“Justice in the case of brutally beating Lt. Col. Ara Mkhitaryan can be restored only after the change of power.” of 168.am said in a conversation with Ara Mkhitaryan’s daughter-in-law, Samvel Mkhitaryan, talking about the reproduction of power in Armenia and the expectations of achieving justice in his son’s case.

Samvel Mkhitaryan despairingly states that it is necessary to wait another 5 years before the government changes in Armenia.

“There is no point in waiting for something now. That time Nikol Pashinyan came here, people said: let’s go, let’s get closer, let’s understand what he thinks about this case, I refused. I’ll go, approach him, what should I do? He has to give a “man’s” word again, then say “my father’s sun”, I’ll do it, but go away and forget.

One million percent Nikol Pashinyan said that the guilty will be punished. It has not been a year since my child’s death, I have met with him twice, once with the governor, deputy, mayor. And the second time, at the governor’s office, in his cabinet, he promised at both meetings that they should sit down and be judged, so where is the trial?” added our interlocutor.

According to him, Nikol Pashinyan removed Trdat Sargsyan from the post of governor and made him a deputy.

“I said a long time ago that they made me not to go close. I asked how Trdat became a deputy, he answered that he does not know, as if he became a deputy without his knowledge.

I don’t know, maybe the lawsuits have been filed, now we have to see what we will do,” emphasized Samvel Mkhitaryan.

To remind, on September 17, 2019, in Yeghegnadzor, after being in a coma for several years as a result of a severe beating, the only convict in the case of lieutenant colonel Ara Mkhitaryan, who died in 2023, Harutyun Grigoryan, the former governor, now the assistant of KP deputy Trdat Sargsyan, was released on parole in February of last year, and then he was imprisoned again. He was charged under Article 112, Part 2, Clause 6 of the Criminal Code (deliberately causing serious harm to health by a group of persons or an organized group), as well as under Article 118 of the same Code (assault). His brother, Zaven Grigoryan, was charged only under Article 112, Part 2, Clause 6.

Both brothers have pleaded not guilty to the charges against them. The name of former governor of Vayots Dzor, Trdat Sargsyan, was also associated with the case.

Officers present at the time of the incident testified that he was present and passive, and they also maintained their testimony during face-to-face questioning. The investigative committee reported that the former governor was not a witness to the dispute that took place on September 17, 2019, and was not at the scene. Despite this, one week after the incident, Trdat Sargsyan resigned from the position of governor of Vayots Dzor, now he is a deputy of the “Civil Agreement” faction of the National Assembly.

—

Former Deputy Commander of the Armed Forces, Major General Davit Manukyan from Baku prison applied Nikol Pashinyan, demanding a public position regarding the accusations attributed to them.

In particular, it refers to the war unleashed in September 2020.

“Cr. of Azerbaijan Under articles 100.1, 100.2 of the Code, we were charged in September 2020 with the wording of “planning, preparing and unleashing or waging an aggressive war”, despite all the irrefutable evidence and facts we have brought. Moreover, it happened in open view of the international community. However, you were the prime minister and supreme commander of the Republic of Armenia at that time, and the planning of the war begins from that point. I urge you to present a public position regarding those accusations, if you don’t respond, it will mean that you agree to the false accusations, thereby making not only you, but also the entire Armenian people complicit,” the general said in the recording transmitted from Baku.

After the war we repeatedly we wrote that in 2020 On September 27, when it became known that Azerbaijan had started a war against Artsakh, there was martial law in RA to be announced.

“On the legal regime of martial law” RA in the law the circumstances serving as the legal basis for such a decision and the powers of the RA government, the government and not the prime minister, are defined. In other words, the martial law does not grant Nikol Pashinyan the powers of supreme commander.

Accordingly, another in the article We have asked the question: in what capacity did Pashinyan give the order to take back Shush with a counterattack, or in what capacity and right did he make a single decision during the war related to the 7th defense region of Artsakh, regardless of whether it was good or bad?

In any case, it is a fact that Nikol Pashinyan has de facto reserved himself the powers of the supreme commander during the war, and the war is conducted by the state.

