March: 30, 2026
“We are living in very difficult and amazing times, when you could not imagine in your most fantastic dream that one day they will not allow you to talk about Artsakh, they will try to close the issue of Artsakh in every possible way. right now we have a situation where courage is required to speak about Artsakh.” 168 Artsakh public figure Nare Simonyan raised his concerns about Artsakh during the TV program “Zara has a question”.
He regretfully noted that not only the enemies outside our borders, but also the authorities of the Republic of Armenia are interested in closing the Artsakh issue.
“They seem to have become the primary beneficiary of closing the Artsakh issue with the Aliyev regime,” he added.
While presenting his vision of the return to Artsakh, Nare Simonyan emphasized: “At this stage, we understand that we cannot return to Artsakh in 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, but it is very important to talk about that right, to raise the voice that about 150,000 Artsakh citizens have very important basic rights that are violated. it is the rights to live and create in their homeland, it is also the right to self-determination, which is less talked about, but should be talked about.
On different international platforms, we should talk about the right of return, talk about our violated rights and let the international community or international actors offer options, because when you don’t talk about your problem, everyone can consider that problem closed.”
To the observation that the raising of these just concerns is often rebuked by the authorities, for example, when Pashinyan considers it harmful to talk about ethnic cleansing in Artsakh, or the famous episode of the subway, as well as when the authorities avoid the word “Artsakh”, our interlocutor responded that all this is the result of both internal political and external coercion.
“In the domestic political field, the authorities of the day are trying to find internal enemies and consolidate their electorate against those enemies, those enemies are the primary bearers of national values and national identity: Artsakh, the Armenian Apostolic Church… Nikol Pashinyan uses this technology and, on the one hand, by inventing internal enemies, softens the perception of the external enemy, which is fatal and threatens us every day from the outside, and on the other hand, he mobilizes his electorate before the elections against the internal enemy.
The fact that he considers the people of Artsakh as enemies, calling them brothers and sisters, has been seen many times, and, yes, also in the episode of the subway, when the daughter of the hero of Artsakh showed in a very detailed, very appropriate and competent way that the people of Artsakh did not run away, the people of Artsakh fought, we saw that the theses that were previously circulated on the scale of fakes, sometimes also of his henchmen, Papoyan, Alensimonyan and others, Pashinyan’s mouth said: “Billions of taxes, you lived at the expense of our taxes, you left and ran away” etc., said the public figure from Artsakh.
To the clarification of where the peace agendas will take us, if the issues related to Artsakh are kept quiet, Nare Simonyan replied that by keeping these matters quiet, this is a very clear and clear way not to peace, but to bring new problems for us.
“Not talking about Artsakh, we are opening the way to Syunik, the Syunik corridor, Tavush, the so-called “return” of Azerbaijanis, Yerevan, etc. In other words, by renouncing our rights, we also give the enemy the opportunity to present new demands.
It is clear that this is not the way to peace. mere “peace” was chosen as a brand in the internal political struggle, but on the other hand, it is absurd that a government that has brought the most wars and the most defeats throughout history is talking about peace.
And already the authorities do not even dare to threaten their citizens with war. if we are not elected, there will be a war, even as if they say a month for the war. What does this mean, an agreement with the enemy, what are you hiding?
I am sure that with the way that the authorities of the day are leading us, we will not have peace, but will even more endanger the existence of the Republic of Armenia.
This is not the way of peace, this is the way of elimination,” concluded Nare Simonyan.
Details in the video
—
The working tool left in Nikol Pashinyan’s hands is to scare people with war
March: 30, 2026
Nikol Pashinyan announces almost on a daily basis that “if the CP does not form a constitutional majority in the elections, then there will be a war.”
He made another such statement this morning on Facebook live, during which he called on the people to “stand up for peace”. Parallel to all this, Nikol Pashinyan and his teammates do not miss the opportunity to declare that “there is no longer peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan”, without answering the question whether they should remain in power forever so that there is peace in Armenia.
To what extent can Nikol Pashinyan’s threat to the people “there will be a war if I am not in power” affect people’s psychology, can this affect people’s orientation in the elections?
