A city called Gyumri, its municipal elections & their ramifications.

Vaհe H Apelian

I have to say that Gyumri reminds me of Knarig Meneshian's book - A Place Called Gyumri. That is why I titled my blog, the way I did. 

In my mind Gyumri is a different kind of city. After Yerepuni, the city of Yerevan, was always and is Yerevan. But that is not the case with Gyumri which, next to Yerevan, is the largest city of Armenia. I quote Wikipedia: “. The area of modern-day Gyumri was originally known as Kumayri (Armenian: Կումայրի) during the period of the Kingdom of Urartu. Over time, the name became disrupted through phonetic changes to Kumri, then Gumri, and finally Gyumri. In 1837, Gyumri was renamed Alexandropol after Czar Nicholas I's wife, Princess Alexandra Fyodorovna. Between 1924 and 1990, the city was known as Leninakan in honor of Vladimir Lenin. Following independence, the original name Kumayri was used until 1992, when Gyumri was chosen as the name of the city.” 

In 1988, a powerful earthquake devastated Gyumri and the surrounding areas. 

Gyumri is where Nikol Pashinyan took his first step on March 31, 2018 that culminated in the Velvet Revolution. Almost exactly 7 years after that momentous event, Gyumiry held its municipal election, which pundits claim has serious political ramifications on national level and may be the barometer of what may come in mid 2026, when Armenia will hold its general election.. 

According to the results, opposition forces collectively secured 50.36% of the vote, while the ruling Civil Contract party received 36.39%. The remaining 13 % of the votes were scattered among the other parties who could not secured d the required 4% to have a seat in the municipal council. Based on reported numbers, the Gyumri municipal council seats are expected to be distributed as follows:

• Sarik Minasyan from the Civil Contract Party, which had 36.65% of the votes, secured– 14 seats

• Vardan Ghukasyan from the Communist Party of Armenia, had 20.71% of the votes and secured 8 seats. 

• Martun Grigoryan form “Our City” Alliance, secured 15.85% of the votes and secured – 6 seats.

• Ruben Mkhitaryan from My Strong Community Party, had 7.94% of the votes and secured 3 seats.

• Karen Simonyan from Mother Armenia Alliance, secured 6.18%a – 2 seats.

Courtesy Massispost

Although the Civil Contract party won the most votes but not the majority votes to name its candidate as the “mayor” of the city. It is inevitable that an alliance will have to be forged to secure at least 17 seats to have majority in the 33 members municipal council. If no candidate in the upcoming Gyumri city council vote receives 17 votes, a second round will be held between the two leading contenders. The next Gyumri council session is scheduled for April 16. 

The PM Nikol Pashinyan issued the following statement: “The Citizen of the Republic of Armenia has the opportunity to freely make a choice. The choice of the Citizen is a law for us. I congratulate all the political forces and candidates who have won the elections and earned the trust of the Citizen.

PS: All reports of illegal influence on the will of voters must be thoroughly investigated, with the primary goal of excluding their further repetition.” 

If the Gyumri election is the barometer of the upcoming national election in 2026, the following may be noted.

1.      The days of a single party rule more likely than not will be over. Thus far Armenia has been ruled by one party. Although Serzh Sargsyan government included the ARF Kerakouyan Marmin in the government, the Republican Party of Armenia had the absolute majority of NA to form a government and did not need the Kerakouyn Marmin’s seven votes. But the Republican party, for reasons it knows best, invited the ARF Kerakouyn Martin to join them. The latter accepted the invitation.

2.      There is a major disconnect between the agenda of the opposition in the National Assembly and in the municipal election. The Artsakh flag symbolizes the opposition in the National Assembly. Artsakh, the plight of Artsakh Armenians, Turkish Armenian relations, the government's crossroad for peace initiative constitute the central themes of the opposition in the NA. But none of these issues had any prominence in the Gyumri municipals election. The citizens' concerns were the mundane, such as improving the city’s lot and their lots, concerns for increase in taxes, in transportation fees, for lack of adequate housing, housing affordability, beautifying the city etc. These seemed to the drivers against the ruling Civil Contract party. They may also be the drivers for voting in the upcoming national election as well, which is expected to take place in mid 2026.

3.      It is to be seen whether the four opposition parties to the Civil Contract, would join force over a common agenda to snatch the leadership of the city from the Civil Contract. Obviously they did not present a unified front. There appears to be serious divisions among the opposition parties in this municipal election. I cannot rule out that the Civil Contract party may form a coalition with one or two of the opposition groups, especially the two that have 3 and 2 seats. They may gain more by negotiating with the Civil Contract, a situation that often happens in Israel and smaller parties tilt the balance among the major parties and end up exercising undue influence than their seats would by themselves. 

4. Overall, the election seems to have been mostly orderly and leading to multi-party governance.  

 

When a kiss is not a kiss

Vaհe H Apelian 

Today, on Yahoo News, I read the following headline: “How often should you kiss your partner? Experts weigh on Reddit debate.” I glanced over the report. It was pretty long to read. There were more than 500 comments.  Apparently, the article had stirred quite a bit of interest.

I was reminded of that pretty famous kiss in American politics, Al Gore kissing his wife Tipper on the Democratic convention stage accepting the party's nomination, especially when Bill Clinton’s campaign was mired with his extra marital affairs and his presidency as well became mired by affairs but Hillary stood by him and famously said the following on Sixty Minutes during Bill Clinton's presidential election campaign: “You know, I’m not sitting here, some little woman standing by my man like Tammy Wynette, I’m sitting here because I love him, and I respect him, and I honor what he’s been through and what we’ve been through together. And you know, if that’s not enough for people, then heck—don’t vote for him.”

The famous Armenian writer Hamasdegh in his epic work "The Village and the Rain" describes a kiss between a boy and a girl whom their parents  had promised betrothal but were never allowed to be together. One day he caught her carrying food to her father and brother toiling in the fields and he kissed her. But they were seen. The news spread quickly in the village. The villagers vouched that he held her so tightly that even the wind could not pass between them.  It became a scandal and had serious ramifications. Her father annulled the promise for betrothal. He ended up eloping her. Her father disavowed her as their daughter and forbad his wife visiting her. But when she gave birth to his grandson, things changed. The story ends with the grandfather sweet talking to his grandson..

Al Gore was with his wife throughout the campaign. In his excitement of having nominated in the  Democratic presidential ticket, he kissed his wife Tipper holding her also very tightly but on the stage in the limelight and in view of millions. That kiss also had its ramifications.

 The following day the NY Times had a commentary whose headlines I copied for this blog, and wrote the following: “IN Vice President Al Gore's campaign to change his robotic image, nothing may have helped more than the big smooch. Mr. Gore stepped on stage at the Democratic Convention on Thursday and greeted his wife, Tipper, with a quick embrace and a kiss on the lips. But instead of letting go, as nice politicians are supposed to, he wrapped her tighter in his arms, closed his eyes and gave her a full-mouthed kiss that lasted a exceptionally long time. (Actually, three seconds; we have tapes; we've counted.) When he remembered where he was -- on national television about to accept his party's nomination for president -- he backed away and went on with his business.

Of course, he could not really have forgotten the cameras for a second, and soon commentators were speculating about how calculated the kiss was. Mrs. Gore had spent days on the talk show circuit trying to humanize her husband's image, after all. And here was the living proof of his humanity, and a photograph the papers couldn't resist.

The next day MSNBC had two people on the case. Chip Reid reported that he had interviewed the Gores' daughter, Karenna Gore Schiff, who told him that kind of kissing goes on around the house all the time. He did not report whether the Gore children had spent much of their youth saying, ''Yuck! Mom! Dad!''

But, lo and behold, that kiss on national television right before Al Gore was about to accept his party's nomination for president, did not help Al Gore secure the presidency nor his marriage. The Gores divorced after 40 years of marriage. But the philandering Bill Clinton was re-elected as president and his marriage endures.

So, it appears that kissing is not a salvation. There is more to it to save your marriage, or your partnership with your significant other. 

My recommendation is to read the message the prophet conveyed Kahlil Gibran and he, in turn collected the prophet’s wisdom in his famous book, titled “The Prophet” and this is what Kahlil Gibran wrote the prophet told him,..................

On Marriage

BY KAHLIL GIBRAN

Then Almitra spoke again and said, And

what of Marriage, master?

     And he answered saying:

     You were born together, and together you

shall be forevermore.

     You shall be together when the white

wings of death scatter your days.

     Ay, you shall be together even in the

silent memory of God.

     But let there be spaces in your togetherness,

     And let the winds of the heavens dance

between you.

 

     Love one another, but make not a bond

of love:

     Let it rather be a moving sea between

the shores of your souls.

     Fill each other’s cup but drink not from

one cup.

     Give one another of your bread but eat

not from the same loaf.

     Sing and dance together and be joyous,

but let each one of you be alone,

     Even as the strings of a lute are alone

though they quiver with the same music.

 

     Give your hearts, but not into each

other’s keeping.

     For only the hand of Life can contain

your hearts.

     And stand together yet not too near

together:

     For the pillars of the temple stand apart,

     And the oak tree and the cypress grow

not in each other’s shadow.

March 31, 2018: Remembering the Armenian Velvet Revolution.

 Vaհe H. Apelian  

March 31, 2018 marks the start of a bloodless revolution in Armenia, led by the Yelk Party representative Nikol Pashinyan. It is the only revolution in recent history that the Armenian nation experienced, for historically we have had revolutionaries, but no revolution.  The revolution spanned 40 days,from March 31, 2018 to May 8, 2018, with both dates inclusive. During that period a fundamental change took place in the governance of Republic of Armenia.  The revolution came to be known as the Velvet Revolution. It was an Armenian brand, bloodless revolution. It surely was a historically consequential event in modern Armenian history that reverberates to this day.

Recently I read  «Հայկական Թավշյա Հեղափոխություն»- “The Armenian Velvet Revolution”, to learn the course of the revolution. . It appears that the original text of the book was not in Armenian as it acknowledges Loucine’ Sargsyan (Լուսինէ Սարգսյան) as its translator and lists Galya Hovhannisyan (Գալյա Յովհաննիսեան), as the publishing editor, Heghine’ Peloyan (Հեղինէ Փիլոյան), as the typesetter, and Arapo Sargsyan (Արաբո Սարգսյան) as the formatter. 

Stepan Grigoryan (Ստեփան Գրիգորյան), who is a physicist by educational training, has authored the book. He was born in Tbilisi on September 24, 1953. From 1975 to 1983 he was affiliated with the prestigious A. Alikhanian Yerevan Institute of Physics in Yerevan. He has authored many scientific as well as social or political papers. He has also assumed different positions in the government and in the private sector.  He is married and they are parents to a son a daughter.

The book  book is in a soft cover and was published on March 16, 2019 by Edit Print publisher. It measures 6x8 inches. It is 183 pages long including the foreword, table of contents, acknowledgments and the listing of the photographs in the book and their photographers and the author’s closing statment. On a front cover inside flip, the biogrpaphy of Nikol Pashinyan is listed and on the back cover inside flip the biography of the author is listed. It is in an easy to read script size on white glossy paper and contains many colored pictures depicting the historic event.

The Barnes and Nobles overview of the book accurately notes the following: “The book discussed the political situation in Armenia in recent years and presents a chronology and analysis of the political processes in the country from March 31, 2018, when the opposition leader Nikol Pashinyan and his allies started a march from Vardanants, the center square in Gyumri, to Yerevan until May 8, 2018, when the National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia elected Nikol Pashinyan prime minister of the country in a special session.”

The content of the books is divided into two sectors. The first contains 7 sections. This section jump starts with the historic meeting between the opposition leader Nikol Pashinyan and PM Serzh Sargsyan in the Marriott Hotel reception hall in downtown Yerevan that ended with the PM holding Nikol Pashinyan accountable for the turmoil in the country and reminding him of the March 1, 2008 incident. From there the author takes the readers through grievances people harbored regarding the Serzh Sargsyan rule, the prevailing corruption and to the constitutional change from a presidential form republic to a parliamentarian form that perpetuated Sezh Sargsyan's rule as PM without a general election. To make his point that the people were caught in a dilemma he cites the example of an incident that had nothing to do with the turmoil in the country but in his estimation presented a graphical picture of the dilemma the people were facing. On May 3, a police captain attacked a bank but it was the people who intervened to take control of the situation and resolve the issue, blurring the responsibility for keeping law and order in the country. This section analyzes grievances and is the shorter of the two sectors of the book and extends from page 12 to page 54.

The second sector is the longest and gives a detailed chronology of the events that transpired from the day Nikol Pashinyan took his first step, of what came to be known as "My Step" movment, on March 31, 2018 from downtown Gyumri to his arrival to Yerevan on April 13, and from there to his election as the Prime Minister by a special session of the National Assembly of Armenia on May 8, 2018 in Yerevan.

This sector contains 5 sections and is detailed in chronology not only by day but also at times by the hour. It starts from page 58 and ends on page 179.

The five sections are as follow:

The first section starts from March 31 and end on April 12 (pages 62 to 63). It covers the start of the “My Step” march headed by Nikol Pashinyan from Vardanants center in Gyumri to Yerevan that lasted until April 12. 

The second section starts from April 13 and ends April 15 (pages 64 to 69). It covers the opposition starting its demonstrations in Yerevan

The third section starts from April 16 and end on 18 (pages 70-89). It covers the spread of the public demonstrations in many parts of the country while on April 17 in a snap session the National Assembly of Armenia elected Serzh Sargsyan as its Prime Minister. 

The fourth section starts from April 19 and ends on 24 (pages 90 to 128). It covers the continued spread of public demonstrations and acts of public civic disobedience and PM Sargsyan’s call on April 21 for negotiating with Nikol Pashinyan for a common ground. The call, the author noted, was wholeheartedly endorsed by the ARF. However, on April 22, the two negotiators had diametrically opposing stands. While PM Sargsyan had presented itself for negotiating, Nikol Pashinyan stated that he had come to meet the PM to discuss the terms of his resignation. The author had already alluded about that historic meeting earlier in his book. The following day, on April 23 afternoon, the PM Serzh Sargsyan announced his resignation with his famous statement that will reverberate into history, that he was wrong and Nikol Pachinyan was right. 

The fifth section is the last section. It  starts on April 25 and ends on May 8 (pages 129 to 178). It starts with Nikol Pashinyan ruling that the resignation of the PM Sargsyan was in effect but no one from the ruling Republican Party of Armenia could assume the premiership. On May 1, Nikol Pashinyan conveyed his vision to the National Assembly of Armenia as a candidate for Prime Minister and on May 8, he was elected the PM by a vote of 59 in favor to 42 opposing him. 53 votes were needed for his election. The author noted that ARF, which  broke rank with the Republican Party of Armenia, voted in favor of Nikol Pashinyan’s election as the PM. Without their votes, NP  would not have been elected as the PM of the third republic of Armenia, a parliamentarian form of a republic.

The book ends with the author’s closuring text analyzing the event giving his assessment of the historic Velvet Revolution of Armenia.

In my view it was a unique Armenian brand bloodless revolution. It differed from the revolutions I have read, not only because it was bloodless, but primarily unlike all previous revolutions that brought a change in governance, the Velvet Revolution DID NOT subvert the existing order. On the contrary it held the constitutional order and the did not pursue a social "-ism", unlike the other revolutions that eventually failed. Russian communist revolution imploded into a quasi, unregulated capitalism. The Chinese revolution morphed into a one party rule again overseeing their brand of capitalism. Cuban revolution morphed into a dictatorship of sort, North Korean revolution gave birth to an hierachial order .

 The Armenian Velvet Revolution, at the coast of sounding repetitious, not only was bloodless but it also upheld the existing order but aimed to amend it and has the promise of a fundamental and lasting change of the Armenian mindset. Although there came the Covid-19 pandemics and the  2020, 44-Day Second Artsakh war and brought the revolution at a crossroad. But the citizens of Armenia, in June 2021, voted for Nikol Pashinyan again and for the third time to continue governing of Armenia.

The book is  in modern Armenian language.  Arti Hayeren –Արդի . Հայերէն, is a term that is commonly referenced nowadays, especially in the academic circles in Armenia. I have been an avid reader in Armenian and my mother, who was a teacher of Armenian language and literature, had ascribed my poor grammar to my reading in Soviet Armenian dictation, known as Apeghian dictation. Reading this book was also a realization that our language is also undergoing a seismic revolutionay change. I would not have been able to understand some of the words used in book had I not known English for they were Armenianized foreign words and their use is becoming common place. But that is an altogether a different matter. 

 

To whom this may concern: Diaspora in disarray

Vaհe H Apelian 

The all-knowing AI says, "To whom it may concern" is a formal, somewhat impersonal greeting used in letters or emails when the writer doesn't know the recipient's name or title, or when the correspondence is addressed to a general audience rather than a specific individual.” Although I had a few Diaspora friends in mind, whose postings Facebook alerts me, but this blog is not meant to be personal. I see no reason to disturb my tranquility over the disarray of the Diaspora, but I simply wanted to share my concerns with those who happen to be reading this blog and for whom the state of Diaspora concerns as well. 

RIDICULING THE PM. Obviously, you may have realized that I am referring to the above picture and to those who have been disseminating the picture that has been going viral among certain segments of the Armenian social media. What makes the phenomenon more surprising to me is  that some those, who resorted to disseminating this depiction of the PM of Armenia with their colorful comments, are Diaspora Armenians some of whom are affiliated with Armenian Diaspora newsletters or have been presented as present day intellectual.

Why do persons resort to posting such pictures of others, be it the PM of Armenia in a far distant land,  but not of themselves?

A person does not need to be a psychologist or psychiatrist to know that it is very human to present oneself in a manner that society is prone to accept with more of open arms. Children are taught to smile when they have their pictures taken. When a group picture, be of adults, is taken, it is not uncommon to hear from the person who will be doing the clicking to take the snap shot for posterity, alert the group by saying out loud, “Cheers!”. 

The message, those who post this depiction from Diaspora, mean to convey is simply this. They mean to say, this is how crazy the prime minister, the citizens of Armenia elected is. No one can possibly expect anything of value coming from the policies of such a man. He must go. 

Common courtesy would have expected them to place a more presentable picture of the PM, or  even his official picture and next to it verbalize the points they want to make about the PM's policies .

GOING SOLO: On February 28, 2025, the foreign minister of Armenia Ararat Mirzoyan brought the plight, and the sham trial of the Armenian hostages and prisoners to the attention of the world. Thus, the government of Armenia has given the green light for the Armenian ambassadors to pursue through diplomatic channels securing their release. 

But even when dealing with a national catastrophe of this magnitude the Diaspora is fragmented.  Yesterday, I read that David Vardanyan the son of the Armenian political prisoner Ruben Vardanyan will speak at AAAinc’s - Armenian Aseembly of America’s In.- spring 2025 Advocacy Summit. Will I read soon that a family member of David Ishkhanian will address ANCA’s advocacy summit?

If (western) Diaspora intends to be more effective trying to secure the release of the Armenian hostages and prisoners held in the Diaspora, it will have to stand with the Republic of Armenia and with ONE voice.

STIRRING THE DIASPORA POT – The former FM Vartan Oskanian, appears to be on a mission to stir the Diaspora pot against Nikol Pashinyan government the citizens of Armenia have elected in a transparent, orderly, democratic election whose legitimacy was unanimously ruled by the Armenian Constitutional Court. 

 I saw him in a Hye Tahd forum in Europe claiming that they worked together for the benefit of Armenia! He was listed among the experts the Catholicos Aram had invited regarding the plight of the Artsakh Armenians, he claims the government of RoA is its main obstacle. During the last few months, he has been posting commentaries in his impeccable English addressing the Diaspora to stand against the PM Nikol Pashinyan. Surprisingly Diaspora newspapers make room for it, 

He calls the Diaspora to oust the PM of Armenia. He knows full well Diaspora Armenians do not vote. But that matters not for the former FM of Armenia.

Forget the loss of dignity, he claims. Yes indeed the security of Armenia is at stake. Without security and with Armenia at another military loss and departed from its southern region, there is not much room left for claiming loss of dignity.

But the security of the Republic of Armenia is at stake not for reasons he charges the (western) Diaspora, but for the kind of Armenian leadership he exemplifies.

 

 

 

The defense and preservation of Syunik is at risk.

Բնագիրը Կցուած է։ Today Ivan Ardhaldjian posted on his FB page, a commentary that resonated with my concerns as well. I translated his commentary and my response and am posting it below.

Courtesy Ivan Ardhaldjian

Ivan Ardhaldjian’s commentary

“Turkification Program Nakhichevan, Artsakh, Zangezur

- In 1918, the Armenians of Nakhichevan were no longer a majority. The First Republic, in 1919, was unable to keep Nakhichevan within its borders. In 1921, under the Kars treaties, Nakhichevan was ceded to Azerbaijan. The last Armenian villages were forcibly evacuated in 1988.

- In 1923, Artsakh, populated mostly by Armenians, became part of Soviet Azerbaijan. In 1991, Armenians liberated Artsakh. The Turks won the Battle of 2020. In 2023, the Turks forcibly deported the Armenians and Artsakh not only became part of Azerbaijan, but was also depopulated.

- In 1918, Zangezur became part of the Republic of Armenia, but the Turks and Turkish villages constantly threatened to secede from Zangezur. Nzhdeh was able to organize the Armenian front and suppress the Turkish plan. During the Sovietization of the Republic of Armenia in 1921, Nzhdeh declared Zangezur the Republic of Mountainous Armenia and forced Zangezur to remain part of Armenia.

Today, the defense and preservation of Syunik is at risk.”

. My response to his posting on his FB was the following:

“Without a doubt, the south of the Republic of Armenia, the Syunik region is in danger, otherwise this peace treaty, which ensures Azerbaijan's land transportation to and from Nakhichevan, through the sovereign territory of Armenia, would have been signed by Aliyev. Yes, the territorial integrity of Armenia is exceptionally endangered, and even more so, because of the internal division in Armenia.”

                                                    ***

Բնագիրը

Իվան Արտհալճեան

Բնագիրը՝ Թրքացման ծրագիր `Նախիջեւան, Արցախ, Զանգեզուր

- 1918-ին Նախիջեւանի հայերը արդէն մեծամասնութիւն չէին: Առաջին հանրապետութիւնը 1919-ին, չկարողացաւ պահել նախիջեւանը իր սահմաններում։ 1921 թուականին Կարսի պայմանագրերով,  Նախիջեւանը յանձնուեց Ադրբեջանին։ Վերջին հայկական գիւղերը բռնի տարհանուեցին 1988-ին։ 

- 1923-ին Արցախը մեծամասնութեամբ հայերով բնակեցուած անցաւ Սովետական Ազրպէյճանի կազմում։ 1991-ին հայերը ազատագրեցին Արցախը։ Թուրքը յաղթեց 2020-ի ճակատամարտը։ 2023-ին թուրքերը բռնի տեղահանեցին հայերը եւ Արցախը ոչ միայն անցաւ Ազրպէյճանի կազմում այլ նաեւ հայաթափուեց։

- 1918-ին Զանգեզուրը անցաւ ՀՀ-թեան կազմում, բայց թուրքերը եւ թրքական գիւղերը անընդհատ սպառնում էին Զանգեզուրը անջատել։ Նժդեհը կարողացաւ կազմակերպել հայկական ճակատը եւ ճնշել թուրքի ծրագիրը։ 1921-ին ՀՀ-թեան խորհրդայնացման ժամանակ, Նժդեհը Զանգեզուրը հռչակեց Լեռնահայաստանի հանրապետութիւն եւ ատամներով պարտադրեց Զանգեզուրը պահել Հայաստանի կազմում։ 

Այսօր վտանգուած է Սիւնիքի պաշտպանութիւնն ու պահպանութիւնը։»

Իմ պատասխանս՝

«Անկասկած որ Հայաստանի Հանրապետութեան Հարաւը՝ Սիւնիքի մարզը վտանգուած է, այլապէս խաղաղութեան այս պայմանագիրը՝ որ կ՚ապահովէ Ազրպէյտճանի ցամաքային transporation-ը Հայաստանի ինքնիշխան տարածքով, Ալիյեւը ստորագրած կըլլար։ Այո, Հայաստանի տարածքային ամբողջաոկանութիւնը բացառձակապէս վտանգուած է, առաւել եւս,, Հայաստանի ներքին պառակտումովը։»

 

Peace treaty: The fault is not in our stars – 3 -

Vaհe H. Apelian

 

This will be my third blog in this month about my take on the Armenian-Azeri peace treaty. I pen this blog because today I read the following comment by Ivan Ardhaldjian about Armenia’s yet unsigned peace treaty with Azerbaijan.  Ivan lives in Armenia. 

Ivan’s comment reads as follows: “The optical illusion of the peace treaty will continue as long as we are ready to unilaterally withdraw, justify the enemy and, what is terrible, gradually break the will of the Armenians, thinking that we are achieving peace. Having accepted the last two points of the negotiated peace treaty by the Armenian authorities, the National Assembly proposed to the Assembly to begin consultations on the signing of the agreed draft. Azerbaijan adds - Armenia must accept its responsibility for the 1991-2023 "aggression" against Azerbaijan and hand over all "criminals" to Azerbaijan. - Armenia must change its constitution. - Armenia must agree to officially dissolve the OSCE Minsk Group. - Armenia must provide a corridor between Nakhichevan and Azerbaijan. - "the right of return of West Azerbaijanis to their homeland, present-day Armenia."

Whatever Aliyev is saying after Armenia announced on May 13, 2025, that it is ready to sign the treaty, have nothing to do with the 17-point text of the peace treaty Armenia and Azerbaijan negotiated. We surely know in our guts and know it all too well why Aliyev is piling add-ons. Quoting from my March 17, 2025 blog, Aliyev “will do his upmost to sink the deal.” (read link 1 below).

The question we should ask ourselves is not why is Aliyev bringing forth such add-ons. The question we should ask ourselves is, why would Aliyev not come forth with such add-ons? He knows that the Armenians are divided over the matter and are not solidly behind the signing of the treaty. Instead of standing behind their government who led the negotiations, the opposition in Armenia is echoing Azerbaijan’s stand, that this peace treaty the government of Armenia negotiated, is not good enough. But the opposition members do not seem to have a common vision to counter the government’s Crossroad for Peace initiative with a policy of their own.

It boils down to this. 

Do the Armenians entrust the right to negotiate on their behalf to the government they elected or do not? 

The Americans have given the right to negotiate on their behalf to the Trump administration they elected. The average Americans citizen is not privy of the negotiations that go behind the doors. I note this while stating that I did not vote for Trump to shape the American government. But he was elected and he is doing just that.

Coming to Armenia, I am under the impression that a vocal segment of the Armenian citizens in Armenia do not abide by the democratic system they instituted when they ratified their own constitution. They relentlessly question the good citizenship of the government the majority of the Armenian citizens elected. Furthermore, those who oppose the Crossroad for Peace Armenia’s strategic initiative, as noted, do not offer a counter strategic proposal.

