V.H. Apelian's Blog

V.H. Apelian's Blog

Sunday, June 7, 2026

An unsettling criticism for a price Armenia can bear

 Vaհe H Apelian

Robert O. Krikorian PhD has recently posted an article in the online journal Keghar.com, titling it “Armenia needs to Challenge its Assumptions”. (June 3, 2026).

 Frankly speaking I was disappointed in the way Dr. Robert O. Krikorian treated in that article,  Armenia’s crossroad for peace existential initiative, especially after reading his academic credentials, academic experiences, and his “career as a diplomatic historian, focusing on the practical and policy-relevant applications of historical knowledge.” Armenia’s strategic initiative is not about what Turkey and Azerbaijan want; it is about what Armenia wants and strategizes to achieve.

Furthermore, considering Armenia’s history with its neighbors and the recent tragic experience losing historic Artsakh, I find Armenia, contrary to Dr. Robert O. Krikorian’s assumption, is is challenging historic assumptions in an unprecedented way. I find the diplomatic headways Armenia has made, in spite that “Armenia has provided no evidence or reasoned analysis that Ankara and Baku want anything other than a weak and compliant Armenia to serve their own strategic interests”, remarkable. For the very first time in recent history, Armenia’s borders including of course along Turkey and Azerbaijan, are now manned by Armenians only. And also “For the First Time Since Independence, Armenia Records 24 Months Without Border Fatalities; Thousands of Homes Being Built in Border Communities” (a Massispost.com quote). 

I invite Dr. Robert O. Krikorian ask and gauge the reactions of parents and relatives of citizens of Armenia who have a son or a daughter, a niece or nephew serving, or will be serving, Armenia’s armed forces and manning Armenia's borders.

I also found offensive that person of his caliper calls the Armenian Government a “regime.” Dr. Robert O. Krikorian knows that the current government came about by the consent of the citizens of Armenia, who elected Nikol Pashinyan led Civil Contract party in an orderly, transparent democratic election to govern Armenia.

There are a number of other issues Dr. Robert O. Krikorian raises, such as the Armenian prisoners in Baku, the destruction of Armenian monuments left behind in historic Artsakh, occupied lands in Armenia, aggressive statements coming from Baku. Yes, there will not come a time when Armenia will not confront serious issues or remain nonchalant in that tinderbox of a region. However, the following is unquestionable. Armenia was 29,743 square kilometers before Nikol Pashinyan came to power. Armenia is 29,743 square kilometers as Nikol Pashinyan strives again to be elected as the PM.

What also was disappointing to me, was his lack of suggestion as to how he proposes Armenia best strategizes its relations with its forever four bordering countries, given his unmistakable criticism of Nikol Pashinyan government. His concluding paragraph is evasive at best. “It is not too late, however, to reverse this troubling trend”, is not a statement that lays down a strategy. Reverse the troubling trade, in favor of what? I invite readers to read it over again and rebut or rebuke me if I err in my assertions. 

Armenia is doing a remarkable job joggling conflicting interests. However, internal matters are exacerbating Armenia’s foreign policy and that is because of the lingering commissar hegemonic mentality and the safeguarding the ill-gotten wealth, and other de-stabilizing legacies of Soviet Socialist Union and its breakup. What exacerbates Armenian policy is the oligarchic remnants from the unprecedented plunder that turned the well-connected members of yesterday’s Soviet nomenklatura, onto fiscal barons be he Robert, Sezh, or Samvel.

Much like any strategy, crossroad for peace initiative exacts its price. But what strategic initiative does not exact a price? All do. But cross road for peace strategic initiative is a price Armenia can bear.  



 


 

Saturday, June 6, 2026

A disappointing article

Vaհe H Apelian


Robert O. Krikorian PhD has recently posted an article in the online journal Keghar.com, titling it “Armenia needs to Challenge its Assumptions”. (June 3, 2026).

 Frankly speaking I disappointed in the way Dr. Robert O. Krikorian treated Armenia’s crossroad for peace existential initiative, especially after reading his academic credentials,  academic experiences, and his “career as a diplomatic historian, focusing on the practical and policy-relevant applications of historical knowledge.” Armenia’s strategic initiative is not about what Turkey and Azerbaijan want; it is about what Armenia wants and strategizes to achieve.

