Armenian president departs for working visit to Qatar

President18:52, 14 July 2026
Read the article in: العربيةEspañolفارسیFrançaisՀայերենქართულიRussianTürkçe中文

A delegation led by Armenian President Vahagn Khachaturyan departed on a working visit to the State of Qatar on July 14.

The Office of the President’s Public Relations Department announced the visit in a statement.

“A delegation led by President of the Republic Vahagn Khachaturyan departed on a working visit to the State of Qatar on July 14 to offer condolences on the passing of His Highness Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, the Father Amir of the State of Qatar, and to pay tribute to his memory,” the statement said.

Read the article in: العربيةEspañolفارسیFrançaisՀայերենქართულიRussianTürkçe中文

Published by Armenpress, original at 
—

FIBA Europe president and executive director congratulate Basketball Federatio

Sports19:35, 14 July 2026
Read the article in: العربيةFrançaisՀայերենRussian

FIBA Europe President Jorge Garbajosa and Executive Director Kamil Novak have sent an official congratulatory letter to the Basketball Federation of Armenia following the Armenia U16 national team’s victory in the FIBA U16 European Championship Division C.

The Basketball Federation of Armenia announced the letter in a statement.

The letter reads, in part:

“This outstanding achievement reflects the hard work, dedication and talent of your young athletes and coaching staff. Winning the championship title is a significant accomplishment for Armenian basketball and a promising sign for the future.

Please convey our warmest congratulations to the players, coaches and all members of the delegation. We wish you continued success, new achievements and sustained development in the years ahead.”

The FIBA U16 European Championship Division C was held in Yerevan. Armenia finished the tournament unbeaten, winning all six of its matches. In the final, the Armenian team defeated Malta 97-68 to claim the Division C title.

Two Armenian players, Anthony Sargsyan and Ethan Kazanchyan, were named to the tournament’s All-Star Five, while Anthony Sargsyan was also named the tournament’s Most Valuable Player (MVP).

Read the article in: العربيةFrançaisՀայերենRussian

Published by Armenpress, original at 
—

Armenpress: European Parliament hosts conference on Armenian detainees held in

Politics21:30, 14 July 2026
Read the article in: العربيةFrançaisՀայերենRussian

The European Parliament has hosted a conference titled “Armenian Prisoners in Azerbaijan and the Imperative of European Union Engagement”, focusing on the issue of Armenians held in detention in Baku.

The event was hosted, with the support of the European Armenian Federation for Justice and Democracy (EAFJD), by Cypriot MEP Costas Mavrides of the Socialists and Democrats Group and Miriam Lexmann, the European Parliament’s standing rapporteur on Armenia and an MEP from the European People’s Party representing Slovenia.

The keynote speakers included human rights lawyer Siranush Sahakyan, who represents the interests of Armenian detainees before international bodies; Joel Veldkamp, Director of Public Advocacy at Christian Solidarity International (CSI); Simon Papuashvili, Programme Director for Eastern Europe and the South Caucasus at the International Partnership for Human Rights (IPHR); and Armen Ishkhanyan, son of David Ishkhanyan, the former speaker of the Nagorno-Karabakh parliament who is being held in Baku.

Sahakyan stressed that the fact that Nagorno-Karabakh was not internationally recognised at the time could not serve as a legal basis for the ongoing criminal prosecutions in Baku. She noted that UN Security Council resolutions had never declared Nagorno-Karabakh’s independence invalid or called on states not to recognise it, unlike in some other conflicts.

She recalled that for decades the status of Nagorno-Karabakh had remained the subject of negotiations within the framework of the OSCE Minsk Group and that its representatives, including some of those now detained in Baku, had engaged with international mediators as part of a recognised peace process.

According to Sahakyan, the proceedings in Baku cannot be regarded as ordinary criminal trials but instead pursue political objectives by reversing the narrative of responsibility, portraying members of the displaced Armenian community as perpetrators and criminalising the political existence of Nagorno-Karabakh.

Papuashvili said the time had come to move beyond resolutions to concrete action. He argued that the release of Armenian detainees should become a clear and measurable priority in all contacts between the European Union and Azerbaijan.

He said that, pending their release, the EU should insist on a number of fundamental guarantees, including unrestricted access for independent humanitarian organisations, regular contact with family members, independent medical examinations, confidential meetings with lawyers and full access to case materials in a language understood by the defendants.

Papuashvili also proposed that the EU establish clear benchmarks and deadlines for Azerbaijan, warning that failure to meet them should affect political cooperation, bilateral negotiations and broader EU-Azerbaijan relations. He further called for consideration of EU Global Human Rights Sanctions against officials for whom there is credible evidence of involvement in torture, arbitrary detention or serious abuses of judicial authority.

“The release of Armenian detainees is not a reward or a privilege for Armenia. It is an obligation arising from international humanitarian law, international human rights law and the commitments undertaken by the parties themselves,” he said.

Speaking at the conference, Joel Veldkamp said that every Armenian detainee held in Baku represented, above all, a human life awaited by a family.

He argued that by failing to demand their immediate release, the international community was effectively accepting Azerbaijan’s actions and the precedent that military force could be used to resolve conflicts and deny peoples’ right to self-determination.

Veldkamp criticised the European Union’s policy, saying it was simultaneously deepening relations with both Armenia and Azerbaijan while demanding the main concessions only from Armenia and placing almost no comparable demands on Azerbaijan.

He also noted that Azerbaijan has yet to sign a final peace agreement and continues to portray the entire territory of the Republic of Armenia as “Western Azerbaijan.”

In his view, current policies risk creating a weakened Armenia, which would not serve Europe’s interests. He argued that, amid Turkey’s growing regional influence and declining respect for international norms, a strong Armenia would be a valuable partner for the European Union.

“If Europe wants to contribute to strengthening Armenia, one of its first steps should be decisive intervention to secure the release of the Armenian hostages held in Baku,” Veldkamp concluded.

Armen Ishkhanyan said that while virtually all peace agreements in modern history had prioritised the release of prisoners of war, Azerbaijan continued to avoid doing so.

Quoting his father, David Ishkhanyan, he said the trials in Baku were directed against the Republic of Armenia and that the Armenian prisoners were being used by Azerbaijan as leverage against Armenia. In his view, this seriously called into question Azerbaijan’s commitment to genuine peace.

In her remarks, Miriam Lexmann stressed that the European Union should take a more consistent approach to defending Armenian political prisoners and detainees held in Azerbaijan.

She said that although the EU was deepening cooperation with Armenia by supporting the country’s economic resilience and access to European markets, it was failing to exert sufficient pressure on Azerbaijan over human rights violations because of energy interests.

Lexmann said the EU should use its political and energy ties with Azerbaijan to demand the immediate release of Armenian detainees. She also underlined the need for close coordination between Armenia and the European Union and for sustained political pressure to address serious violations of international law.

During the question-and-answer session, participants thanked the organisers for keeping the issue on the agenda. Some expressed concern that the EU’s actions did not reflect its stated values as it continued to regard Baku as a reliable partner. Others asked how Members of the European Parliament explained the gap between Parliament and the European Commission, noting that the Commission rarely acted on Parliament’s resolutions.

Costas Mavrides said that after serving in the European Parliament for 15 years, he regretted that it was no longer possible to discuss the EU’s foreign policy solely in diplomatic language.

Simon Papuashvili added that it was regrettable that the EU continued to invest in fossil fuels in a country such as Azerbaijan, arguing that such dependence was both unnecessary and harmful to the bloc’s long-term energy security.

Read the article in: العربيةFrançaisՀայերենRussian

Published by Armenpress, original at 
—

Verelq: The employees of the ministries have started applying for mass layoffs

“Past” newspaper writes:


“According to the information we have, a large number of people in a number of ministries and other state administration bodies have either already been dismissed or are about to write an application.


The point is that people’s patience has already run out. Moreover, it is not about political orientation, because these people continued to work with CP in the past years. It is about the fact that the compulsions to actively “share” on social networks not only the publications related to the activities of the given department, but also the government in general, not to mention Nikol Pashinyan’s posts. Many people’s patience has finally run out, especially in connection with the final rally of Nikol Pashinyan and CP on June 5 in Republic Square. All employees were informed that they were present at the meeting being on the Soviet “voluntary-mandatory” principle, otherwise conclusions will be drawn. However, many did not even wait to draw conclusions, they made their own conclusions and wrote applications for release.


Our interlocutors also mentioned that this is not the only reason. it is no longer possible to work in the state administration system under this government, because first of all, there is chaos in almost all systems, professionalism and experience have no role, the right hand does not know what the left is doing, in addition, total capitulation is underway. According to our information, some sincerely hoped that there will be a change of power with the June 7 elections, and the state system will fall on the rails.”

—

The TRIPP project at the center of a clash between Tehran and Moscow’s “red lines”.

The Armenian government does not hide its desire to move to the practical implementation of the TRIPP project as soon as possible. It is clear from Nikol Pashinyan’s latest statements that Yerevan is counting on the readiness of the American side.


However, any major regional project is viable only if it takes into account the security interests and perceptions of not only the immediate participants, but also the key players in the region, Iran and Russia.


Just one day before Pashinyan’s announcement, Iran’s ambassador to Armenia, Khalil Shirgholami, clearly presented Tehran’s concerns. According to him, one of the agenda priorities of Armenian-Iranian relations is the management of risks arising from TRIPP and the prevention of possible challenges.


The ambassador emphasized that it is necessary to develop such mechanisms that, on the one hand, will enable Armenia to fully realize the potential of lifting the embargo, and on the other hand, will neutralize the risks arising from the strategic presence of the USA and exclude any threats to Iran’s security.


These wordings prove that Iran’s main concern is the security environment that can be formed as a result of the implementation of the project. This approach has clear geopolitical foundations. After the military operations of the USA and Israel, Tehran has become significantly sensitive to any expansion of American influence near its own borders. If TRIPP is perceived in Tehran as a tool of US strategic presence in the form of infrastructure with 99 years of rights, it will be difficult to expect the project to be accepted under the current parameters.


Russia’s position towards TRIPP also has clear security and geopolitical foundations, although it is expressed in a more cautious way. Moscow views the project as an expansion of the US’s strategic presence in the South Caucasus, in its traditional sphere of influence. Although Russia’s position in the region has weakened significantly after the events of 2020 and 2023, Moscow still has leverage to influence the course of the project. Russia maintains influence over the railway infrastructure of Armenia, which can become a serious factor during the implementation of the railway component of TRIPP. In addition, Russian border guard units continue to carry out service in some parts of the Armenia-Iran border, including in the vicinity of the possible TRIPP crossing zone. These factors allow Moscow, if necessary, to complicate or slow down the practical implementation of the project.


The official reaction is still cautious-sceptical. Russia avoids an open confrontation with the project named after Trump, but the statements of high-ranking officials already sound warnings about the dangers of Armenia going the “Ukrainian way”. Moscow threatens with economic consequences: increase in gas prices, restriction of market access and problems related to the Armenian diaspora.


Thus, the future of TRIPP does not depend only on the political will of Yerevan and Washington. As much as the Armenian authorities are interested in the quick start of the project, its implementation cannot be imagined without taking into account the regional power balance and security architecture. The important components of that balance are the security interests of Iran and Russia, which if ignored, any initiative will face serious political and practical resistance.


Therefore, the key issue of the upcoming negotiations should not be the quick implementation of TRIPP, but its political and security reformulation, taking into account the red lines of Tehran and Moscow. If it is possible to develop a model that will be accepted by Iran and Russia, the project can continue under new conditions. Otherwise, it may not turn into a platform for regional cooperation, but another hotbed of new geopolitical contradictions.


The impulses of the Iranian ambassador and the Russian side clearly show that the original logic of TRIPP is no longer sufficient. The new military-political realities formed in the region require editing of the project and a new balance of interests. Otherwise, the haste of the Armenian authorities may face not only technical, but also serious geopolitical opposition, both from the south and from the north.


Political scientist Suren Surenyants




—

Aliyev’s statement questioned Pashinyan’s handling of the Artsakh issue

The President of Azerbaijan stated that for many years, the basis of the Karabakh conflict negotiations was the handing over of the former Nagorno-Karabakh region, Karvachar and Lachin regions to the RA.


According to Aliyev, the co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group, represented by the USA, Russia and France, also insisted on this solution.


By the way, these ideas and positions are also seen in Pashinyan’s package of the Artsakh negotiation process published last year.


In fact, the main international actors defended Artsakh’s right to self-determination, negotiations were held in that direction for many years, but the Pashinyan government rejected that approach and handed over Artsakh to Azerbaijan.


Tigran Abrahamyan, secretary of “I have an honor” faction




—

A new phase of regional turbulence is beginning

The US Armed Forces announced that they will resume the naval blockade against Iran from today. It was noted that the entry and exit of ships going to and leaving Iranian ports will be blocked. The safe navigation of only those ships that will not violate the blockade requirements (of course, money, fee) will be ensured.


At the same time, according to The New York Times, President Trump has officially informed Congress about the resumption of military operations against Iran.


After these statements of the US President and the Armed Forces, oil prices increased by 8%.


Iran also has its plans of actions aimed at resistance and protection of interests. The countries that will cooperate with the USA against him have already been announced as legal targets. US-owned facilities in neighboring countries are targeted.


At the initiative of France and England, the leaders of 25 countries, within the framework of the “coalition of the determined”, have gathered and are discussing the issues of supporting Ukraine against Russia, resisting further actions, and defending against more powerful ballistic and strategic strikes.


