Nikol Pashinyan’s statements about the Ararat cement factory once again showed that the state in Armenia is gradually turning into a tool of political reprisal.

When the country’s prime minister publicly announces that a private factory “will be state-owned” and “congratulates its employees on the occasion of liberation”, this is a clear message that the government is ready to interfere in property relations for political purposes and pre-determine the fate of private business.

If there are legal issues related to any company’s activities, they should be resolved exclusively within the law, based on the principles of courts, legal procedures and the rule of law. However, when the Prime Minister personally announces what will happen to a specific enterprise, the impression is created that the political decision has already been made, and the legal process is just a formality.

Pashinyan’s vocabulary: “mafia”, “retribution”, “business backbone”, clearly shows that it is not about economic policy, but about political revenge. Gagik Tsarukyan has been one of the main political opponents of the government for many years and is one of the leaders of the favorite forces in this electoral process, and today it becomes obvious that an attempt is being made to attack not only his political influence, but also his economic supports.

However, this story is much deeper than the issue of one person or one factory.

Ararat cement factory is one of the important components of the industrial system of Armenia. It is a system-creating production that provides thousands of jobs, participates in maintaining the country’s construction and economic stability, and plays an important role in terms of economic self-sufficiency. Creating an atmosphere of political pressure, property redistribution and instability around such an enterprise is a blow to Armenia’s economic resilience.

All this is happening at a time when Armenia is facing serious security and geopolitical challenges. Under such conditions, any step that weakens the country’s industrial potential objectively harms Armenia’s economic sovereignty.

And here the most important question arises. Whose interests does the weakening of Armenia’s industrial system serve?

There are states in the region, Azerbaijan and Turkey, which are interested in having a weak, dependent and economically vulnerable Armenia. The processes of political pressures, property redistribution and economic destabilization around Armenia’s large production systems cannot but coincide with these interests.

At the same time, the pre-election calculation is also obvious. Pashinyan is trying to revive the old manipulative opposition of “the people against the oligarchy” before the elections, presenting to the public that “property is being returned to the people”. However, in reality, this is not a policy of social justice, this is a political technology, the purpose of which is to mobilize one’s own electorate and divert the public’s attention from the accumulated problems.

The most dangerous consequence of this process is the deterioration of the investment environment.

Which investor will invest capital in a country where the level of property protection depends not on the law, but on the political sentiments of the government, on the whim of one person? Who will trust the state where the prime minister can announce the future of private enterprise with a public speech?

In a rule of law, property issues are resolved in the courts, not in political speeches.

The fate of a businessman is determined by the law, not by the political expediency of the government or the whim of one person. The state cannot turn into a tool of pressure and punishment against political opponents.

Political scientist Suren Surenyants

—