Furthermore, considering Armenia’s history with its neighbors and the recent tragic loss of Artsakh experience, I find Armenia, contrary to Dr. Robert O. Krikorian’s assumption, is challenging Armenian historic assumptions in an unprecedented way. I find the diplomatic headways Armenia has made, in spite that “Armenia has provided no evidence or reasoned analysis that Ankara and Baku want anything other than a weak and compliant Armenia to serve their own strategic interests” and by  ruling out war, remarkable. For the very first time in recent history, Armenia’s borders including of course along Turkey and Azerbaijan, are now manned by Armenians only. And also “For the First Time Since Independence, Armenia Records 24 Months Without Border Fatalities; Thousands of Homes Being Built in Border Communities” (a Massispost.com quote). 

I invite Dr. Robert O. Krikorian ask and gauge the reactions of parents and relatives of citizens of Armenia who have a son or a daughter, a niece or nephew serving, or will be serving, Armenia’s armed forces and manning Armenia's borders.

I also found offensive that person of his caliper calls the Armenian Government a “regime.” Dr. Robert O. Krikorian knows that the current government came about by the consent of the citizens of Armenia, who elected Nikol Pashinyan led Civil Contract party in orderly democratic election to govern Armenia.

What also was disappointing, was his lack of suggestion as to how he proposes Armenia best strategizes its relations with its forever four bordering countries, given his unmistakable implied criticism. His concluding paragraph is evasive at best. I invite readers to read it over again and rebut me if I err in my assertions. Vahe H Apelian PhD

Friday, June 5, 2026

Armenia: Happy voting on Sunday June 7, 2026

  Vaհe H Apelian


I was born and raised in Lebanon as a Lebanese national. I am now an American citizen. I have not renounced by Lebanese citizenship. I have not exercised by Armenia right of return and have not applied for Armenian citizenship. I do not intend to repatriate. Naturally I cannot vote in Armenian election. In the upcoming election, my favorite political party in Armenia i is the Civil Contract party. But I stand by and support any government the citizens of Armenia bring about by an orderly democratic election.

Throughout the past month, the relentless attacks on the PM Nikol Pashinyan, reminded me of Kristapor Mikayelian's, "Crowd Mentality – Ամբոխային Տրամաբանութիւն treatise. Kristapor Mikayelian’s famous treatise – Crowd Mentality - is quoted to this day. In it, Kristapor Mikayelian refuted the crowd mentality that follows the Latin phase "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" - after this because of this. He was refuting the mentality that attributed the mid 1890’s Hamidian massacres to the revolutionary organizations founded not even a decade earlier. Surprisingly, elements who uphold Kristapor Mikayelian’s treatise, nowadays do the same, attributing the depopulation of Artsakh solely to Nikol Pashinyan because it happened under his watch. 

Naturally not all in Armenia are carried by that false Nikol Pashinyan is the sole culprit for the loss of Artsakh, crowd mentality; especially the mostly young and upcoming generation in Armenia, some of whom were not even born on September 21, 1991. They remain rallying for Nikol Pashinyan. They played a decisive role in having NP elected in June 2021.  They are rallying for him for June 2026 election as well. Whether they will be able to carry the election or not, we will know in a day or two. But they have changed the narrative of the election.

Over the years I have gotten to know more about some of them, than others from the competing parties and alliances. I first heard the name Nikol Pashinyan on November 27, 2010 when the online journal Keghart.com ran “Free journalist Nikol Pashinyan” appeal. Subsequently I got to know about some of the other prominent members of the Velvet Revolution and presently Civil Contract party member. I wrote in my blog about them. I listed the links to these blogs, below.

Maybe on Monday, June 8, 2026 we will find out who carried the election. But I believe the mostly younger Armenians who brought about the Velvet Revolution have already changed the election narrative and further democratized election in Armenia. The election is now more about issues than about persons, although prominent persons are playing pivotal roles in the election.

