ARMENIA AT THE CIVILIZATIONAL CROSSROADS OF EAST AND WEST

Introduction and Methodology
The article is dedicated to the analysis of the history of Armenia through the prism of the civilizational approach proposed by political scientist Saro Saroyan. The author of the review emphasizes the importance of such a method, as it extracts Armenian historiography from isolationism (isolation: "our history is exceptional") and returns it to the living context of world history. The formation of Armenia is examined through Karl Jaspers' concept of the "Axial Age."

The Key Tenet
The main idea of the article is that Armenia, as an independent political entity, emerges, develops, and collapses in direct dependence on the dynamics of the geopolitical confrontation between the East and the West. When the civilizational border between them passes through the region of the Armenian Highlands, Armenia becomes a key subject of international relations. When this line shifts far beyond its borders, Armenia loses its independence.

Historical Retrospective and the Transformation of Geopolitical Axes
• Replacement of the "North–South" axis with the "East–West" axis (7th–6th centuries BC). In the ancient period, the confrontation between the North (Armenian Highlands, Asia Minor) and the South (Mesopotamia, Egypt) was pivotal. The fall of Assyria in 612 BC and the rise of Media and Persia led to the birth of a new global axis: the East (the Iranian world) versus the West (the Hellenic world and Lydia). At this turning point, the state of Urartu, destroyed by external blows, is replaced by Armenia (the Orontid Kingdom), which completely reformulates its cultural and religious field (Arameo-Iranian syncretism / synthesis) to successfully maintain a balance between the new powers.
• The Era of Hellenism and the Seleucids (4th–2nd centuries BC). The campaigns of Alexander the Great temporarily shifted the center of confrontation deep into Asia, which reduced Armenia's sovereignty. However, during the Seleucid era, who united the lines of the East and the West based on the "right of arms," three independent centers were formed within the territory of Armenia: Greater Armenia, Lesser Armenia, and Sophene.
• The Formula of Tigranes 2 the Great and the Buffer (Intermediary) Function (1st century BC). With the emergence of Rome in the West and Parthia in the East, the Euphrates River became the stable border between the two worlds for the next 1400 years. Realizing the inevitability of defeat in the war against Rome (69–66 BC), King Tigranes 2 the Great developed a viable geopolitical formula: Armenia renounces external conquests, fixes optimal borders within the Highlands, and assumes the role of a buffer state, maintaining the balance of power and maneuvering between Rome and Parthia (and later, the Sassanids, Byzantium, and the Arab Caliphate).

Contemporary Parallels and Geopolitical Challenge
In the concluding section, the author transposes Saroyan's civilizational logic into modern times. The return of the East–West confrontation axis to the South Caucasus region took place in the 20th century (starting from the First World War and the Treaty of Sèvres).

The author presents a rigorous intellectual challenge to Armenian society: under conditions of passivity and "fatigue" in Armenian political thought, global players (the West) have begun to actively shape an alternative balancing power in the region—the independent Kurdistan project. The future of Armenia directly depends on the ability of its elite to abandon provincial thinking, to recognize its own historical buffer function, and either integrate into new regional processes or assist in transforming the South Caucasus into a unified subject endowed with common geopolitical interests.