And Davit Manukyan, in fact, not only reminded Pashinyan of the war period itself and his responsibility at that time, but also pre-war, and demanded a clear answer: does he agree with the statement that the 44-day war was unleashed by the Armenian side under his own leadership, because the deputy commander of the Armed Forces could hardly unleash a war, he did not have that level of “authority”.

Let us remind you that during the war, the President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev to Nikol Pashinyanhad accused in breach of agreement.

“The ceasefire regime was maintained and restored for 2 years at the request of the RA Prime Minister. He asked me that the internal situation is difficult, I am being pressured from all sides, give me time and I will solve the issue. He said, “I have come with new ideas, I have erased everything that happened in the past, give me a chance and time.” I replied: OK. And what happened? After a year, he announced: “Karabakh is Armenia, and that’s it.” Well, let him say now: “Karabakh is Armenia, and that’s it,” Aliyev announced at the beginning of October 2020, referring to the elevator negotiations.

Of course, Pashinyan, on his part, claimed that it was Aliyev who asked him not to endanger the internal situation of Azerbaijan, perhaps that is why he did not use the confidential information he had against Aliyev, although here it is a violation of a different agreement. And here, in fact, Aliyev puts the responsibility of the war on Pashinyan, even if on other occasions both Azerbaijan and Turkey openly have accepted that they started the war, September 27, 2020 was the right time.

In particular, after the 44-day war in 2021, Aliyev opened some parentheses in a conversation with “National Defense” magazine, stating:

“Every day I held a consultation with the leadership of the Ministry of Defense, National Security, Foreign Intelligence Service, State Border Guard Service, Ministry of Foreign Affairs. During these meetings, we summarized the results of the previous day, highlighted the shortcomings, and also approved the plan for the next day. In other words, very active daily work was carried out, and our actions and operations were a surprise for the enemy, which are already known in many cases today.”

He also reported that During the 44-day period, changes and corrections were introduced in the military operations, including taking into account that “the opponent may have information about their intentions”, which we wrote about in various operations: the capture of Lachin, Shushi.

And in 2025, a similar one confession Turkish Defense Minister Yashar Güler also did, saying. “Azerbaijani army has started military operations with the aim of “liberating the native land – Karabakh” from occupation and putting an end to years of oppression and injustice.”

And now General Manukyan from Baku urges Pashinyan to have courage and declare that the only planner, preparer and unleasher of the aggressive war of September 27, 2020 is Azerbaijan, Aliyev, about which they tried to present irrefutable evidence and facts in the Baku court.

Will Nikol Pashinyan, who and his team have always accepted with bayonets the statements of some opposition figures or former RA presidents, that Pashinyan brought the 44-day war closer or provoked it with his statements and political steps, or may he have fears that Aliyev might make new leaks?

In other words, Aliyev’s rating is on one side of the scale, and the Republic of Armenia’s is on the other. Whom will Pashinyan recognize as a war criminal, if we forget his “reports” against the Republic of Armenia and the Armed Forces of the Republic of Armenia?

By the way, in the context of the Azerbaijani charge of “planning, preparing and unleashing an aggressive war” against General Davit Manukyan, we should remind that, for example, Anna Hakobyan, about a month before the 44-day war, in 2020. August 25-31, in one of the military units of Artsakh had initiated  get togetherwhere 15 women of different ages and professions living in Artsakh were involved, and the purpose of the course was to learn about military life and acquire military skills. According to Pashinyan’s and Aliyev’s assessment, can this be placed in the logic of preparing for war, preparing “armed groups”?

Regarding the evidence and facts mentioned by the general, let’s present some episodes from the “trial” in Baku, from different sessions.

Episode one

During one of the court hearings held in June 2025 In the court of Baku, the prosecution of the former deputy commander of the Armed Forces, Major General Davit Manukyan, asked questions about the 44-day war of 2020.

Responding to them, Davit Manukyan first noted that Armenia has not heard about the implementation of “provocations” on September 27, 2020, there was no such information.

