Category: News

Pashinyan Signals ‘Constructive Transformation’ in Armenia–Russia Ties

Tatoyan Vazgen
Commonspace.eu
April 14 2026

Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said relations with Russia are undergoing a “constructive transformation,” following his 1 April meeting with President Vladimir Putin. Speaking at a weekly briefing on 2 April, he said he viewed the process “positively” and stressed that Armenia would “not deviate from the logic of friendly dialogue,” with another meeting expected later in June.

Despite this optimistic tone, the talks in Moscow did not produce agreements on several key issues. One of the main points of disagreement remains Armenia’s railway network, which has been operated by Russia under a concession agreement since 2008. Russian Deputy Prime Minister Aleksei Overchuk said on 2 April that there were “no objective reasons” to transfer control, while Armenian officials argue the current system limits the country’s role in regional transport. Pashinyan has suggested that a third country, such as Kazakhstan, could potentially take over management, but said Armenia would not act “behind Russia’s back or against Russia.”

Energy policy has also emerged as a point of tension. Pashinyan said there was “no basis” for any Russian increase in gas prices, pointing to long-term agreements, after Putin highlighted that Armenia pays significantly less than European countries. The issue led to warnings that Armenia may, in response, leave Russian-led organisations like the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) and the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO), though officials indicated such a step is unlikely.

Moscow reacted critically to such statements. On 8 April, Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova compared the threats to “threatening a hedgehog,” and said she would not “seriously comment on the statements of emotional politicians,” adding that Armenia is responsible for ensuring its own energy security.

Former Armenian president Robert Kocharyan also weighed in on the “Big Politics” podcast. Kocharyan, considered by analysts as a pro-Russian figure, warned that distancing from Russia could disproportionally impact Armenia, as Armenia’s trade, remittances, and labour ties remain heavily dependent on Russia. He added that leaving the EAEU could lead to “economic collapse,” while Russia would “barely notice such a move.” Kocharyan further criticised what he described as an inconsistent foreign policy and cautioned against attempts to balance between Russia and the European Union. In his view, Armenia should refrain from choosing a side, balancing economic relations with its primary market, Russia, and benefiting from ties with the EU.


—

Armenian Church Destroyed in Azerbaijan: The Diocese Denounces a “Cultural Gen

Ekmekjian Janet
Info Vaticana
April 14 2026

The Armenian church of San Santiago, in Stepanakert (Azerbaijan), has been completely destroyed, according to a statement from the Diocese of Artsaj published on April 12, 2026. As reported by Tribune Chrétienne, the destruction of the temple is attributed to the authorities of Azerbaijan, in the context following the total takeover of the territory in 2023.

The diocese, currently taking refuge in Armenia after the forced exodus of the Armenian population, has expressed its “profound sadness” for the loss of a place that for years was the center of the liturgical life of the local Christian community.

A central temple in sacramental life

The church of San Santiago was a spiritual reference point for thousands of faithful who gathered every Sunday for the liturgy and the reception of the Eucharist.

Its destruction means, in the words of the diocese, not only the disappearance of a building, but the elimination of a place where the sacramental life of a community that today finds itself dispersed after its forced departure from the territory was sustained.

Accusations of systematic destruction of Christian heritage

The statement frames this event within a broader series of attacks against Christian religious heritage in Nagorno-Karabakh. The diocese denounces the destruction or profanation of other churches in recent years and speaks of a process carried out in a “systematic, deliberate, and state-level” manner.

In that sense, it qualifies the situation as a “cultural genocide,” considering that there is a will to eliminate all traces of the Armenian Christian presence in the region.

Exile and disappearance of a historical presence

Since September 2023, following the total recovery of the territory by Azerbaijan, the vast majority of the Armenian population has abandoned the area and taken refuge in Armenia.

This displacement has put an end to a Christian presence that dates back centuries. Churches, monasteries, and cemeteries were not only places of worship, but also visible signs of an identity deeply rooted in the history of the Caucasus.

Call in the face of lack of international reaction

The diocese also denounces the lack of response from international organizations, which it accuses of remaining indifferent to the destruction of religious heritage.

According to its leaders, the progressive disappearance of these temples affects not only the Armenian people, but the entire Christian heritage. The loss of these places also raises questions about the protection of religious sites in conflict contexts and about the effective respect for religious freedom.

Deprived of their churches, Armenian faithful today live in exile, with added difficulties for the transmission of the faith, closely linked in their tradition to consecrated places.

The diocese has reiterated its intention to continue demanding justice and has called on the international community to intervene to stop what it considers a continued destruction of the Christian legacy in the region.

