Share this
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

(July 19, 2024 / Newsweek)

From the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait to Russia’s war with Ukraine, the pursuit of lost territory has caused enormous bloodshed. But the countries that pay the most for such revanchism and irredentism are small nations.

And no one has suffered more in this regard than the Palestinian people.

The Palestinians have sacrificed their security, wellbeing, land, and independence by chasing the fantasy of destroying Israel. They had countless opportunities to create their own state and use generous loans from the international community to build a prosperous future. Instead, they pursued maximalist claims, using terror as a means to achieve them and destroying their chances of self-determination. Not unlike a gambling addict, they have thrown everything into the pot, including their children, who are taught that there is no greater hero than the “shahid,” or martyr, who dies trying to kill Jews.

Since 1948, generations of Palestinians have insisted on returning to the land they lost during the Israeli war of independence. Many still cling to their house keys and pine for a return to what is now Israel.

As painful as it may seem for many Palestinians, they should look to the example of a smaller nation in the process of giving up its extraterritorial ambitions—Armenia.

For more than 35 years, Armenia has fought a brutal ethnic conflict with Azerbaijan over the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh—an Armenian-separatist region on internationally recognized Azerbaijani soil. During the first war, from 1988 to 1994, both sides saw some 30,000 killed. According to refugee organization estimates, some 900,000 Azerbaijanis were displaced from Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia and some 300,000 Armenians were displaced from Azerbaijan. To keep control over the region against their militarily superior neighbor, Armenia relied on Russia, which cynically used the conflict to maintain its influence over both Yerevan and Baku. In turn, Armenia remained an underdeveloped, authoritarian kleptocracy unable to pursue its own foreign policy.

But that changed after anti-government protests during the so-called 2018 Velvet Revolution led to the democratic election of Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan. After losing the 44-day Second Nagorno-Karabakh War in 2020, Pashinyan finally understood that Armenia needed to give up its claim to the region to move forward. He realized that holding on to Karabakh, where the separatists held control with Russian support, would interfere with his attempts to reorient Armenia towards the West, develop the economy and stamp out corruption.

Pashinyan then risked the wrath of his people when he agreed to cede most of the Armenian-occupied territories to Azerbaijan in a ceasefire accord following the 2020 war. Many Armenians were livid and took to the streets to protest Pashinyan’s capitulation after some 4,000 Armenian and separatist soldiers died fighting for that territory. In March 2023, Pashinyan joined the international community in recognizing Azerbaijan’s sovereignty over the whole Nagorno-Karabakh region. Six months later, Azerbaijan launched an offensive to retake the territory from the separatists, causing around 100,000 ethnic Armenians to flee to Armenia proper.

During such fierce ethnic conflicts, pursuing peace can be dangerous.

Indeed, Pashinyan was not only branded a traitor by Armenian nationalists, he faced waves of antigovernment protests and drew the wrath of many in the Armenian diaspora, which has historically encouraged Armenian irredentism.

Nevertheless, something surprising happened—Pashinyan found that many Armenians were tired of throwing away their futures for Nagorno-Karabakh and the dream of Greater Armenia. Indeed, following the second war in 2020, polls showed that 70 percent of Armenians opposed withdrawing from a peace agreement with Azerbaijan and 97 percent considered domestic issues such as the economy, political stability, and social problems their main priority.

Sometimes, peace begets peace. In a 2023 poll, almost 80 percent of Azerbaijanis supported peace with Armenia.

That said, making peace hasn’t been easy. Pashinyan’s popularity is at an all-time low and he still faces occasional major protests, the latest led by the Armenian Apostolic Church, which has close ties with Russia and Iran. But these protests have all died down and he is still the most popular politician in Armenia.

If a Palestinian leader like Pashinyan pursued peace, he would undoubtedly face similar challenges from nationalist and Islamist extremists and a radicalized diaspora that cares more about the Palestinian cause than the Palestinian people. Not to mention Iran, for which Palestinians are cannon fodder to be used in a war of attrition against Israel.

But maybe, like Pashinyan, perhaps such a Palestinian leader would find a surprise ally in the portion of the population that just wants a normal life.

Today, Armenia and Azerbaijan are closer than ever to peace. The only major roadblock left is the Armenian constitution. Azerbaijan has insisted that Armenia remove a constitutional reference to a joint decision by the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic and Karabakh Council to “reunify the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Mountainous Region of Karabakh.”

Pashinyan has lobbied his government to do so. Founding documents of a country should not include the intent of taking over part of a neighboring country. Pashinyan’s willingness to remove this reference proves his commitment to achieving lasting peace and not just a cessation of hostilities.

Meanwhile, the Hamas charter still calls for the destruction of Israel and killing of Jews. And although the Palestinian Authority promised to change its charter advocating for the “total liberation” of “indivisible Palestine,” it never did. That is why any cease-fire or peace deal with these quasi-governments is just delaying future conflict.

In April, Pashinyan gave a speech to parliament, in which he urged Armenians to mentally demarcate “Real Armenia” from “Historical Armenia.” He described the latter as only harming Armenia’s sovereignty and independence.

But that mental demarcation is a painful process. It requires putting the nation’s wellbeing over its pride and revanchism.

As Armenia and Azerbaijan conclude peace, war rages in Gaza. Civilians are bombarded while Hamas Chief Yahya Sinwar sits in a tunnel and celebrates that their deaths will increase pressure on Israel. For now, peace seems distant. But maybe it is just a good leader away.

Joseph Epstein is the director for legislative affairs at the Endowment for Middle East Truth (EMET) and a fellow at the Yorktown Institute.

Share this

About the Author

Joseph Epstein
Joseph Epstein is EMET’s Legislative Fellow. Prior to EMET, Joseph worked in Business Intelligence and Due Diligence for Kroll and Vcheck Global. He has additionally worked as a journalist, analyst, and consultant covering security and migration issues in the former Soviet Union, the Middle East, and Central Africa. From 2017 to 2019, he served as a Lone Soldier in the Israeli Border Police. A graduate of Columbia University, where he studied Political Science and Soviet Studies, Joseph is fluent in Russian and Hebrew.

Invest in the truth

Help us work to ensure that our policymakers and the public receive the EMET- the Truth.

Take Action

.single-author,.author-section, .related-topics,.next-previous { display:none; }