Psychologist Karine Nalchajyan, answering these questions, he said: at this pre-election stage, the tools that Nikol Pashinyan has in his hands are mostly outdated: wooing people, pretending to be a common man, etc.
“The working tool left in Nikol Pashinyan’s hands is to scare people with war. Fear is one of the deepest, most archaic feelings, and war, especially after seeing so much destruction and blood, people probably don’t want war the most.
So, out of the theses put forward by Nikol Pashinyan, only this can work to some extent, but I will not say that it will be very influential. Those people whose consciousness and ability to analyze are in place are not blinded by emotions, they understand very well that this power and peace are as far apart as the earth and the sky. of 168.am Karine Nalchajyan said in a conversation with
According to the psychologist, the situation in which Nikol Pashinyan has put himself, together with his team, is dangerous, because they do not say it openly, but they are already mocking the people.
“All this is from the genre of absurdity, this is a mockery of people, it says: ‘Do whatever you want, your song is sung.’ It is understandable, this causes laughter, disgust and other emotions, and at the same time, Nikol Pashinyan is not idle, he is doing business, he is advancing his plans, and that is in a hurry, for which he occupies the society with nonsense.
So, this behavior of his is already very dangerous, one should not despise and disgust him. With all this, they spoil the collective image of the Armenian nation, reduce the self-esteem of the Armenian people,” Karine Nalchajyan added.
Continuing, the psychologist said that the “color revolutions” that are happening in the world are preceded by a decrease in the self-esteem of nations, therefore, the pranks that are happening today are not done as an end in themselves.
“Today, many of us, don’t we, hear when people say: what kind of nation are we, what kind of people are we? This is what this government wants. Our collective opposition should work on this and raise the self-esteem of our people. If the authorities need the voice of the people, that’s why they took to the streets, that’s why people should understand that their voice is important and with that voice they can change things in this country,” emphasized Karine Nalchajyan.
—
RFE/RL – Iran Thanks Armenia For ‘Humanitarian Support’
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has thanked Armenia for what he described as humanitarian support provided to Iran during its ongoing war with the United States and Israel.
“The support of the Armenian government and people to the Iranian people in the evacuation of Iranians and humanitarian aid is highly commendable,” he said in a weekend post on X. “The centuries-old ties between Iran and Armenia have once again shown their strength in a difficult time, and these brotherly steps will remain in the memory of the Iranian people.”
Araghchi’s Armenian-language tweet followed his phone call with Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan. According to the Iranian Foreign Ministry, the two men discussed “consequences of the continued US and the Israeli military aggression against Iran.” In a statement, the ministry said Mirzoyan offered Yerevan’s condolences over the deaths of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, other officials as well as civilians killed in U.S.-Israeli air strikes.
The Armenian Foreign Ministry released a much shorter readout of the call. It said Mirzoyan discussed with Araghchi “possibilities for resolving the situation” around Iran and “humanitarian issues.” It did not elaborate.
The Armenian government has reacted cautiously to the war, declining to criticize the U.S.-Israeli military campaign. Mirzoyan said last week that it has delivered medicines and other humanitarian assistance to the Islamic Republic. He did not reveal the volume of the aid.
The government had not officially reported the shipment. Its critics claimed that it was afraid of displeasing the U.S.
Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian’s administration has sought to reorient Armenia towards the West in recent years. It agreed last year to open a U.S.-administered transit corridor for Azerbaijan what would run along Armenia’s strategic border with Iran.
In the months leading up to the ongoing war, Iranian officials spoke out against the transit arrangement. They feared that it could undermine Armenian control of the border and lead to U.S. security presence there. Yerevan sought to allay their concerns. Some observers believe that Tehran will now be even more opposed to the planed Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity.
—
RFE/RL – Pashinian’s Visit To Yerevan Church Followed By Arrests
- Naira Bulghadarian
Two teenage brothers and another man were arrested on Sunday after confronting Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian at a church in Yerevan.
Surrounded by his bodyguards and aides, Pashinian unexpectedly arrived at the packed St. Anne’s Church during a Palm Sunday Mass held there. He began making his way out of it shortly afterwards, with the bodyguards clearing the way for his passage. They upset a young worshipper who told them not to push him and said he wants to keep “standing in the middle” of the church.
