Centuries ago, Roman emperors were guided by the “Bread and Scenes” principle in order to maintain power. Many of the emperors believed that they needed to provide the people with bread and make scenes in order to keep their mouths shut and so that they won’t complain about the emperor.
Some emperors used to organize gladiator battles and bread was thrown to the public on behalf of the emperor. Although the Roman Empire doesn’t exist for a long time now, however the “Bread and Scenes” principle is still used. In fact, Armenian authorities have been guided by that principle for a while now. We understand that the bread is the large amount of “charities”. But if we try to understand the purpose of Armenia’s foreign policy, we’ll see that it’s all about making scenes. Today, there are only two main issues in Armenia’s foreign policy agenda: the “fair settlement” of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and international recognition of the Armenian Genocide. The second one, of course, is an inconsumable source for making scenes (although in many cases the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is used to reach that goal).
It’s clear that if the Armenian Genocide recognition didn’t clash, let’s say, France’s interests, France wouldn’t take the step it took and if something clashes a country’s interests, the given country (if it has autonomy more or less) takes the step regardless of what position Armenia has on that issue. After all, many large countries and international organizations had recognized the Armenian Genocide before the genocide issue was included in Armenia’s foreign policy agenda and even before Armenia’s declaration of independence. Not making announcements about recognition of the Armenian Genocide may effectively help get the international recognition. For example, the Armenian government is using this approach in the case of the appointing of the new U.S. Ambassador to Armenia. Armenia has officially approved the nomination of the candidate for the post of ambassador, but is really postponing the appointment (parliamentary elections are coming up; can you imagine having the ambassador come to Armenia and see all of the “charities” and other ways of showing “care for the people”? He wouldn’t stand it).
“The absence of the ambassador stands in the way of the full use of Armenian-American relations,” announced Armenian Deputy Foreign Minister Arman Kirakosyan at the National Press Conference. Why isn’t Armenia using the influence it has on Armenian lobbying so that it doesn’t create obstacles for the affirmation of Hoagland’s candidacy? Armen Kirakosyan didn’t respond to that question during the press conference and simply said: “We have officially approved Richard Hoagland to be the new U.S. Ambassador to Armenia.” The rest, according to Kirakosyan, is connected with the U.S. internal affairs and the announcement made by former U.S. Ambassador to Armenia John Evans. So, what’s the point of including the Armenian Genocide issue in the foreign policy agenda and if not making the scenes mentioned above? However, today Armenia has found itself in an unenviable situation as a result of the “sentimental” foreign policy aimed towards making the scenes. It’s even worse that we don’t want to accept that and draw conclusions on that. What’s more, Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan suggests “following up with clear conscience” on the development of events. The Kars-Akhalkalak railway construction treaty was signed in Tbilisi on February 7 and on the same day Oskanyan announced that that railway “isn’t leading Armenia to isolation" Meanwhile, during the press conference, A. Kirakosyan announced the construction of that railway is the “continuation of Turkey’s policy, which is to do anything possible to circumvent Armenia along with Azerbaijan”. So, the Foreign Minister says that the railway “doesn’t lead Armenia to isolation”, while the deputy foreign minister tends to differ. Now, what’s the foreign affairs ministry’s role on this-does the railway lead Armenia to isolation or not? In response to this question, Kirakosyan said: “You’re saying different things. The attempts to isolate and form a blockade have always been around starting from the days of Armenia’s independence. I said that this is a new attempt by these countries to strengthen the blockade policy,” mentioned Kirakosyan. We tried to find out whether that was a successful try or not. “No, it is just a try. We’re dealing with different issues. We have created such .conditions for Armenian economy that we evade that blockade. I also mean trade relations…Armenia can find its spot even in the case of a blockade. This railway is, of course, beneficial for Georgia, Turkey and Baku. Of course, if the Kars-Gyumri railway were to function, it would be economically much more beneficial for Armenia. This isa political decision aimed to circumvent Armenia, no question about it. As for the economy, Armenia’s economy won’t suffer if the railway is constructed. We can’t foresee any economic downfall. Only Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey will benefit,” said the deputy foreign minister.
As they say, no comment. However, Kirakosyan said that Armenia and Iran “wish” to construct an Iran-Armenia railway. In fact, let’s recall that that Oskanyan also announced on February 7 that Armenia could have prevented the construction of the Kars-Akhalkalak railway if it “made unacceptable compromises” for the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. It is worth mentioning that this has been announced during the implementation of each regional project aimed to circumvent Armenia. So, this is a try to convince us that Armenia couldn’t have been isolated without giving up Nagorno-Karabakh. In other words, what we have is the “isolation or Karabakh” situation or something like “Death or Freedom”. In any case, A. Kirakosyan also announced that after the funeral procession of Hrant Dink, on the same day when he was in Istanbul for the funeral, he had a telephone conversation with Turkish Foreign Minister Abdulah Giul. “Giul welcomed me to Turkey and expressed his condolences on behalf of Turkey. He suggested meeting with his representative whom he sent from Ankara to Istanbul the next day to meet with me. He was a high-ranking Turkish foreign ministry official,” mentioned Kirakosyan. According to the latter, during that meeting and the telephone conversation with Giul, the Turk government officials were talking about the Turkish government’s desire to improve relations with Armenia. “As to what conditions and what preconditions, that’s a different story. But there was a desire during the conversations and negotiations,” said Kirakosyan, adding: “Armenia’s position is the following: reach reconciliation through cooperation. Turkey’s position is to discuss and clarify the genocide issue and then start cooperation and opening of borders. This is the main particularity of the current non-official relations and contacts between Armenia and Turkey.”