The President of Russia promises to strike Ukraine several times more powerfully.


Along with the new regional escalations, Aliyev took ambitious and tougher positions to strengthen his positions in the South Caucasus. From the footnotes of the latter’s statements, it can be seen that the peace treaty with Armenia is not so interesting to him. Azerbaijan sees the developments and its role in it differently.


Clearly, a new phase of regional turbulence is beginning…


P.S. Does the leader of a completely failed government, aimlessly climbing the slopes of Khustup, have the slightest idea of ​​how to cope with the new turbulence that lies ahead?


Former RA Deputy Defense Minister Artak Zakaryan




—

The Catholicos of All Armenians honored the memory of Ayatollah Khamenei

H.E. Karekin the Second Supreme Patriarch and Catholicos of All Armenians visited the Iranian Embassy in Armenia and paid his respects to the memory of the martyred supreme leader of Iran, Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei.


During the meeting with the Iranian Ambassador to Armenia, Khalil Shirgolami, His Holiness expressed his condolences and sympathy to the government and people of Iran and expressed hope that the peace-loving people of Iran will be able to restore security.

—

This choice is fatal

There are historical moments when the external course of political events is deceptive.


It seems that the elections have ended, the mandates have been distributed, the post-election tension has passed, a relative calm has been established, the government is distributing positions, and the political forces are rearranging themselves to find the way of their future struggle.


But in fact, under the cover of silence, something completely different is happening in the depths of the earth. The foundation of the state is cracking. After June 7, Armenia reached such a dramatic milestone.


The created situation is a simultaneous crisis of legitimacy, legal state and statehood. And when these three crises coincide, the state begins to exist more in external forms than in its internal content.


Today’s government holds in its hands the state administration and power system, the courts and the parliamentary majority, but this control is not yet statehood. The state exists as long as the power rests on trust, justice and awareness of the common destiny. When these foundations are lost, the government turns into a self-preservation machine that covers up its crisis of legitimacy with new repressions, criminal prosecutions of dissidents, and the spread of public fear. From that point on, repression is no longer a political choice, but the system’s main mode of survival.


However, not only the government is facing a crisis. The entire opposition field faces an equally crucial choice.


Parliamentary and extra-parliamentary forces should decide whether they are able to form a common platform and a common agenda of struggle, or whether they will take the path of decentralized resistance.


United struggle is certainly the way to consolidate power. But the decentralized struggle can also be effective if it does not turn into private ambitions, mutual neutralization and endless competition for the same audience.


It is not necessary that everyone be in the same structure, stand on the same stage or speak the same vocabulary. However, it is imperative that the independent agendas are synchronous, complementary and directed against the same systemic problem.


The forms of struggle may be different, but the meaning of struggle cannot be contradictory.


And the basis that unites these different ways should be the national one.


Not national, as a word used in speeches, but as a defense of the state’s identity, historical memory, sovereignty and right to exist.


Anti-Turkish, not in the sense of enmity towards peoples, but in the sense of rejecting the Turkish-Azerbaijani expansionist policy towards Armenia, the rewriting of history and the plan to break the will of our national resistance.


Anti-authoritarian, not in the sense of personal hatred or revenge, but in the sense of fighting against the system that internally presents external coercion as peace, retreat as realism, and national self-denial as state wisdom.


Today, the question is not even whether the struggle will be unified or decentralized.


History often does not even ask people if they are ready. It simply mercilessly puts them before the choice.


Our choice today is between the state and the system, national resistance and adaptation to defeat.
All other differences are temporary. This choice is fatal.


Davit Ananyan, former chairman of the RA SRC




—

Armenia has presented its efforts to strengthen peace at the United Nations

On July 13, within the framework of the high-level political forum on sustainable development held in New York, RA Deputy Foreign Minister Robert Abisoghomoyan had a meeting with UN Secretary General Rosemary DiCarlo, Deputy Secretary General for Political and Peacebuilding Affairs.


This was reported by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.


The Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Armenia presented the efforts aimed at further strengthening the peace established in the South Caucasus. The implementation of projects aimed at the development of transport infrastructures and the promotion of interconnection was highlighted in the context of the full realization of the region’s potential.


The interlocutors discussed the “UN80” reform process. In this context, the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs emphasized the importance of ensuring the continuity of the effective activities of UN structures within the framework of development cooperation, human rights protection and prevention agendas.


The Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Armenia and the Deputy Secretary General of the United Nations also discussed the activities carried out ahead of the 17th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (COP17) to be held in Armenia in October.


Thoughts were exchanged on issues related to international security.

—