“Don’t look at me like that,” the man, subsequently identified as Davit Minasian, then told Pashinian before attempting to slap him on the shoulder.
Videos of the incident showed a Pashinian bodyguard knocking down one of the brothers moments later. Meanwhile, the premier signaled to his entourage to not react to the man and to carry on. They left the church amid angry cries from other believers.
Minasian was arrested right after the liturgy along with his twin brother Mikael and another citizen. Footage posted online showed several police officers dragging the 18-year-old high school student from the church courtyard in downtown Yerevan.
All three men remained in police custody but were not formally charged with any crime as of Monday evening. Another law-enforcement agency, the Investigative Committee, said it launched a criminal investigation into hooliganism committed against a state official performing their duties or engaging in political activities.
Vartuhi Elbakian, a lawyer representing the brothers, insisted that they did not commit any crimes when she spoke to reporters outside the Interior Ministry building in Yerevan picketed by their classmates and the latter’s parents demanding their release.
“The boys to go to Mass every Sunday,” she said. “They are very pious.”
Elbakian also insisted that the Minasians “have no connection” to the third detainee, opposition activist Gevorg Gevorgian. The latter stood next to them during the incident.
Pashinian’s loyalists blamed it on Catholicos Garegin II, the supreme head of the Armenian Apostolic Church whom Pashinian has been controversially trying to depose. The chief of the prime minister’s staff, Arayik Harutiunian, accused Garegin of turning the church into a political “sect.” Opposition figures countered that the incident was the result of what they see as Pashinian’s provocative behavior.
Pashinian has spent the last few weekends touring various parts of Armenia and talking to people in the streets on what look like campaign trips connected with the June 7 parliamentary elections. Some of those citizens caused him to lose his temper by openly denouncing his policies or complaining about his government’s track record.
In the most scandalous of those incidents caught on camera, Pashinian raged at a female refugee from Nagorno-Karabakh who blamed him for Azerbaijan’s recapture of the region that forced its ethnic Armenian population to flee to Armenia. The premier branded the Karabakh Armenian as “fugitives” and said they have no moral right to denounce him, sparking a storm of criticism from not only his detractors but even some sympathizers. He later apologized for his outburst.
—
News: Study finds Armenian alphabet structurally closer to ancient Ethiopic Ge
Addis Ababa – A new study has found that the Armenian alphabet may be structurally closer to the ancient Ethiopic Ge’ez than previously understood, shedding fresh light on possible historical connections between cultures in Africa and the Caucasus.
The research, conducted by scientists at San Diego State University and reported by Phys.org, used artificial intelligence to examine similarities among ancient writing systems. The findings were published in the journal Digital Scholarship in the Humanities.
Using a dataset of more than 28,000 Ethiopic characters, researchers trained a computer model to recognize structural features such as curves, straight lines, and angles. The system, which had no access to historical or cultural context, then compared these patterns with letters from Armenian, Georgian, and Caucasian Albanian alphabets.
The analysis showed that Armenian letters exhibited the strongest structural similarity to Ge’ez, followed by Caucasian Albanian with moderate resemblance, while Georgian showed weaker and less consistent similarities. By contrast, the Latin alphabet demonstrated significantly lower similarity, reinforcing the distinctiveness of the observed patterns.
“Our aim was to move beyond visual impressions that are difficult to test or replicate,” said Sam Kassegne, the study’s lead investigator. “By making our criteria explicit and mathematical, we introduced an objective computational approach that is easily reproducible.”
One notable finding is that the Armenian script appears nearly as similar to Ge’ez as Ge’ez is to its own earlier forms, suggesting the resemblance may not be coincidental. Both writing systems developed around the 4th to 5th centuries CE—a period marked by documented travel between Ethiopia and parts of the Middle East, including Jerusalem, Egypt, and Syria. Historical accounts also indicate that Mesrop Mashtots, credited with creating the Armenian alphabet, traveled within the region.
“What makes the research significant is that computational geometry and historical scholarship converge on the same scripts and time period,” said Daniel Zemene, the study’s first author.
