Armenian parliament speaker Alen Simonyan has commented on Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s warnings that war could break out if the ruling party fails to secure a constitutional majority in the upcoming elections. Simonyan said there is no need to look for a “tactical or political trick” behind these remarks.

“In 2020, there was a war. After that, Armenia and Azerbaijan established a border. If a force comes to power and says: ‘I do not recognise the delimitation and demarcation that took place. I intend to think about territories beyond 29,743 square kilometres,’ then naturally, as a politician and as citizens, we can assume that war is possible,” Simonyan said during a briefing.

He added that the prime minister, who has access to information and oversees ongoing processes, has the right to make such forecasts.

Simonyan also agreed with Pashinyan’s view that voters in the 7 June parliamentary elections will face a choice between peace and a possible war.

In recent weeks, Pashinyan has repeatedly said the ruling Civil Contract party must secure a constitutional majority in the elections. He has warned that otherwise war will be inevitable. He has also indicated a possible timeframe, saying hostilities could begin as early as September this year.

The opposition says Pashinyan is using the threat of war as a form of pressure. They argue that this has become the ruling party’s main tool for re-election — to frighten voters with the prospect of conflict. Pashinyan’s team rejects this, saying the statements are political assessments, not threats.

• ‘Russia trying to send tens of thousands of voters to Armenia’s elections’: debate in Yerevan
• Phishing attack by cyber fraudsters posing as members of Armenia’s ruling party
• Poll: Will Armenia’s ruling party win June election?

‘We must not miss the chance for peace’ — Simonyan

“I understand that the forces currently in parliament, as well as those seeking to enter it, need war — or talk of war — to build their political agendas. But there is no war now, there is peace,” the National Assembly speaker told journalists.

Alen Simonyan stressed that no one has been killed by Azerbaijani fire on the border for two years.

“So are we at war or at peace? Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Armenia and Azerbaijan have never traded. Never before have leaders of both countries spoken about peace at the same time.”

He said people should be careful not to miss the opportunity for peace.

“The current government of Armenia, Civil Contract, is a party of peace. All the other main opposition players are parties of war. That is the reality. If they say they want to put forward demands and go beyond these square kilometres, that is called war.”

Simonyan also recalled that unresolved border issues have remained across the former Soviet Union — in Central Asia, Ukraine and the South Caucasus.

“They told us: people of Armenia, always dream that your home is not only here but also there, and we will support you. The goal was to keep us dependent on them. Yes, there is a party of war, and there is a party of peace. And yes, the 2026 elections will be about peace and a possible war,” he said.

Pashinyan warns of “catastrophic war”

Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said over the weekend that war would be inevitable, speaking during a livestream on his Facebook page:

“There will be war in September. And it will be a catastrophic war if the Civil Contract party does not secure a constitutional majority… I am not just talking about winning the elections.”

He did not provide detailed justification. He said his seven years as prime minister allow him to assess the situation and the risks.

Pashinyan made similar remarks during a briefing on 19 March. He said military action could begin in autumn, shortly after the June elections. He warned that if forces advocating a “revision of peace” come to power, this will lead to serious consequences. He said this could mean losses — not only of territory, but also of sovereignty.

Asked why opposition forces would need a war, Pashinyan said:

“War would bring them the following: they would run an outpost, not a state, because time has shown this benefits them financially. […] All three forces advocating a revision of the peace agreement [the Armenia bloc, Strong Armenia and Prosperous Armenia] have billions in assets in Russia and Belarus. They were told: if you want to keep these assets, you must work, sweat, run, do push-ups 30 times. They will not manage it.”

The prime minister said a constitutional majority in the next parliament could guarantee that peace in the region becomes “irreversible”.

Why does the ruling party need a constitutional majority? Foreign minister responds

Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan said the timeline for a possible war — set out by the prime minister as September — is conditional, but confirmed that such a scenario remains possible.

Mirzoyan noted that both parliamentary and extra-parliamentary opposition figures hold territorial claims against almost all neighbouring countries.

