2026 declassified by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. The Annual Threat Assessment report makes clear the algorithms of that superpower’s calculations regarding events in our region.

Everything resembles a dry calculation without adequate legal evaluations, but they did not publicly express the non-existence of international law for nothing. The analysis of Aliyev’s demand to change the Constitution is typical. “There are still obstacles on the way to the final conclusion of the peace agreement. For example, President Aliyev continues to insist that Armenia should amend its Constitution to remove a reference to what he interprets as a provision making Nagorno Karabakh part of Armenia. That step will require holding a constitutional referendum in Armenia, the result of which is not guaranteed.”

Thus, the US is not worried about the criminal attitude of the Azerbaijani president to dictate demands to Armenia based on his own mental abilities, clearly undermining the sovereignty of Armenia, but the fear that this step will simply require a referendum, the result of which is not guaranteed.

It is an indisputable fact that in the current legal and political climate in Armenia, when even in the republican elections it is not possible to ensure at least 50 percent participation, which is a mandatory condition for the referendum. Even the Yerevan Council of Elders in 2023 the participation in the elections was barely 28.4 percent.

Moreover, we publicly voiced this important circumstance 4 years ago, when the declaration of “Independence” was considered problematic for the first time.

Once again, we emphasize two very key reservations: a) the “Independence” declaration does not contain a territorial claim, but only respect for the right of the people to self-determination, which is a norm of international law, b) the preamble of the Constitution is intended to be based not on all 12 points of the Declaration (some of them were ignored back in 1991, when the institution of the president was introduced), but on “the fundamental principles of Armenian statehood and national goals”.

P.S. In the United States, at least they understood well that the demand to change the Constitution on the above-mentioned basis is an insurmountable obstacle, and if we look more complexly, we can state that it is a road leading to a dead end, because in case of failure of the referendum, we inevitably confirm with our own hands the legal fact of having territorial ambitions as if by the mother law, along with the inevitable negative consequences arising from it. Steps to “revise” voter lists are also futile. It’s not too late…

Doctor of Law, Professor Gevorg Danielyan

—