It’s not only the memory of suffering of biblical proportions that links two geopolitically significant hubs—Serbia and Armenia. Interwoven into their histories are cultural and fraternal ties, as well as their mutual relationship with Russia. It is precisely this last connection that explains the West’s exceptionally strong interest in both countries—Armenia and Serbia alike.
Fire, sword, NGOs
The United Kingdom, the United States, and the European Union have ranked the geopolitical significance of both countries—Armenia and Serbia—very highly. In their attempt to sever these nations from the Russian sphere, every method has been tested, from fire and sword to infiltrating Western elements through the NGO sector. It turned out that the latter tactic was far more successful.
With Nikol Pashinyan’s rise to power, Armenia made a sharp turn towards the West. As a pro-Western politician whose unwavering path toward Europe brought him victory after the 2018 protests and the ousting of former Prime Minister Serzh Sargsyan, Pashinyan completely transformed Armenia’s political landscape. His closeness with the U.S. and the European Union, and distancing from Russia, did not bring prosperity to the Armenian people; instead, it led to worsening economic conditions, a freeze on membership in the CSTO, and the cancellation of planned military exercises with this military organization. The greatest loss, undoubtedly, was Nagorno-Karabakh and over 100,000 refugees who had to leave the territory. Despite the situation on the ground and policies working against national interests, the only sector operating at full capacity in Armenia is the NGO sector, which, through its decades-long activity, has fulfilled many of the West’s expectations.
Targeting Russian peacekeepers
Just like in Serbia, apart from USAID and the European Union, the main sponsor of most civil sector projects is the National Democratic Institute. In addition to the “Catherine” program, highly active in Armenia and aimed at empowering women in politics, promoting democracy, and fighting for human rights with an emphasis on women’s rights, there is a range of other NGOs and projects that no longer hide their primary objective—spreading Western values and disrupting traditionally good relations with Russia.
Soon after the two-day military intervention in Nagorno-Karabakh, when Azerbaijan took control of the territory and waves of refugees left their homes, Pashinyan, determined to place the blame on Russia, expressed doubts about the effectiveness of CSTO membership and froze Armenia’s membership in this military organization. Simultaneously, the NGO sector is actively working to reduce trust in Russian peacekeepers and create space for NATO troops. This situation benefits not only the West but also Turkey, a NATO member, which actively supported the Azerbaijani side in the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict, contributing significantly to the Muslim victory in the 2020 conflict.
9000 of subcontractors
Armenian journalist and political scientist Gusakian Arman, in his article “Western Money and Armenian NGOs: Who and How Promotes Their Interests in Armenia,” notes that over 9,000 active NGOs in Armenia work to promote Western interests. The author identifies seven different types of work, granting none primacy in influence since each is impactful in its own way and within its sector. The first type includes direct representatives of the UN, OSCE, European Commission, NATO, Council of Europe, World Bank, International Monetary Fund, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, etc. The second type comprises diplomatic missions and Western embassies. The third type of donor includes specialized transnational or foreign organizations, such as USAID, the Eurasia Partnership Foundation, the British Council, the Department for International Development (DFID), the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC), and Germany’s GTZ, whose grants are stable and long-term. The fourth type consists of organizations working with specific goals in the socio-political and electoral sphere, including the Environmental Public Advocacy Center (EPAC), International IDEA, World Vision Armenia, International Organization for Migration (IOM), NDI, and IREX. Particularly noteworthy is the Armenian branch of the Open Society Institute—Assistance Foundation (OSIAFA), which traditionally has a relatively large influence on Armenia’s public and media sectors.
An overlooked detail
Under the patronage of the Soros Foundation, more than 100 public organizations in Armenia influence the republic’s internal and foreign policies. The organizations belonging to the fifth type also operate in Serbia and include German party foundations such as the Heinrich Böll Foundation, Friedrich Ebert Foundation, and Friedrich Naumann Foundation.
The sixth type includes organizations engaged in charity and humanitarian programs, like the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and Save the Children – Armenia, among others. The seventh type encompasses foundations shaping Armenia’s informational agenda and public opinion: the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the European Endowment for Democracy (EED), the National Democratic Institute (NDI), and media resources, including the International Journalists’ Network “Umbrella,” the information-analytical website evnreport.com, and the newspaper of the current prime minister, “Armenian Times” (up until 2018).