“If they come to power, problems with neighbours will arise immediately. Given the way disputes are resolved today, Armenia would most likely find itself in a state of war straight away.”

Journalists asked the minister whether he saw the prime minister’s remarks as blackmail.

“Do I see an element of blackmail here? No. Why are we acting this way? We are doing the right thing. This is our political proposal. Are we breaking the law? Absolutely not,” he said.

According to Mirzoyan, the ruling party aims to secure a constitutional majority in order to “form a more stable government”. Radio Azatutyun (RFE/RL) asked whether this was linked to the process of adopting a new constitution.

“It may be related to that as well — I cannot say for sure,” Mirzoyan replied.

Armenia’s parliament has approved the appointment of former ruling party MP Vladimir Vardanyan as a judge of the Constitutional Court. A total of 67 out of 107 MPs took part in the vote, all of whom supported his nomination.

Vardanyan resigned his parliamentary mandate a week earlier, after the country’s president nominated him for the post. He also left the Civil Contract party, although until recently he had been an active member of parliament. He previously chaired the parliamentary committee on state and legal affairs.

Representatives of Armenia’s civil society have warned that his appointment to the Constitutional Court could pose a risk to the court’s independence and impartiality.

• Scandal in Armenia: museum director dismissed for gifting book to US vice-president
• Phishing attack by cyber fraudsters posing as members of Armenia’s ruling party
• Poll: Will Armenia’s ruling party win June election?

What the law provides

The law “On the Constitutional Court” sets out the requirements for a Constitutional Court judge.

Under the law, a Constitutional Court judge cannot:

• be a member or founder of any political party,
• hold a position within a party,
• act on behalf of a party or engage in political activity in any other way.

“A judge of the Constitutional Court must demonstrate political restraint and neutrality in public statements and in all other circumstances,” the law states.

If a Constitutional Court judge engages in political activity, authorities can terminate their mandate. The current Constitution of Armenia also includes this provision.

Representatives of civil society stress that these rules apply after appointment. However, they aim to prevent links between a judge and political forces. As a result, they seek to ensure the court’s independence and impartiality.

“Ending political ties is not guaranteed”: NGO statement

“Although Vladimir Vardanyan resigned his parliamentary mandate and left the political force that holds the parliamentary majority, the fact that he spent more than seven years in politics and belonged to a party raises doubts about his ability to perform the duties of a Constitutional Court judge impartially,” representatives of more than a dozen NGOs said.

In their view, “political interconnectedness rules out the possibility of managing risks”.

NGOs published the joint statement before MPs began voting. They urged lawmakers “to refrain from voting for Vladimir Vardanyan’s candidacy”.

Civil society representatives stressed that an ideological link with the ruling party provides sufficient grounds to question Vardanyan’s independence and impartiality in the role:

“Resigning a parliamentary mandate or leaving a party cannot guarantee the end of political and party ties or political influence.”

Farewell to committee members ahead of appointment

A week before parliament debated the appointment of a Constitutional Court judge, Vladimir Vardanyan said goodbye to members of the committee he chaired.

“By tradition, I should say: dear colleagues, I apologise if anything was not right,” he said, thanking MPs for their active cooperation.

His remarks surprised even members of his own party.

“There was no need to rush to say goodbye,” said Civil Contract MP Arusyak Julhakyan.

Opposition figures argued that the farewell in advance showed the vote would be a formality. In their view, parliament would confirm an appointment rather than hold a genuine selection.

Kristine Vardanyan, an MP from the opposition Armenia faction, said the ruling party did not even seek to preserve a formal appearance of procedure, as the outcome was already clear:

“Everyone knows a candidate has been nominated. He will come, no matter what he says, what questions are asked, or how society reacts. An SMS will arrive, he will be elected, because that has already been decided, because the Constitutional Court must become even more compliant with them.”

https://jam-news.net/former-ruling-party-mp-becomes-constitutional-court-judge-in-armenia-ngos-warn-of-risks/