California Courier Online, Nov. 9, 2026
1- Pashinyan’s Pointless Speech
At the Global Armenian Summit
By Harut Sassounian
www.TheCaliforniaCourier.com
2- Pashinyan sues journalists who speculated around brief split with his wife earlier in 2026
3- Foreigners face higher costs and stricter requirements to obtain residency in Armenia
4- Turkey Uses AI and Other Tech to Claw Back 100 Looted Antiquities from the US
5- Daron Acemoglu on the Armenian Genocide, Democracy, and AI
6- Alleged Turkish Crime Boss Assassinated Inside Spanish Hospital Room
7- Glendale’s First Armenian High School to Be Established after $9.6 Million Donation by Alex and Lina Megerdechian
*************************************************************
1- Pashinyan’s Pointless Speech
At the Global Armenian Summit
By Harut Sassounian
TheCaliforniaCourier.com
Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan addressed the Global Armenian Summit held in Yerevan on November 6.
In his speech at a similar summit in 2024, Pashinyan offended everyone by claiming that the “biggest problem” facing him and his audience was being patriotic. He went on to make the ridiculous claim that foreign powers had instilled patriotism in Armenians. He even claimed that the commemoration of the Armenian Genocide was a tool of Soviet propaganda. He also insulted his Diaspora audience by criticizing and rejecting the humanitarian aid they had sent to Armenia.
At this year’s Summit, once again, Pashinyan wasted his own time and that of the hundreds of patriotic Diaspora Armenians who had left their homes and jobs and spent thousands of dollars on airfare, hotels, and meals to visit their homeland.
Pashinyan said nothing new. He repeated his propaganda about “Real Armenia,” which is really his “Fake Armenia.”
Pashinyan’s biggest mistake was speaking for 27 minutes without a written text. He simply said whatever came to his mind at that moment. Most of what he said had nothing to do with the Diaspora or anything else.
He started by saying that Armenians were not the first Christian nation, which momentarily shocked the audience. He then went on to explain what every Armenian knows: that Armenia was the first country to adopt Christianity. Next, he minimized the historic significance of Armenia’s acceptance of Christianity by saying that Armenians adopted it because of the king’s orders.
Throughout his speech, Pashinyan repeatedly explained the difference between the homeland and the state. Most Armenians know that there is no difference between the two. While it is true that Armenians had a much larger country in the past, and hopefully will have one again in the future, what we currently have is both our homeland and our state. They are the same thing.
Pashinyan even wondered whether there were any Armenians before they adopted Christianity. I am glad that he did not claim that there were no Armenians and no Armenia before he came to power in 2018.
For no apparent reason, Pashinyan then delved into a lengthy explanation about Armenian farmers who do not want driver’s licenses, license plates, or vehicle inspections. None of these issues concern the Diaspora Armenians, who came to Armenia for a completely different reason.
Pashinyan then foolishly argued that Armenia’s borders prevent neighboring Azerbaijan and Turkey from encroaching on Armenia’s territory. He apparently hoped that those present would not remember that Azerbaijan’s army has occupied parts of the territory of the Republic of Armenia since 2021-2022 and continues to do so.
Near the end of his remarks, Pashinyan falsely announced that Armenia offers “love and respect” to Diaspora Armenians. On the contrary, the Armenian government prevents some Diaspora Armenians from visiting their homeland by placing them on its blacklist, simply because they disagreed with the Armenian authorities and Pashinyan in particular. I recently wrote about the sad experience of an Armenian woman, a U.S. citizen, who was arrested at the Yerevan airport for a critical comment about Pashinyan that she had posted on her Facebook page in the United States a year earlier.
I will not dwell on the arrest of dozens of Pashinyan’s local political opponents and the confiscation of their properties and businesses without a trial. But no one dares to charge and arrest Pashinyan for his many violations of Armenia’s laws, including his threats to slay his Armenian opponents.
Pashinyan constantly boasts about bringing democracy and peace to Armenia. Regrettably, he has turned the country into a dictatorship and is on the verge of destroying what remains of the homeland.
