Introduction

Right now, delegations from almost every country in the world are in Yerevan. They have come for COP17, the UN biodiversity conference, to negotiate how the planet will protect its forests, water, land and species in the years ahead. Never before has a meeting this important for global environmental diplomacy taken place in Armenia.

Yet for many young Armenians, COP17 feels like someone else’s event. Students who dream of diplomacy follow wars, borders and security. Biodiversity sounds like a subject for biologists. And many young people who do care about nature think the problems are too big for them to make a difference.

We want to change both of these views. Look closely at what is happening in Yerevan and you see real diplomacy: countries building coalitions, defending their interests and looking for compromise. Only this time, the negotiations are about the future of nature, and with it the future of our food, our water and our security.

This article is the first step in the cooperation between YereMUN and Maqoor. In the first part, Vruyr explains why biodiversity should change the way we think about threats. In the second, Mkrtich explains why it is also one of the best opportunities for young people who want real influence.

Broadening the Way We Think about Threats : Biodiversity, Science, and Youth 

When I ask young people what diplomacy or international relations mean to them, the first answers often revolve around war, conflict, security, defence, or relations between states.

And that is perfectly understandable. These issues remain central, especially in regions where security is part of everyday political life. But I increasingly feel that we need to broaden the way we think about what a threat actually is.

When we hear the word “threat”, we tend to imagine a hostile state, an army, weapons, or a geopolitical crisis. Yet other forms of vulnerability can affect our societies just as deeply over time: the degradation of ecosystems, the disappearance of species, soil and water pollution, or the overexploitation of natural resources.

These threats are often less visible, but their consequences are very concrete. If soil quality deteriorates, agriculture suffers. If water is polluted, public health is affected. If pesticides are used without enough control, the consequences can concern farmers, consumers, and entire ecosystems.

They may attract fewer headlines than an armed conflict, but their effects can last for decades and directly affect our health, economy, food security, and living conditions.

This is why biodiversity should not remain a subject reserved for environmental specialists. It belongs in the wider conversation about the challenges our societies are facing.

This does not mean replacing traditional security concerns with environmental ones. Conflict, defence, and interstate rivalries remain essential issues. The point is that the challenges of the twenty-first century are increasingly interconnected. Health, agriculture, access to resources, economic resilience, security, and the environment can no longer always be thought about separately.

I see this very clearly when working with young people.

There is already real environmental engagement in Armenia. Young people volunteer, join awareness campaigns, work with NGOs, and take part in projects linked to biodiversity. Around COP17, this mobilisation is particularly visible and genuinely encouraging.

A concrete example is the Biodiversity Ambassadors programme. Universities from across Armenia have come together to involve students directly in COP17. These students will contribute as rapporteurs during meetings in the Green and Blue Zones, content developers, guides, promoters, and coordinators.

I find this particularly important because it gives young people more than a symbolic role. It gives them responsibilities and allows them to see from the inside how an international conference works, and how scientific expertise, public policy, international cooperation, and diplomacy interact in practice.

The real question is how to make that engagement last.

Over the past few years, through activities with young people around international relations, I have noticed that environmental issues often remain in the background. Conflict and geopolitics naturally attract more attention. They feel immediate, political, and sometimes more compelling.

Biodiversity, by contrast, can seem more technical or more distant. That perception needs to change.

Talking about biodiversity is not simply about protecting nature. It is about the food we eat, the water we drink, the land we cultivate, and the conditions in which future generations will live.

This is why education matters so much. Young people need more opportunities to engage with these issues in schools, universities, workshops, civil society projects, and through direct exchanges with scientists.

And this is also where I see a strong connection between diplomacy and science.

International affairs increasingly require more than negotiation and political understanding. They also require the ability to understand scientific evidence. Whether we are discussing pesticides, pollution, species loss, or ecosystem protection, science must help inform the debate.

The next generation will therefore need to move more easily between politics, law, economics, science, and the environment.

This is also why COP17 matters. Its impact should not be measured only by what happens during the conference, but by what remains afterwards.

If initiatives such as the Biodiversity Ambassadors programme encourage young people to stay involved, deepen their knowledge, work with institutions or NGOs, or simply look differently at environmental issues, then COP17 can leave something much more lasting behind.

Preparing the next generation starts now.

From “We’re Just Kids from Villages” to the Negotiating Table

“We can’t do anything about it. These problems can’t be solved. We’re just kids from villages.”

At Maqoor I hear some version of this at almost every new training. I don’t blame the teenagers who say it. I grew up between Vagharshapat and Arshaluys, in the Ararat valley, where you learn early that water decides a lot. When you’re sixteen in a village, the important decisions seem to be made somewhere else, by people who will never see your street.

We adults are partly responsible. For years we talked about the environment almost only through bad news. It was true, but people switch off. Why join a fight everyone says is already lost?

What changed my thinking happened at one of our eco-journalism trainings. A sixteen-year-old participant sent an official inquiry to his community administration about a problem in his village. He researched it and asked specific questions. The letter was so good that the mayor came to his house to answer him personally.

For me that was one of our biggest wins. He didn’t shout or write angry comments online. He knew his subject and used the right channel. I’d call that diplomacy on a village scale, and it’s pretty much what young people come to YereMUN to practise.

That’s what I’d like young people interested in international relations to hear. Biodiversity isn’t only a list of problems. It’s a field where you can have real influence.

The Convention on Biological Diversity has 196 parties. Its COPs look like scientific events, but inside they’re negotiations like any other. In 2022 countries agreed to protect 30 percent of the world’s land and sea by 2030. Someone had to negotiate that number.

In this field, size matters less. Knowledge, trust and good partners count for more. For Armenians this should sound familiar. We’ve never been a large nation, and we’ve survived through education, culture and knowing how to make our case.

We also have something to offer. Armenia is in the Caucasus, one of the world’s biodiversity hotspots. You can drive from semi-desert to alpine meadows in a few hours, and wild relatives of wheat grow on our hillsides. My grandparents knew which spring had the best water and which slope gave the best apricots.

Now COP17 is here, a short drive from Vagharshapat. For a young Armenian dreaming of a career in international affairs, I can’t think of a better place to learn. Ministries and international organisations need people who understand both negotiations and nature, and there still aren’t many. Honestly, working on biodiversity is a good career move.

None of this is easy. But environmental action works when people commit to it. Ecosystems recover because people negotiate, plan and do the work.

I still think about that boy and his letter. He didn’t wait until he had an official title. He started in his own village, with one question. Maybe a seat at the negotiating table starts the same way.

Conclusion

Our two parts begin with different questions. One asks what we should be worried about. The other asks what young people can gain. We don’t see a contradiction. The loss of biodiversity is a real threat, and working on it is a real opportunity. Young people deserve to hear both.

This is also why we decided to work together. Diplomacy needs people who understand nature and science. Environmental protection needs people who can negotiate, persuade and build alliances. YereMUN and Maqoor each bring one side of that, and we want young Armenians to get both.

This article is only a first step. After COP17 we want to run workshops for young people, organise meetings with institutions such as the Ministry of Environment, and build educational projects around biodiversity together.

The conference will last two weeks. We hope its effect on young Armenians lasts much longer than that.