—

‘On security, we are in the same boat’: Armenian experts on visit to Azerbaija

Emil Lazarian
JAM News
April 14 2026
  • JAMnews
  • Yerevan

Nineteen representatives of Armenian civil society have returned from the Azerbaijani city of Gabala, where they held another meeting with Azerbaijani counterparts as part of the Peace Bridge initiative. After returning from Azerbaijan, they met with journalists. They outlined what they discussed and what results they achieved.

Areg Kochinyan, a political analyst and head of the Armenian Council analytical centre, coordinates the Armenian side of the initiative. He said the very fact that Armenian and Azerbaijani experts have now met four times marks a significant achievement. He also noted that participants want to continue working together.

“These visits help advance the peace agenda and foster peace between the societies of Armenia and Azerbaijan. To some extent, they also support the peace agenda promoted by the authorities of both countries,” Kochinyan said.

He noted that Azerbaijani colleagues showed interest in the outcome of Armenia’s upcoming parliamentary elections in June.

However, Kochinyan stressed that their questions remained appropriate. He said they recognised that the issue is Armenia’s internal matter and did not try to interfere or influence it in any way, even though “the future of the peace process largely depends on this factor”.

The main points raised during the press conference involved five Armenian co-founders of the initiative. The report also includes impressions from the JAMnews editor in Armenia who joined the trip.

  • ‘Changing Armenia’s constitution is our decision, not others’,’ Pashinyan says in briefing
  • Yerevan discusses the potential for linking energy systems of Armenia and Azerbaijan
  • ‘First economic deal since independence’: Azerbaijani petrol arrives in Armenia

The fourth meeting of the Peace Bridge initiative took place on 10–12 April. Representatives of NGOs, media and analytical centres from both Armenia and Azerbaijan took part. This marked the second visit of Armenian experts to Azerbaijan. The first visit involved five founding members, while the second brought together an expanded group of 19 experts.

Participants alternate the round tables between Armenia and Azerbaijan. During the last two meetings, in both countries, participants did not travel by air. They crossed the interstate land border at the Tavush–Gazakh section instead. This part of the Armenian-Azerbaijani border has already been delimited and demarcated. Participants completed all required border and passport procedures.

After the meeting in Gabala, organisers said it took place in an “atmosphere of constructive dialogue and frank discussions”.

Participants in Gabala also met Hikmet Hajiyev, head of the foreign policy department of the Presidential Administration of Azerbaijan. They discussed regional security, the progress of the peace process and the role of civil society in normalising relations between the two countries.

“There are topics we are not yet ready to discuss”

During a press conference in Yerevan, participants in the Peace Bridge initiative told journalists that discussions in Gabala covered a wide range of issues. They addressed Armenian-Azerbaijani relations in detail. Topics included the peace treaty, the unblocking of communications and potential cooperation between the two countries in various fields.

They told journalists that no topics are formally off-limits. However, they said both sides are not yet ready to discuss some issues in depth.

“Both sides are not yet able to discuss the past. They are not ready. They have not healed their wounds or overcome the pain. This initiative is about the moment when we will be able to address even these very painful issues,” said Naira Sultanyan, director of the Democracy Development Foundation.

Among the topics discussed, political analyst Areg Kochinyan highlighted the potential for cooperation between Armenia and Azerbaijan in hydrocarbons and electricity.

He also said that experts involved in the initiative are developing ideas and proposals to strengthen the peace process. One of these initiatives has already started. It involves a series of joint programmes by the Yerevan and Baku press clubs.

According to Boris Navasardyan, honorary president of the Yerevan Press Club, both Azerbaijani partners and local media show strong interest in the initiative:

“The current atmosphere and the intensity of contacts give grounds for optimism. Once the official Armenian-Azerbaijani format becomes more active, more specific initiatives will follow. These will involve concrete organisations and individuals participating in the 20+20 format of the Peace Bridge initiative. We will see progress in very specific thematic areas.”

Participants in the Peace Bridge initiative also do not rule out the creation of new formats. In particular, they are considering work in separate clusters. This could later include cooperation between business representatives, environmental experts, economists and specialists from other fields in both countries.

“Humanitarian issues should not be politicised”

Naira Sultanyan said Armenian and Azerbaijani partners jointly shape the discussion agenda, without interference from the authorities:

“We mainly focus on three issues. These are the problems that concern us, the obstacles to the peace process, and the opportunities we do not want to miss.”

She stressed that Armenian participants once again raised the issue of detainees held in Azerbaijan, as well as missing persons:

“We had an open and frank discussion. We once again underlined that the issue of detainees does not fit into the logic of the peace process. The process has moved much further ahead. These issues must be resolved to guarantee further progress in the peace process.”

She also said participants are trying to understand how they can help build trust between the sides. The aim is to create an environment where humanitarian issues become “less toxic, are not politicised and are not used as instruments of pressure.”

