This is the third comment Hagop made in the Armenian Weekly I post because they have stood apart from the rest of the comments made in the Armenian Weekly. This was made to an article Hoory Minoyan posted on July 2, 2025. The Latin quote means “After this, because of this”. I copied it from ARF founding ideologue Kristapor Mikaelian’s writing titled “Ամբոխային Տրամաբանութիւն - Crowd Mentality.” Vaհe H Apelian
The polemic presented against Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan is a highly emotional, misleading, and deeply biased narrative that deliberately omits context, misrepresents complex national developments, and dangerously undermines Armenia’s fragile democracy. It weaponizes religion, national trauma, and diaspora sentiment in service of political score-settling.
Let’s break this down:
1. The Loss of Artsakh: History, Not Betrayal
Yes, the loss of Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh) was devastating. But blaming Pashinyan alone is intellectually dishonest. Armenia had been militarily and diplomatically isolated for years before he came to power. Corruption and cronyism flourished under previous regimes, weakening Armenia’s military preparedness while empowering oligarchs.
• The 2020 war was initiated by Azerbaijan, heavily backed by Turkey and Israeli military technology. Armenia stood virtually alone.
• Pashinyan inherited a broken system—corrupt defense procurement, inflated army rosters, and no international recognition of Artsakh.
• Russia, the supposed ally and “protector,” abandoned its role when Azerbaijan launched its final offensive in 2023, betraying both Armenia and Artsakh Armenians.
To say Pashinyan “devised ways to destroy the country” is not only factually baseless, it’s morally reprehensible.
2. Armenian Identity and the Genocide
The claim that Pashinyan wants to erase the Armenian Genocide or forget Mount Ararat is an outright lie.
• His government has repeatedly spoken about the Genocide on the international stage, including through diplomatic channels and commemorative events.
• The shift in rhetoric is about focusing on a viable future, not living in the past. Armenia cannot afford to be a hostage to symbolic politics while surrounded by aggressive neighbors.
Pashinyan has advocated for a realist approach to sovereignty, security, and statehood. That may not appeal to ultranationalists or some diaspora factions, but it aligns with modern statecraft, not self-destruction.
3. Church and State: Accountability, Not Persecutio
The hysteria about a supposed “persecution” of the Armenian Church stems from accountability measures, not religious oppression.
• Several high-ranking clergy and church-adjacent oligarchs have faced investigation due to allegations of corruption, not because of their religious roles.
• The Armenian Apostolic Church is not above the law. Public trust in the Church has declined in recent years precisely because of its close ties with discredited oligarchs.
• Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan, who is now leading political protests, is engaging in explicit partisan activism. When clergy enter the political arena, they must abide by the same legal and civic expectations as any other citizen.
The Church’s statement about “hatred and hostility” is inflammatory rhetoric designed to shield it from scrutiny, not a credible reflection of government policy.
4. Samvel Karapetyan: A “Philanthropist” or a Powerbroker?
Let’s not canonize Samvel Karapetyan so quickly:
• He is a Russian-Armenian billionaire whose fortune was built during Russia’s oligarchic privatization era. His ties to Russian financial and political elites are well-documented.
• The nationalization of the Electric Networks of Armenia (ENA) is not “vengeance”—it’s a response to long-standing concerns about monopolistic pricing, infrastructure neglect, and lack of transparency.
• Armenia’s parliament voted on this, not Pashinyan alone. Calling this a “dictatorship” is absurd when the legal process was followed, including the right to appeal.
Moreover, the diaspora outcry over Karapetyan’s arrest conveniently ignores that legal action does not equate to guilt, and wealth does not guarantee innocence.
5. The Myth of One-Man Rule
Pashinyan was elected democratically—twice—after the 2018 Velvet Revolution, which ended decades of authoritarian rule and crony governance.
• The opposition calling for an uprising does not represent all Armenians. Protests exist—but so does broad public support for anti-corruption efforts and economic reform.
• The judiciary remains functionally independent, with multiple high-profile cases decided against the government in recent years.
• The Armenian diaspora should support strong institutions, not return to the days of oligarchic impunity.
6. Investors, Institutions, and the Future
The alarmism about scaring off investors is unfounded.
• Foreign investment in Armenia has increased steadily since 2018, particularly in the tech and renewable energy sectors.
• International observers, including the IMF and World Bank, have commended Armenia for its fiscal discipline and anti-corruption measures.
If anything, reclaiming critical infrastructure is a signal that the Armenian government is serious about protecting public interest, not enriching foreign-based elites.
Final Thoughts
This piece is a masterclass in fearmongering, distortion, and weaponized nostalgia. It seeks to reestablish the nexus between Church, oligarchs, and former elites who ran Armenia into the ground.
Nikol Pashinyan is not perfect. His communication missteps and crisis management flaws are legitimate concerns. But to portray him as a dictator destroying Armenia is a gross and dangerous lie. Armenia needs reform, rule of law, and sovereignty—not a return to a feudal state run by clerics and tycoons.
Let the facts speak louder than fear.
No comments:
Post a Comment