While the researchers caution that structural similarity does not prove direct borrowing, the findings strengthen arguments that cultural contact and exchange may have influenced the development of writing systems across regions. The study also highlights the growing role of artificial intelligence in uncovering patterns in historical and linguistic research. AS
https://addisstandard.com/study-finds-armenian-alphabet-structurally-closer-to-ancient-ethiopic-geez-revealing-links-between-african-and-caucasus-scripts/
—
Why America’s AI Push in Armenia Faces Political and Security Risks
US AI investment in Armenia risks national security vulnerabilities without safeguards against political capture and chip diversion.
When Vice President JD Vance visited Armenia and Azerbaijan last month, much of the commentary focused on the military agreements and diplomatic signals. The more consequential development attracted less scrutiny: Washington’s approval to export next-generation Nvidia Blackwell processors for the construction of Armenia’s first large-scale artificial intelligence (AI) supercomputing center, built and operated by Firebird. This deal is nothing short of an act of geopolitical commitment in a country whose political direction is openly contested and where the surrounding risks have not been carefully enough distinguished. This distinction matters because the two principal risks facing the Firebird facility are structurally different, operate through different mechanisms, and require different responses. Washington should be asking two separate questions: What happens if Armenia’s next government is aligned with Moscow? And what happens if chips are diverted to Russia regardless of who governs?
The Firebird AI Data Center That Washington Approved in Armenia
The Firebird supercomputing center is a 100-megawatt facility expected to come online in Q2 2026. It will be the first project of its kind in the South Caucasus and, on paper, represents Armenia’s formal entry into the high-end global compute economy. The allocation structure is worth examining closely. Twenty percent of capacity is reserved for Armenian entities; eighty percent is contracted to US firms operating in the region. Put simply, this distribution is both commercial and geopolitical. By tying the majority of the facility’s output to American corporate demand, Washington embeds Armenia into US-linked AI supply chains while cultivating domestic capacity. This is especially the case given that the facility sits alongside a broader package of cloud cooperation agreements between Armenian entities and Amazon.
Taken together, these initiatives are designed to position Armenia as a Western-aligned technology hub in the South Caucasus, and to do so at a moment when Yerevan is actively recalibrating its relationship with Moscow. That strategic logic is sound. The question is whether Washington has adequately priced in the political environment in which this infrastructure will operate.
Armenia’s Elections and Constitutional Reform Create Political Risk
Armenia is heading into a June election whose only certain outcome is constitutional change. Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has pledged a post-election referendum as part of an effort to secure a peace deal with Azerbaijan and to probably revise the institutional relationship between the Armenian state and the Armenian Apostolic Church. If Pashinyan wins and proceeds along this path, the facility’s operating environment is likely to stabilize. A peace deal with Azerbaijan would ease regional security pressures, potentially unlock transit corridors, and reinforce Western investor confidence.
The more disruptive scenario is an electoral upset. Samvel Karapetian, a Russian-Armenian billionaire, and his newly formed Strong Armenia movement have pledged to rewrite the constitution if they win a parliamentary majority. That pledge carries a specific implication that has received insufficient attention: Karapetian currently holds Russian citizenship, which under Armenia’s existing constitution makes him ineligible to serve as prime minister or as a member of parliament. Constitutional revision could remove that constraint. Washington is therefore embedding high-value AI infrastructure in a country where a credible electoral contender holds Russian citizenship, has pledged constitutional revision in ways that would benefit himself, and has built his commercial fortune substantially within Russian business networks.
Armenia’s Risk Landscape: Political Capture and Diversion
The political capture risk is about what a Karapetian-led government could do to the facility’s operating environment, not through overt expropriation, but through the gradual reconfiguration of the legal and regulatory framework surrounding it.
In fact, a critical legal precedent is already being established by the current government. Pashinyan has moved to revoke the operating license of Electric Networks of Armenia (ENA), the country’s electricity distribution network, which is owned by Karapetian, by invoking Article 60 of the constitution and proceeding to nationalize the enterprise. The justification advanced centers on alleged governance violations, financial irregularities, and energy security concerns.
The merits of these particular claims are not the point. Nor are the potential political motivations of Pashinyan’s team for going after Karapetian’s most valuable asset in the country. Rather, the key point is the legal mechanism that is being deployed. The Armenian state is establishing, in active practice, that privately owned infrastructure can be reclassified as a strategic national asset and brought under state control through constitutional provisions without abandoning formal rule-of-law procedures, and without requiring the kind of naked expropriation that would immediately trigger international arbitration. In other words, a legal architecture for any future strategic asset seizure is being stress-tested right now against Karapetian’s own company.
