government, must go out of its way to make certain that the formation of any element of the instruments of transitional justice are fundamentally impartial, profoundly non-politicized, and unequivocally objective.

Nerses Kopalyan examines and debunks the arguments that the arrest and detention of Armenia’s second President Robert Kocharyan is politically motivated and that the basis of the arrest lacks cogent and substantive legal foundations. Kocharyan has been charged with “overthrowing constitutional order” regarding the events of March 1, 2008 that left ten people dead.

Nerses Kopalyan writes that Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s declaration of war against the entrenched powers of the previous system is not simply a singular attack against corruption, but rather a broad multi-pronged strategy that envisions an ideational restructuring of Armenia’s political culture.

Policies of previous administrations were not shaped by ideology, but rather, by a drive to consolidate illegitimate power through patronalistic politics. Nerses Kopalyan argues that the political ideology of Nikol Pahsinyan’s new government is aggressive centrism.

Dr. Nerses Kopalyan applies two conceptual frameworks from political science - prospect theory and historical institutionalism - to understand how Serzh Sargsyan’s Administration collapsed in the face of an unprecedented popular uprising in Armenia.

Armenia is facing its greatest challenge since independence. Nikol Pashinyan’s Velvet Revolution has left the ruling Republican Party facing a crisis of legitimacy. Nerses Kopalyan writes, “Pashinyan is not seeking to usurp the Constitutional legitimacy of Parliament, but rather, force the majority in Parliament to conform to the will of the popular movement.”

Today, former president Serzh Sargsyan became Armenia's new prime minister. Dr. Nerses Kopalyan outlines Sargsyan's achievements over the ten years as president. He writes: "The most vital complexity of Sargsyan becoming PM is that it not only reinforces, but also justifies the de-moralization of the Armenian citizen."

Is corruption inherent to the post-Soviet Armenian political culture, and if so, does this make the political culture of Armenia incompatible with democratic values? Dr. Nerses Kopalyan examines how conflictual matters that should be resolved in the public sphere are almost always resolved within the cultural rules of the private sphere.

Dr. Nerses Kopalyan takes a look at the role some of the most powerful Diasporan organizations have played in “reinforcing and indirectly legitimating the country’s existing political system” and draws parallels between the relationship of Armenia’s ruling administrations and their politics of co-opting the powers of the Diaspora.