Happy voting on Sunday June 7, 2026.

***

 

Link: The evolution of Hayk Konjoryan. https://vhapelian.blogspot.com/2025/06/the-evolution-of-hayk-konjoryan.html

 

Link: Vahagn Aleksanyan, a true role model. https://vhapelian.blogspot.com/2025/07/vahagn-aleksanyan-true-role-model.html

 

Link: Not all Armenian Americans treated Armenia’s Ambassador Lillit Makunts properly. https://vhapelian.blogspot.com/2025/08/not-all-armenian-americans-treated.html


 

 

 

 

 

Thursday, June 4, 2026

Armenia: A trend in exercising democracy

  Vaհe H Apelian

The citizens of Armenia are exercising democracy to the x th degree, it such a thing could be said. For a small country with a population of around 3 million, Armenia boasts abundant political entities. I say political entity because some are coalitions or alliance of different parties. An overabundance of political parties has a   major drawback.  The votes cast in favor of the parties or alliances that did not meet the threshold requirement, are absorbed by the parties or alliances that met the threshold. Consequently, it is recommended that fewer parties or alliances take part in the election. 

Nineteen – 19 – parties/alliance are vying for power during this upcoming election.  During June 2021 election, there were twenty-six – 26 - parties vying for power. That is to say, there are seven less parties in this upcoming election, from June 2021 election. Hopefully this will trend continue at the same rate.

If this trend continues, there will be 12 parties vying for power during June 2031 election. I think, 12 parties vying for power in Armenia is ample.

 


 

Tuesday, June 2, 2026

In Armenia an election alliance of two is not recommended

Vaհe H Apelian 

 

Courtesy OC-Media.org. 
https://oc-media.org/whos-who-in-armenias-2026-parliamentary-elections/


 

 

In the upcoming election in Armenia, Robert Kocharian led Armenia Alliance of two is the only alliance made up of two parties, ARF and Forward Party. This monogamous political relationship may well backfire on both and one or both of them may end up regretting forming an alliance when both could have run independently. Because when it comes to politics in Armenia, a coalition of two, a political monogamy of sort, is not recommended. But an alliance of three or more, a political party, a political polygamy of sort, is very much recommended.

Let me explain myself and elaborate why a political alliance of two is not recommended in Armenia.

In politics, naturally a party’s voting constituent is the party’s capital to procure for itself seats for governing the country. In Armenia, thresholds for entering the government are as follows.

4% for single parties

8% for alliances of two parties

9% for three and 10% for alliances of more parties.

In Israel, the electoral threshold, that is to say the minimum share of votes required in order to have seats the Knesset, the Israeli parliament, is at least 3.25%. It used to be 1%  but was gradually raised to the current requirement of 3.25%. I do not think they have Armenia like election threshold provisions. In Turkey the threshold is 7%. It used to be 10% preventing smaller parties to have representation.

In Armenia, three or more parties forming an alliance and presenting themselves to the public as an alliance makes a lot of sense. An alliance of three parties would have needed a combined 12% of the votes to individually gain seats in the National Assembly and then form a fraction or a post-election coalition. But as an election alliance, it will only need 9% of the votes to have ideological presence in the National Assembly. An election alliance of four or more parties, looks even more conducive for each, but it is not recommended. It is unlikely that four could agree on a PM. In the National Assembly, only three parties can form a post-election coalition to nominate the PM. Coalition Limits: To ensure a stable government, coalitions can consist of a maximum of three political forces. (Armenian Weekly, 2.28.2017)

The problem with the parties that do not meet the threshold is that the votes cast for them will be absorbed by the winning parties/alliances. Thus, in fact they end up forfeiting their political capital. During 2021 June snap general election, 26 political entities took part in the election. Only two passed the threshold. Nikol Pashinyan led the Civil Contact at 53.95%, and Robert Kocharian led Armenia Alliance that had 21.11% of the votes. Even Serzh Sargsyan/Artur Venetsyan led I Have Honor Alliance had only 5.22% but got seat because of the law that mandates at least 3 political entities (party/alliance), in the National Assembly. The combined votes of these three parties/Alliances, amount to 80% of the votes. The remaining 24 parties had a total of 20% of the votes which were absorbed by the winning three parties in the National Assembly.