This, in turn, could set a precedent that would be readily available to any future government. A Karapetian administration, or a successor with similar interests, could apply the same reasoning to other infrastructure it deems strategically significant. High-value AI compute, with its obvious national-security dimensions, would be a plausible candidate. In such a scenario, the threshold question would not be whether such a move is legally conceivable. By deciding to go ahead with the nationalization of ENA, Pashinyan has already answered this.
The implications, however, extend beyond ownership. Effective control over sensitive compute infrastructure depends on personnel access as much as on property rights. Replacing system administrators, maintenance contractors, or executive leadership with actors aligned with Russian commercial interests could introduce exposure at the level of firmware updates and credential management. Shifts in the regulatory environment, including adjusted foreign-ownership safeguards, revised emergency powers, or reclassified security-review thresholds, could facilitate exactly this kind of gradual penetration of operational authority.
In addition, Russia retains additional leverage that amplifies these concerns. Armenia remains dependent on Russian energy supplies, grain, and transit infrastructure. Russia also maintains a military base at Gyumri. In a scenario of heightened pressure, legal mechanisms framed under national-security provisions could be deployed to justify forced partnerships or compelled data access. To be sure, this is not a high-probability scenario, but it is within the range of plausible contingencies that serious risk planning should address.
There is then the all too real risk of diversion, which is distinct from political capture since it does not depend on who wins the June election. Rather, it exists as a background condition under any Armenian government, including the current one.
In recent years, Armenia has functioned as one of several conduit routes, alongside Kyrgyzstan, through which sanctioned Western goods have entered Russia. The recent case of Cygnet Texkimp, a United Kingdom-based carbon fiber producer, illustrates the supply-chain opacity involved. UK export authorities suspended shipments to an Armenian buyer, a company called Rydena, following concerns about links to Russian military networks.
Admittedly, Firebird is a US-registered company with no known ties, direct or indirect, to Russia, which limits the analogy. However, Moscow’s formal and informal commercial presence in segments of Armenia’s economy, combined with established smuggling networks, means that the possibility of advanced chips being redirected cannot be dismissed as implausible. The materialization of this risk, moreover, does not require a hostile government in Yerevan. It only requires that private actors with access to the facility’s supply chains have incentives to divert components, and that oversight mechanisms are not sufficiently robust to detect or deter it. Given the scale of what is at stake—next-generation Blackwell processors—it is reasonable to assume that incentives will be there.
What Can Be Done: Protecting AI Infrastructure
Since the two identified risks are different, they each require a separate mitigation framework.
Against political capture, the priority should be contractual and structural. Agreements should include automatic suspension clauses tied to ownership changes in the facility’s governance, constitutional revisions that materially alter foreign-investment protections, or interference with inspection rights. US approval rights over critical subcontractors and key personnel appointments would also reduce the scope for gradual operational penetration.
For diversion-related risks, on the other hand, rigorous end-use verification, enhanced export-compliance monitoring specific to the facility, and sustained intelligence-sharing with Armenian customs and law-enforcement agencies constitute some of the most viable options that ought to be explored by relevant US agencies.
The longer-term solution to both risks is strategic presence via the recently established Tech Corps rather than defensive contracting alone. Embedding American technical personnel, training a local AI workforce to US professional standards, and building durable institutional relationships within Armenia’s technology sector would raise the cost of any future attempt to reorient the facility’s operational environment. Human networks are harder, albeit by no means impossible, to legislate away than contractual provisions. Washington should treat this facility not as a one-time export approval but as the foundation of an ongoing institutional relationship, one that does not depend on any single electoral outcome.
A Test Case Worth Getting Right: National Security Risks in AI Infrastructure
By all counts, the Firebird facility is a meaningful act of geopolitical commitment. However, commitment is not the same as strategic clarity. Washington has embedded high-value AI infrastructure in Armenia at precisely the moment when the country’s political trajectory, constitutional framework, and geopolitical alignment are all in motion simultaneously.
