"A Difficult Choice" - Karen AGEKYAN

Karen Agekyan's article "A Difficult Choice" is devoted to a critical analysis of Rachya Arzumanyan's work on the problems of strategic security of the Armenian nation (Armianstvo) in the 21st century, and represents an extended publicistic commentary by the editor-in-chief of the journal "ANIV" on the key theses of the text under analysis.

Introduction and Methodology

The author points out that Arzumanyan's article, despite its outward simplicity, contains two semantic blocks — one concerning the security environment of the 21st century (the images of the Island and the Fortress), and another concerning the configuration of the three parts of the Armenian nation with the necessity of defining national goals. Agekyan interprets these blocks as thesis and antithesis, revealing behind them the key dilemma facing the nation.

Historical-Psychological Context

Examining the nature of catastrophism and alarmism as a constant element of ideologies and religious teachings, the author shows that Armenian political perception is burdened by specific phobias rooted in the experience of the abrupt transition of Soviet Armenians from a state of subordination to the formal subjecthood of independent Armenia. This condition is compared to the metaphor of "disembarking from a ship onto an island" — an experience of isolation, discomfort, and anxiety.

Comparison with Tsymbursky's Concept

The key analytical device is the comparison of Arzumanyan's image of "Armenia the Island" with Vadim Tsymbursky's optimistic concept of "Russia the Island" (1993). Whereas for Tsymbursky isolation is a conscious act of the subject, a restoration of distance in its own interests, for Arzumanyan the "Island" arises from the outset as a metaphor of enforced rather than chosen isolation.

The Dilemma of Subjecthood and Objecthood

The central thesis of Agekyan's article is formulated through an opposition:

• subjecthood — the position of an actor with all its risks, but also with the possibility of strategic struggle;
• objecthood — a state in which catastrophism inevitably grows into fatalism and a survival mode.

The author emphasizes that there is no intermediate position: one cannot be "a little bit a subject."

The Image of the Fortress and a Historical Illustration

Special attention is given to the analysis of the image of the Fortress as an advertising and psychotherapeutic construct for a nation seeking to sell the status of "object." The historical parallel with the fortress of Kars — surrendered twice without a fight by Armenian forces in the 20th century — serves as proof of the formality of such constructs.

Critique of Geopolitical Discourse

The concluding part is devoted to a critique of the very language of geopolitics, which operates with macro-quantities, within which the Armenian nation is doomed to remain a "negligibly small quantity." The author draws parallels with historical precedents of great powers surrendering "fortresses" (Algiers, Saigon, Kabul), arguing that such a logic of orientation invariably leads to defeats.

The article's key conclusion is that the genuine choice facing the Armenian nation in the 21st century requires rejecting the geopolitical approach as the sole framework of self-determination, and making an unconditional internal decision in favor of subjecthood — a decision that precedes any strategic calculations or alliances.