Identifying Ukraine’s investment potential
Buried treasure
parallax background

Friends at last?

How Armenia and Azerbaijan finally made peace

May 24, 2024

6 min read

May 24, 2024

6 min read

When the USSR disintegrated at the end of 1991, the Kremlin manufactured or indirectly supported ethnic conflicts throughout the territory of the Soviet Union. In each case the former Soviet army transformed into the new Russian army, and its intervention was decisive in giving victory to separatists and pro-Russian proxies. Russia continues to financially and militarily support separatist enclaves in Eurasia.

In Moldova, the former Soviet and Russian army intervened in support of separatists who defeated the central government. Russia manufactured a frozen conflict in the Transnistria which continues to host Russian military bases and a lawless separatist enclave. Russia seeks to militarily intervene and remove Moldova’s pro-Western leaders.

In Georgia, the Russian army and Chechen mercenaries defeated the Georgian central government. South Ossetia and Abkhazia were ethnically cleansed of their Georgian inhabitants, and they became lawless frozen conflicts. In 2008, after Russia invaded Georgia, the Kremlin recognised the ‘independence’ of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The two Georgian provinces have been ethnically cleansed of Georgians and have been de facto annexed by Russia.

In Azerbaijan, Soviet and then Russian forces assisted Armenia in defeating the central government, intervening militarily in Baku and Sumgait where they killed 150 Azerbaijani civilians.

Unlike in Moldova and Georgia, where Russia created proxy entities under its control, Armenia occupied a fifth of Azerbaijan territory, including the Karabakh region.

Breaking the deadlock

The Moldovan and Georgian frozen conflicts remain unresolved. Azerbaijan is the only case in Eurasia which has resolved the three-decade old conflict through patient diplomacy, transforming itself into an energy power and building up military alliances with Israel and Turkey.

Decades of negotiations under the auspices of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) proved fruitless in Azerbaijan, as in Moldova and Georgia. The US lost interest in the region while France increasingly sided with Armenia.

The deadlock changed in three ways. First through military means, second through a decline in Russian influence, and third through greater involvement by the European Union.

First the military. In 2020, after a brief conflict in 2016 and skirmishes over the next four years, the Second Karabakh War broke out. The war was relatively brief, lasting only forty-four days, and leading to Armenia’s military defeat.

Population sizes, Armenia with 2.8 million people and Azerbaijan with 10 million, were not decisive factors; after all, Armenia defeated Azerbaijan in the early 1990s. The key factor was the two very different militaries. Armenia continues to possess a Soviet or Russian military force, using Russian military equipment and with its officers trained in Russia.

 The 2020 Second Karabakh War and the Russian-Ukrainian war since 2022 have highlighted the very poor quality of Russian military equipment and Russian military training. In contrast, Azerbaijan’s army was outfitted with Israeli, Turkish, and other Western military equipment and its officers were trained in military academies in NATO member states.

Azerbaijan’s military victory returned the bulk of the land it had lost in the early 1990s, in the First Karabakh War. A trilateral peace agreement between both parties brokered by Russia introduced so-called Russian ‘peacekeeping’ forces. Russia has used its so-called ‘peacekeeping’ forces to freeze conflicts indefinitely, making them into a de facto permanent military base.

Not surprisingly, neither side was satisfied by the Russian ‘peacekeeping’ forces. Armenia had hoped they would defend its last remaining enclave in Karabakh. Meanwhile, Azerbaijan believed Russian ‘peacekeepers’ should facilitate the de-militarisation of Karabakh and the dismantling of separatist institutions that had become illegal under the trilateral agreement.

Armenia did not withdraw its forces from Karabakh or dismantle the enclave’s separatist institutions, two steps to be taken in the trilateral peace agreement. Russian ‘peacekeepers’ turned a blind eye to Yerevan supplying military equipment and rotating troops to Karabakh. Azerbaijan applied pressure on the enclave by blockading the Lachin corridor connecting Karabakh and Armenia.

Peace, finally

In September 2023, conflict between the three parties, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Russian ‘peacekeepers,’ came to a head. A 24-hour offensive by Azerbaijan, dubbed an ‘anti-terrorist operation,’ recaptured Karabakh. The enclaves’ Armenian inhabitants, after decades of nationalist propaganda, ignored Baku’s guarantee of minority rights and moved to Armenia.

This year, the final stage in the long-drawn-out drama is ending. In March, Yerevan agreed to  villages it still controlled returning to Azerbaijan. After long refusing to countenance this step, Armenia has agreed to sign a peace treaty with Azerbaijan with their border based on the republican boundaries that existed in the USSR.