However, an Alliance of two does not make sense at all. 

I have Kocharian’s Armenia Alliance in mind. During June 2021 general snap election, Kocharian’s Armenia Alliance was made up of three parties. They were ARF, Reborn Armenia and One Armenia. These three parties forming an alliance under the leaderships of Robert Kocharian made sense for the reasons given above. 

But during the upcoming June 7, 2026 election, Armenia Alliance led by Robert Kocharian is made up of two parties, ARF and Forward Party. The Alliance has to secure 8% of the votes to get seats in the National Assembly. Which means that each of them has to contribute at least 4% of the votes to come up with the required 8% for the alliance.  Otherwise, it would mean that one of the two is benefiting from the political popularity of the other and will remain politically indebted.

Each of these two parties, ARF and Forward Party, was more likely to have gotten 4% of the votes and gotten seats in the National Assembly and formed a post-election parliamentary fraction; instead of each one of them tying their fortunes to 8% threshold to have seats. 

An alliance of two would make sense if a voter, who would not have wanted to vote to either one of them, decides to vote for them as a single entity. I do not think that is a realistic expectation. It is more likely that the contrary may happen. A voter would have voted for one of the two and not the other, may end up voting to neither, having not voted for the alliance.

 

 

 

 


 

Monday, June 1, 2026

Grace Is Given

Rev. Avedis Boynerian graciously forwards me his Sunday service sermon ahead of time. Rev. Avedis Boynerian had titled this past Sunday’s, May 31, 2026, sermon was "Grace is Given." With his permission, I reproduced the sermon below. Vaհe H Apelian 


“We have different gifts, according to the grace given to each of us” (Romans 12:6a).

When Billy Graham was driving through a small town, he was stopped by a policeman and charged with speeding. 

Graham admitted his guilt, but was told by the officer that he would have to appear in court. 

The judge asked, “Guilty, or not guilty?” 

When Graham pleaded guilty, the judge replied, “That will be ten dollars -- a dollar for every mile you went over the limit.” 

Suddenly the judge recognized Billy Graham. 

“You have violated the law,” he said. 

“The fine must be paid, but I am going to pay it for you.” 

He took a ten dollar bill from his own wallet and attached it to the ticket. 

“That,” said Billy Graham, “is how God treats repentant sinners!” 

Now, that’s grace. 

Grace is God’s free and undeserved love toward sinners.

Our text (Romans 12:1-8) 

Tells us what God’s grace causes us to,

Tells us that God’s grace causes us to.

1st) humble ourselves

2nd) honor others and 

3rd) use our gifts.

1.- Humble ourselves. “Do not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgment, in accordance with the measure of faith God has given you” (3). 

Meaning, do not have an exaggerated opinion of yourself or of your own importance! 

(Do not take yourself too seriously

We often think of ourselves better than we ought and have an exaggerated opinion of ourselves. 

Now, that’s pride! 

And pride is a big temptation. 

We better watch it! 

The Bible says “Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall” (Proverbs 16:18). 

It also says, (“When pride comes, then comes disgrace, but with humility comes wisdom” (Proverbs 11:2). 

It also says, “God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble” (1 Peter 5:5).

(When God’s grace is at work in our lives, it will cause us to think less of ourselves and more of others.

Mother Teresa was gifted as a humble servant, caring for the sick, the diseased and the poor. 

She said,  “Not all of us can do great things. But we can do small things with great love.” 

We need to discern who we are. We need to have a proper estimate of ourselves, because thinking more highly of ourselves, than we should, is one of the greatest problems in serving God. 

Have you ever been around an individual who always thinks they are right? 

How does it feel to be around someone who boasts and brags about his or her abilities? 

It’s not a good feeling, is it? 

We are to avoid thinking too highly of ourselves. 

The best way to do that is by focusing on God’s grace, which causes us to think less of ourselves causes us to think more of others.

2. Others. “As each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function, so in Christ we who are many form one body, and each member belongs to all the others” (4-5).

