By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Armenia’s National Assembly Speaker, Alen Simonyan, has suggested the country consider suspending the broadcasting of Russian TV channels due to their potential to damage Armenian-Russian relations and interfere in domestic affairs. Simonyan specifically cited concerns about programming potentially funded by pro-Kremlin businessman Samvel Karapetyan, owner of the Gazprom-linked Tashir Holding. This consideration follows reports of Russian information operations aimed at discrediting Ukraine and amid Armenia’s complete freeze of its participation in the Collective Security Treaty Organization.
Read the original article here
Armenia proposes banning broadcasting of Russian channels, a move that feels like a significant turning point in the relationship between the two countries. It’s hard to ignore the underlying sentiment of frustration and a clear desire for a shift in power dynamics. Considering the historical context and the current geopolitical climate, this proposal isn’t just about controlling information; it’s a statement. It’s a bold assertion of sovereignty and a clear indication that Armenia is charting its own course, away from the influence of its former ally.
The Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), often referred to as Russia’s version of NATO, comes into the picture here. It’s a military alliance that was supposed to guarantee mutual defense, mirroring the principle of “an attack on one is an attack on all.” However, when Armenia faced conflict with Azerbaijan, the CSTO’s response was underwhelming, to put it mildly. The lack of meaningful support, especially considering the significant territorial losses Armenia suffered, has clearly eroded trust and sparked a reevaluation of its alliances. The reality seems to be that the CSTO did little to prevent the loss of territory.
This proposed ban on Russian state TV broadcasts is a direct response to what Armenia perceives as interference in its internal affairs. It is a clear demonstration of a growing sentiment – a desire to distance itself from the influence of a propaganda machine. The question of losing access to Russian culture, like literature and ballet, feels a little ironic in light of the bigger picture, where the issue is about strategic self-determination.
The situation is, arguably, quite complex, but one thing seems clear: Russia’s actions have inadvertently created a common ground between Armenia and Azerbaijan. It’s a testament to Russia’s ability to unite opposing forces through its own behavior, even if unintentionally. This is one of the greatest unintended feats of the 21st century. Russia’s weakness has made it possible for these countries to act.
The CSTO’s failures have placed a spotlight on the perceived weakness of its membership. The only supporter left seems to be Lukashenko, who is stuck, unable to extract his country from Putin’s shadow.
It’s also worth noting the specific details of the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan. The fact that the territories in and around Nagorno-Karabakh were not internationally recognized as Armenian territory played a role in the CSTO’s inaction. Azerbaijan occupying Armenia’s actual border towns is where the CSTO should have intervened, but this never happened.
The strategic implications are considerable. If Russia continues down its current path, it risks losing its remaining allies. With China as a potential counterweight, Russia could be pushed into even greater isolation.
Looking ahead, the possibility of a significant shift in power dynamics on the global stage becomes very relevant. As Russia’s sphere of influence shrinks, other actors will likely step in to fill the void. The implications of Armenia’s decision to ban Russian broadcasts is not just about information control but a broader geopolitical realignment, with significant consequences for the region and the world.