What is more surprising, if not outright non-sensical for me, is that a vocal segment of the Diaspora Armenians, who are not citizens of Armenia, do not live in Armenia, did not vote as they cannot vote, do not have their personal fortunes staked on the state of the Republic of Armenia, and yet surprisingly, vehemently articulate in the Diaspora press, against the Armenian government and ignore and do not respect this government the citizens of Armenia elected, whose PM is Nikol Pashinyan and FM is Ararat Mirzoyan.

The Republic of Armenia cannot long endure without living peacefully with its neighbors in the region. It will come about only if the Armenians overwhelmingly stand behind their democratically elected government against their enemy. Otherwise, it is not farfetched that the third Republic of Armenia, like its two predecessors, may go into the history text books. 

The fate of Republic of Armenia will be determined not by the stringencies of Aliyev, but by the good citizenship of the Armenians. And yes, the map presented by a recent French-German broadcast may not be farfetched, should the Armenians not live up to overcome the existential challenge the Republic of Armenia faces.  

Yes, the fault is not in our stars.

                                ***

Link 1:Peace treaty: What does it accomplish - 1/3 - https://vhapelian.blogspot.com/2025/03/what-does-this-peace-deal-accomplish-my_17.html

 

Link 2: Peace treaty: Stay the course - 2/3 - https://vhapelian.blogspot.com/2025/03/stay-course_23.html 

 

  

Stay the course

Vaհe H Apelian

Recently I read the following by Dave Rolph: “The term “stay the course” was an old nautical term of navigation meaning “to continue in the proper direction.” It was later used by Winston Churchill, Ronald Reagan and both George Bushes as an exhortation to not give up or turn back.» Armenia stayed the course for the Crossroad for Peace strategic initiative, the PM Nikol Pashinyan lounged on October 2023, and agreed to the ongoing peace deal with Azerbaijan.

But I did not expect that Aliyev will sign the peace deal the Armenian FM announced on March 13, 2025, after having Armenia accept the last two contesting points of the peace deal that was in progress for the past two years or more. In my following blog titled: “What does this peace deal accomplish? My take”, on Monday March 17, 2025 -see the link below - I wrote the following.

I quote : “The issue is existential. However imperfect a peace deal this may be, if signed, as Azerbaijan will do its utmost to sink it, it will be for Armenians to support the government in the peace deal they have worked out and to rally around it to assure that the premises of the peace deal are implemented.”

Yes, let us brace ourselves for the upcoming saga. Aliyev signing the peace deal is not in the immediate future, but Armenia will have to stay the course the PM Nikol Pashinyan has outlined in the Crossroad for Peace initiative he spearheads. 

Aliyev’s reluctance is expected. Let us be reminded that the cornerstone of Aliyev’s domestic legitimacy was his policy for depopulating Nagorno-Karabakh of its ethnic Armenians. He succeeded in doing it. There are no Armenians left in Azerbaijan. Emboldened by his success in depopulating Artskah, the axis of Aliyev’s domestic policy is now the so called Western Azerbaijan, if not in its entirety, then at least to gain a corridor, he calls Zankezur Corridor,  to have a land connection with Nakhichevan. But with the Crossroads Peace initiative both Armenia and Azerbaijan  will recognize their MUTUAL TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY (տարացքային ամողջականութիւն), MUTUAL SOVEREIGHNTY (,ինքնիշխանութիւն), MUTUAL BORDER SANCTITY (Սահմանային անձռմխելիութիւն) and  ABSENCE OF MUTUAL THREAT OF  FORCE  (ուժի բացառում). Surely Aliyev knows that Azerbaiijan does not face a threat on these premises from Armenia. I do not envision Aliyev will sign the peace treaty in the near or foreseeable future.

But Armenia will stay its course for peaceful coexistence with its neighbors within the former Soviet Socialist Republic of Armenia as agreed in the Alma-Ata. 

The Alma-Ata protocols came about on December 21, 1991 – Soviet Armenia had already declared itself independent on September 21, 1991 - when and where the Soviet Union was declared dissolved and the following former Soviet Socialist States agreed to recognized each other’s territories, as constituent states of the Soviet Union. The following former Soviet Socialist agreed on the protocol: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekstan. By signing the peace deal Aliyev would have committed himself, in front of the international family of nations, to formally abide by the Alma-Ata protocol. 

It is natural that Aliyev would not want to go out of his way to abide by the protocol.

But Armenia will stay its course.

Let us brace ourselves that Azerbaijan will attempt to stir the Armenian public against itself by resorting to provocations. Let us also brace ourselves that the expected provocations may be deadly and regrettably there may be casualties.