Pashinyan also praised himself for establishing the High Commission of Diaspora Affairs of Armenia. He does not realize that he and Zareh Sinanyan, the official he put in charge of that office, have burned every bridge between Armenia and the Diaspora.
Pashinyan then spent 22 minutes answering a few questions from his Diaspora audience. The first person expressed his dismay at the recent brawl in the Armenian Parliament. Surprisingly, Pashinyan dismissed the criticism, adding that the brawl was a sign of democracy! He falsely claimed that such brawls never occur in dictatorial regimes and happen only in democratic countries like Armenia. He must not have seen the repeated ugly scenes of brutal fistfights in the Turkish Parliament. No one would call Turkey a democratic country. Pashinyan once again contradicted himself by saying that he does not welcome the brawl in the Armenian Parliament even though a week earlier he praised the members of his party for taking part in the fights.
Pashinyan desperately needs a speechwriter, as leaders in other countries have, to help him avoid delivering such nonsensical remarks. Fortunately, he did not speak as long as he did two years ago.
Despite the flaws in Pashinyan’s remarks and the government’s excessive $814,000 expenditure on the Summit, I am certain that hundreds of Armenians from around the world enjoyed the opportunity to visit their homeland.
***************************************************
2- Pashinyan sues journalists who speculated around brief split with his wife earlier in 2026
By Ani Ghulinyan
OC-Media
Armenian Prime Nikol Pashinyan (left) with his wife Anna Hakobyan. Photo via social media.
Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has filed a defamation lawsuit against the administrator of the Facebook page Hayakan Zham (Armenian Time) and the company behind the outlet Iravunq Tert (Right Newspaper), demanding public retractions and ֏4 million ($11,000) in compensation. Pashinyan is challenging posts published on 30 September and 5 October 2026, which speculated over the reasons for the brief separation from his wife, Anna Hakobyan.
Pashinyan and Hakobyan announced their separation in February 2026 ahead of the 7 June parliamentary elections after nearly 30 years together, with Hakobyan announcing it on social media and Pashinyan saying he ‘respects Anna’s decision’. Months later, Pashinyan confirmed that the two had reconciled, saying he had actively worked toward it.
Armenia decriminalised defamation and insults in 2010, shifting such disputes to civil courts. In 2021, however, Pashinyan’s government tripled the maximum civil fines to ֏3 million ($8,300) for insults and ֏6 million ($16,600) for defamation.
Separately, parliament introduced criminal liability for ‘grave insult’ in July 2021, which Civil Contract MPs defended as a way to combat disinformation and abusive language online. However, press freedom groups criticised the changes at the time, warning that the fines could bankrupt smaller outlets and encourage self-censorship, while benefiting public officials that want to take legal action. Defamation cases have commonly been used by ruling party members against critics and journalists.
Local advocates say fines of this size are roughly 30 times a journalist’s monthly salary.
According to Armenia’s legal information system, Datalex, Pashinyan’s claim is against Anna Gevorgyan, administrator of the Hayakan Zham page and Iravunq Tert LLC, which operates a news website and Facebook page.
The posts Pashinyan is suing for alleged, among other things, that the couple split because they had accumulated ‘large capital’ they wanted to ‘legalise on paper’, and that Hakobyan was being freed from asset declaration requirements as part of the separation process. They also claimed that as part of the separation the couple’s main property and money would be kept in the EU, and that Hakobyan had bought a house in central Paris for €5.7 million ($6.3 million).
The posts also referred to Hakobyan’s visits to Switzerland in 2018–2020, describing them as secretive and linking them to the country’s banking secrecy. They cited an unnamed Central Bank employee as saying that one should ‘look at the money flows’ to understand the trips.
The exact posts are the following:
‘Anna and Nikol have accumulated large capital that they now want to legalise on paper’.
‘While they lived in the same house, Anna was obliged to submit an asset declaration. With this story, Anna was freed from filling out declarations, and now they have already started the process of transferring their capital into Anna’s name’.
