The velvet revolution in Georgia occurred one year ago and the consequences of that event are already starting to have an influence on post soviet republics. The Georgian "Rose Revolution" marked the beginning of a new period for the South Caucasus and was almost like a beacon marking changes in the geopolitical situation in the region.

Oppositional Dynamics

The Georgian revolution seriously influenced public perceptions in its two neighbouring republics. Eduard Shevardnadze had hardly given up his throne when the Armenian opposition eagerly announced its intention to follow the example of their Georgian colleagues. The events of spring 2004 when opposition forces tried to force Robert Kocharyan to resign through destabilizing the situation in the country were attempts to replicate events in Georgia . However, while the opposition in Armenia decided to follow the path already trodden by their Georgian counterparts, they tried to find similar features with regards to the situation but failed to see significant differences.

The Georgian scenario could not have been repeated in either Armenia or Azerbaijan not only because of Shevardnadze's weakness when compared to first the elder Aliyev and his son as well as Kocharyan who were able to reign in the bridles of government and who could easily attack the opposition. There was also a restraining factor in both republics in the form of the unresolved conflict over Nagorno Karabagh which did not allow the opposition to cross a certain line in their attempts to radically change the situation in both republics.

In Georgia, society viewed conflict in Abkhazia and South Ossetia which were their equivalents of the Karabagh conflict from completely different perspectives. For Georgian society, these two conflicts were connected with opposing Russia and Saakashvili represented a new force that was able to struggle against Russia without succumbing to its influence, as had happened to Shevardnadze towards the end of his presidency. In Armenia and Azerbaijan , however, every attempt by the opposition forces to weaken the power of the ruling regime brings with it an immediate exploitation of the unresolved conflict in Karabagh by the government and its supporters.

In these countries, the connection between resolution of the Karabagh conflict and maintaining a strong powerbase has become an established stereotype, an attitude that is actively propagated by the pro-government mass media in both republics. Indeed, the following approach has been distinctly formed: those able to solve the Karabagh conflict must have power. If the government is controlling the situation regarding Karabagh or even giving that impression, it is practically impossible to replace them. The opposite is also true, as was seen when the first President of Armenia, Levon Ter-Petrosyan, resigned after being seen willing to make concessions in negotiations to resolve the Karabagh conflict.

In fact, the Georgian scenario of regime change is only possible in Armenia and Azerbaijan if the issue is connected to Karabagh.

American Experiments

2004 was decisive for the South Caucasus in many respects. The main catalyzing factor that brought serious geopolitical changes in the region were the presidential and parliamentary elections in all three republics which, while carried out with totally different plots, were nonetheless similar in terms of their social-political background. On the eve of elections in the South Caucasus , the social-political situation in all three republics had reached the point where part of society was ready to engage in radical action. The internal situation that had been formed in recent years became a favourable environment for an outbreak of public emotions.

The US managed to use this accumulated internal tension for their geopolitical interests and the Georgian revolution represented the first successful attempt by Washington to 'remove' Moscow from the territory of CIS . The Americans, for example, succeeded in removing Russia from their traditional bastion - Ajaria. However, it is naive to suppose that the White House will start encouraging 'rose revolutions' in every country. If the Americans obviously supported Saakashvili by allowing him to shame, humiliate and kick out their old friend Shevardnadze, they have totally different agendas in Armenia and Azerbaijan.

In Armenia , the Americans could hardly find any deserving figure in the opposition on whom they could rely if Kocharyan, who has the image of a pro-Russian leader in the region, were removed. In fact, the leading figures in the Armenian opposition are no less orientated towards Russia than the duo of Kocharyan and Serj Sargsyan. Rumours that opposition protests held during spring 2004 were initiated by the West have no apparent basis. The opposition, of course, was inspired by the success of the Georgian revolution and tried to exploit the situation but to see the hand of Washington in this process would be wrong because the US wouldn't have gained anything if Kocharyan had been removed.

If Stepan Demirchyan, Artashes Geghamyan or Aram Sargsyan came to power, Russian rule over Armenia might have even strengthened. Moreover, to the contrary, the rise of the opposition could have been encouraged by the Kremlin to weaken Kocharyan's power who has become increasingly infatuated with the West. If we remember, the spring unrest 'took' Kocharyan to Russia where he not only received Moscow 's full support but where it was also agreed to actually increase Russian influence in Armenia . In fact, the spring unrest in Armenia benefited Moscow and strengthened its positions both in the political and military spheres as well as in the energy sector.

During the second half of 2004, American policy towards Armenia was rather passive and there are at least two reasons for it. Firstly, presidential elections in the US took up significant resources and didn't allow the White House to play any introductory game here. Secondly, the US was more concerned with weakening Russian influence in the Ukraine and it is here that the destiny of Armenia will also be decided. The 'brown' or 'orange' revolution has already brought Ukrainian society and the country to the brink of disintegration. Moscow and Washington are confronting each other head on but after Ukraine, the US has no place in the CIS except for Armenia to engage in another serious confrontation with Russia . We must therefore suppose that the 'spectre of revolution' is now moving towards Armenia .

In this respect we should note that events in Ukraine also coincided with the unexpected reappearance of Levon Ter- Petrosyan who, after arriving back in Armenia after visits to Europe and the US , suddenly spoke after a long silence. The leaders of the Pan Armenian National Movement ( HHSh ) and Levon Ter-Petrosyan in particular are ideal candidates to carry out an 'Armenian revolution.' Today, the Pan Armenian National Movement is the only opposition force whose agenda fits in with Washington 's. On the one hand, the Pan Armenian National Movement is the only serious oppositional force with an anti-Russian and pro-American approach and on the other, in the case of any destabilisation it will be easier for Robert Kocharyan to leave peacefully under its pressure.