We all have different functions in church. 

You can do things that I cannot do. 

You have abilities that I do not have. 

Therefore, I need to recognize you and honor you for your gifts. 

That’s why God’s grace causes us to honor others, first.

We need to celebrate diversity. 

We must also remember that, just as the different parts of our bodies have different functions, so too, in the church, each of us is given different gifts. 

We cannot do it alone. 

If God’s purposes are to be accomplished and His church is to grow, every one of us has to use their gifts. While no one can do everything, everyone can do something.

God has designed and wired us differently. 

So, therefore, as followers of Christ, we need to celebrate this diversity in the church.    

We have different gifts, according to the grace given us. If a man’s gift is prophesying, let him use it in proportion to his faith. If it is serving, let him serve; if it is teaching, let him teach; if it is encouraging, let him encourage” (Romans 12:6a).

Henry Ford once said that “the ability to encourage others is one of life’s finest assets.”

Ford, the auto inventor and manufacturer, knew the power of encouragement. 

He had learned it as a young man. 

Young Ford had endured criticism and ridicule. 

Attending a dinner one evening at which Thomas Edison was present. 

Ford began explaining his engine to men nearest him at the table. He noticed that Edison, seated several chairs away, was listening. 

Finally, Edison moved closer and asked young Ford to make a drawing. 

 

When the crude sketch was complete, Edison studied it intently, then suddenly hit his fist on the table. “Young man,” he said, “that’s the thing! You have it!” 

God had gifted both Edison and Ford differently and that was not a hindrance, but it was the use of their gifts. 

God’s grace gives us gifts and abilities, but they are not for self-use only. 

Grace is one of the most beautiful words in the Christian faith.

Grace means God gives what we could never earn.

 Forgiveness we did not deserve.

 Love we could not buy.

 Mercy we could not repay.

 

The world teaches us:

 “Work harder.”

 “Prove yourself.”

 “Earn your place.”

 

But the Gospel says something different:

It says, “It is given.”

 

God’s grace is not a reward for the worthy; it is a gift for the needy.

When the prodigal son returned home, he came with shame and failure. 

He expected punishment, but the father ran to embrace him. 

Now, that is grace given.

When Peter denied Christ three times,, Jesus did not abandon him. 

Instead, after the resurrection, Christ restored him and entrusted him again with ministry. 

That is grace given.

Our gifts are to be used to edify and be a blessing to others. 

The Bible says, “Each one should use whatever gift he has received to serve others, faithfully administering God’s grace” (1 Peter 4:10). 

We need to recognize our dependency. While we are uniquely designed, we have been made to function in community with one another. 

Each of us belongs to one another. 

 

I might be strong in the area of my gift, but I am weak in the areas where others are gifted. 

Therefore, I must minister to others out of my strength and be dependent upon the ministry of others in my areas of weakness.

Did you know that you belong to the person sitting next to you? 

Did you know that we are on the same team with each of us playing different roles, different positions? 

So, please, 

Do not get puffed up by your own importance and 

Do not take yourself out of the game by thinking you do not matter. 

You are needed, as much as I am needed, because both you and I belong to each other.

To make this work, we must stop thinking individualistically and begin to think corporately, communally. 

We cannot look at ourselves as an island, independent of all others.

There is no room for individualism within the church of Christ, for we are inter-dependent. 

Remember: “There is no “I” in “TEAM.”

We must rely on others, just as they must rely on us. 

We must see ourselves as fully functioning church members, with certain gifts that are necessary to the equipping and ministry of the entire church. 

Therefore, let’s determine to follow the example of Christ, “who, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage … “he 

Humbled himself.     

Served people and 

Considered others better than Himself! (Philippians 2:6b, 8b).

A powerful illustration of Jesus’ humility is found in John 13, when He washed the disciples’ feet.

After World War II, a group of German students volunteered to help rebuild an English cathedral that had been severely damaged by German bombs. 

As work progressed, they became concerned about a large statue of Jesus, whose arms were outstretched and beneath which was the inscription: “Come unto Me.” 

They had particular difficulty trying to restore the hands, which had been completely destroyed. 