The growing role of the EU as an honest broker bringing Armenia and Azerbaijan into a negotiated settlement grew at the same time as Russia’s influence declined. Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine reduced the Kremlin’s influence throughout Eurasia. Of the fourteen former Soviet republics, other than Russia, only one—Belarus—has supported the Kremlin at the UN and in other international organisations.

Russia withdrew its ‘peacekeeping’ forces in April-May for three reasons. Firstly, both sides were critical of the passivity of Russian ‘peacekeepers’ in either defending the Karabakh separatist enclave (Armenia) or in not implementing the trilateral agreement’s demilitarisation and dismantling of the Karabakh separatist structures (Azerbaijan).

Secondly, Azerbaijan had completed the return of all its internationally recognised territory in the First Karabakh War in 2020, in the ‘anti-terrorist operation’ in Karabakh in 2023, and this year in negotiating the return of four villages.

Thirdly, Russia’s massive losses in military equipment, including 3,000 tanks, and over 450,000 casualties in its war against Ukraine. These losses have led the Kremlin to withdraw its forces from frozen conflicts in Eurasia and recruit mercenaries from Africa, Syria, India, and Nepal for use in its war against Ukraine.

After 32 years, Armenia and Azerbaijan are set to sign a peace agreement that will bring peace to the most bitter conflict that emerged in the dying days of the USSR. This was achieved by four factors coming together. First, Azerbaijan investing in Western military equipment and training; second a colour revolution bringing Western-leaning Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan to power; third the Kremlin’s war against Ukraine speeding up Russia’s decline as a great power; and finally, the EU replacing Russia as the power broker in the South Caucasus.

Photo by Levon Vardanyan on Unsplash.

Taras Kuzio

Taras Kuzio

Dr Taras Kuzio is a professor of political science at the National University of Kyiv Mohyla Academy.

Share

Case study: Global technology company

1. The Client

A global technology company operating across EMEA, with a regional HQ in Istanbul. The company manages 20+ markets, handling everything from brand campaigns to strategic partnerships.

Role we worked with: The EMEA Head of Marketing (supported by two regional managers).

2. The Challenge

Despite strong products and a respected global brand, the regional team was struggling with:

  • Misaligned strategy across markets → campaigns executed with inconsistent narratives.
  • Slowed growth → lead generation plateaued despite increasing spend.
  • Internal friction → marketing, sales, and product teams disagreed on KPIs and priorities.

Traditional fixes (more meetings, more reporting) only created more noise.

3. The Sprint

We ran a 10-day Remote Reinvention Sprint with the regional HQ team.

  • Day 1–3: Intake → Reviewed decks, campaign data, and plans.
  • Day 4: Sprint Session (90 mins) → Breakthroughs:
    • Sales and marketing had different definitions of “qualified lead.”
    • 40% of spend was going into low-potential markets.
    • The team assumed the problem was lack of budget, but it was actually lack of alignment.
  • Day 5–10: Synthesis → Insights distilled into a Clarity Brief + Insight Canvas.
4. The Breakthrough

The Sprint uncovered that the issue wasn’t budget, but fragmentation.
Three sharp insights unlocked a way forward:

  1. Unified KPIs bridging marketing + sales.
  2. Market prioritisation → shifting budget to 5 high-potential markets.
  3. Simplified narrative → one EMEA core story, locally adaptable.
By just realigning resources and focus, the client could unlock an estimated £250,000 in efficiency gains within the next 12 months — far exceeding the Sprint’s value guarantee. The path to higher returns was already inside the business, hidden by misalignment.
5. From Sprint to Action (4 Pillars Applied)

With clarity secured, Reinvantage didn’t suggest “more projects.”

Instead, we used the Sprint findings to create laser-focused next steps — drawing only from the areas that would deliver the most impact:

  • Readiness → Alignment workshops for sales + marketing teams. New playbooks clarified “qualified lead” definitions and reduced internal disputes.
  • Foresight → A market-opportunity scan identified which 5 countries would deliver the highest ROI, removing the guesswork from allocation.
  • Growth → Guided the reallocation of €2M budget and designed a phased rollout strategy that protected risk while maximising return.
  • Positioning → Built a messaging framework balancing global consistency with local nuance, ensuring campaigns spoke with one clear voice.

Because the Sprint had stripped away noise, these actions weren’t generic consulting ideas — they were directly tied to the breakthroughs.

6. The Results
  • +28% increase in qualified leads across the region.
  • 30% faster campaign rollout due to streamlined approvals.
  • Budget efficiency gains → €2M redirected from low-return to high-potential markets.
  • Internal cohesion → marketing + sales now use a single shared dashboard.
The client came in believing they needed more budget.
The Sprint revealed that what they really needed was clarity and alignment.

