- Armine Martirosyan
- jam-news.net
How Armenia should ensure its security
The situation in the Middle East is extremely tense. Powers are trying to redraw borders, and the balance of power is shifting. Some Armenian experts say the region now follows the same logic that the South Caucasus experienced in 2020. In their view, the war in Nagorno-Karabakh that year created a new regional order. In this order, force dictates the rules rather than law. Since then, they argue, Yerevan has chosen a strategy of concessions.
CIS affairs expert Lilit Grigoryan says this approach amounts to “not peace, but defeatism”. Here is her view on what Armenia should do to ensure its security.
Comment by CIS affairs expert Lilit Grigoryan
Iran between weakening and fragmentation
“What is happening in Iran is the result of processes that have unfolded over decades. The weakening of Iraq after the US invasion disrupted the regional balance of power. A redistribution of that balance became only a matter of time. Today the Middle East is undergoing a major reconfiguration, in which Israel pursues its own ambitions.
Two scenarios appear possible for Iran. The first is the gradual weakening of the regime while the country’s territorial integrity remains intact. Most European states support this scenario. The second is the fragmentation of Iran through support for separatist movements in certain regions. Israel is primarily interested in that option.
In any case, the regime will weaken. However, a prolonged conflict harms the countries of the Persian Gulf, which are already suffering significant losses. War drives oil prices up. Russia benefits from this situation. The United States has eased sanctions pressure in some areas and granted India a 30-day exemption from the ban on purchasing Russian oil. In addition, some weapons that had been intended for Ukraine are now being used against Iran. The conflict itself also shifts international attention away from the Ukrainian front, which again works in Moscow’s favour.”
South Caucasus without international law
“What is happening in the Middle East today already took place in the South Caucasus in 2020. At that time, with the consent of Russia, Turkey and Iran, a redistribution of power began. Russia and Azerbaijan changed the regional balance to Armenia’s detriment. This process created a new model — regionalism. In this model, major players, primarily Russia and Turkey, set the red lines, while smaller countries such as Armenia and Georgia accept the new realities. Azerbaijan became a co-author of this model.
Regionalism is essentially an anti-Western concept. Smaller states seek security through cooperation with regional heavyweights rather than through Western institutions. Armenia now acts within this logic. It declares friendly relations with everyone but relies primarily on regional powers. Discussions about Yerevan pursuing a Western course contradict the idea of regionalism. Armenia’s actual policies suggest something different.
However, this model contains a fundamental flaw. The new order rests on force rather than law. Previously, the issue of Artsakh was addressed within the OSCE Minsk Group, where the key principle was the non-use of force. Russia and Azerbaijan dismantled that structure with Armenia’s effective participation. The region now operates according to the principle of force. This means the costs of the new order will fall first and foremost on the weakest states — the smaller countries.”
Peace in exchange for concessions
“Military action against Armenia will resume the moment it stops making concessions. As long as it continues to concede, there will be no military escalation.
Ahead of the elections, the authorities will avoid any steps that could provoke escalation. Their key message is an economic breakthrough and lasting peace in the region for 99 years, according to TRIPP. It is a politically advantageous position: the authorities can accuse any opponent of potentially bringing the country to disaster and war.”
The “Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity” (TRIPP) is a proposed transport corridor that would connect mainland Azerbaijan with its exclave of Nakhchivan.
Armenia and Azerbaijan agreed to unblock the route with mediation from the US president. An American consortium would take part in managing the business operations linked to the project.
“But in a situation where the collective West no longer exists as a guarantor of international law, the greatest danger is the loss of a sense of reality — something the authorities are actively encouraging. Countries that can assess the situation soberly and recognize that the region is entering a period of military tension will emerge with the fewest losses.
When society sincerely believes that a single route — TRIPP, whose economic dividends remain uncertain — can solve everything, the most dangerous combination arises: loss of vigilance, lack of political will and absence of strategy.
The minimum Armenia can do under these conditions is pursue a policy of deterrence. But that requires political vision and determination.”
Deterrence strategy — the only way forward for Armenia
“A policy of deterrence is not the same as resilience. Resilience responds to blows after they occur. Active deterrence works preventively. A country identifies risks in advance and removes them before they grow. It seeks autonomy in all areas, not only in the military sphere.
Armenia has proclaimed ‘peace at any cost’. In reality, the country is moving not towards peace or stability but towards steady decline. The authorities have no plan B. Society is becoming divided and losing a clear understanding of what is happening. Under such conditions, the country risks finding itself unprepared for new challenges.
A policy of deterrence requires concrete steps. Armenia must secure supply chains. It must ensure food and energy security and manage water resources. Psychological preparation of society is also important. This is not about military mobilization but about civic readiness. People should know what to do in a worst-case scenario. Regions should be able to provide themselves with food and fuel. They should maintain communication even without the internet and deliver basic medical assistance.
The military dimension also requires deep reform. Azerbaijani forces are consolidating their presence in occupied territories while Armenia remains passive. This passivity opens the way to creeping annexation. The logic is simple: if a country allows an adversary to entrench itself, the next step will be further advances. Limited tactical operations and targeted actions could prevent the opponent from feeling secure there and gradually push it back from the positions it has taken.”
Armenia plays by its opponent’s rules
“Armenia’s current policy accepts Azerbaijan’s appeasement program. Baku openly calls it the peace of the victor: Azerbaijan sets the terms and Armenia agrees.
Inside the country and across the diaspora, many follow the same logic. First accept these conditions, rebuild strength and later address the accumulated problems. Today’s peace agenda operates within that framework.