‘They will not have anything in Armenia; the main property and money will be kept in EU territory’.
‘Anna has already bought a large house in central Paris, the price of which was €5.7 million [$6.3 million]’.
‘If you recall, between 2018 and 2020, Anna Hakobyan frequently visited Switzerland. These visits generally remained secret, and the purpose of her trips to that country was unknown. Switzerland is world-renowned for its banking secrecy; it is precisely there that the funds of those who have plundered the country often end up. A Central Bank employee told us: ‘‘If you want to understand why Anna Hakobyan goes to Switzerland, look at the financial flows’’. The difference is enormous. It’s interesting to wonder what percentage of these funds Anna Hakobyan is connected to’.
Pashinyan’s claim describes all of these statements as false and defamatory.
What does Pashinyan want?
Pashinyan wants the court to order both respondents, within five working days of a ruling entering into force, to publish a retraction on the same platforms where the original posts were published. The claim specifies the wording of the retraction, which would state that the information ‘defames Nikol Pashinyan, is false, and does not correspond to reality’.
The claim also sets conditions for how the retraction should appear. It must be visible to all users, remain online without a time limit, be no less prominent in placement, font size and style than the original posts, and contain no commentary from the respondents or third parties. If publication on the Facebook pages proves impossible, he asks that it be printed in a newspaper with a circulation of at least 5,000 copies sold across Armenia.
Pashinyan is also seeking ֏4 million ($11,000) from the two respondents jointly as compensation for non-pecuniary damage.
***************************************************
3- Foreigners face higher costs and stricter requirements to obtain residency in Armenia
JAMnews
From 1 November, foreigners in Armenia have had to apply for residency permits entirely online. The government has also increased the state fees applicants must pay.
A temporary residence permit now costs 150,000 drams ($418), up from 105,000 drams ($293). A permanent residence permit now costs 250,000 drams ($698), compared with 135,000 drams ($377) previously. Applicants will not receive a refund if the authorities reject their application.
The Migration and Citizenship Service says the number of people seeking residence permits in Armenia has recently increased.
For example, Armenia granted residence permits to 10,561 foreigners in the first half of 2026, compared with 6,656 during the same period in 2025. That represents a 59% increase. Russian citizens make up the largest group among those who received temporary or permanent residence permits.
Analyst Artem Yerkanyan believes that Armenia is regulating the inflow of foreign nationals in line with its own interests.
He explains that making it harder to obtain residency clearly shows that the country is shifting its priorities from quantity to quality.
However, he sees no reason to believe that Armenia will stop attracting people relocating from abroad, particularly from Russia.
“For the overwhelming majority of Russian relocants, this reform will not be a life-changing ordeal. They will be able to adapt easily to the new conditions,” Yerkanyan said, pointing to the rules that apply within the Eurasian Economic Union.
Russia leads the EAEU, whose members include Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Armenia. The union operates a customs framework that guarantees the free movement of labour, goods, services and capital.
Foreign nationals can obtain temporary residency if they have grounds to stay in Armenia for at least one year. These include studying, employment, family circumstances, business activities, Armenian ancestry or other grounds recognised by law.
Foreigners can qualify for permanent residency if they are married to an Armenian citizen, have a close relative who holds Armenian citizenship or have a close relative with special residency status. However, applicants must also have accommodation and sufficient means of subsistence, and must have lived in Armenia for at least three years. Applicants of Armenian ancestry or those who run a business in the country can also qualify for permanent residency.
Special residency status will no longer be granted: what is changing?
The changes, which took effect on 1 November, affect not only state fees but also the eligibility criteria for residency and the procedures for processing applications.
The Interior Ministry says temporary residence permits will now be valid for up to one year, while permanent residence permits will last five years.
The grounds for obtaining permanent residency include:
Armenian ethnicity;
making investments in Armenia;
providing exceptional services to the country;
having family ties or running a business in Armenia, subject to additional legal requirements.
From now on, Armenia will have only two types of residency status: temporary and permanent.