With that clarity, the four pillars became not theory, but practical tools to deliver measurable impact.

The Sprint guaranteed at least £20,000 in value — but in this case, it helped unlock more than 10x that within six months.

Case study: Regional VC fund & accelerator

1. The Client

A regional venture capital fund and accelerator focused on early-stage tech start-ups in the Baltics and Central Europe.

The fund had raised a new round and was under pressure to deliver stronger returns while also building its reputation as the go-to platform for founders.

Role we worked with: Managing Partner, supported by the Head of Portfolio Development.

2. The Challenge

Despite a promising portfolio, results were uneven.

Key issues:

  • Scattered portfolio support → no consistent playbook for start-ups, every partner did things differently.
  • Weak differentiation → founders and co-investors saw the fund as “one of many” in the region.
  • Stretched team → too many small bets, not enough clarity on which companies to double down on.

The leadership team knew something was off, but disagreed on whether the issue was pipeline quality, market conditions, or internal capacity.

3. The Sprint

We ran a 10-day Remote Reinvention Sprint with the partners and portfolio team.

  • Day 1–3: Intake → Reviewed pitch decks, pipeline funnel data, and start-up performance reports.
  • Day 4: Sprint Session (90 mins) → Breakthroughs:
    • No shared definition of a “high-potential founder.”
    • Support resources were spread too thin across the portfolio.
    • The fund’s positioning was more reactive than proactive — it didn’t own a distinctive narrative in the market.
  • Day 5–10: Synthesis → Insights consolidated into a Clarity Brief + Insight Canvas.
4. The Breakthrough

The Sprint revealed that the challenge wasn’t pipeline quality — it was lack of focus and positioning.

Three core insights provided the turning point:

  1. Portfolio Prioritisation Framework → defined clear criteria for where to double down.
  2. Founder Success Playbook → standardised support model for portfolio companies.
  3. Differentiated Narrative → repositioned the fund as “the accelerator of reinvention-ready founders.”
These shifts alone gave the fund a path to add an estimated £2M+ in portfolio value over the following 18 months, by concentrating capital and resources where they could move the needle most.
5. From Sprint to Action (4 Pillars Applied)

With clarity from the Sprint, Reinvantage created a tailored support plan:

  • Readiness → Coached partners on using the new prioritisation framework and trained the team on deploying the Founder Success Playbook.
  • Foresight → Ran scenario analysis on regional tech trends, helping the fund anticipate where capital would flow next.
  • Growth → Guided resource reallocation across the portfolio and supported new co-investor pitches for top-performing start-ups.
  • Positioning → Crafted a sharper brand story for the fund, positioning it as the reinvention partner for globally minded founders.
6. The Results
  • 10 portfolio companies onboarded to the new Playbook → greater consistency of support.
  • Raised follow-on capital for 3 top start-ups with the new prioritisation framework.
  • +26% increase in inbound deal flow from founders citing the fund’s new positioning.
  • Stronger internal cohesion → partners aligned on where to focus resources.
The client thought the problem was pipeline quality.
The Sprint showed it was actually lack of clarity and focus inside the firm.

By applying the four pillars, Reinvantage helped turn scattered effort into concentrated value creation.

The Sprint guaranteed at least £20,000 in value; here it set the stage for multi-million-pound upside in portfolio growth.

Case study: International impact Organisation

1. The Client

A large international impact organisation focused on entrepreneurship and economic empowerment.
The organisation runs multi-country programmes across Eastern Europe and Central Asia, often in partnership with global donors and corporate sponsors.

Role we worked with: Senior Programme Director, responsible for regional coordination.

2. The Challenge

The organisation had launched a flagship regional initiative supporting women entrepreneurs, but the programme was underperforming.

Key issues:

  • Fragmented delivery → each country office interpreted the programme differently.
  • Donor frustration → reporting lacked consistency and clear impact metrics.
  • Lost momentum → staff energy was spent on administration rather than scaling success stories.

Traditional programme reviews had produced long reports, but no real alignment or action.

3. The Sprint

We ran a 10-day Remote Reinvention Sprint with the regional leadership team and representatives from two country offices.

  • Day 1–3: Intake → Reviewed donor reports, programme KPIs, and field feedback.
  • Day 4: Sprint Session (90 mins) → Breakthroughs:
    • Donors cared about quantifiable outcomes, but reporting focused on stories.
    • Staff were duplicating efforts across countries, wasting time and resources.
    • The initiative lacked a clear theory of change — everyone described its purpose differently.
  • Day 5–10: Synthesis → Insights distilled into a Clarity Brief + Insight Canvas.
4. The Breakthrough

The Sprint revealed that the issue wasn’t donor pressure or programme design — it was a lack of shared framework and alignment.

