Vulnerability and Viability in Small State Foreign Policy: The Case of Armenia

This paper asserts that, described as a small state in view of its hard and soft power capacity as well as impact on international relations, Armenia’s failure in qualifying as a resource-extractive state leads to vulnerability in its foreign policy autonomy, while its relations with the diaspora and Russia provide partial viability in foreign policy via remittances, foreign direct investment and political/military support. However, since such activities have not provided a grass-roots reconstruction and self-sufficiency, it is argued that Armenia is not likely to emulate the autonomous foreign policies of the successful actors in the system and is likely to sustain/reinforce the existing, mostly diaspora- and Russia-oriented foreign policy strategies and practices in the short- and medium-terms