The authorities will no longer grant special residency status. However, those who already hold it will retain all their rights and obligations until their status expires.
Until 1 November 2026, Armenia also granted a special residency status valid for 10 years. The prime minister awarded it to foreign nationals of Armenian descent, as well as foreigners engaged in economic or cultural activities in Armenia. They received a special Armenian passport that allowed them to enter and live in Armenia without an entry visa.
People with special residency status enjoyed the same rights and freedoms as Armenian citizens and had the same obligations. The only exception was that they could not vote. They were also exempt from compulsory military service in the Armenian Armed Forces.
Applicants must now submit residence permit applications through a single online platform. The authorities will make decisions within 30 days.
“EAEU regulations will remain in force” – deputy interior minister
Armenia’s Deputy Interior Minister Armen Ghazaryan said that citizens of Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) member states remain subject to special rules. These reflect the union’s principle of free movement of labour.
As a result, EAEU citizens do not need special permits to work in another member state.
“This provision remains in force. Throughout their employment in Armenia, citizens of EAEU member states – for example, Russia or Kyrgyzstan – are considered to be legally residing in the country.”
According to Ghazaryan, once EAEU citizens obtain a document confirming the legality of their stay in Armenia, they enjoy the same rights as other foreign nationals legally residing in the country.
The document confirming their legal stay costs 30,000 drams ($83).
The deputy minister stressed the importance of digitising procedures for granting residency on the basis of employment or education. He noted that study ranks second among the reasons foreign nationals apply for residency in Armenia. Employment accounts for the largest number of applications.
He also said the government plans to introduce a new type of visa – a work visa – to make it easier for people to enter Armenia. It will complement the existing visa categories: visitor, official, diplomatic and transit visas.
Comment
Analyst Artem Yerkanyan notes that the changes which took effect on 1 November will primarily affect foreigners engaged in economic activities in Armenia.
He points out that, previously, a foreign national could obtain residency by registering as an individual entrepreneur and paying minimal tax. Under the new rules, applicants will have to:
“Invest a more substantial amount in their business – either maintain a bank account balance of at least 1 million drams ($2,793) or provide proof of turnover over the previous 60 days;
In addition, if a foreign national is a co-founder of a limited liability company, its registered capital must amount to at least 2 million drams ($5,586).”
As for Russian citizens, the expert noted that they will continue to benefit from the privileges available to citizens of EAEU member states. In particular, Russians can stay in Armenia for 180 days a year without restrictions.
“Moreover, if they take up employment in Armenia under an employment contract, they will no longer need additional permits. They will only have to pay the fees and taxes required by law,” he added.
Yerkanyan believes that Russian relocants will be able to adapt to the new rules after the necessary consultations.
“They should approach these changes with understanding, as they reflect Armenia’s national interests. Armenia is not the only country reforming its legislation. Kazakhstan, for example, has taken a similar path, and its rules are considerably stricter.”
According to Yerkanyan, the changes to the residency application process reflect both Armenia’s transition to biometric passports and its efforts to liberalise the visa regime with the European Union. In other words, the EU has driven these changes through its requirements.
He believes countries around the world are now seeking to attract migrants who are “law-abiding, economically active, competent and well-educated”:
“In this respect, Armenia is in a fairly advantageous position, because the migrants arriving here – Russians, as well as Indians and Iranians – are not ‘problematic’ migrants.”
In his view, Europe, by contrast, faces serious threats from the arrival of “problematic” migrants. However, he stresses that Armenia should also approach migration with greater caution.
“Until recently, the Russians arriving in Armenia were self-sufficient IT specialists. But if Russia does announce mobilisation, less affluent people may try to move to Armenia. They are more likely to create additional problems for the country than to contribute to the state budget.”
***************************************************
4- Turkey Uses AI and Other Tech to Claw Back 100 Looted Antiquities from the US
By Brian Boucher, ARTnews.com
Turkey’s Culture Ministry took a victory lap at the Istanbul
Archaeological Museums on Monday, presenting some 200 cultural artifacts that
it reclaimed from the US, reports Anadolu Ajansı. The event also marked the
opening of the show “No Escape: Boubon,” spotlighting Turkey’s efforts to
combat the unlawful trafficking of cultural heritage.