This does not mean that the export approval is a mistake. Armenia’s drift away from Russian dependency is a rare strategic opportunity, and technological embedding is a legitimate tool for reinforcing it. However, the value of this embedding depends on whether the surrounding risks are accurately identified and managed. If Washington manages to articulate the right mitigatory frameworks, Armenia could serve as a model for how Washington uses AI infrastructure partnerships to anchor emerging partners within American technological ecosystems. If it does not, the Firebird facility risks becoming an early case study of what happens when geopolitical and commercial ambitions could potentially endanger national security.
About the Author: Nima Khorrami
Nima Khorrami is an analyst at NSSG, a strategic risk consultancy firm, where he works on Iran and South Caucasus affairs. He is also a research associate at the Arctic Institute. Previously, he has worked at UK Defense Forum and OSCE Academy, amongst others, and has written for a number of publications and think tanks, including MEI in Washington, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, The Guardian, and War on the Rocks.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/techland/why-americas-ai-push-in-armenia-faces-political-and-security-risks
—
Strong Armenia rejects defeatist agenda and presents 6-point security plan: St
The Strong Armenia party has rejected a defeatist agenda and presented a six-point security plan.
The party has signed memoranda of understanding with Greek and Dutch companies aimed at border automation and the professional training of soldiers.
“We are beginning work toward a lasting peace with the best security team in Armenia,” the news release said.
—
One who will resist the temptation to be proclaimed King on Palm Sunday and be ready
March: 29, 2026
The one who will resist the temptation to be proclaimed king on Palm Sunday and will be ready with all his being to bear the path of Charcharanats crucifixion, he will also reach the VICTORY OF THE RESURRECTION. Bagrat Srbazan’s new letter from prison
“Blessed is the coming in the name of the Lord…
Palm Sunday is the wonderful and glorious entry of the Lord into Jerusalem. It is a wonderful opportunity for us individually, personally and collectively to blossom, to renew, to open our hearts as a spiritual Jerusalem for the sanctifying entry and dwelling of the Lord.
You know, however, that Palm Sunday is followed by the Great or Charcharanats (suffering) week: denial, betrayal, false trial, crucifixion, but ultimately Resurrection and Victory.
However, it would be more correct to say that Palm Sunday precedes Charcharanats council, which is also a reflection of our life. life is not only Palm Sunday, and not only Charcharanats council, but the one who will resist the temptation to be proclaimed king on Palm Sunday and will be ready with all his being to bear the road of Charcharanats crucifixion, he will also reach the VICTORY OF RESURRECTION.
Our Lord’s way was and is, and ours is a choice to follow that way or not.
May the blessing of our Lord be with you all, dear ones, with the Flowering of our lives and the dwelling of Jesus in our hearts and the guidance and grace to guide our lives.
Remember, Palm Sunday is the bitter way to reach the VICTORY OF THE RESURRECTION by way of crucifixion, and that
VICTORY HAS NO OTHER CHOICE…”
With love and prayers
Prisoner of the homeland
Prince Bagrat Galstanyan
29.03.2026
—
The last days of Joseph Stalin’s life. exceptional detail of health conditions and treatment
March: 29, 2026
On March 1, 1953, Joseph Stalin was at his country house in Kuntsevo, Moscow region. On the same day, he was found by the security guard Lozgachyov, lying on the ground in the small dining room. The next day, on the morning of March 2, doctors arrived at the summer house.
On March 4, Stalin’s illness was officially announced. Information about his health was regularly broadcast on the radio.
The information mentioned the symptoms of Stalin’s illness: loss of consciousness, stroke, paralysis of the body and other complications. In the same period, newspapers throughout the Soviet Union began reporting details of Stalin’s illness, health, and treatment on a daily basis. Even local newspapers in Soviet Armenia, regardless of their content, were flooded with news about Stalin’s health. The Soviet Armenian press reported all the details related to Stalin.
“In 1953 On the night of March 2, I. V. “Stalin suffered a sudden hemorrhage in the brain, which involved vital parts of the brain, resulting in paralysis of the right leg and right arm, with loss of consciousness and the ability to speak.” (“Soviet studentship”, 1953, N 10).