And here at the court in Baku, the Azerbaijani prosecutor recalled the meeting of the former Minister of Defense of the Republic of Armenia Davit Tonoyan with the Armenian community in the USA on March 30, 2019 and his the speech show a video of it where he announces reformulate the “territories for peace” format to the “new war: new territories” format.

“We will get rid of the trench situation, the constant defensive situation, and we will increase the number of units that can move military operations to the enemy’s territory.” In a well-known statement, Tonoyan explained from a purely military point of view.

Later, during the “trial”, a “secret document” signed by Kamo Vardanyan, the former chief of staff of the Artsakh Armed Forces (from March 19, 2020 to September 11, 2021), former commander of the Armed Forces, was examined.

According to the Azerbaijani propaganda machine, we are talking about order N 0671 of September 25 according to which firing positions were supposed to be planned until September 28 and “around 70 settlements of the enemy were to be destroyed”.

Davit Manukyan, the former deputy commander of the Armed Forces responded that first learned about the said order during the preliminary investigation.

It should be noted that Nikol Pashinyan said exactly On September 25, 2020, information about the start of the war was received, which seemed very reliable.

Later, in the Investigative Committee, the Chairman of the National Defense and Security Committee Andranik Kocharyan announced that «According to Directive 0046, the Armed Forces of the Republic of Armenia were gradually brought to the first level of readiness, which was based on radio absorption on September 25. received the F-16 pilots’ conversation that they will be participating in something important tomorrow.” 

Episode two

During the Baku “trial” held in April 2025 During the questioning of Davit Manukyan, the Azerbaijani prosecutors did not ignore the topic of “missile attacks on Azerbaijan” during the 44-day war, in response to which, according to the Azerbaijani media, the general announced, or is not aware of the alleged rocket attacks on the territories of Azerbaijan far from the front line.

During another session at the court in Baku Manukyan noted that during the 44-day war, his official duties were clear: “deal with combat training, there is no mention of war planning.”

At the same time, during the “trial” on trumped-up charges, the former high-ranking military officer of the RA Armed Forces and Defense Forces emphasized that he did not participate in the SC sessions. General Manukyan even announced on one occasion in Baku that During the 44-day war, the Turkish “Bayraktar” targeted his car, his driver was injured, and he was 20 meters away from the car, so he was not injured.

According to our information, the incident happened on the general’s birthday, October 15, and it was only by a lucky coincidence that he survived.

Episode three

In March 2025, during one of the court sessions in Baku, in response to the question of the Azerbaijani state prosecutor, General Manukyan had noted that Zhirayr Sefilyan was the commander of Shushi’s special battalion, and then answered an additional question addressed to him: has no information that Jirayr Sefilyan was born in Beirut, the capital of Lebanon.

“He is from “Western Armenia”, but he became a citizen of Armenia,” stressed Davit Manukyan.

In other words, the general tried to deny Baku’s accusations that Armenia involved mercenaries during the 44-day war.

Azerbaijan directly addressed this accusation during another court hearing was opposed also Levon Mnatsakanyan, former commander of the Armed Forces.

“As far as I know, they were not mercenaries. All of them were volunteers, none of them specifically sent them to serve and paid money for it,” the general stated in the court of Baku.

These are just a few episodes where the former military-political leadership of Artsakh, the generals kept there, tried to throw the Azeri accusations on Armenia and Nikol Pashinyan, and today, being in Baku, they do not feel the support of the RA government and Nikol Pashinyan himself.

Of course, there were cases when they had to make some “declassifications” related to the relations between the Republic of Azerbaijan and the Armed Forces of the Republic of Armenia, and not only that. But one thing is clear: Davit Manukyan’s speech addressed to Nikol Pashinyan is a serious challenge, it is a serious examination and contains a serious message.

After all, no matter how Nikol Pashinyan’s name was mentioned in the context of the “Ganja events” during the trial in Baku, and the former president of Artsakh, Arayik Harutyunyan, was the main the arrow corrected In the direction of the RA military leadership, from Pashinyan in this matter responsibility does not neutralize.

