Armenia should consider the feasibility of replacing its predominantly Russian-sourced wheat with rice grown elsewhere to enhance national security, a senior official hinted over the weekend. However, this proposed shift raises significant questions about the country’s continued reliance on Russian energy resources.
At a conference in Yerevan, Armen Grigoryan, the secretary of the Security Council, emphasized the need for greater flexibility to protect strategic commodities. “We need to prevent others from targeting our essential goods,” he stated. “For instance, we could transition from wheat to rice. While wheat is indeed a strategic commodity, adapting our habits to prioritize rice could redefine our strategic landscape.”
This proposed diversification aligns with the government’s so-called “comprehensive security concept.” Yet, one must wonder: unless Grigoryan and Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan have a plan to source energy from alternatives like Azerbaijan—something Alen Simonyan previously suggested—how will we cook this rice? Switching our energy supplier from a formal ally to a country that committed genocide against Artsakh Armenians just over a year ago raises serious ethical and strategic concerns. Without Russian gas and electricity, the very act of preparing rice would remain out of reach, raising doubts about the practicality of this transition.
Grigoryan’s comments seem partially motivated by a recent rebuke from Maria Zakharova, the spokesperson for the Russian Foreign Ministry, who criticized him for participating in a pro-Ukrainian video conference on international food security. “Those concerned about food security should first focus on their own country’s needs,” Zakharova remarked. She pointed out that Armenia relies on Russia for 90 percent of its grain supply, questioning the wisdom of pursuing ties elsewhere while still dependent on Russian imports.
Current statistics show that wheat imports fulfill about 70 percent of Armenia’s domestic demand, with almost 344,000 tons coming exclusively from Russia last year. Suren Parsian, an economist based in Yerevan, dismissed Grigoryan’s proposal as politically motivated and lacking economic rationale. He highlighted that with no rice being cultivated domestically, Armenia would remain fully reliant on imports, contradicting the intended goal of increased independence.
Pashinyan’s government has publicly committed to diversifying Armenia’s foreign and security policy to reduce reliance on Russia. However, critics argue that this dependency has only intensified during Pashinyan’s six-year tenure. Data reveals that Russia accounted for over 35 percent of Armenia’s foreign trade last year, a significant increase from 26.7 percent in 2017, the year before Pashinyan assumed power. This trend has been exacerbated by the spike in Russian-Armenian trade following Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine and subsequent Western sanctions.
Additionally, Armenia continues to depend on Russia for natural gas, with prices set significantly below international market rates. Without Russian energy, the prospect of cooking rice becomes impractical. Despite this reliance, Moscow has yet to leverage its economic influence to deter Yerevan’s Western pivot. Arayik Harutiunyan, Pashinyan’s chief of staff, raised the specter of a potential Russian trade embargo last year, suggesting that the Armenian Diaspora could counterbalance any shortages by purchasing local goods.
In summary, while the idea of replacing wheat with rice sounds appealing in theory, it raises essential questions about Armenia’s energy security and the practicality of reducing dependence on Russia. Without viable alternatives, we must critically assess whether this strategy genuinely enhances our national security or merely shifts our vulnerabilities.