“Armenia and Azerbaijan face shared challenges”

Representatives of Armenian and Azerbaijani civil society also discussed the regional situation. Political analyst Narek Minasyan said both sides agree on one point. The war in Ukraine on the one hand, and developments around Iran on the other, create serious challenges for the South Caucasus. He described the region as “now effectively an island of stability and peace”.

Participants in the initiative believe it is in the interests of both Yerevan and Baku to prevent further escalation. They want to avoid any expansion of conflict and seek a resolution as soon as possible:

“The Azerbaijani side delivered a fairly clear message on this. In their view, Armenia and Azerbaijan are in the same boat when it comes to security. The regional challenges we face are shared. We therefore need to assess the current situation and try to strengthen it.”

He also stressed that discussions led experts to a shared conclusion. The current level of relations between the two countries has created a certain “security immunity”. Without it, there would be a “significant risk of interference by third countries and an expansion of the geography of the conflict in the region.”

“There are concerns about the implementation of the TRIPP programme”

Experts also discussed how regional developments could affect the implementation of the TRIPP project.

“Trump route for international peace and prosperity” (TRIPP) is a proposed road that will connect Azerbaijan with its exclave of Nakhchivan through Armenian territory.

For several years, Yerevan and Baku failed to reach an agreement on this issue. Azerbaijan demanded a route it referred to as the “Zangezur corridor”. Armenian authorities said they were ready to unblock all transport links. However, they rejected the term “corridor”, as it implies a loss of control and, therefore, sovereignty over the territory.

Only on 8 August, in Washington, did the sides reach an agreement. They agreed that the road would remain under Armenia’s sovereign control. The United States would take part in the unblocking process as a business partner. As a result, the project became known as the “Trump route”, named after the mediator.

“We are trying to understand what solutions are possible if events drag on, if a war in Iran continues, or if TRIPP is suddenly seen as infrastructure that could come under attack during a conflict,” said another participant in the initiative, political analyst Samvel Meliksetyan.

He said both the Armenian and Azerbaijani sides share these concerns. He stressed that the connection with Nakhchivan remains a key issue for Baku:

“The possibility of unblocking depends on efforts from the Armenian side as well. We have become used to closed borders. We have not developed as a transit country. When you are not a transit country, you do not think about road quality in terms of competitiveness.”

Meliksetyan said Armenia needs to develop high-quality transport links and technical solutions to remain competitive. He gave an example from his trip to Gabala. Armenian experts travelled on the Ganja–Gabala train, which runs at around 100 km/h. Train speeds on Armenian railways are significantly lower.

“This is not about forgetting the past”

Areg Kochinyan stressed that representatives of state institutions in both Armenia and Azerbaijan told participants during meetings that peace between the two countries has already been established. At the same time, he rejected accusations that the initiative seeks to erase the tragedies experienced by the two societies:

“The initiative is not about forgetting the past, or changing, adjusting or editing it. It aims to build new narratives and new opportunities alongside existing narratives, history and reality.”

The political analyst said no one can guarantee the success of the initiative or of the peace process as a whole. However, he added that “there will never be peace” without sustained efforts in this direction:

“In my view, even the signing of a peace agreement is not the end point of peace, but the starting point. From that moment, the real process of building peace between societies and shaping genuine peace will begin.”

“An insider’s perspective”

Naira Martikyan, JAMnews editor in Armenia, also took part in the round table. She shared her impressions with colleagues from the Armenian editorial team:

“I will say straight away that my impressions are positive and encouraging. I returned with greater confidence that peace has been established. During the sessions and informal conversations with colleagues, I saw that there is a genuine willingness for peace in Azerbaijan. This was also confirmed by Hikmet Hajiyev, head of the foreign policy department of the Presidential Administration of Azerbaijan:

‘Peace has been established. Azerbaijan fully supports the peace agenda,’ he said.

Moreover, he asked us to convey to our societies that the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan has been resolved.

We are in a unique situation. A war is taking place right next to us, in Iran. At the same time, two neighbouring countries with a long history of conflict are discussing how to build cooperation across a wide range of areas.

After two meetings with Azerbaijani colleagues, I believe this direct and open dialogue benefits both sides. Experts from Armenia and Azerbaijan are putting forward interesting and even unexpected proposals. These ideas could change life in both countries and across the region.

Overall, this is a very positive process. What matters now is that it continues and reaches the stage where ideas turn into practical results.”

—

What Armenian experts’ visit to Azerbaijan means for the region’s peace agend

Markos Nalchajian
JAM News
April 14 2026
  • JAMnews
  • Baku

On 10–12 April, the fourth bilateral meeting under the “Bridge of Peace” initiative took place in Gabala.

Nineteen experts from Armenia travelled to Azerbaijan, along with representatives of media outlets and NGOs. They crossed a formally delimited and demarcated section of the land border. The delegation also included a cameraman from Armenia’s Public Television.

In the organisers’ press releases, the crossing is described as a technical and procedural step, but also as a symbolic stage in the normalisation process.

This was not just a single event. Coordinators framed the border crossing as evidence of a “reality of peace” — a practical test aimed at restoring a sense of normal, everyday relations after conflict.

In other words, the message is that for political agreements to hold, trust between societies must gradually become part of daily life.

What is the “Bridge of Peace” initiative and how did it begin?

The “Bridge of Peace” is presented as a Track 1.5 dialogue format that does not replace official negotiations but complements them. Within this framework, experts, civil society representatives and media actors engage directly, exchange ideas and help prepare their societies for peace.

In the initiative’s press releases, the dialogue is linked to the peace agenda endorsed at the Azerbaijan–Armenia–United States summit held in Washington on 8 August 2025. Following the meeting, the US State Department announced the publication of the final documents, while both Azerbaijan and Armenia released the text of the joint statement on their official platforms.

The first bilateral roundtable took place in Yerevan on 21–22 October 2025. This was followed by a working visit by Armenian representatives to Azerbaijan on 21–22 November 2025. The third meeting was held on 13–14 February 2026 in an expanded format in the Armenian town of Tsaghkadzor.

The fourth meeting in Gabala: agenda and format

According to official press releases, the meeting held on 10–12 April focused on three main areas:

  • the current state of the peace process;
  • the activities of participants in both countries and their outcomes;
  • the impact of the regional geopolitical situation on the peace process.

Organisers also noted that separate sessions addressed how to promote peace in the public sphere and how to strengthen trust in the next stages.

The outcomes of the meeting were presented at a press conference in Gabala. It was emphasised that some of the four sessions focused on political and geopolitical issues, while others examined the role of civil society and future areas of work.

Particular emphasis was placed on the idea of “dialogue without intermediaries” and on state support. Coordinators stressed that this format differs from platforms of previous years, which involved donors or external mediators.

Official signals and public diplomacy

As part of the visit, participants also met Hikmet Hajiyev, Assistant to the President of Azerbaijan. In a post on X, he said the meeting lasted more than two hours.

He stressed that Azerbaijan is “fully committed to the Washington agenda” and highlighted the need to expand trade, transit links and people-to-people contacts to generate the economic benefits of peace.

In the same post, Hajiyev noted that against the backdrop of regional and global tensions, the importance of a sustainable peace between Azerbaijan and Armenia is growing, while revanchist rhetoric in Armenia’s domestic politics poses risks to stability.

Farhad Mammadov, the Azerbaijani coordinator of the initiative, told Trend that its key feature is “direct communication without intermediaries”. He said that in previous years, dialogue formats were typically built around the involvement of third parties, whereas the current process continues with state support.

Areg Kochinyan, the Armenian coordinator, described the fourth meeting as a “significant achievement” in comments to AZERTAC.

He said the initiative had initially faced criticism and scepticism over its sustainability, but that the continuation of meetings had shown those doubts to be unfounded. Kochinyan also spoke of plans to prepare joint articles and research, and to hold joint events in the near future.

Optimism and caution coexist in Azerbaijan

In Azerbaijan’s public discourse, attitudes towards such initiatives are shaped by two contrasting sentiments. On the one hand, there is caution rooted in the memory of conflict; on the other, a pragmatic interest in whether the logic of “peace after war” can prove viable.

The main symbol of the Gabala meeting — the crossing of the land border — can also be seen in this context as a tool of public diplomacy aimed at softening perceptions of the other side as an enemy. Kochinyan’s emphasis on “preparing societies for peace” and Hajiyev’s remarks on people-to-people contacts reinforce this interpretation.

At the same time, the issue of “red lines” for the sustainability of the process remains relevant in Baku. Political volatility in Armenia, the electoral agenda and the constitutional question are viewed as key factors in anchoring peace at an institutional level.

In an interview with 1news.az, Kochinyan pointed to upcoming elections as an indicator of public support. Meanwhile, Armenian analytical sources note that Azerbaijan continues to view amendments to Armenia’s constitution as one of the conditions for concluding a peace agreement; cautious statements from the Azerbaijani side about the “risk of revanchism” are also framed within this context.

What added value does the Gabala meeting bring to the peace process?

The meeting in Gabala does not replace a peace agreement, but it serves three practical functions.