Of course, Pashinyan may not accept his responsibility and also at some point and in exchange for something, leave the responsibility of the “Ganja incidents” to the RA military leadership, especially when earlier Aliyev demanded to investigate these incidents and bring the “culprits” to justice.

This is also the “just demand” of Ganja-born Hikmet Hajiyev, with whom Pashinyan’s government has close ties today.

By the way, during the “trial” in Baku, Ruben Vardanyan, Davit Manukyan, and Davit Babayan submitted a motion to interrogate Nikol Pashinyan through teleconference, but the Azerbaijani court rejected it.

And the demand of the former deputy commander of the Armed Forces had another very important message: Pashinyan should decide for himself whether they are prisoners, hostages or imprisoned persons, who may agree with Aliyev regarding the charges brought against them, or at least it is beneficial to him.

It is this that must be proven, and then any status requires a special approach and characterizes its “responsible”, in this case, Aliyev. General Manukyan, in fact, did not leave the international community without a message either, saying that everything happened in front of their eyes. The international community, which believes that Armenia should fulfill Baku’s demands, Nikol Pashinyan’s government should continue its existence out of their own interests.

And Davit Manukyan gave Nikol Pashinyan an opportunity to prove to what extent Armenia is a sovereign state and to what extent Nikol Pashinyan is able to protect the innocence, justice and authority of the state he leads, or should he agree that Armenia committed war crimes during the 44-day war, expecting Aliyev’s forgiveness in exchange for something at some point…

—

“I am happy to record that the Armenian-French relations, which are based on these common values, have risen to an unprecedented level in recent years, have acquired a new quality and strategic direction.

Today, the strategic partnership established between Armenia and France is steadily developing in all key areas, from political dialogue and defense to economy, investments, infrastructure, energy, education, science, culture and decentralized cooperation,” said the congratulatory letter of Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan to French President Macron on the occasion of the National Day of France on July 14.

And on July 20, Defense Minister Suren Papikyan published a video of exercises using the French 155-millimeter “Caesar” self-propelled artillery system, which was named “Aramazd” in Armenia. In the video posted on the Telegram messenger, the commander of the artillery calculation tells about his service and duties.

Thus, France’s comprehensive partnership with Armenia, including: in the military field, about which informed our periodical received another approval and is consistently developing with the involvement of Georgia (at least in transit). Paris is no longer just a political ally of Yerevan. it has turned into one of the main external allies of Nikol Pashinyan’s government, which is shown not only on a symbolic level, but also on a very practical level.

In 2023, the first batch of ACMAT Bastion armored vehicles was delivered to the territory of Georgia. At the end of October of the same year, the then French Minister of Defense Sebastien Lecorne announced that Paris intends to sell three Ground Master 200 (GM200) radar systems to Armenia, as well as the planned signing of a memorandum of intent with missile systems manufacturer MBDA regarding the Mistral ARPR.

In this regard, despite the possible bias, the exclusive information obtained from military and intelligence sources of the TV channel AnewZ in Baku is noteworthy. the data which are not officially denied either in Yerevan, Tbilisi or Paris.  Thus, according to ADS-B flight tracking data, already on May 4, the large-scale French military transport Airbus A330-200 (board identifier F-UJCS) of the French Aerospace Forces arrived in Yerevan for the first time, during Macron’s stay there. The next day, this plane “officially” returned to Paris, from where it went a few hours later to a major air force base in southern France, Istre-le-Teube, near Marseille.

The same F-UJCS flight (call sign CTM021) was previously spotted on the flight tracker associated with Macron’s East Asia tour: on March 28, it was heading east from Europe, and on March 29, April 2 and 3, it was recorded in the region of South Korea and Japan.

Just these days, on April 1 in Japan and April 3 in South Korea, Macron signed documents on the deepening of French defense cooperation with Tokyo and Seoul, which corresponds to the official Paris system line on strengthening the military and political presence of France in the Asia-Pacific region, especially since France’s extensive island departments are located here, the partial circulation of the Pacific Franc is maintained.

