Pashinyan threatens revolution in Armenia. What does it mean

Armenia may change the constitution if the provisions of the country's basic law contradict the peace treaty with Azerbaijan. At the same time, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan suggested that citizens who disagree with the rejection of the Karabakh movement organize a revolution. What is happening in Armenia and how likely a coup is — in the Izvestia article.

What is happening between Armenia and Azerbaijan

• On August 11, the Ministries of Foreign Affairs of Armenia and Azerbaijan presented a draft peace agreement, which includes 17 points. The parties gave preliminary consent to the document on August 8 through the mediation of US President Donald Trump. For the agreement to enter into force, it must be signed by the leaders of the two states and approved by the parliaments.

• The draft specifically stated that the parties undertake to recognize each other's political independence, territorial integrity and sovereignty. At the same time, international borders are defined by the borders of the former Soviet republics.

• In addition, during his parliamentary speech, Pashinyan stated the need for Armenia to abandon the Karabakh movement. He recalled that he had supported this idea in his youth, but now regards its preservation as a delusion. The Prime minister stressed that he intends to adhere to this line as long as he is in power. At the same time, he added that citizens who disagree with such a course have the right to organize a revolution in order to change the direction of state policy.

Pause or failure: why haven't Armenia and Azerbaijan made peace yet

Nikol Pashinyan congratulated Muslims on Eid al-Adha and criticized the hierarchs of the Armenian Apostolic Church

How real is the revolution in Armenia

• The issue of the possibility of revolution in Armenia remains the subject of active discussions, especially outside its borders — among members of the Armenian Diaspora. The political situation in the republic remains quite tense. The discussion of the prospects for a peace agreement with Azerbaijan touches upon issues of national identity and security. Against this background, a part of society is increasingly dissatisfied with the actions of the authorities, which are perceived as concessions or abandonment of previous principles.

• The government led by Pashinyan is pursuing a course that provokes a mixed reaction among the population. His statements about the need to abandon the Karabakh movement were a blow to a significant part of society, especially those who associate their identity with this issue. For many citizens, such initiatives are perceived as steps that undermine national interests. This increases the protest mood.

• Revolutionary scenarios are possible in Armenia, because the country already has experience of mass street demonstrations that led to a change of power. The protest potential is also preserved due to the influence of the diaspora from other countries and the dissatisfaction of the opposition. To this is added a sense of instability due to concerns about the country's security. Statements by Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev that Baku should be ready for a possible war only increase tension in Yerevan.

Changing their orientation: why Armenia joined the European Union

Yerevan is preparing to adopt a law on EU accession

What is Armenia going to do next

• Pashinyan's statement on the end of the Karabakh movement symbolizes the end of an entire historical era. This topic concerns not only the territorial issue. Now Yerevan has to overcome the crisis of Armenia's political identity. The country is facing a choice between two fundamentally different models of development. The ethnic group, which developed at the end of the 19th century, interpreted the Armenian people as a single transnational community. In turn, the civil one, which Pashinyan supports, means that Armenia as a state belongs only to citizens living within the republic.

• Pashinyan's policy was the result of consistent steps by all the leaders of independent Armenia. Robert Kocharyan limited the political influence of the diaspora, Serzh Sargsyan consolidated this line at the constitutional level. After gaining independence, the issue of the Diaspora's place in Armenia's political system has become one of the most difficult. About three million people live in the country, while there are multimillion-strong Armenian communities outside its borders with significant financial and organizational resources. For the authorities, this factor was both a source of support and a threat, since it created an alternative center of influence.

• The break with the diaspora has serious geopolitical consequences. Armenia is losing key allies who have traditionally provided international lobbying and supported the republic financially. At the same time, limiting the influence of the diaspora will lead to the centralization of power in Yerevan and the likelihood of building a more predictable domestic and foreign policy.

However, the very idea of Karabakh is deeply rooted in collective identity. This region is a kind of symbol of national unity. For several generations of Armenians, he represented the connection between the past and the present. The losses caused by wars and forced migrations have consolidated the role of Karabakh as an integral part of historical memory. Therefore, it is unlikely that Armenians will completely abandon the ideas of the Karabakh movement.

When writing the material, Izvestia talked and took into account the opinions of:

• political scientist Gleb Kuznetsov;
• Igor Semenovsky, Associate Professor at the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation;
• political scientist Artur Ataev;
• political scientist Alexander Dudchak.