After much discussion, they decided to let the hands remain missing and changed the inscription to: “Christ has no hands, but our hands.” 

Nothing satisfies more than God calls and use us.

Jesus humbled himself, served people and considered others better than Himself! 

May we follow Jesus and His life example!

 

Political monogamy is not recommended, but polygamy is

Vaհe H Apelian  


In Armenia election, a political monogamy is not recommended for election, but political polygamy is.

Let me first define the terms. Monogamy is the marriage of two, when two unite to form a single entity.  Political monogamy is when two political parties form an alliance, a political marriage of sort. Polygamy is when a man is married to multiple wives. Polyandry is when a woman is married to multiple husbands. The latter is a very rare practice but it persists in isolated or indigenous communities as a social and economic adaptation. I chose the term polygamy and not polyandry because political leadership, especially in Armenia, is very much a man’s thing.  Consequently, a political polygamy is the political marriage of three or more parties as an alliance.

When it comes to politics in Armenia, an alliance or a coalition of two, a political monogamy of sort, is not recommended. But an alliance of three  political parties, a political polygamy of sort, is very much recommended. Let my explain myself.

In politics, naturally a party’s voting constituent is the party’s capital to procure for itself seats for governing the country. In Armenia, thresholds for entering the government are as follows.

4% for single parties

8% for alliances of two parties

9% for three and 10% for alliances of more parties.

In Israel, the electoral threshold, that is to say the minimum share of votes required in order to have seats the Knesset, the Israeli parliament, is at least 3.25%. It used to be 1%  but was gradually raised to the current requirement of 3.25%. I do not think they have Armenia like election threshold provisions. In Turkey the threshold is 7%. It used to be 10% preventing smaller parties to have representation.

In Armenia, three parties forming an alliance and presenting themselves to the public as an alliance makes a lot of sense. An alliance of three parties would have needed a combined 12% of the votes to individually gain seats in the National Assembly and then form a fraction or a post-election coalition. But as an election alliance, it will only need 9% of the votes to have ideological presence in the National Assembly. An election alliance of four or more parties looks even more conducive for each, but it is not recommended as only three parties can form a post-election coalition to nominate the PM.

The problem with the parties that do not meet the threshold is that the votes cast for them will be absorbed by the winning parties/alliances. Thus, in fact they end up forfeiting their political capital or the political trust extended to them. During 2021 June snap general election, 26 political entities took part in the election. Only two passed the threshold. Nikol Pashinyan led the Civil Contact at 53.95%, and Robert Kocharian led Armenia Alliance that had 21.11% of the votes. Even Serzh Sargsyan/Artur Venetsyan led I Have Honor Alliance had only 5.22% but got seat because of the law that mandates at least 3 political entities (party/alliance), in the National Assembly. The combined votes of these three parties/Alliances, amount to 80% of the votes. The remaining 24 parties had a total of 20% of the votes which were absorbed by the winning three parties in the National Assembly.

However, an Alliance of two does not make sense at all. 

I have Kocharian’s Armenia Alliance in mind. During June 2021 general snap election, Kocharian’s Armenia Alliance was made up of three parties. They were ARF, Reborn Armenia and One Armenia. These three parties forming an alliance under the leaderships of Robert Kocharian made sense for the reasons given above. 

But during the upcoming June 7,2026 election, Armenia Alliance led by Robert Kocharian is made up of two parties, ARF and Forward Party. The Alliance has to secure 8% of the votes to get seats in the National Assembly. Which means that each of them has to contribute at least 4% of the votes, as required for a party if running on its own,  to come up with the required 8% for the alliance.  Otherwise, it would mean that one of the two is benefiting from the political popularity of the other and will remain politically indebted.

Had each of these two parties, ARF and Forward Party, ran on its own, each was more likely to have gotten 4% of the votes  and gotten seats in the National Assembly and formed a post-election parliamentary fraction; instead of each one of them tying their fortunes to 8% threshold to have seats. 

An alliance of two would make sense if a voter, who would not have wanted to vote to either one of them, decides to vote for them as a single entity. I do not think that is a realistic expectation from a voting public.