After the event that took place on March 2, Stalin’s health condition as of March 4 was already mentioned in detail. Newspapers literally wrote all the details.
“During March 4, medical measures were taken to introduce oxygen, give camphor preparations, caffeine, strophantin and glucose. A second time, blood was taken using leeches. In connection with high temperature and high leukocytosis, penicillin treatment is intensified. On the night of March 5, I. V. Stalin’s health condition remains critical. The patient is in a state of soporosis (deep anesthesia). Her nervous regulation of breathing as well as her heart remain severely impaired.” (Ibid.).
“At around 2 o’clock in the night of March 4, I. V. Stalin’s health condition remains critical. There are significant breathing disorders, the rate of breathing is up to 36 per minute, the rhythm of breathing is irregular with regular long pauses. There is an increased pulse rate up to 120 beats per minute, complete arrhythmia, the maximum blood pressure is 220, the minimum is 120.” (Ibid.).
After all these details, newspapers are already writing about Stalin’s death. Apart from that, full articles are already being published about how Stalin’s health began to deteriorate, how he was during those few days. The preliminary, official version of death and the complete medical conclusion are also written.
“Medical conclusion of I. V. About Stalin’s illness and death
On the night of March 2nd, I. V. Stalin suffered a cerebral hemorrhage (in his left hemisphere) due to hypertension and arteriosclerosis. This resulted in paralysis of the right half of the body and permanent loss of consciousness.
On the very first day of the disease, signs of breathing disorders due to the disturbance of the function of the nervous centers were found. These violations increased day by day, they had the character of so-called periodic breathing with long pauses (Cheyne-Stokes breathing). On the night of March 3rd, respiratory disturbances began to take on a threatening character from time to time.
Significant changes in the cardiovascular system were also detected from the very beginning of the disease, namely, high blood pressure, frequent and irregular pulse rhythm (radiating arrhythmia) and heart enlargement. In connection with the growing disorders of breathing and blood circulation, signs of oxygen deficiency appeared already on March 3. From the first day of the illness, the temperature increased and high leukocytosis began to be observed, which could indicate the development of foci of inflammation in the lungs.
On the last day of the illness, along with a severe deterioration of the general condition, repeated attacks of severe acute cardiovascular failure (collapse) began. The electrocardiographic examination revealed an acute blood circulation disorder in the coronary vessels of the heart with the formation of focal lesions of the myocardium.
In the second half of the afternoon on March 5, the patient’s condition began to deteriorate particularly quickly, breathing became shallow and very frequent, the pulse rate reached 140-150 beats per minute, the bleeding of the pulse dropped. 50 minutes after 21:00, as a result of increasing cardiovascular and respiratory failure phenomena, I.V. Stalin is dead.” (“Soviet studentship”, 1953, N 10).
Stalin’s death was officially announced on the radio on the morning of March 6, 1953. March 6-9 is declared mourning. The funeral takes place on March 9. Stalin is buried in the Kremlin Wall Pantheon.
Z. I hesitated
—
Pashinyan says majority will back peace agenda in upcoming elections
Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said he is confident that a majority of voters will support the government’s peace agenda in the upcoming elections.
Speaking during a meeting with residents in Yerevan’s Malatya-Sebastia administrative district, Pashinyan addressed concerns about the peace process with Azerbaijan and the risk of renewed war, stressing that the established peace must be upheld with public support.
A resident said the prime minister’s remarks about the possibility of war is causing fear and creating an impression that war would be inevitable if the current government were not returned to power. In response, Pashinyan said the issue is not about an individual but about a political course.
“The political forces known to you are advocating for a review of the peace process, and that is very dangerous. We, on the contrary, are saying that peace has been established and are calling on the people to stand up for peace,” Nikol Pashinyan said.
Pashinyan also referred to agreements signed in Washington on Aug. 8, 2025, and said he had addressed the public on Aug. 18 to announce the establishment of peace.
Responding to claims that he had previously warned of war if he did not remain in power, Pashinyan said he had not made such a statement.
He added that he expects voters to endorse the government’s approach at the polls. “I am confident that the majority of our people will go out on June 7 and stand up for peace, and we will make that peace more institutional,” he said.
Published by Armenpress, original at
—