Archaeological Museums on Monday, presenting some 200 cultural artifacts that
it reclaimed from the US, reports Anadolu Ajansı. The event also marked the
opening of the show “No Escape: Boubon,” spotlighting Turkey’s efforts to
combat the unlawful trafficking of cultural heritage.
A focus of the presentation was bronze statues from the
ancient city of Boubon in Burdur, southwestern Turkey. The site was illegally
excavated in the 1960s, the statues dismantled and scattered among various
countries. Excavations at the site resumed in 2023 and are ongoing.
ancient city of Boubon in Burdur, southwestern Turkey. The site was illegally
excavated in the 1960s, the statues dismantled and scattered among various
countries. Excavations at the site resumed in 2023 and are ongoing.
The greatest number of artifacts, some 44, were terracotta
architectural panels from Duver in Burdur, dating to 700–480 BCE. There were
also 40 artifacts from the Horoztepe archaeological site, in Tokat province, a
portrait from the ancient city of Aphrodisias, and theatrical masks and goddess
statuettes.
architectural panels from Duver in Burdur, dating to 700–480 BCE. There were
also 40 artifacts from the Horoztepe archaeological site, in Tokat province, a
portrait from the ancient city of Aphrodisias, and theatrical masks and goddess
statuettes.
In attendance were Turkey’s culture minister, Mehmet Nuri
Ersoy, and Manhattan district attorney Matthew Bogdanos. New York’s Antiquities
Trafficking Unit (ATU) has recovered some 6,452 looted antiquities, said
Bogdanos, including 276 originating from Turkey. Bogdanos established the ATU
in 2017.
Ersoy, and Manhattan district attorney Matthew Bogdanos. New York’s Antiquities
Trafficking Unit (ATU) has recovered some 6,452 looted antiquities, said
Bogdanos, including 276 originating from Turkey. Bogdanos established the ATU
in 2017.
Last year, the Cleveland Museum of Art agreed to surrender a
statue of Marcus Aurelius to be repatriated to Turkey. The ATU had at that time
seized 15 looted antiquities from Boubon, 14 of which had been repatriated,
collectively valued at almost $80 million.
statue of Marcus Aurelius to be repatriated to Turkey. The ATU had at that time
seized 15 looted antiquities from Boubon, 14 of which had been repatriated,
collectively valued at almost $80 million.
Three technologies were used in the effort to recover the
100 objects unveiled Monday, reports Tech Times. Lead isotope geochemistry can
prove where ancient bronze was smelted. Geometric mold-matching determines
whether a sculpture belonged to a specific pedestal. And an AI platform called
TraceART scans global auction sites and social media for trafficked Turkish
objects. The Ministry of Culture and Tourism developed TraceART and began using
it in 2025. Items flagged by the AI are reviewed by experts. One early hit: two
16th-century Iznik tiles clawed back from a UK auction house just this year.
100 objects unveiled Monday, reports Tech Times. Lead isotope geochemistry can
prove where ancient bronze was smelted. Geometric mold-matching determines
whether a sculpture belonged to a specific pedestal. And an AI platform called
TraceART scans global auction sites and social media for trafficked Turkish
objects. The Ministry of Culture and Tourism developed TraceART and began using
it in 2025. Items flagged by the AI are reviewed by experts. One early hit: two
16th-century Iznik tiles clawed back from a UK auction house just this year.