All the other opposition forces want the blood of the ruling elite whereas Robert Kocharyan has done everything to spare the leaders of the Pan Armenian National Movement from being held to account for their actions when they were in power during the period of cold and hunger.

Iranian Fears

Any 'Armenian revolution' with an American accent is also important for Washington not only to remove Russia from the country and the South Caucasus region as a whole but also because after Iraq , the regime in Tehran is a possible future target for the Bush administration. This sort of development in Armenia allows the US the opportunity to finally blockade Iran . After the occupation of Afghanistan and then Iraq by US troops, Tehran is in an extremely dangerous situation. The American military ring around the country is, in practice, nearly complete and recently, the mass media have reported on rumours that the US military is already being stationed in Azerbaijan . Although Baku officially denies this information, the possibility of the US military already being in Azerbaijan or that they will be there very soon is very real.

In fact, Armenia is inadvertently preventing Washington from taking more decisive actions against Tehran and as a result, Iran is trying to contribute to the strengthening of the position of the Armenian government. Tehran is also actively working in the direction of economic stabilization in Armenia . By helping semi-blockaded Armenia to be less vulnerable from an economic point of view, Tehran will be able to reduce factors of external pressure on Yerevan and at the same time, also secure its future.

In this respect we can view the beginning of construction of the Iran-Armenia gas pipeline which is financed by Iran and the opening of the second high voltage electric line between Agarak and Shinuhair. The two countries are actively cooperating in the sphere of energy and Iran has already announced its intention to build a third electricity line (LEP) and to increase the flow of energy from 400MV to 1000MV. Apart from this, Iran also wants to take part in a number of projects connected with the construction and reconstruction of hydroelectric power stations and other alternative energy sources.

During the meeting between the Secretary of the National Security Council of Armenia, Serj Sargsyan, and the Ambassador of Iran, Alizera Hagigiyan, there was also talk about building a railway connecting the two countries and importing oil products into Armenia from Iran. At the same time, Armenia will also try to secure other routes to the outside world to lessen its reliance on the Russian-Georgian border which is becoming less secure. In September, new routes were spoken about that connected Russia and Armenia via the Caspian Sea and the territory of Iran .

So, Tehran is trying to increase its influence on Armenia by helping prevent the possibility for a different type of revolution to emerge. Indeed, the Ambassador of Iran has openly announced that "the stability and economic development of Armenia is very important to Iran ".

Burst of European Activity

The Georgian revolution marked the beginning of the 'second geopolitical invention' of the South Caucasus . With the coming of Saakashvili to power, confrontation between Russia and the West has significantly increased in the region and in the territory of the CIS in general. If after the 11 September terrorist attack on the United States saw Moscow and Washington cooperate in the mutual struggle against international terrorism, the war in Iraq and the removal of Eduard Shevardnadze from his position brought confrontation between Russia and the US to new heights. Already, at the Istanbul North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit of 28 July 28 this year, the Caucasus was identified as an important region for NATO who announced their intention to concentrate on encouraging partner relations with the countries of the region. In fact, the 'Rose Revolution' marked the beginning of a new periodical restructuring of the South Caucasus . Europe, which has had an exclusive role as an international body with economic objectives and a desire to monitor how human rights and European values are observed in the three South Caucasus republics, didn't stay silent. Nevertheless, a European political agenda wasn't expressed in the region.

Today, however, the Europe 's desire to extend its influence into the South Caucasus can be clearly seen in its actions, particularly with regards to the Karabagh problem. During the last year, European emissaries, while not planning to replace the OSCE Minsk Group in negotiations, are at least attempting to supplement attempts to resolve the conflict. It is worth mentioning in this respect, one of the main acting figures of European diplomacy, Special Representative of the European Union in the South Caucasus, Heiki Talvetier, Special Representative of the OSCE in Nagorno Karabagh, Goran Lenmarker, and the Rapporteur on Nagorno Karabagh for the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), Terry Davis, General Secretary of the European Union.

Visits by these emissaries to the region show that there is obviously a desire in the Council of Europe to influence and control geopolitical processes in the South Caucasus . Moreover, Europe is trying to sidetrack the OSCE Minsk group by bringing to attention issues that were not mentioned before. This can be seen in the report on Nagorno Karabagh by PACE. In case of its full acceptance, Europe will have possibility to involve itself with the Karabagh problem and in the internal politics of Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Accusations that Armenia is a country occupying the territories of a neighbouring country, as was stated in the report by David Atkinson, could possibly justify peaceful military intervention in the future. For example, and most notably, at the end of November Europe announced the formation of a new Quick Reaction Force that can be deployed to any "hot spot' in the world in 2005. Why shouldn't Europe try this unique development in Karabagh first and at the same time, maintain their position in the region?

So, we can definitely say that in the near future the South Caucasus will be the centre of attention for the great powers and the location of a more apparent clash of interests. Already, the South Caucasus is the geographic location where the interests of Russia, the US and Europe actively clash. The Georgian revolution marked the beginning of this confrontation.

Samvel Martirosyan

South Caucasus. Monthly Magazine

www.caucasusjournalists.net