All 9,000 organizations, both foreign and domestic, were tasked with creating the image of incompetent Russian peacekeepers. Since Russia maintains good relations with both Armenia and Azerbaijan, the West needed to convince Armenians that Russia was to blame for the loss of Nagorno-Karabakh while omitting one detail—that Turkey, as a NATO member, actively participated in all of Azerbaijan’s logistical preparations and that the West, which now presents itself as a peacemaker, indirectly supported the Azerbaijani side and contributed to the escalation of relations between the two countries.
A program for reprogramming
Although it actively participated in worsening relations between Azerbaijan and Armenia, the Collective West, projecting the Balkan situation onto the Caucasus, attributed the failure to Russia. The similarities with Serbia are not complete. Unlike Nikol Pashinyan, Boris Tadić, despite all efforts, failed to sign the recognition of Kosovo and Metohija’s independence.
But beyond status lies the people’s relationship with their territory. What the West insists on is not just reprogramming the minds of politicians like Pashinyan but of ordinary people. For these purposes, ten thousand civil sector activists from foreign services and their mentors, who spare no money to achieve their “Bondsteel in the Caucasus,” step onto the scene.
One of the programs by the “Open Society Foundation Armenia” involves a series of reports, later disseminated through the media, about human rights violations, torture, and restrictions on reporting during the 44-day war in Artsakh in 2020. However, what especially catches attention is the mention of volunteers on the Azerbaijani side coming from Syria, emphasizing that Russia, which is a peacekeeping force in this conflict zone and simultaneously an ally of Syria, is implicated. More intriguingly, the report mentions the weaponry used by Azerbaijan, specifically the “Smerch” and “Grad” systems produced in Russia. It’s not hard to guess what particularly caught Western propagandists’ attention and in what direction their narrative is going. While they allegedly stand on Armenia’s side and express concern over human rights abuses, write reports on the number of casualties and the grim fate of Armenians, Azerbaijan is waging war with Russian weaponry.
Falsifying facts
The website Union of Informed Citizens is the Armenian equivalent of the Serbian portal “Raskrinkavanje,” a project by the site “Krik.” This is one of many Western projects in Serbia that acts as media policing, enforcing Western propaganda, while Russian-sourced news is sanctioned and labeled as false, regardless of the content. Alongside numerous reports portraying Russia as the villain responsible for Armenia’s situation, other news items on this site seem like they are straight from a dimension X. And, of course, it’s no coincidence that both platforms share the same Western sponsors.
In a deeply emotional report by the NGO Democracy Development Foundation, whose main sponsor is the NED, titled “Why Are There No Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh?” the focus is on the forced displacement of Armenians from Nagorno-Karabakh. Special attention is given to the insufficient effectiveness of Russian peacekeepers during Azerbaijan’s military action. The report’s authors go so far as to claim that Russian soldiers refused to assist Armenians, passively observing the killings and torture of civilians. This report was funded by Freedom House, the International Partnership for Human Rights, and the Democracy Development Foundation, all under the general sponsorship of the NED.
From tears to a base
In addition to these, numerous other projects, portals, and reports funded by hundreds of thousands of dollars from Western organizations have the same goal—to change the Armenian people’s perception of Russia, undermine trust in Russian security forces, and simultaneously promote NATO as an alternative. What happens next has been evident for years in Kosovo and Metohija, where KFOR, the so-called guarantor of the safety of the Serbian population, in practice guarantees protection for Albanian terrorists. This occurs even as the ethnic cleansing of Serbs continues.
All the narratives from numerous NGOs, allegedly concerned about the suffering of the Armenian people, will fall apart as soon as NATO opens its first base in Nagorno-Karabakh, proclaiming Azerbaijani terrorist units as the legitimate military of Karabakh. It’s no stretch to assume this partnership isn’t new but has, just as with the Albanians, lasted for decades. At that point, Armenian roads will yearn for Russian peacekeepers, but once the process begins, it’s difficult to reverse.
Advisor for Serbian reorientation
The West no longer hides its willingness to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to pull regions with strategic and military importance away from Russian influence. This is evident in a recent announcement from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) about an open position for an advisor overseeing program operations within its mission in Serbia. According to the job posting, this position is open to U.S. citizens with at least 10 years of experience in international development. The main responsibilities include leading a team, managing projects valued at $141 million, developing a new strategy for the period from 2026 to 2030, tracking budgets, and evaluating projects.
What’s particularly interesting about this posting is a section on Russia, which states verbatim: “The U.S. seeks to correct Serbia’s orientation, which has leaned towards Russia, and align it with Western interests, especially in anticipation of a potential conflict that could spread across Europe.”
4