  • First, it helps embed trust in everyday practice. The crossing of the border and the functioning of procedures demonstrate what “normal relations” could look like in reality.
  • Second, it contributes to public legitimacy. By bringing into discussion the results of debates held within their own societies, participants may help governments gauge public sentiment and identify risks at an early stage.
  • Third, it signals a shift towards tangible outputs. Coordinators have announced plans to produce joint articles and research, and to hold joint events, suggesting an effort to move the dialogue beyond discussion and towards materials that could have a real impact.

If these goals are achieved, the idea of expanding the dialogue to a regional level — for example, by involving additional expert platforms with participation from Georgia — may appear more realistic. However, the key condition remains the achievement of basic agreements between Baku and Yerevan.

Overall, the fourth meeting in Gabala can be seen as a cautiously encouraging step.

As independent analysts note, long-term sustainability depends not only on diplomatic documents, but also on the willingness of both societies to move away from conflict-driven narratives, as well as on the direction of domestic political dynamics.

—

Why did a Tehran church host a memorial service for Ali Khamenei?

Edgar Tavakalian
Article18
April 14 2026

Why did a Tehran church host a memorial service for Ali Khamenei?
April 14, 2026

A memorial service for the assassinated former Supreme Leader of Iran, Ali Khamenei, was held in a Tehran church last week.

The service at the Armenian cathedral of St Sarkis marked 40 days since Khamenei’s death, and was attended by officials including the former Minister of Intelligence, Mahmoud Alavi, and Iranian-Armenian MPs.

Christians of Armenian and Assyrian descent are a recognised religious minority in Iran who have long been used as propaganda tools by the Islamic Republic, which seeks to present a message of inter-religious harmony and tolerance while cracking down on Christian converts and any Armenians or Assyrians who associate with them.

One of the most high-profile recent propaganda wins came last October, when a metro station just outside the St Sarkis cathedral was named after the Virgin Mary.

More recently, Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref posted on X last week that “Iran has been, for centuries, a safe haven for the sound of Christian bells and Jewish prayers alongside the call to prayer”.

Meanwhile, parliamentary speaker and chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Galibaf described the death during the war of an Armenian Christian in Isfahan as a sign of “the unity of all Iranians in defending the homeland”, and wished his soul “eternal rest and peace in the loving embrace of Jesus Christ”.

However, at least five Armenians are among the at least 48 current Christian prisoners of conscience in Iran – all detained on charges related to their religious beliefs or activities.

Among them are Iranian-Armenian church leader Joseph Shahbazian, who was last year handed a second 10-year sentence related to his leadership of a house-church, and Hakop Gochumyan, an Armenian citizen who was arrested while holidaying in Iran three years ago and also sentenced to 10 years in prison on charges related to his visit to a house-church and possession of seven Persian-language copies of the New Testament.

Meanwhile, at least seven Armenians were among the tens of thousands of protesters massacred by Iran’s security forces in January.

According to Iranian-Armenian journalist Fred Petrossian, even though harassment of religious minorities is “institutionalised in the very fabric of the Islamic Republic … representatives of religious minorities find themselves almost forced to defend the interests and discourse of a government that has deprived them of many of their rights, in an attempt perhaps to regain those lost rights or to prevent their further deterioration”. 

He added: “The persecution of unrecognised minorities such as Baha’is and Christian converts is so severe that there is less talk about violations of the rights of the minorities ‘recognised’ in the Constitution.”

Article18’s director, Mansour Borji, has also noted that Armenian and Assyrian church leaders were among the first to welcome the Islamic Republic’s founding father, Ayatollah Ali Khomenei, when he arrived at the airport, and “in so doing ensured their protection under the new Islamic state”.

The messaging from the Armenian representatives at last week’s memorial service was in keeping with messages past, with an archbishop hailing Khamenei’s “wise leadership” and an MP saying “the people of Iran of every religion, ethnicity and sect have shown during the past 40 days that they support our beloved Iran and the regime”.

The current Christian prisoners of conscience and the families of the at least 22 Christians killed during the recent massacre may have a different perspective, although with the ongoing Internet blackout, such dissenting voices are even more tightly controlled than usual.

—

Armenian foreign minister meets EU foreign policy chief, discusses strategic p

Markos Nalchajian
Anadolu Agency, Turkey
April 14 2026
Ararat Mirzoyan, Kaja Kallas held detailed discussions on preparations for upcoming Armenia–EU summit, which will take place in Yerevan in May, says Armenian Foreign Ministry
Kanyshai Butun
14 April 2026•Update: 14 April 2026

ISTANBUL

Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan on Tuesday met with EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas in Brussels, Belgium, and discussed the strategic partnership between Yerevan and the bloc.

The two held detailed discussions on preparations for the upcoming Armenia–EU summit, which will take place in Yerevan in May, according to a statement issued by the Armenian Foreign Ministry.

They emphasized the importance of programs that produce tangible results for Armenian citizens, as well as the need to carry out mutually beneficial projects to improve economic and transportation connectivity and promote energy sector cooperation, it said.