On May 11, this French military heavy transport vehicle, number CTM2025, was registered east of a southern French military base, heading for the Southern Transcaucasia. According to information reviewed by AnewZ, the cargo officially declared for transit through Georgia to Armenia included gas cylinders, lithium batteries and chemicals.

But did the actual cargo match the declaration? Or were the components, hubs and auxiliary equipment of modern long-range French Caesar howitzers already supplied to Armenia transported under the “guise” of the above-mentioned and other “civilian” cargoes?

We remind you that the transportation of weapons and military components by civil and military aircraft is strictly regulated by the Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation of 1944 and the ICAO rules on the transportation of dangerous goods (Annex 17 – “aviation security” annexes).

Such shipments require export licenses, import permits, approval of transit through third countries, special packaging, labeling and strict controls. Probably, the mentioned has been observed, or at least the corresponding transit through the territory of Georgia has been agreed with the corresponding payment.

The situation became even more vivid after the appearance of television footage from Yerevan on the eve of the military parade dedicated to the Day of the Republic of Armenia on May 28, with those Caesar howitzers. The contract for the supply of 36 such systems was signed in June 2024 in Paris. Now these systems are publicly displayed on the territory of Armenia as a vivid proof of military-technical “diversification”.

So far, there are no grounds to assume that the transit of French military equipment through the territory of Georgia to Armenia has been stopped. Even more so, in the last congratulatory message addressed to Macron by the Prime Minister of Armenia on the Bastille Day announced about the unprecedented level of bilateral relations… “Relations have reached an unprecedented level in recent years, gaining new quality and strategic content.

Today, the strategic partnership formed between Armenia and France is confidently developing in all key directions, from political dialogue and defense to economy, investments, infrastructure, energy, education, science, culture and decentralized cooperation.”

It should also be recalled that in the Indian Ocean basin, in the area of ​​several French island departments and military bases, the French Ministry of Defense under leadership the recent joint military command about the creation in which member countries of the “Indian Ocean Commission” created by Paris in the first half of the 1980s are involved.

Accordingly, military supplies to Armenia and, in general, the current interconnection with Yerevan are a constituent link of the modern geopolitical strategy of the French authorities.

Alexey Baliev

vpoanalytics.com

Translation by GM

—

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has blocked the process of putting the issue of recognizing the events of 1915 as “Armenian genocide” to a vote in the Knesset. As reported by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, the decision was taken after the application of the Azerbaijani side.

According to the newspaper’s source, Hikmet Hajiyev, assistant to the president of Azerbaijan, contacted the office of the Prime Minister of Israel on the instructions of Ilham Aliyev. After that, Netanyahu blocked the initiative put forward earlier by Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar.

Israeli officials later assured Baku that the issue had been removed from the Knesset agenda and would not be put to a vote in the last plenary session before the parliamentary summer vacation.

Earlier, the Israeli government had unanimously supported the proposal to recognize the events of 1915, but a parliamentary vote was needed for final approval. The Knesset has not yet adopted such an official decision.

Published by 168.am

—

After a long break, the “3 3” regional consultation platform of the South Caucasus has returned to the political agenda. The impetus for the activation of the process was recently given by the President of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, during the IV Global Media Forum held in Shushi, where he actually presented Baku’s revised ideas about the future of the platform. Aliyev stated that it is important for “3 3” to be a full six-way cooperation.

“Until Georgia joins, at least five-sided, but with a very clear agenda. It is important so that this mechanism does not turn into another Minsk Group, which will deal exclusively with Azerbaijani-Armenian issues. It should include issues related to the entire region, with the participation of Russia, Iran, Turkey, Armenia and Azerbaijan, on the principle of equality,” he said.

Aliyev also emphasized that if this approach is acceptable to other capitals, it will be possible to organize at least a five-way meeting at the level of foreign ministers.

This statement of the President of Azerbaijan almost immediately received a reaction from Moscow. Maria Zakharova, the official representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry, reaffirmed that Russia continues to consider “3 3” as a key regional format for the South Caucasus, and reminded that Moscow is waiting for the agreement of Yerevan and Baku on the order of holding future sessions of the platform.