Included in the exhibition are four portraits of Roman
emperors whose statues once stood at Boubon’s Sebasteion, a monumental display
dedicated to the Roman imperial family, notes Tech Times. The bronze sculptures,
looted and broken apart in the 1960s, had found their way to US institutions
including the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Cleveland Museum of Art, and the
J. Paul Getty Museum. The objects were connected to the ancient site through
lead isotope analysis; matching the statues’ feet to imprints in the pedestals;
and research by professors and the work of journalists including Turkey’s Özgen
Acar as well as Graham Bowley and Tom Mashberg of the New York Times.
emperors whose statues once stood at Boubon’s Sebasteion, a monumental display
dedicated to the Roman imperial family, notes Tech Times. The bronze sculptures,
looted and broken apart in the 1960s, had found their way to US institutions
including the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Cleveland Museum of Art, and the
J. Paul Getty Museum. The objects were connected to the ancient site through
lead isotope analysis; matching the statues’ feet to imprints in the pedestals;
and research by professors and the work of journalists including Turkey’s Özgen
Acar as well as Graham Bowley and Tom Mashberg of the New York Times.
The handover on Monday traces back to when an American
auction house listed Anatolian artifacts for sale. When Turkey’s Ministry of
Culture flagged them and made a case to the Manhattan District Attorney and US
Department of Homeland Security Investigations, the items were returned.
auction house listed Anatolian artifacts for sale. When Turkey’s Ministry of
Culture flagged them and made a case to the Manhattan District Attorney and US
Department of Homeland Security Investigations, the items were returned.
Turkey achieved the repatriation of some 180 cultural
artifacts in 2025 alone, notes Tech Times, bringing the total since 1980 to
more than 26,700. The ministry is still pursuing an ancient marble torso called
the Old Fisherman, in the holdings of the Altes Museum in Berlin, and dozens of
Iznik tiles residing at the Louvre, in Paris.
artifacts in 2025 alone, notes Tech Times, bringing the total since 1980 to
more than 26,700. The ministry is still pursuing an ancient marble torso called
the Old Fisherman, in the holdings of the Altes Museum in Berlin, and dozens of
Iznik tiles residing at the Louvre, in Paris.
“We will keep tracing cultural artifacts illegally taken
from Anatolia and working to bring them back to their rightful home through
scientific, legal and diplomatic efforts,” said Ersoy on Monday.
from Anatolia and working to bring them back to their rightful home through
scientific, legal and diplomatic efforts,” said Ersoy on Monday.
***************************************************
5- Daron Acemoglu on the Armenian Genocide, Democracy, and AI
TARPERAK21
By V.T.
In an interview given on October 30, 2026, for Bloomberg’s *The Mishal Husain Show*, Nobel Prize-winning economist Daron Acemoglu reflects on his childhood in Turkey, his Armenian heritage, and his family’s untold past. He also discusses the crisis of liberal democracy, economic inequality, and the growing influence of tech giants.
The occasion for the interview is Acemoglu’s new book, *What Happened to Liberal Democracy: Remaking a Politics of Shared Prosperity*. However, the conversation also reveals a little-known aspect of Acemoglu’s family history: the long-standing silence surrounding the Armenian Genocide, as well as the experiences that contributed to the shaping of his academic interests.
Childhood in Turkey and Armenian Identity
Acemoglu grew up in Turkey and was still an adolescent when the military coup took place in 1980. He was around 13 years old at the time. The years following the coup were marked by political repression and a military presence—factors that, by his own account, had a significant impact on his youth.
As a member of the Armenian minority, he also experienced the hostile attitude held by certain circles toward Armenians. He recalls that his father had left his university position. Although the family enjoyed relatively secure economic circumstances, the political climate did not leave them unaffected.
In response to a question from Huseyin regarding the extent to which his Armenian identity and his experiences living in Turkey influenced his academic interests, Acemoglu explains that they played a certain role—particularly in shaping the direction of his early research.
He attributes his interest in authoritarianism, democracy, economic institutions, and the consequences of political power, in part, to that period of his life. He also believes that these experiences contributed to his interest in liberal ideas—ideas that value pluralism and the coexistence of diverse perspectives.
The Armenian Genocide: An Untold Family History
In one of the more personal segments of the interview, Mishal Husain asks about Acemoglu’s ancestors, inquiring whether they had witnessed the tragic events of the early twentieth century. Acemoglu clarifies that he is not referring to his grandparents, but rather to the generation of their parents.