Mirzoyan and Kallas also discussed initiatives to strengthen democratic resilience, “which form an important part of the value-based Armenia-EU partnership and its strategic agenda,” and agreed to ensure the continuity and effectiveness of existing mechanisms that support democratic processes, the statement said.

Russian President Vladimir Putin told Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan at the Kremlin in early April that Moscow is not concerned about Armenia’s relations with the EU.

He emphasized, however, that Yerevan will be unable to join both the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) and the EU.

Later, Armenian Parliament Speaker Alen Simonyan said Yerevan would withdraw from the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) and the EAEU if Russia decides to raise prices for gas supplied to the country.

“But I don’t think it will come to that, as I know that a very good and effective conversation took place between the heads of state,” he added.

—

Armenia: Legal Dispute Continues Over Catholicos Case

Garo Vardanian
Eurasia Review
April 14 2026
 April 14, 2026  0 Comments

By PanARMENIAN

The Yerevan Court of First Instance, presided over by Judge Ani Danielyan, has ruled to grant the appeal filed by the defense of Catholicos Karekin II, ordering the removal of the preventive measure imposed on him.

According to the lawyer and Mother See representative Ara Zohrabyan, the decision has not yet been implemented, Aysor.am reports.

“I am certain that the Prosecutor’s Office will appeal this decision and will do everything possible to avoid its enforcement,” Zohrabyan said.

Commenting on whether the ruling reflects the existence of justice, he noted that hope remains.

“Unfortunately, some judges blindly make decisions that are pleasing to the authorities. However, there are also judges who act in accordance with the law, and this, of course, increases hope for justice,” he emphasized.

The lawyer’s assessment has been confirmed, as Armenia’s Prosecutor General’s Office stated it is preparing to file an appeal.

The Catholicos is accused of obstructing the enforcement of a judicial act requiring the reinstatement of Arman Saroyan as Primate of the Masis Diocese. A travel ban had been imposed on the Catholicos as a preventive measure.

—

‘Robert Kocharyan is the prime ministerial candidate of the ‘three-headed part

Lilit Nahapetian
JAM News
April 14 2026
  • JAMnews
  • Yerevan

Armenia’s Deputy Speaker Ruben Rubinyan has described opposition forces planning to take part in the parliamentary elections in June as a “three-headed party of war”. Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan had earlier used the same phrase. He said that the “three-headed party of war will face a wall of people in the elections”. He meant that voters will not support them and will not allow them to enter parliament.

Pashinyan’s team uses the term “three-headed party of war” to refer to the Armenia bloc, as well as the Strong Armenia and Prosperous Armenia parties.

The prime minister explained that their leaders advocate a “revision of peace” with Azerbaijan. He argued that this would inevitably lead to war.

The Armenia bloc is led by former president Robert Kocharyan. Russian businessman Samvel Karapetyan heads the Strong Armenia party. Authorities arrested him in June last year on charges of publicly calling for a seizure of power. He is currently under house arrest. The Prosperous Armenia party was founded and is led by prominent businessman Gagik Tsarukyan.

Deputy Speaker Ruben Rubinyan has drawn voters’ attention to how his main opponents are preparing for the elections. He noted that the Prosperous Armenia party has not announced its candidate for prime minister. He also said that Strong Armenia’s candidate, Samvel Karapetyan, cannot run for the post. Armenia’s constitution allows only a person with solely Armenian citizenship to serve as prime minister. Karapetyan holds citizenship of Armenia, Russia and Cyprus.

Based on this, Rubinyan concludes that the three opposition forces share a single candidate for prime minister. In his view, that candidate is former president Robert Kocharyan.

“What does this mean now? How many prime ministerial candidates does the three-headed party of war have? One. The Russian oligarch cannot be a candidate for prime minister. Tsarukyan is not a candidate, because he says: ‘I will not say who my candidate is.’ In short, these three forces together have one candidate for prime minister — Kocharyan,” he said.

  • Vote-buying in Armenia: ‘Strong Armenia’ party disguised bribes as salaries and charity
  • Robert Kocharyan named prime minister candidate: will he become represent opposition in Armenia’s upcoming elections?
  • ‘Russia trying to send tens of thousands of voters to Armenia’s elections’: debate in Yerevan

‘They have decided to take part in the elections with a secret candidate’

The deputy speaker said the situation ahead of the parliamentary elections has become rather unusual. Rubinyan pointed out that Robert Kocharyan appears first on the electoral list of the Armenia bloc as its candidate for prime minister. He said the situation looks different for the Prosperous Armenia and Strong Armenia parties.

