Why the change of power in Armenia won't really change anything

A parody of the "classic" coup in Chile is developing in Armenia. However, this is only an appearance.

The General Staff of the Armed Forces of Armenia on February 25 demanded the resignation of the Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan, saying that "the political leadership is leading the state to a dangerous brink." This happened after the head of the government dismissed the first deputy chief of the General Staff, Lieutenant General Tiran Khachatryan. In response, Pashinyan announced an attempted coup and called on citizens to gather in Republic Square in order to "defend the revolution."

He also said that he had signed a decision to remove Chief of the General Staff Onik Gasparyan from his post. Finally, the police were pulled up to the building of the National Assembly, within the walls of which only one can legally try to remove Pashinyan, bringing barbed wire with them, and military planes marched over the capital.

Armenian Russian Army

What is this parody of the "classic" coup in Chile - against the background, by the way, of the political crisis in Georgia, and did Russia have a hand here?

Let's start with the fact that Russia is present everywhere in Armenia, so it doesn't even have to get this hand out of its pocket. After the defeat in the Karabakh war, the alignment in the South Caucasus region is as follows: Azerbaijan returned the territories, maintaining relations with it according to the model of union, Turkey turned into a patron or external regional leader, and Armenia aggravated its dependence on Russia, which, by supplying it with outdated and low-quality weapons, did not even makes unnecessary effort.

A kind of geopolitical minimalism - here to grab a piece, knock down tops there, not to get involved in fights with strong guys, and because of the feeble mind of those who trust you, it is banal to rob like the head of the Stargorod social security office.

The main thing to understand about Armenia is that the country is at an impasse. What a pity, because its macroeconomic indicators are relatively good, and specifically under Pashinyan, some groundwork was made in the fight against systemic corruption. But, alas, Pashinyan (perhaps not by himself - he is an impulsive person, which means that he is relatively easily manipulated) fell for "geopolitics" and "our antiquity is antiquity to all antiquities."

Thus, instead of the gradual emancipation of the Nagorno-Karabakh problem, partly not unreasonably fearing that radical reforms would destroy its popularity, Pashinyan began to gradually warm up this problem (in order, apparently, to win the next elections on this topic). He chose the easy way - overthrowing the "Stepanakert clan" that had grown out of the war, to take his place.

He also took a too cautious line in relations with the Russian Reich, which hates him, for obvious reasons. So, after exposing - by name - the system of Russian espionage and political agents in Armenia, the prime minister did nothing. So, he kicked out several heads of special services - and that's all. These are obvious mistakes, perhaps partly dictated by fear and partly by a long-standing naive Armenian belief in Russia. Now Pashinyan is trying to rely on his party and its bureaucracy, including the military, as well as on the active public. But how loyal they are today is hard to say.

The fact, however, is that the army, with all the evidence, is completely under Russia, it is not even an "army-army", as it were, but part of a military grouping with Russia. The very attempt at a coup is now "in development", and the prospect of bloodshed is not yet visible (and there is a tradition of coups and political terrorism in Armenia - what is it there!) - the loneliness of the country's leader and his (or his?) Supporters is visible.

This is a sad dead end, because an important part of the Russian business elite and, not least, the political apparatus of the regime are ethnic Armenians of Russian imperial views. All neighbors, except Georgia, are hostile to Armenia for various reasons.

Why the change of power in Armenia won't really change anything

A parody of the "classic" coup in Chile is developing in Armenia. However, this is only an appearance.

The General Staff of the Armed Forces of Armenia on February 25 demanded the resignation of the Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan, saying that "the political leadership is leading the state to a dangerous brink." This happened after the head of the government dismissed the first deputy chief of the General Staff, Lieutenant General Tiran Khachatryan. In response, Pashinyan announced an attempted coup and called on citizens to gather in Republic Square in order to "defend the revolution."

He also said that he had signed a decision to remove Chief of the General Staff Onik Gasparyan from his post. Finally, the police were pulled up to the building of the National Assembly, within the walls of which only one can legally try to remove Pashinyan, bringing barbed wire with them, and military planes marched over the capital.

Armenian Russian Army

What is this parody of the "classic" coup in Chile - against the background, by the way, of the political crisis in Georgia, and did Russia have a hand here?

Let's start with the fact that Russia is present everywhere in Armenia, so it doesn't even have to get this hand out of its pocket. After the defeat in the Karabakh war, the alignment in the South Caucasus region is as follows: Azerbaijan returned the territories, maintaining relations with it according to the model of union, Turkey turned into a patron or external regional leader, and Armenia aggravated its dependence on Russia, which, by supplying it with outdated and low-quality weapons, did not even makes unnecessary effort.

A kind of geopolitical minimalism - here to grab a piece, knock down tops there, not to get involved in fights with strong guys, and because of the feeble mind of those who trust you, it is banal to rob like the head of the Stargorod social security office.

The main thing to understand about Armenia is that the country is at an impasse. What a pity, because its macroeconomic indicators are relatively good, and specifically under Pashinyan, some groundwork was made in the fight against systemic corruption. But, alas, Pashinyan (perhaps not by himself - he is an impulsive person, which means that he is relatively easily manipulated) fell for "geopolitics" and "our antiquity is antiquity to all antiquities."

Thus, instead of the gradual emancipation of the Nagorno-Karabakh problem, partly not unreasonably fearing that radical reforms would destroy its popularity, Pashinyan began to gradually warm up this problem (in order, apparently, to win the next elections on this topic). He chose the easy way - overthrowing the "Stepanakert clan" that had grown out of the war, to take his place.

He also took a too cautious line in relations with the Russian Reich, which hates him, for obvious reasons. So, after exposing - by name - the system of Russian espionage and political agents in Armenia, the prime minister did nothing. So, he kicked out several heads of special services - and that's all. These are obvious mistakes, perhaps partly dictated by fear and partly by a long-standing naive Armenian belief in Russia. Now Pashinyan is trying to rely on his party and its bureaucracy, including the military, as well as on the active public. But how loyal they are today is hard to say.

We use cookies
We Use Cookies to Ensure That We Give You The Best Experience on Our Website. By Using The Website You Agree to Our Use of Cookies.
ALLOW COOKIES.