“No sort of peace can be negotiated anywhere if it’s based on ‘might makes right,’ on the hegemon of the moment, on the threat of bombs or tariffs, on invasion or the violation of international law.”
“There can be no lasting peace if it’s based on a double standard, where we’re told that it’s essential to abide by international law in Ukraine while trampling all over it in the Middle East. That isn’t sustainable. There is only one kind of peace, which is based on respect for the same order – the order we created in 1945 with the UN Charter, and likewise with the Council of Europe and the European Union.”
These were among the most striking remarks delivered by French President Emmanuel Macron during the opening session of the Yerevan Dialogue, held in the Armenian capital on 5-6 May under the theme of “Riding through the Storms”.
Now in its third edition, the dialogue brought together political leaders, diplomats, and policy thinkers to discuss the future of conflict resolution in the South Caucasus and beyond.
This year’s gathering unfolded amid wars in both Eastern Europe and the Middle East, with the US-Israeli war on Iran spilling over into neighbouring countries and intensifying pressure on global markets, trade routes, and energy supplies. The atmosphere in Yerevan reflected growing international anxiety over whether the world is entering a prolonged era of geopolitical fragmentation in which military confrontation increasingly overshadows diplomacy.
For Armenia, the discussions carried particular urgency. The country continues to live with the political and social consequences of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Refugees displaced after Azerbaijan’s takeover of the enclave in September 2023 remain in difficult conditions in Yerevan, while frustration persists over what many Armenians see as Russia’s failure to honour its security commitments.
The sense of abandonment has deepened Armenia’s search for new regional and international partnerships at a time when traditional alliances appear increasingly uncertain.
Against this backdrop, Macron argued that dialogue remains the only viable path away from escalating confrontation. “Dialogue remains our best compass in navigating the storms of conflict,” he said, calling for “persistent engagement, honesty, and empathy” to rebuild trust in international relations. His remarks reflected a broader concern shared by many participants that the language of diplomacy itself is gradually disappearing from international politics to be replaced by deterrence, coercion, and economic pressure.
The wider debate in Yerevan centred on a pressing question: does the international rules-based order still exist in any meaningful sense? Many participants argued that the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East have exposed a dangerous weakening of the post-1945 system. The growing acceptance by some states of pre-emptive military action was repeatedly cited as evidence of the erosion of international law.
Several speakers argued that the crisis is not merely political but structural. One participant described the current moment as a “systemic fracture” in which legal norms are increasingly subordinated to raw power. The concern expressed repeatedly throughout the dialogue was that the selective application of international law had undermined the credibility of the system itself.
Speakers pointed to what they viewed as clear double standards in the global response to conflicts, particularly regarding civilian protection, sovereignty, and the interpretation of international legitimacy.
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, who also attended the preceding European Political Community Summit in Yerevan, warned that the world was entering a period in which integration itself could become a geopolitical weapon. The existing rules, he suggested, were no longer sufficient to restrain major powers. Instead of creating stability, economic interdependence was increasingly being used as leverage in geopolitical rivalries through sanctions, tariffs, technological restrictions, and energy pressure.
Speakers also warned against the rise of what they described as a “transactional” international environment, where immediate interests increasingly override institutions, alliances, and legal commitments. The wars in Ukraine and the Middle East were repeatedly cited as examples of how weakened international mechanisms can fuel instability rather than contain it. For many participants, the concern was not only the outbreak of wars themselves but also the growing inability of international institutions to prevent escalation or impose meaningful accountability.
Yet the event was not dominated solely by pessimism. Much of the discussion focused on how the existing order might still be repaired rather than abandoned. The participants argued that rebuilding cooperation among like-minded states could help restore confidence in multilateralism and demonstrate that strategic partnerships rooted in shared values remain more sustainable than purely transactional arrangements. Several speakers insisted that the answer to global disorder could not be greater isolationism or nationalism, but renewed investment in collective institutions and regional cooperation.
This debate intersected directly with Armenia’s own regional vision. The government of Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has promoted what it calls its “Crossroads of Peace” initiative aimed at reopening borders and establishing regional trade and transport corridors linking Armenia with Turkey, Azerbaijan, Iran, and Georgia.
The project reflects an attempt to reposition the South Caucasus not as a zone of permanent conflict but as a centre of regional connectivity. Supporters argued during the dialogue that economic integration and infrastructure development could raise the political and financial costs of future wars, encouraging diplomacy over confrontation. Armenian officials presented the initiative not simply as an economic project, but as a political strategy designed to reduce long-term regional tensions through interdependence.
EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas stressed that the conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East have direct consequences for Europe’s security environment, making regional resilience and connectivity increasingly important. The instability generated by war, energy disruptions, refugee flows, and economic uncertainty has reinforced European concerns that crises in neighbouring regions can no longer be treated as geographically contained conflicts, she said.
Despite growing doubts about the durability of the international system, many participants insisted that the rules-based order still retains broad legitimacy because most states continue to recognise the need for shared legal and diplomatic frameworks. The real challenge, they argued, lies not in inventing a new order but in restoring credibility to the existing one.
As Macron put it in one of the dialogue’s clearest political messages: “Europeans are taking their destiny into their own hands, increasing their defence and security spending, and building their own common solutions.”
In Yerevan, the underlying message was unmistakable: the alternative to rebuilding international order is not stability, but fragmentation and chaos.
The writer is a London-based foreign affairs commentator.
* A version of this article appears in print in the 14 May, 2026 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
Short link: