Author: Frangulian Shushan

Political scientist Vazgen Hovhannisyan in my opinion, a sober person cannot have such an idea that the people of Artsakh have fled.

“A moral person will never have such a question that the people of Artsakh have fled. The people of Artsakh were subjected to ethnic cleansing. 2023 The threat of genocide hung over the heads of the people of Artsakh like a sword of Damocles, those people simply had no other option and were subjected to ethnic cleansing, which is one of the tools of the genocide.

As for Pashinyan’s statement that he did not surrender Artsakh, the November 9 statement was signed on his own initiative, that is, the war was defeated by that person, and then he created such conditions, as a result of which Azerbaijan, implementing its consistent policy, subjected the Artsakh state to dismantling and subjected the people to genocide with the tools of ethnic cleansing.

In other words, the fault lies with the military-political leadership of the day, which signed the statement of November 9 and after that tried to leave the Artsakh issue little by little.” 168TV “Review” he said during the program, emphasizing that as long as Pashinyan is in power, we will constantly hear the narrative that he is not guilty and that Artsakh was surrendered in September 2023.

Pashinyan does not say Artsakh in 2023. it was handed over in September, but he says that it was handed over by the previous authorities, Artsakh was part of Azerbaijan for 30 years, etc., Vazgen Hovhannisyan responded like this: “Oh, that’s delusional, what does it mean, the previous authorities handed it over?” A normal historian will write in the history book that by 2018 The Armenian units controlled not only the territory of the Republic of Armenia, but also the Republic of Artsakh, which was the subject of negotiations between the Republic of Armenia and Azerbaijan. After 2018, the narratives changed, after which we saw a war, after the war, the gradual dissolution of Artsakh by Azerbaijan…”

He emphasized that Pashinyan and his teammates are promoting the Azeri agenda, according to which Armenia should have a miserable status, where the decision-maker is not the RA citizen and the RA state interest, but the service of Azerbaijan’s strategic interests. “I continue to insist that Nikol Pashinyan’s stay in power every day leads to the dissolution and dismantling of the Armenian state.”

According to him, when Pashinyan declares that if he is not re-elected, there will be a war, then it should be looked at with Azerbaijan’s logic. “Since Pashinyan’s government is collaborationist, Azerbaijan is not using a military tool at the moment, because Nikol Pashinyan meets all the demands.

When will Azerbaijan use a military tool, i.e. pay a higher price to get something? at a time when there will be a containment policy against him. In the case of Pashinyan, they do not use force, because just as Pashinyan strangled Artsakh and handed it over to the enemy, he will strangle RA in the same way. In other words, the map that he is walking around in his hand, tomorrow if Azerbaijan decides to subject Syunik to military occupation, he will walk around with a smaller map.”

Details in the 168TV video

—

Nikol Pashinyan, with his recent statements about the “new September war” and the need to obtain a constitutional majority in the National Assembly, “reveals the demonic motive of reproducing his power.” 168TVof Revue expressed such an opinion on the air of the program Political scientist Suren Surenyants, chairman of the “Democratic Alternative” party։

According to his assessment, Nikol Pashinyan is “in a panic” because he was presented with the data of closed sociological polls, according to which the defeat of his party in the upcoming elections is almost predetermined.

According to the political scientist, Nikol Pashinyan cannot bring a single fact that would testify that the programs, slogans or statements of any of the three forces he mentioned: “Strong Armenia” led by Samvel Karapetyan, “Armenia” bloc led by Robert Kocharyan, or the “Offer to Armenia” initiative consolidated around Gagik Tsarukyan, contain a risk of resumption of war.

“On the contrary, these forces are so realistic that they did not even include the return of Artsakh citizens in their plans, considering it unreal in this situation, a manifestation of excessive exploitation of people’s feelings.

Secondly, I can say on behalf of our power: “Democratic alternative”, “Prosperous Armenia”, “Offer to Armenia” that we have never said that in case of coming to power, we will abandon the international obligations undertaken by the country. Yes, both in the document of November 9, and especially in the TRIPP project, there are many points that are not to our liking and were criticized by us, but we did not talk about canceling those documents, therefore, swinging a sword against the geopolitical centers, but using their opportunities to improve them,” explained Suren Surenyants.

The political scientist observes, where is Nikol Pashinyan’s claim that “peace is irreversible” if it can be endangered by just one event?

“If that peace can be endangered because of just one election, just one internal political event, then Nikol Pashinyan’s entire campaign bursts like a balloon, which means that there is no irreversible peace. I have the impression that Nikol Pashinyan, talking about the “war party”, is describing, giving the exact epicrisis of pre-war Nikol Pashinyan,” commented the political scientist.

According to Surenyants, Pashinyan is targeting the above-mentioned three opposition forces for three reasons. “He is trying to artificially put everyone in one basket in order to give a green light to repression for state bodies, but in that case he has to consider whether he can digest it or not. Secondly, he is talking about the use of the Moldovan scenario, and thirdly, he is in a panic, that is, he was presented with closed polls, some of which I also know, and he realized that his defeat in the upcoming elections is almost predetermined. is”.

The political scientist considers the emphasis on the need to obtain a “constitutional majority” of the CP in Nikol Pashinyan’s statement more remarkable.

«As a matter of fact, Nikol Pashinyan reveals the demonic motive for the reproduction of his power, that is, he directly implies that he enjoys Aliyev’s patronage in the matter of the reproduction of power, on one condition, if he undertakes to change the Constitution of Armenia in accordance with Baku’s demands. Only in this case, 2/3 is necessary in the parliament.

Ahavasik, as he said in Tavush in April 2024 at the Voskepar school, that “if we do not fulfill these demands of Azerbaijan, there will be a war by the end of the week”, in fact, nothing has changed since August 8, after TRIPP. Now he says: “I am reproducing myself in order to change the Constitution of Armenia at the request of Aliyev”, i.e. “to turn the Republic of Armenia into an Azerbaijani sub-state. if we don’t do it, there will be a war.” Nothing has changed. Do you see that the assurances of the CP members are lies and empty?” Surenyants declared.

According to our interlocutor, Pashinyan’s dry account of what he negotiated is that “either he will continue to be Ilham Aliyev’s ideal vassal, or the country is threatened with war.”

Surenyants emphasizes that the fight is not between the false dilemma of “peace or war”, but between different models of peace.

“This is Nikol Pashinyan’s blackmail. Of course, it is beneficial for Aliyev to have such a government as the current government, that they will fulfill all his demands without opening their mouths, in the end, a joint Armenian-Azerbaijani state will be created on the territory of the Republic of Armenia, which will only be formalistically Armenian, but in reality we will lose the civilizational basis of statehood. But I am deeply confident that in the presence of a serious government guided by state interests, we can manage a number of risks and at least guarantee the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the Republic of Armenia.

Yes, it cannot happen that any new government will completely neutralize the consequences of the Forty-Four Day War and negotiate from the position of the winner, but on the other hand, any new government can stop the process of continuous, seemingly endless capitulation. The seemingly endless process of capitulation will have to stop somewhere. This is what distinguishes Nikol Pashinyan from other political forces,” adds Suren Surenyants.

The political scientist recalls the well-known story of the Kikuyu in Tumanyan’s fairy tale “The End of Evil”, noting that Nikol Pashinyan has already brought several wars to Armenia as a result of this policy.

“He wants to be hurt. Let me repeat once more: he is not the head of the government of Armenia, he is Aliyev’s six-member or ideal vassal. If I say something wrong, let him explain why he necessarily connects the “war-peace” dilemma with the thesis of the constitutional majority of the Communist Party.

Addressing the voters at the end of the conversation, the leader of the “Democratic Alternative” party announced. “If you want war and the loss of the Republic of Armenia, choose Nikol Pashinyan. War and Nikol Pashinyan are synonymous. I call on the voters to choose the Republic of Armenia and guaranteed peace, for that they can choose any of the opposition parties according to their preference on the ballot.”

Let’s remind that on March 22, while summing up the Yerevan day of intra-party campaign, Nikol Pashinyan announced in a conversation with the party members. “There will be a war in September, and a catastrophic war at that, if the “Civil Agreement” party, I’m not saying wins the elections, does not get a constitutional majority.”

Full interview in the video.

—

Import of 3.6 million dollars from Azerbaijan and export of 0 drams. January “records”

For years, despite the lack of diplomatic relations and closed borders, Armenia has conducted a large volume of trade with Turkey in a mediated way. But that trade was exclusively one-sided.

A large amount of Turkish goods were imported and sold in Armenia. Instead, there were almost no exports from Armenia to Turkey. Their volumes, compared to imports of Turkish goods, were insignificant. Barely a few hundred thousand or a few million dollars a year. However, Turkish imports amounted to hundreds of millions of dollars.

Turkey’s economy has benefited from it. Through the imports of Turkish goods, Armenia made an indirect investment of several hundreds of millions of dollars in the Turkish economy every year. In return, he received cheap products, which often created problems for domestic manufacturers. Not being able to withstand the competition, they were pushed out. Despite this circumstance, the authorities did nothing to protect the local producer, to increase the competitive opportunities.

Even today, under the closed border conditions, a large amount of imports from Turkey are carried out to Armenia. Although they have been talking about opening the border for a long time, the border remains closed. Sometimes it opens and closes again on different occasions.

They are waiting when the current rulers of Armenia will fully satisfy all the demands of Azerbaijan in order to open the Armenian-Turkish border. However, it is still a big question, is it more beneficial for Armenia to be closed or to be opened?

Turkey does not feel bad in the Armenian market even under the conditions of closed border.

Last year, more than 368 million dollars worth of goods were imported from that country, 32 million more than the previous year. In the conditions of a sharp decline in the general trade of Armenia, imports from Turkey have increased by almost 10 percent.

The flow of Turkish goods to Armenia is maintained this year as well. In January, 25.5 million dollars were imported. Last year there were only 16.7 million. An increase of more than 52 percent was registered.

And as always, unofficial trade relations with Turkey have been one-sided. Compared to 25.5 million imports, exports are zero. Despite the “fraternal” aspirations of today’s rulers of Armenia with the Turks, Armenian products continued to have no place in the Turkish market.

Last year, barely 473 thousand dollars were exported to Turkey, only 60 thousand dollars more than 1 year ago.

Can you imagine what kind of “serious” progress has been made in the case of exports of Armenian products from Armenia to Turkey?

After solving the issues of unilateral trade with Turkey “fundamentally”, they have now moved on to the implementation of trade with Azerbaijan. And again in a unilateral mode. There have been cases all over the world that Azerbaijani goods are imported from Azerbaijan to Armenia.

For dozens of years, the Armenian-Azerbaijani trade index has been zero in official statistics. Of course, episodic cases were recorded in individual years, but they both appeared and quickly disappeared from the official statistics.

At the price of handing over Artsakh, deporting the people of Artsakh, depriving them of their homes, they finally achieved their long-time dream: they trade with Azerbaijan.

Azerbaijani oil products have been imported to Armenia since the end of last year.

The first batch arrived in December. What’s more, after that the prices of gasoline decreased a little, they raised such enthusiasm as if they had brought back Artsakh. The cheapening of gasoline was linked to the import of petroleum products worth several hundred thousand Azerbaijani dollars. Later, of course, it turned out that they also faked it, the decrease in prices was the result of changes in the international markets, not the import of Azerbaijani gasoline.

According to official statistics, trade with Azerbaijan in December last year amounted to 873.4 thousand dollars. That was the whole year’s trade, exclusively in one direction. Azerbaijani oil products were brought.

In January of this year, trade of around 2.7 million dollars was carried out and again in the form of import of oil products.

After January, more Azerbaijani oil products were imported to Armenia, but these data are still not included in the official statistical indicators.

In December of last year and January of this year, within 2 months, imports from Azerbaijan to Armenia amounted to almost 3.6 million dollars. Instead, zero drams were exported from Armenia.

Such trade relations were established between Armenia and Azerbaijan through the efforts of CP members. When they ask why Armenian products are not exported to Azerbaijan, they tell fairy tales, they talk about exchanges of product lists, but the result is zero.

There are no Armenian products in both the Turkish and Azerbaijani markets, instead, along with the expansion of the presence of Turkish products, Azerbaijan is now also conveniently located in the Armenian market, which is greatly supported by the rulers of Armenia. They are trying to create the illusion of establishing mutual trade relations with unilateral trade.

What will be the end of this will be seen later.

HAKOB KOCHARYAN

—

A few days ago, lawyer Roman Yeritsyan warned that the sister of a fallen soldier from Artsakh, the mother of five children, was arrested in front of her children by several policemen from her residence in Nor Hachn and transferred to the investigative department of Dilijan, just because she called for violence against Nikol Pashinyan in her comments on the Facebook platform.

Minister of Internal Affairs Arpine Sargsyan in a briefing with journalists today in the parliament said, that “he is aware of that incident, it is worrying, they will talk to the woman, and there will be an appropriate reaction from the Ministry”.

Today 168.am from Roman Yeritsyan I wondered if the Ministry of Internal Affairs had already spoken with the woman from Artsakh, what equivalent reaction does he expect from the Ministry of Internal Affairs?

“At least as of this moment, no one has spoken to that woman, I should not have mentioned all this in order for there to be a reaction from the Ministry of Internal Affairs. It’s just that the police should have been guided by the law and apart from the law, by conscience and inner conviction, which seems to be lacking in the police,” said the lawyer.

He reminded that the police went to the woman’s house at night, in the presence of a young child, without clarifying anything, without providing any information, which is a constitutional violation of criminal procedure, they deprived the woman of her freedom and transferred her to Dilijan police station.

“What will be the reaction of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs? Will it be a formal demonstration or will it give a reaction, but the conclusion of that reaction is already understandable for all of us?”

I assure you that this is not the way the police work, but it was an act of intimidation, they knew very well that this woman would cover everything. The only goal is not to target the government on Facebook and other public platforms, that’s why the police thought that if they scare someone, it won’t happen again. But if you noticed, even under my post, people were not afraid and expressed themselves.

The woman’s child is in a serious psychological condition after that incident, the woman too, she is a person who lost her home and place, whose brother was killed. They break into a man’s house in the middle of the night for a post he made just a year ago, and take him to the police.

Of course, the psychological condition of an Artsakh citizen is strong, he has gone through many things, but these situations have an effect,” emphasized Roman Yeritsyan.

—

More and more common todaywho gets «debanking» the new word. It even appeared in explanatory dictionaries. Means be deprived to the person from banking services: But not because the actual or potential customer violates some laws related to money, for example, engages in money laundering or transfers money to terrorists. Such a person cannot access their bank accounts. they must be blocked in accordance with applicable laws.

No, it is about depriving a person of access to banking services for political reasons. Or because of the person behavior defies the bank’s notions of what is good and what is bad (by the way, some banks have their own corporate value system, which may differ from the general system adopted in the country):

It seems that banks should be apolitical and tolerant of their customers, serving everyone regardless of nationality, religion, political views and behavior (except when the behavior is in clear conflict with existing laws).

Looks like «debanking» start the termto spread widely In 2023, when in the UK flared up scandal՝ associated with the famous English politician Nigel Farage around։

Being a member of the European Parliament since the end of the 1990s, he stood out for his sharp criticism of European integration within the framework of the European Union and the Eurozone. And became one of the most active initiators of Brexit. At the end of December 2019, the British newspaper Financial Times included Farage in its published list of 50 people who “made the face of the decade”. Presumably, Faraj had many political opponents. But unexpectedly it turned out that he has opponents not only among politicians, but also from the banking world.

In June 2023, Coutts, a member of the NatWest group, blocked Nigel Farage’s personal and business accounts without explanation. At first, the politician assumed that this happened because of the news of receiving money from the Russian RT channel. Farage later said he had been denied access to the accounts because the bank had identified him as a “political figure”.

According to Farage, the 36-page document attributes to him a friendship with former US President Donald Trump, and also discusses his political views, his stance on LGBT people and his attitude towards Russia. Moreover, the politician claims that he was characterized as a “racist and xenophobe”.

The scandal was huge. By the way, not only Farage was upset, but also many other politicians who realized that they are also not immune to the whims of bankers. The confrontation between Farage and the bank ended in a victory for the politician. Even British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak condemned the blocking of accounts due to political views. The scandal led to the resignations of NatWest Group chief executive Alison Rose and Coutts bank chief Peter Flavell.

Farage’s aforementioned story reminded us that debanking has happened in the UK before. Several Muslim organizations, in particular, have recalled that In 2014, HSBC closed their accounts, probably due to a religious factor: Bank executives said the decision to close the accounts was “absolutely unrelated to race or religion.”

Here is another similar case in the foggy Albion Isles. In 2016, the Co-operative Bank closed the bank accounts of Friends of Al-Aqsa, Palestine Solidarity Campaigns and about 25 other Palestine-related organizations. The Independent reported in the same 2016 that the decision to close the accounts was made without any explanation. At that time the Govt to announce was that it empowered banks to reduce the risks associated with possible questionable financing or money laundering.

There are many similar cases in continental Europe as well. in April 2023 former lobbyist Frédéric Baldan initiated a criminal case against the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, in the investigative chamber of Liège. Baldan accused von der Leyen of abuse of official position.

We are talking about the famous “Pfizergate” scandal. The essence of the scandal is that there was a secret SMS correspondence between von der Leyen and the head of Pfizer, Albert Burla, which led to a dubious deal to supply 1.8 billion doses of a vaccine against the coronavirus, worth about 35 billion euros. In June 2023, Baldan’s lobbyist certification was revoked. Two years later, he reported on Platform X that his accounts at ING and Nagelmackers banks in Namur (Belgium) had been closed.

Baldan published a letter in which the bank informed him about the decision to close the accounts. According to Baldan, the closing of the accounts affected not only his personal bank account, but also the accounts of his consulting firm, his household, as well as his five-year-old son’s savings account.

The loudest scandal related to debanking in Germany took place in November last year. At the same time, several German cooperative banks have closed the accounts of the opposition party Alternative for Germany, which has serious chances of winning the next Bundestag elections.:

Some banks brazenly announce that they will pursue a debanking policy based on their understanding of what is good and what is bad. From 1 November 2023 National Australia Bank (NAB, Australian Banking Group, one of the big four banks in Australia) threateningly stated: will block accounts of citizens publishing unauthorized statements on the Internet.

In Canada, in 2022, a wave of closing accounts rose, which can be called debanking. At that time, the country was engulfed in protests by citizens and companies regarding all kinds of bans and restrictions, which were allegedly introduced to fight against the “COVID pandemic”. The prohibitions and restrictions were illegal in nature. In response to the protest, Canadian banks blocked at least 76 accounts of the protesters, worth a total of C$3.2 million.mb: Later, the courts recognized them as illegal.

There were not few cases of debanking in the USA. On August 7, 2025, Trump issued an executive order calling for an end to debanking and punishing those who unfairly cut off legitimate customers from the banking system.

Here is the most recent and perhaps the most resonant story on the subject of bank debanking. The most recent, since it started in the second half of January 2026. Most resonant for at least two reasons. Because Donald Trump, the 47th president of the USA, appears in it as a victim of debanking. And the bank insulting the US president is JPMorgan, the largest bank in the United States։

All this is quite detailed is described “What is debanking and why is Trump suing JPMorgan over it?” in the article. On January 22, CNN and Bloomberg reported that Trump filed a $5 billion lawsuit against JPMorgan Chase Bank and its CEO Jamie Dimon because the bank stopped providing banking services to him personally, Donald Trump, and his businesses in 2021.

The denial of services, the lawsuit states, was due to political reasons. The mentioned article states: “Trump’s legal team not only claims that JPMorgan made the wrong decision, but accuses the bank of turning financial infrastructure into a political tool.”

The closing of the accounts has caused significant financial and reputational damage to Donald Trump. Moreover, as if on the sidelines, the US president explained that he filed the lawsuit not only to compensate for his own losses, but also to create a convincing precedent and prevent future debanking in America that violates the US Constitution.

This precedent, Trump supporters say, should strengthen the president’s August executive order mentioned above. This ordinance prohibits banks and other financial institutions from denying or restricting services based on political or religious beliefs. The order directs federal bank regulators to remove “reputation risk” provisions from their guidelines, reinstate customers who have been illegally deprived of bank accounts, investigate past discriminatory practices and refer religious denials to the attorney general.

Jamie Dimon denies wrongdoing and believes there is an element of “personal vendetta” in the lawsuit. After all, Trump could address his claim only to the bank, and he is also addressing it to the head of the bank, Jamie Dimon. The decision regarding Trump was “subjective” and “politically motivated.” Furthermore, Dimon is a member of the Democratic Party and thus a political opponent of Republican Trump.

Those who agree with Dimon’s opinion about “personal revenge” pay attention to such a “trifle”; US President Donald Trump announced on January 10th the introduction of a fixed maximum interest rate of 10% on credit cards, starting on the anniversary of his inauguration on January 20th. Dimon responded to this initiative of the president.

Speaking at the World Economic Forum (WEF) meeting in Davos, he said Trump’s proposed restriction would lead to an “economic disaster”. Probably, it angered the owner of the White House. Because the lawsuit against JPMorgan Chase Bank and Jamie Dimon appeared literally one day after the speech of the head of the bank in Davos.

By the way, Trump said that in 2021 he was debanked not only by JPMorgan Chase, but also by Bank of America. However, the head of the second bank is afraid to criticize Trump, hoping that he will be able to avoid the trial.

The lawyers of the Trump team emphasize that the guilt of JPMorgan Chase bank can be proven even on the basis that the blocking of Trump and his business in 2021 was done in gross violation of the bank’s own internal rules.

Some observers believe Trump’s lawsuit against a major Wall Street bank is unprecedented in US history. No owner of the White House has dared to do this. It is believed that the 47th US president wants to control the US banking system: By the way, at the beginning of November, the US government started an investigation against JPMorgan Chase by order of the president. The investigation concerned whether the bank provided its customers with fair access to banking services.

JPMorgan what happened at the time was connecting with Trump’s August executive order overhauling bank policies that could have led to customer rejections due to “reputational risks.” Especially given that he has already launched a prosecutorial investigation into US Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, which has a very high chance of escalating into legal proceedings against Powell. of the claim.

For now, experts refrain from evaluating what decision the court will make in this case. Of course, the court’s ruling on Trump’s lawsuit against JPMorgan Chase and Dimon could have far-reaching consequences. The mentioned article concludes:

«If the court considers the idea that a major bank used control of its accounts to punish a sitting president for political reasons, it could open the door to new legal restrictions on how financial institutions manage reputational risks.:

On the other hand, if JPMorgan successfully defends its right to close accounts, the outcome of the case could strengthen banks’ broad powers to decide which customers they serve, even if those decisions affect influential public figures.”

VALENTINE KATASONOV

fondsk.ru

Translation by Zhanna Avetisyan

—