“The number one candidate from the force led by Tsarukyan is Tsarukyan. But the candidate for prime minister is not Tsarukyan. This is an exclusive know-how in global politics: their candidate for prime minister is a secret. In other words, Tsarukyan says: my candidate for prime minister is a secret,” he said.

Gagik Tsarukyan’s party has already presented its election programme to voters. However, it has not yet announced the name of its candidate for prime minister.

Rubinyan said Prosperous Armenia has chosen to run in the elections with a “secret candidate”.

“In other words, dear voters, if you cast your vote for Tsarukyan’s force, you should know that anyone could become prime minister,” he said.

The deputy speaker also stressed that Tsarukyan’s electoral list includes figures who took part in the 2021 snap elections as members of Robert Kocharyan’s Armenia bloc.

He added that the electoral list of the recently established Strong Armenia party also includes representatives from Kocharyan’s team. Among them is Aram Vardevanyan, listed second on the party’s slate led by Samvel Karapetyan. Vardevanyan is a former MP from the Armenia bloc and Kocharyan’s lawyer.

“From the lists I have seen, it looks as if they mixed everyone together, split them up and created a single list. They simply wrote down names, mixed them, each picked a party label, and that is how they formed the lists,” Rubinyan said.

‘Let Samvel Karapetyan give up his foreign citizenship’

One of the journalists asked Rubinyan: “Samvel Karapetyan says they are sacrificing everything for Armenia, and you…”. The deputy speaker did not let him finish and replied:

“Is he going to give up his Russian and Cypriot passports for Armenia? Is this a trend among so-called saviours? They all want to ‘save’ the country while holding citizenship of several other states. Archbishop Bagrat [the leader of the opposition movement ‘Sacred Struggle’] held Canadian citizenship. When we said he should give it up, he did not do so. They want to become prime ministers, but they are not ready to give up even foreign citizenship to prove they are not proxies or acting on someone else’s orders.”

Rubinyan did not specify whose interests dollar billionaire Samvel Karapetyan would serve, although most of his assets and businesses are in Russia.

“I do not know whose will he would carry out, but it would certainly not be that of the Armenian people,” he said.

‘Which of them is a new face?’

Gagik Tsarukyan, the leader of Prosperous Armenia, has repeatedly said his party has not just one but several candidates for prime minister. He has insisted that the party has no ties either to former authorities or to the current government. Tsarukyan argues that Armenia needs a “prime minister of the future”.

“It is telling that Tsarukyan speaks about the need for new faces. So who are these new faces? Is Kocharyan a new face? Is Tsarukyan himself a new face? Perhaps he has aged well physically. But what is new about him? Or what is new about the Russian oligarch?” Ruben Rubinyan said.

He also recalled that Samvel Karapetyan’s brother, Karen Karapetyan, led the parliamentary faction of former president Serzh Sargsyan’s Republican Party and later headed his office.

Journalists asked the deputy speaker why Tsarukyan and Karapetyan do not openly say that their candidate for prime minister is Robert Kocharyan.

“Why did Martun Grigoryan, who is now on the Prosperous Armenia list, say during the election campaign in Gyumri that he would not support Vardan Ghukasyan? He wanted to mislead people, win votes, and then he voted for Ghukasyan,” Rubinyan said.

Snap municipal elections were held in Gyumri on 30 March. No party secured 50% plus one vote. The ruling Civil Contract party received the largest share of votes. However, none of the opposition forces agreed to form a coalition with it. Three of the four opposition groups that passed the electoral threshold backed Vardan Ghukasyan, the mayoral candidate from the Communist Party of Armenia.

He believes the opposition forces will “tell fairy tales” and claim they are not connected to each other in order to implement a “Gyumri-2” scenario.

“They want to create a false impression that they have nothing to do with each other. They do this to win votes. Then they will unite and carry out the ‘Gyumri’ scenario. But with one difference. After the original ‘Gyumri’ scenario, Vardan Ghukasyan was arrested on corruption charges six months later. In this case, no one will be arrested, because corruption will become a highly desirable, patriotic and respected activity, like in the old days,” Ruben Rubinyan said.

—

Armenia Courts Global Investors for U.S.-Backed Trade Corridor

Hovik Karapetian
Oil & Price
April 14 2026
By Eurasianet – Apr 14, 2026, 1:00 PM CDT

  • Armenia is actively inviting additional international investors, including Middle Eastern states and Kazakhstan, into the TRIPP corridor project.
  • The corridor would connect Azerbaijan to Nakhchivan via Armenia, forming part of a broader Europe–Central Asia trade route.
  • The United States reaffirmed its commitment to the project despite ongoing geopolitical tensions in the Persian Gulf.

Anticipating that US attention could be focused on Iran and the Persian Gulf for a long time, Armenia is seeking to attract additional investors in TRIPP, the planned trade corridor that Yerevan foresees as a cornerstone of its economic future.

Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan have indicated in recent days that the bilateral agreement between the US and Armenia on building TRIPP, or the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity, is moving forward. But both leaders now indicate that Armenia wants to attract other investors to be involved in the corridor’s construction and operations. 

The project, the centerpiece of the provisional Armenian-Azerbaijani peace deal signed last August in Washington, would connect Azerbaijan and its Nakhchivan exclave via a 42-kilometer land bridge across Armenia’s Syunik province. It is envisioned as a key node in the emerging Middle Corridor trade network connecting Central Asia to European markets.

Mirzoyan suggested some Middle Eastern states, which he did not name, have expressed interest in TRIPP.

Pashinyan, meanwhile, seems keen to get Kazakhstan involved. On April 9, he met with Kazakh Foreign Minister Yermek Kosherbayev, with the discussions exploring potential cooperation on infrastructure development, connectivity, and tourism. The two countries have also pledged to engage in intelligence cooperation.

“Naturally, we should invite Kazakhstan to be prepared to consider using transit routes through Armenia as part of their export, import, and transport service chains,” the official Kazakh news agency, Kazinform, quoted Pashinyan as saying prior to the meeting.

US officials have sought to reassure Yerevan that the ongoing turmoil in the Persian Gulf, despite an ostensible ceasefire between the United States and Iran, will not distract Washington from implementing TRIPP.

TRIPP “remains a top priority for the United States, with the potential to unleash peace and prosperity in the South Caucasus region and beyond. The Trump Administration remains committed to making TRIPP a reality,’’ the Armenpress state news agency quoted a US State Department representative as saying. 


 https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Armenia-Courts-Global-Investors-for-US-Backed-Trade-Corridor.html



—

Hungary Elections Results Sparks Heated Debate in Armenia’s Opposition Ranks

Yeghisabet Arthur
Cocoa Took daily off
April 14 2026
14 Apr 2026 | News, Politics, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia

Hungary held its most consequential parliamentary elections since the end of communism on 12 April 2026, with a record voter turnout of around 76–79%, the highest in decades. The vote marked a major political turning point in the country’s modern history. The opposition Tisza Party, led by Péter Magyar, won a landslide victory over Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz party, which had been in power for 16 years.

On April 14, commenting on political developments in Hungary, Edmon Marukyan, the leader of the Bright Armenia party, stated in a video shared on his Facebook page that opposition figure Péter Magyar had achieved a “historic victory” over Viktor Orbán, whose party had governed the country for 16 years. He noted that out of 199 parliamentary seats, 138 were secured by Magyar’s party, while Orbán’s party obtained 55.

Marukyan emphasized that the outcome came despite external political signals, recalling that “two or three days ago, JD Vance was there and declared his support for Orbán.” Drawing parallels with Armenia, he argued that public narratives about the invincibility of the authorities are misleading. Referring to Nikol Pashinyan, he remarked that claims about backing from global powers should not discourage opposition efforts, stressing that “if the Armenian people have a good offer from the opposition, there will be intrigue… and the government will be changed.”

Addressing voter engagement, Marukyan pointed to the high turnout in Hungary, where citizens reportedly stood in long lines to vote. He contrasted this with Armenia, stating that such participation cannot be achieved through appeals alone, but requires a compelling political alternative. “It’s not because the opposition is saying, ‘People, this is important, you must go to the polls,’ but because there’s no compelling proposal… We need to create an intriguing proposal,” he stated.

According to Marukyan, discussions about opposition consolidation in Armenia are unproductive, as political forces continue to act independently. He added that his party intends to present a distinct platform, noting, “we… will put forward a good proposal that will be different from all the others, and you will see.” He also rejected characterizations of Orbán as a dictator, arguing that “it’s impossible to defeat a dictator in an election,” and highlighting that Orbán conceded defeat before the final recount, stating, “I accept my defeat, congratulations, we will be the opposition, we will serve Hungary.”

He further criticized interpretations of political processes in Armenia, asserting that they are often distorted. “You have dictators; in Armenia, power hasn’t changed through elections for 35 years, and you’re talking about Hungary?” Marukyan stated, adding that electoral outcomes depend on the choices presented to voters: “If you offer the voter the same thing, you get the same result… the voter makes the decision… not based on your appeals.”

On the same day, Narek Karapetyan, a member of the Strong Armenia party, also commented on the developments, stating that the Hungarian opposition had defeated a long-serving leader and prevented the country from becoming a dictatorship. “Hungary has chosen change, and soon it will happen in Armenia too!” he emphasized.


https://caucasuswatch.de/en/news/hungary-elections-results-sparks-heated-debate-in-armenias-opposition-ranks.html


—