The political future of Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan is uncertain after his country’s sudden surrender in the Nagorno-Karabakh War sparked large-scale protests against him, but even though he’s taken full responsibility for this unpopular decision and was also arguably responsible for misleading the masses into wrongly thinking that their side was winning the war up until the eve of their defeat, he should still only be removed through legal means if that’s indeed what the Armenian people actually want to have happen after thinking deeply about the possible consequences.
Poetic Irony For Pashinyan
There’s a poetic irony in Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan facing the fury of the same ultra-nationalist elements of society that he himself exploited two and a half years ago during his rise to power in the so-called “Velvet Revolution”. As the saying goes, “the revolution eats its own”, and nowhere is this more apparent than in Armenia after its leader suddenly surrendered in the Nagorno-Karabakh War despite misleading the masses up until the eve of Yerevan’s defeat that their side was winning by far. He’s since taken full responsibility for their surrender, but that if anything has only provoked many people into protesting against him all the more angrily since quite a few of them regard him as a “traitor” for what he did. In addition, the growing awareness about Pashinyan’s connections to the Soros Foundations and the dominant control that the US-based Armenian diaspora held over him since he came to power has incited even relatively “moderate” Armenians into becoming ultra-nationalists, at least for the time being. Confronted with this unprecedented challenge to his rule, many observers are now wondering whether he’ll remain in office or be violently overthrown.
The Rule Of Law Should Reign Supreme
For as upset as both his own people and the vast majority of the international community are with him after his disastrous debacle cost the lives of at least several thousand Armenian soldiers for absolutely no reason whatsoever other than to perpetuate his own power, the fact of the matter is that the rule of law should always be respected and no leader should ever be overthrown through violent anti-democratic means despite he himself having done exactly just that against his predecessor. If the Armenian people actually do want him to leave office, then they must follow the relevant political process as stipulated by their constitution. Even so, they should also consider whether they’re being exploited as “useful idiots” by allowing their emotions to get the best of them during these turbulent times. Russian foreign spy chief Naryshkin warned this week that Western intelligence agencies are trying to take advantage of people’s disappointment with the outcome of the latest war in order to promote their own geopolitical interests, and even President Putin himself even had some choice words to say on this topic during an extended interview with the media around the same time.
Russia’s Unambiguous Message To Armenia
According to the Russian leader, the accusations of treason against Pashinyan are “absolutely groundless”, and it “would be suicidal” if ultra-nationalists replaced him by force and then “simply refused to implement what has been signed”. Taken together, Naryshkin and Putin’s words can be interpreted as an unambiguous message from the Kremlin that the domestic disorder in Armenia is being exploited by foreign intelligence agencies for the purpose of provoking the country into committing suicide by Azerbaijan’s (and possibly even Turkey’s) hand. This isn’t just sensationalist fearmongering either but a very sober assessment of the strategic situation. If there’s anyone who Pashinyan “betrayed”, it’s Soros and the powerful US-based Armenian diaspora lobby after he signed the de-facto instrument of surrender with Presidents Putin and Aliyev. He knew right then and there that they would never accept what he had done, hence why they and their US intelligence patrons have since sought to violently overthrow him through anti-democratic means under the guise of the easy-to-provoke ultra-nationalist argument that he “betrayed” his country by doing so.
The Roots Of Armenian Radicalism
As was mentioned at the beginning of this analysis, Pashinyan was arguably responsible for tying his own noose by getting his people’s hopes unrealistically high the whole time by lying to them about the conduct and course of the war after wrongly telling them that their side was consistently winning. The disappointment that inevitably followed naturally provoked a radical political reaction against him which in turn facilitated these foreign actors’ efforts to advance the ongoing Color Revolution scenario for deposing him from office and replacing him with an ultra-nationalist puppet who’d then lead Armenia to suicide by Azerbaijan’s (and possibly even Turkey’s) hand. Those foreign meddlers don’t care about Armenia but only regard it as a geopolitical instrument with which to provoke a larger war like Pashinyan thankfully failed to do. This might be very difficult for the average Armenian to accept since they’ve been brainwashed with ultra-nationalist and even sometimes fascist narratives for the past two and a half years but that’s why their society must urgently undergo deradicalization as soon as possible.
Pashinyan’s Second Chance
Plunging even deeper into the depths of fascist delusions by clinging to the discredited regional imperial policy of so-called “Greater Armenia” will only lead to the country’s inevitable destruction. Naryshkin and Putin are acutely aware of this and extremely concerned that it might prospectively happen, hence why they’ve spoken out about this dangerous scenario in order to raise widespread awareness of it in the hopes that responsibly patriotic Armenians will take heed and thus avert this coming disaster. For all of his personal and political faults, Pashinyan nevertheless ended up splitting with Soros and the toxic US-based Armenian diaspora at what’s literally the risk of his own life. He certainly still deserves to be legally punished by the international community for the war crimes that he committed by bombing Azerbaijan’s second-largest city of Ganja among many other violations of international law, but violently overthrowing him would only play into the US’ geopolitical hands at the expense of Armenia’s objective national interests. Pashinyan at the very least deserves the chance to partially redeem himself first by saving Armenia from the brink of disaster during these dangerous times.
To the best of the author’s knowledge, never before has Russia’s foreign spy chief or its President — let alone both at almost the same time in an obviously coordinated way — sent such an unambiguous message to an allied country as Naryshkin and Putin did this week. They basically said that those Armenians who submitted to ultra-nationalist impulses after their country’s de-facto surrender in the Nagorno-Karabakh War are functioning as the “useful idiots” of Western intelligence agencies and unwittingly leading their nation to suicide by Azerbaijan’s (and possibly even Turkey’s) hand. The same goes for what the author describes as the Non-Armenian Pro-Armenians (NAPAs) who sometimes bray for blood even louder than that country’s toxic US-based diaspora does for reasons that might be related to what he personally suspects is their militant Christian radicalism of wrongly regarding that conflict as a so-called “Clash of Civilizations” between Christianity and Islam. It’s therefore of the highest priority that these pernicious forces be thwarted before their devious regional designs can transpire, which is why Pashinyan mustn’t be violently overthrown no matter what.