When the interviewer asks whether this past was passed down as family memory, the economist explains that the answer is both yes and no.
In Turkey, the Armenian Genocide was such a sensitive subject that people often did not speak about it, even within their own families. His own family was no exception. Acemoglu recounts that he had general knowledge about the Armenian Genocide and the history of the Ottoman Empire during that period. However, he was unaware of his own family’s history—specifically, how his ancestors had survived the catastrophe. This account reached him much later, when the father of one of his relatives wrote down the family’s past, and the text was subsequently passed on to him.
Hüseyin asks whether it was a story of a narrow escape. Acemoglu confirms that it was, though he does not elaborate on the circumstances of the flight, nor does he specify the locations or describe the route his ancestors took.
The economist notes that he had begun reading about the history of the Ottoman Empire during his late adolescence. However, he only became acquainted with the written account containing his family’s history after the age of 25. He notes that learning this history in adulthood did not have as profound an emotional impact on him as it might have had, had he heard it at the age of ten. This testimony reveals an important aspect of the transmission of historical memory: one may be aware of the history of one’s people while remaining entirely unacquainted with the experiences lived by one’s own family.
In Acemoğlu’s case, the silence was linked to the social and political sensitivities surrounding the Armenian Genocide in Turkey. Yet, the family’s history was not entirely lost; it had been preserved through a written account, reaching the next generation decades later.
The Crisis of Democracy: A Consequence of Economic Inequality
The conversation shifts from personal life to Acemoglu’s primary scholarly and political concerns. According to the economist, the current crisis of liberal democracy cannot be explained solely by the rise of right-wing populist movements. Part of the cause must also be sought among those political forces that, for decades, have presented themselves as defenders of democracy and liberal values. Acemoglu specifically criticizes the economic priorities of center-left political forces and their gradual estrangement from the working classes.
In recent decades, the transition from an industrial economy to one based on knowledge and services has not yielded the same outcomes for all segments of society. Urban populations with university education have benefited significantly from these new economic conditions, whereas many workers—particularly those without higher education—have faced stagnant incomes, job insecurity, and a weakening of their economic standing.
Acemoglu points to the decline in real wages among men in the United States who lack a university education as one of the consequences of these economic shifts. He observes that, over time, this economic discontent has also evolved into political discontent. When significant segments of the citizenry feel that economic development is not improving their lives, their trust in democratic institutions weakens.
Equality, Identity Politics, and the Value of Work
Acemoglu’s critique also extends to certain manifestations of identity politics. This concept refers to political approaches that focus on people’s national, ethnic, religious, gender, or other identities, with the aim of protecting their rights and combating discrimination. While he supports the fight against discrimination and the necessity of social inclusion, he harbors reservations regarding the methods by which certain diversity, equality, and inclusion initiatives are implemented. In his view, when such policies are imposed from the top down—without taking into account the concerns of various segments of society—they can create new forms of conflict. The economist warns that political struggles centered on cultural issues should not relegate concerns regarding wages, working conditions, and economic justice to the background.
At the core of his economic proposals lies the objective of mitigating the existing imbalance between labor and capital. Acemoglu criticizes tax systems that treat labor income and capital income differently—a structure that sometimes makes it more profitable for companies to replace human labor with machinery. He advocates for a revision of the tax system that would reduce this inequality and create a fairer basis for state revenue. However, he emphasizes that economic policy cannot succeed through tax reforms alone. Democratic societies must also rediscover a sense of social justice, mutual obligation, and collective well-being.
Artificial Intelligence: In What Direction Is Development Heading?
One of the key parts of the interview concerns the development of artificial intelligence (AI) and its economic consequences. Acemoglu warns that the great enthusiasm surrounding AI should not be confused with the actual impact it has already had on the economy. Although AI-based conversational systems have become widespread, their integration into production and work processes remains limited—with the exception of certain sectors, such as computer programming.