Three critical insights reshaped the path forward:

  1. One Unified Theory of Change → agreed narrative for why the programme exists.
  2. Core Impact Metrics → clear, comparable KPIs across all countries.
  3. Smart Resource Sharing → digital hub to stop duplication and accelerate knowledge flow.
By eliminating duplicated reporting and clarifying what success looks like, the client saw they could save the equivalent of £100,000 in staff time annually — while also unlocking stronger donor confidence and follow-on funding opportunities.
5. From Sprint to Action (4 Pillars Applied)

Armed with Sprint clarity, Reinvantage proposed a laser-focused support plan:

  • Readiness → Trained programme leads on using the new metrics and integrated them into existing workflows.
  • Foresight → Analysed donor trends and expectations, aligning the initiative with the next funding cycle.
  • Growth → Developed a funding case based on the new unified theory of change, securing higher renewal chances.
  • Positioning → Crafted a regional success narrative and storytelling toolkit, helping them showcase results consistently across markets.
6. The Results
  • 30% less time spent on reporting → freed capacity for programme delivery.
  • Donor satisfaction improved → positive feedback on the clarity of impact evidence.
  • Secured new funding commitment → one major donor increased their contribution by 20%.
  • Stronger internal morale → staff felt they were working with clarity, not chaos.
The client thought it needed better donor management.
The Sprint revealed it needed a shared foundation across its teams.

By anchoring on the four pillars, Reinvantage turned alignment into efficiency gains and fresh funding opportunities.

The Sprint guaranteed at least £20,000 in value; here it unlocked both six-figure savings and future-proofed funding.

Case study: National digital development agency

1. The Client

A national digital development agency tasked with driving the government’s digital transformation agenda, including e-services, citizen portals, and smart city pilots.

Role we worked with: Director of Digital Transformation, supported by IT and service delivery leads from three ministries.

2. The Challenge

The agency had strong political backing but faced hurdles in implementation.

Key issues:

  • Siloed projects → each ministry developed digital tools independently, leading to duplication.
  • Citizen frustration → services were digital in name, but still required multiple logins and offline steps.
  • Funding pressure → international partners demanded clearer impact in the short term.

The agency wanted to accelerate momentum but struggled to get alignment across ministries.

3. The Sprint

We ran a 14-day Immersive Reinvention Sprint with the agency’s leadership and digital focal points from three ministries.

  • Day 1–3: Intake → Reviewed strategy docs, donor reports, and citizen feedback data.
  • Day 4: Immersive Sprint Session (half-day) → Breakthroughs:
    • Each ministry had different definitions of “digital service.”
    • 20% of budget was going into overlapping pilot projects.
    • Citizens’ top frustrations were known — but not prioritised.
  • Day 5–14: Synthesis → Insights consolidated into a Clarity Brief + Insight Canvas.
4. The Breakthrough

The Sprint revealed that the biggest blocker wasn’t lack of funding, but lack of shared priorities.

Three practical insights stood out:

  1. One Definition of Digital Service → agreed across ministries.
  2. Quick-Win Prioritisation → focus on top 3 citizen pain points (ID renewal, business registration, healthcare booking).
  3. Shared Resource Map → pool budgets to eliminate duplication.
These changes alone allowed the agency to unlock £75,000 in immediate savings and deliver 2–3 visible improvements in the next quarter — meeting donor expectations and building citizen trust.
5. From Sprint to Action (4 Pillars Applied)

Based on the Sprint clarity, Reinvantage proposed a modest, targeted package of support:

  • Readiness → Facilitated inter-ministerial workshops to embed the “one digital service” definition.
  • Foresight → Analysed citizen feedback trends to shape the quick-win roadmap.
  • Growth → Supported the reallocation of funds to joint projects, reducing overlap.
  • Positioning → Crafted a communication plan highlighting early digital wins to donors and citizens.
6. The Results
  • 2 pilot services integrated into the central portal (ID renewal + healthcare booking).
  • Budget savings of £75,000 from eliminating overlapping projects.
  • Citizen satisfaction up modestly → call centre complaints on digital services dropped by 12%.
  • Donor confidence improved → short-term impact report received positive feedback.
The client thought it needed more funding and bigger projects.
The Sprint revealed it first needed clarity and alignment.

By applying the four pillars to a targeted scope, Reinvantage helped deliver visible results within a single quarter — proving progress to citizens and donors and laying the groundwork for deeper transformation.