Jrbashyan: Allowing oak aging could undermine the value of the GI “Armenian Br

YEREVAN, April 17. /ARKA/. Permitting oak aging for cognac under the “Armenian Brandy” geographical indication (GI) could undermine the value of this designation and weaken Armenia’s position in the high-quality alcoholic beverages market, stated Tigran Jrbashyan, Director of Management Consulting at Ameria.

“Do you know why Churchill demanded Armenian cognac? Because it was real. Real—produced only from grapes grown in Armenia, infused with Armenian water, aged for years in oak barrels, and crafted by the hand of a master. Margar Sedrakyan—the creator of Dvin, Nairi, Akhtamar, Ani, Yubileyny, Armenia, Tonakan, and many other cognacs—knew this better than anyone,” Jrbashyan wrote on social media.

He recalled that Armenian cognac has historically been associated with an authentic product made from grapes grown in Armenia, aged in oak barrels, and crafted in accordance with established professional traditions.

According to him, the use of oak chips or other forms of oak wood is not an equivalent substitute for classic oak aging, but merely creates the illusion of a fully matured beverage. He recalled that similar approaches were discussed back in the Soviet era, but, according to family memoirs of the master distiller, Margar Sedrakyan, he rejected such solutions in order to preserve the traditions of Armenian cognac and its high quality.

Jrbashyan also pointed out that decades of scientific research have directly compared aging in oak barrels with aging in contact with oak wood, and these methods yield fundamentally different results. This isn’t about “fast” and “slow” versions of the same process, but rather products of different quality and, essentially, different natures.

He noted that application No. 2026001, approved on March 13, 2026, for the geographical indication “Armenian Brandy” specifies in the “Production Method” section that the resulting spirits are aged “in oak barrels or in contact with oak wood.” According to Jrbashyan, it is this wording that makes the issue particularly pressing.

The expert believes that arguments that the use of oak wood is necessary due to a lack of investment in grape processing and storage infrastructure are not sufficiently substantiated. He expressed confidence that this is not a solution to the industry’s strategic problem, but an attempt to simplify quality requirements.

At the same time, according to Jrbashyan, the application does not clearly define what exactly is meant by “oak wood.” He noted that this could include various methods, whereas while aging on oak staves may be discussed in certain cases outside the scope of GI, the use of oak chips in the production process should be prohibited.

He identified the issue of control as a separate problem. According to Jrbashyan, it will be extremely difficult for the state to effectively administer this area, especially if different aging methods are used within the production processes of the same producer. Moreover, he added, the existing control system currently does not always ensure even basic conditions, including the use of exclusively grape-based spirits in cognac production.

“If oak aging is permitted at the regulatory level under the GI ‘Armenian Brandy,’ this could be negatively perceived in the international high-quality beverage market, and Armenia itself risks losing some of the opportunities offered by the geographical indication mechanism,” Jrbashyan thinks.

According to him, lowering the standard will not save the industry but will only create the illusion of a solution. He emphasized that Armenian brandy must either obtain a GI with clear quality criteria and an effective control system that allows it to operate in the high-quality segment, or it will be forced to limit itself to more modest opportunities in the lower price and quality segments of the market.

Why brandy?

The refusal to use the name “cognac” for Armenian products is related to Armenia’s international obligations under the EU-Armenia Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement (CEPA). According to the agreement, “Cognac” is a protected geographical indication of the EU and can only be used for products produced in the Cognac region of France.

The CEPA entered into force on March 1, 2021, and provides for a transition period of approximately 14 years (including the deferred start date), during which Armenian producers may temporarily use this name in the domestic market. Upon completion of the transition period, Armenia is required to completely abandon the term “cognac” and switch to an alternative name.

The agreement also provides for EU assistance to the Armenian side, including financial and technical support, for rebranding products and promoting the new name in foreign markets.