However, his primary concern lies in the current trajectory of AI development. Acemoglu criticizes the tendency among major technology companies to prioritize the creation of general-purpose artificial intelligence that either matches or surpasses human capabilities. In his view, this objective absorbs vast amounts of capital and scientific potential—resources that could otherwise be directed toward developing tools that enhance workers’ abilities, boost productivity, and address the genuine needs of society. Under this approach, technological progress should not be measured solely by the capabilities of machines or their potential to replace human labor. It is equally important to consider the extent to which new technologies contribute to workers’ productivity, economic well-being, and social participation. In other words, for Acemoglu, the fundamental question is not merely how much AI will develop, but rather whom that development will serve.
Tech Giants and Democratic Oversight
Acemoglu also expresses concern regarding the growing social and political influence wielded by the leaders of major technology companies. He criticizes the tendency to treat statements by Elon Musk, Sam Altman, and other tech entrepreneurs as authoritative guides for the future of society. In his view, the media should approach the ideas and promises of these entrepreneurs with greater critical scrutiny, rather than granting them a privileged position to steer public discourse.
The economist’s concern goes beyond the influence of individual leaders. The issue is also that the technological decisions shaping the future of society are increasingly concentrated in the hands of a limited number of companies—without adequate democratic oversight. This concern extends to social media platforms as well. Acemoglu criticizes their algorithmic systems, which prioritize content that captures and sustains users’ attention while eliciting strong reactions.
He advocates for limiting—or even banning—the operation of such recommendation systems. His proposal is not directed against freedom of speech, but rather against the practices through which social media platforms disseminate certain types of content—practices that can exacerbate societal polarization. Following the same logic, he advocates for measures to limit the influence of money on politics, including a proposal to ban political spending by corporations. According to Acemoglu, the concentration of economic power, control over the information environment, and the influence of money on political decision-making are interconnected issues that can weaken democratic engagement.
The Future of Democracy: In the Hands of Society
The various parts of the interview converge around a central idea: democracy cannot remain healthy if economic and political power continues to be concentrated in the hands of a small number of influential individuals and institutions. For Acemoglu, the restoration of democracy is not limited to elections or a change in political leadership. It requires a re-evaluation of the goals of economic development, the value of labor, the direction of technological innovation, and the participation of citizens in public decision-making.
The alternative he proposes involves strengthening economic justice, social cohesion, and democratic participation. From this perspective, a notable connection can be observed between Acemoglu’s personal history and his scholarly concerns. The experience of an Armenian youth growing up in Turkey—amidst political pressures and the silence within families regarding the Armenian Genocide—illustrates the diverse realities of a society where the conditions of power can affect not only people’s daily lives but also their capacity to speak and pass on their own history.
The economist’s subsequent research focuses on a broader, more comprehensive question: how can institutions be created that limit the concentration of power and provide citizens with a genuine opportunity to participate in shaping the future of their society?
Consequently, the central issue arising from Acemoglu’s interview concerns not merely democracy or artificial intelligence, but the right to determine the future of society. Will economic and technological progress serve society as a whole, or will it continue to concentrate wealth and power in the hands of a limited number of people?
According to the approach presented by Acemoglu, the answer to this question should not be left solely to political leaders, the economic elite, or tech giants.
***************************************************
6- Alleged Turkish Crime Boss Assassinated Inside Spanish Hospital Room
Mekin Büyükdeniz was recovering from a recent assassination attempt when a hitman infiltrated his hospital ward in a highly coordinated early-morning attack and fatally shot him.
***************************************************
7- Glendale’s First Armenian High School to Be Established after $9.6 Million Donation by Alex and Lina Megerdechian
*************************************************************
If you wish to read daily
updated Armenian news and commentary,
Please send me your email
address: [email protected]
Website:
TheCaliforniaCourier.com
**************************************************************
—
Disclaimer: This article was contributed and translated into English by Jalatian Sonya. While we strive for quality, the views and accuracy of the content remain the responsibility of the contributor. Please verify all facts independently before reposting or citing.
Direct link to this article: https://www.armenianclub.com/2026/11/09/california-courier-online-nov-9-2026/