But Armenia will stay its course.  

There is a price to pay for every strategy. Armenia’s Crossroad for Peace strategic imitative is no different. Other strategic initiatives most likely will have disastrous consequences to the nascent Republic of Armenia. 

Armenia will stay its course.  

The non-violent peaceful Gandhi strategy challenged the mightiest force in his time, the British Empire and India gained its independence.

By staying the Crossroad for Peace strategic initiative, Armenia is bound to secure for its citizens the right to live securely, peacefully and prosper in Armenia, and it will.

                                    ***

 The link: “What does this peace deal accomplish? My take”: https://vhapelian.blogspot.com/2025/03/what-does-this-peace-deal-accomplish-my_17.html

 

Peace treaty: Stay the course - 2/3 -

Vaհe H Apelian

Recently I read the following by Dave Rolph: “The term “stay the course” was an old nautical term of navigation meaning “to continue in the proper direction.” It was later used by Winston Churchill, Ronald Reagan and both George Bushes as an exhortation to not give up or turn back.» Armenia stayed the course for the Crossroad for Peace strategic initiative, the PM Nikol Pashinyan lounged on October 2023, and agreed to the going peace deal with Azerbaijan.

But I did not expect that Aliyev will sign the peace deal the Armenian FM announced on March 13, 2025, after having Armenia accept the last two contesting points of the peace deal that was in progress for the past two years or more. In my following blog titled: “What does this peace deal accomplish? My take”, on Monday March 17, 2025 -see the link below - I wrote the following.

I quote : “The issue is existential. However imperfect a peace deal this may be, if signed, as Azerbaijan will do its utmost to sink it, it will be for Armenians to support the government in the peace deal they have worked out and to rally around it to assure that the premises of the peace deal are implemented.”

Yes, let us brace ourselves for the upcoming saga. Aliyev signing the peace deal is not in the immediate future, but Armenia will have to stay the course the PM Nikol Pashinyan has outlined in the Crossroad for Peace initiative he spearheads. 

The Aliyev’s reluctance is expected. Let us be reminded that the cornerstone of Aliyev’s domestic legitimacy was his policy for depopulating Nagorno-Karabakh of its ethnic Armenians. He succeeded in doing it. There are no Armenians left in Azerbaijan. Emboldened by his success in depopulating Artskah, the axis of Aliyev’s domestic policy is now the so called Western Azerbaijan, if not in its entirety, then at least to gain a corridor, he calls Zankezur Corridor,  to have a land connection with Nakhichevan. With the Crossroads Peace both Armenia and Azerbaijan  will recognize their MUTUAL TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY (տարացքային ամողջականութիւն), MUTUAL SOVEREIGHNTY (,ինքնիշխանութիւն), MUTUAL BORDER SANCTITY (Սահմանային անձռմխելիութիւն) and  ABSENCE OF MUTUAL THREAT OF  FORCE  (ուժի բացառում). Surely Aliyev knows that Azerbaiijan does not face a threat on these premises from Armenia. I do not envision Aliyev will sign the peace treaty in the near or foreseeable future.

But Armenia will stay its course for peaceful coexistence with its neighbors within the former Soviet Socialist Republic of Armenia as agreed in the Alma-Ata. 

The Alma-Ata protocols came about on December 21, 1991 – Soviet Armenia had already declared itself independent on September 21, 1991 - when and where the Soviet Union was declared dissolved and the following former Soviet Socialist States agreed to recognized each other’s territories, as constituent states of the Soviet Union. The following former Soviet Socialist agreed on the protocol: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekstan. By signing the peace deal Aliyev would have committed himself, in front of the international family of nations, to formally abide by the Alma-Ata protocol. 

It is natural that Aliyev would not want to go out of his way to abide by the protocol.

But Armenia will stay its course.

Let us brace ourselves that Azerbaijan will attempt to stir the Armenian public against itself by resorting to provocations. Let us also brace ourselves that the expected provocations may be deadly and regrettably there may be casualties.

But Armenia will stay it course.  

There is a price to pay for every strategy. Armenia’s Crossroad for Peace strategic imitative is no different. Other strategic initiative most likely will have disastrous consequences to the nascent Republic of Armenia. 

Armenia will stay it course.

The non-violent peaceful Gandhi strategy challenged the mightiest force in his time, the British Empire and India gained its independence.

By staying the Crossroad for Peace strategic initiative, Armenia is bound to secure for its citizens the right to live securely, peacefully and prosper in Armenia, and it will.

                                    ***

 The link: “What does this peace deal accomplish? My take”: https://vhapelian.blogspot.com/2025/03/what-does-this-peace-deal-accomplish-my_17.html