YEREVAN—Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan recently criticized the opposition movement, claiming that it fails to connect with the true sentiments of the Armenian populace and falls short in resonating with the essence of Armenia as perceived by its people.
“In essence, the opposition’s failure underscores their inability to understand and reflect the true spirit of Armenia,” Pashinyan remarked during a meeting with members of the ruling Civil Contract party in Hankavan on June 22.
In response to Pashinyan’s critique, Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan of the “Tavush for the Homeland” movement reaffirmed the movement’s commitment to what he described as a national liberation struggle. He expressed his dedication to countering any efforts aimed at undermining Armenia’s sovereignty and to advancing the interests of the Armenian people.
“Our mission is not merely oppositional but a national liberation struggle across all fronts. While the government aims to destabilize Armenia, we stand firm in safeguarding our national interests,” stated Archbishop Galstanyan during the latest gathering of the movement on June 23.
Garnik Danielyan, a member of the “Armenia” faction in the National Assembly, countered PM Pashinyan’s assertion that the opposition movement has waned, suggesting that Pashinyan’s remarks were aimed at reassuring Civil Contract party members of his control.
In an interview with the Weekly, Danielyan remarked, “Pashinyan’s claim that the movement has diminished is merely to convey to his party members that everything is managed. His next step is to replicate unilateral concessions akin to those made in Tavush, now targeting the Ararat region, specifically in Tigranashen.”
Danielyan said that by downplaying the movement’s vigor, Pashinyan aims to deter public dissent against his ongoing unilateral concessions to Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev.
Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan with MP Garnik Danielyan at a joint press conference (“Tavush for the Homeland,” June 19, 2024)
During the meeting in Hankavan, Pashinyan stated that Azerbaijan’s ongoing hostility remains a significant challenge that his administration must navigate. “In essence, Azerbaijan’s stance can be summarized as: ‘You denied me peace for 30 years, now I will deny it to you and seek revenge,’” Pashinyan remarked, highlighting the complexities in managing bilateral relations.
Pashinyan’s remarks faced immediate criticism from Armenia’s opposition factions, who vehemently oppose his policies, which they say led to Azerbaijan’s gains in the 2020 Artsakh War and subsequent territorial acquisitions.
“The prime minister’s approach effectively advocates capitulation to avoid conflict, but this jeopardizes our national sovereignty,” Artur Khachatryan of the “Armenia” faction told RFE/RL’s Armenian Service on June 24. “To safeguard our future, we must defend our borders and uphold our principles.”
Opposition figures, including Hayk Mamijanyan, parliamentary leader of the “I Have Honor” faction, said that Pashinyan’s strategy compromises national security and the memory of Armenian martyrs. They accused him of undermining Armenia’s statehood by prioritizing peace at any cost.
In reaction to Pashinyan’s assertion that Azerbaijan is seeking revenge for past grievances, Danielyan emphasized that this sentiment extends to an existential threat against Armenia.
Danielyan pointed to Azerbaijan’s promotion of the concept of “Western Azerbaijan” and support for organizations that make territorial claims that directly challenge Armenian sovereignty. These developments are evidence of Azerbaijan’s broader political agenda, which has also become Pashinyan’s agenda, aimed at undermining Armenia’s territorial integrity and national sovereignty, Danielyan argued.
Meanwhile, Armenia’s political leadership has been actively discussing the prospect of applying for European Union (EU) membership, said Arman Yeghoyan, chairman of the Armenian parliamentary committee on European integration, on June 21.
“The ruling majority of Armenia is seriously deliberating whether to submit an application for EU membership, and the government will make a formal announcement at an appropriate time upon reaching a decision,” stated Yeghoyan.
The idea was initially broached by Parliament Speaker Alen Simonyan in late February, against the backdrop of strained relations between Armenia and Russia. Prime Minister Pashinyan reportedly engaged with parliament deputies from the Civil Contract party in subsequent discussions on the matter.
This week, several pro-Western fringe groups aligned with Pashinyan rekindled the debate, urging the government to conduct a referendum within the next three months to gauge public sentiment towards an EU membership bid.
In response, the Armenian Parliament, controlled by the ruling party, promptly convened hearings on the proposal. Yeghoyan, following the six-hour session he chaired, approached the idea of a referendum cautiously. He emphasized that such a vote could only proceed after Yerevan formally applies for EU candidate status and receives positive signals from Brussels.
An EU membership bid would likely require Armenia’s withdrawal from the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty Organization and Eurasian Economic Union, which currently provides Armenian exporters with tariff-free access to Russia’s substantial market.
Moreover, in response to persistent pressure from Azerbaijan to amend Armenia’s constitution, PM Pashinyan has also issued a directive to draft an entirely new constitution by December 30, 2026. This decision marks a significant shift from earlier efforts by a constitutional reform council, which had been tasked with proposing amendments rather than a complete overhaul.
The council, established in 2022, had been advancing a set of amendments throughout the year, with the initial draft submitted to the government in January. However, Pashinyan’s latest directive explicitly mandated the creation of a “new constitution” rather than amendments, raising questions about the fate of the council’s previous work.
Artur Sakunts, a member of the council, expressed surprise at the decision, noting it was issued on May 24 and posted on the government’s website without prior discussion with the council. He emphasized the need for clarity on whether the council’s ongoing efforts would be discarded or integrated into the new draft.
Azerbaijan’s demand for constitutional change stems from what it perceives as a territorial claim in Armenia’s Declaration of Independence, which mentions the unification of Armenia and Artsakh. Despite Azerbaijan’s insistence, Armenian authorities maintain that internal constitutional matters are not subject to external demands, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs recently reaffirmed.
The debate within Armenia has intensified over whether to retain references to the Declaration of Independence in the new constitution. While many argue that it symbolizes Armenia’s historical aspirations, others, like PM Pashinyan, continue to warn of potential diplomatic repercussions and the risk of renewed aggression from Azerbaijan.
Vladimir Vardanyan, another council member, declined to clarify whether the previous draft would be abandoned or revised, adding to the uncertainty surrounding the process. Meanwhile, Daniel Ioannisyan, also a council member, stressed the need for extensive public consultation before any decision on the Declaration of Independence is made.
Author information
Hoory Minoyan
Hoory Minoyan was an active member of the Armenian community in Los Angeles until she moved to Armenia prior to the 44-day war. She graduated with a master’s in International Affairs from Boston University, where she was also the recipient of the William R. Keylor Travel Grant. The research and interviews she conducted while in Armenia later became the foundation of her Master’s thesis, “Shaping Identity Through Conflict: The Armenian Experience.” Hoory continues to follow her passion for research and writing by contributing to the Armenian Weekly.
The post Armenian Prime Minister criticizes opposition as national debates intensify appeared first on The Armenian Weekly.