At the same time, he specifically emphasized that during the expert meeting held in St. Petersburg in June 2026, the parties agreed to “focus on specific mutually beneficial economic projects, avoiding politicization of the process”, adding that Russia fully shares this approach.

The theme of “3 3” was also continued by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Russia, Sergey Lavrov, within the framework of the negotiations with the Foreign Minister of Azerbaijan Jeihun Bayramov in Moscow.

Lavrov announced that along with the discussion of the situation in the South Caucasus, the parties will also discuss the regional consultation format, noting: “We record the return and growth of interest in the “3 3″ regional cooperation platform.” Bayramov, for his part, said during the press conference with Lavrov that the format is an important mechanism of regional cooperation.

According to him, that is why, about a month after the last meeting held in 2024, Azerbaijan proposed to hold the next meeting in Azerbaijan. “We believe that this platform is of great importance for the discussion of all issues of mutual interest for the participating states. Based on this approach, we once again reaffirm our readiness to host the next meeting in Azerbaijan,” Bayramov noted.

The recent diplomatic activity around “3 3”, however, does not yet mean that the platform is close to being fully operational. The main obstacle of the process is not so much organizational as it is geopolitical in nature.

The platform was formed with the logic that the issues of security and economic cooperation of the South Caucasus should be solved exclusively with the participation of the states of the region and immediate neighbors, without the involvement of Western actors. At this stage, Russia and Iran are most interested in this perspective, against whose influence the West is actively fighting in the South Caucasus.

It is this principle that makes “3 3” competitive for the West, which in turn has consistently deepened its political and security involvement in the region in recent years, from the European Union’s observation mission to new formats of Armenia-US and Armenia-EU strategic cooperation. Under these conditions, the full operation of “3 3” implies such a change in the regional power balance, in which case the influence of external actors will be minimized, and such conditions have not yet been formed.

No less important factor is the mistrust within the region itself. Georgia continues to refuse to participate in “3 3”, citing the lack of diplomatic relations with Russia and the issue of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Without the participation of Tbilisi, the platform loses its full regional character and actually turns into a “3 2” or “3 2 1” format. Although Georgia has not announced whether it will join this platform officially.

At the same time, the Armenian authorities still have significant reservations about the platform, which are most likely due to the possible attitude of the West. In fact, Azerbaijan also has serious reservations, which are due to the foreign policy of Azerbaijan and the problems that arise regularly with Moscow and Tehran.

Under these conditions, the full operation of “3 3” will be possible only when several prerequisites coincide. First, relative stability and predictability should be established in Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, which will allow economic and transport projects to be removed from the influence of the permanent security crisis.

It is also necessary that the main actors of the region – Russia, Turkey and Iran – maintain the minimum consensus of cooperation. And finally, the effectiveness of the platform will depend on the dynamics of the West-Russia, West-Iran confrontation. the deeper the competition in the South Caucasus, the more “3 3” will remain not a fully functioning regional institution, but a platform for political statements.

On the contrary, if a relative balance of influence zones is formed, “3 3” can gradually turn into a real mechanism of regional cooperation, focusing on transport, energy and economic projects.

It is in this context, perhaps, that Moscow’s and Tehran’s consistent emphasis on the “3 3” format should be considered. Both countries, in fact, try not to allow the platform to be left out of the regional political agenda, regularly reminding about its existence and potential.

Although the “3 3” has not yet been able to turn into a fully functioning regional institution in the current geopolitical realities, Russia and Iran apparently view it as a strategic investment for the future. If a new balance of power is formed in international relations, and the competition of external actors in the South Caucasus weakens to a certain extent, this very platform can become the political and economic mechanism through which the countries of the region will try to regulate interaction.

In that sense, the current activity of Moscow and Tehran is perhaps not so much an expectation of today’s result, as an attempt to preserve the “3 3” as an already ready political base of the future regional architecture, which, if appropriate geopolitical conditions are formed, will be able to be quickly transformed into an effective format of practical cooperation.

—