Armenia’s fundamental problem lies elsewhere. For decades it has not monitored the strategies of its opponents, including Russia. It has not studied their tactics or drawn conclusions.
People now forget Russia’s role in the current situation with striking speed. That itself creates a security risk. A state that cannot identify hostile policies directed against it is destined to face the same scenario again — but in a worse form.
Meanwhile, the tactics of hostile countries are clear. They aim to prevent Armenia from accumulating strength, resources and capabilities so that it cannot, in their words, pursue revenge. One instrument is control over Armenia’s political field.
Aliyev’s rhetoric in Munich illustrates this approach. His references to Nuremberg and fascism were not accidental. Azerbaijan is building a narrative in which it presents itself as a fighter for justice while portraying Armenians as aggressors. Behind this stands a state-centred strategy with long-term planning and well-established mechanisms. Armenia does not counter this strategy — it adapts to it.”
Armenia should become a “poisonous flower”
“Armenia must openly defend its rights. This includes the issue of Artsakh, the deportation of the Armenian population and the demand for a just peace. Peace imposed by a victor never lasts. Either the winner continues the pressure, or the defeated side eventually pushes back. This is not stability. It is a postponed conflict.
For 30 years Azerbaijan built a strategy. Now, facing little resistance, it is moving to the next stage. Officials speak about ‘historical lands’ and the ‘restoration of Azerbaijani communities’ inside Armenia. As long as Yerevan believes concessions are a winning tactic, it keeps losing its already weakened strategic position. Armenian rhetoric increasingly repeats the narrative created in Baku, and changing that becomes harder each time.
Building a security policy on the assumption that ‘Azerbaijan also wants peace’ is extremely risky. Such an approach might have made sense in the early 1990s. At that time liberal democracy expanded and the collapse of the Soviet Union strengthened the discourse of human rights. Presenting that logic today as the only correct strategy is an anachronism and a gamble.
When a victor faces no real leverage from Armenia or outside actors, the absence of a plan B allows it to change the rules at any moment. Deterrence works in the opposite way. The adversary understands that any misstep will carry a high cost and that victory will not come easily. Being small does not mean being defenceless. A country can become a ‘poisonous flower’.”
TRIPP is not deterrence
“TRIPP is exactly what Azerbaijan sought — and obtained without firing a single shot. It is difficult to describe this as a deterrent. By the same logic, Armenia could ‘deter’ Baku by handing over all settlements where some Azerbaijanis once lived, abandoning the term ‘Artsakh’ and agreeing to any other concessions. The correct term here is not deterrence but defeatism.
The same logic appears in the case of Ukraine. If Kyiv agreed to territorial concessions and abandoned its course towards NATO, it could also ‘stop the war’. The question is at what price.”
How Russia controls Armenia’s political field
“Armenia is going through a deep crisis today, and it is not only about the current authorities. The emerging opposition does not resemble the old-style pro-Russian forces. Instead, Russian oligarchic structures have penetrated it. These actors offer no way out of the regionalism that threatens Armenia. Russia exercises almost total control over Armenia’s political field.
Moscow has no real problem with the current government. The real problem for Russia would be Armenian citizens who could create new parties, raise questions of justice and demand accountability — not only from Azerbaijan but also from Russia. Russian influence systematically closes that political space.
Russia has lost the Armenian people, but it has not lost the political field. Moscow now pursues three goals:
- to close the issue of Artsakh
- if possible, to attract Armenians from Artsakh to Russia — for this reason hostility toward them is artificially encouraged in Armenia
- to shift responsibility for the loss of Nagorno-Karabakh onto Pashinyan alone and attribute the redistribution of power in the region to other centres of influence.
At the same time, a more vulnerable Armenia could be brought back under control more easily if necessary. For now, Moscow does not need to do this. At present, Armenia — like Georgia and Azerbaijan — serves as a channel for bypassing Western sanctions.”
Why the West views Armenia through Baku’s lens
“The West is undergoing a deep transformation. This process will intensify over the next two to three years. Western decision-making centers do not act as a single bloc. Countries with organized lobbying networks promote their narratives more effectively.
Azerbaijan understood this long ago. It works successfully with Western experts against Armenia. A striking example illustrates this trend. A well-known Azerbaijani propagandist publicly claimed that Azerbaijan would help Armenia free itself from Russian influence. Armenia offers no comparable voices. Moreover, since 2023 some voices inside Armenia have begun repeating Azerbaijani messages.
As a result, Western perception forms in layers. First comes the Azerbaijani narrative. Then experts repeat and reinforce it. Finally, Western observers see a simplified Armenian political landscape. On one side stands a Russian oligarchic opposition. On the other stands the current government, despite its flaws. Western actors choose the latter as the lesser evil. They applied the same approach to Armenia’s previous authorities.”
Yerevan should not be drawn into Baku and Ankara’s ‘virtual reality’
Political analyst says Azerbaijan and Turkey project an image of “peace-loving states,”urging Armenia’s authorities to assess the situation soberly.
Worst-case scenario for Armenia
“A multipolar world order is the worst scenario for Armenia. When major centers of power become equal in strength, they start competing for the periphery. Armenia lies exactly in that zone. The first step large powers may take is to divide smaller states among themselves. Multipolarity will not bring friendly or cooperative relations between centers of power. It will produce confrontation.
Under such conditions, regionalism becomes a trap rather than a solution. Armenia therefore needs to build a strong core inside the country. It should stop making constant concessions. It should accumulate strength and carry out reforms so that it can defend its rights in the future. Azerbaijan followed exactly this strategy for 30 years.”
CC: ‘This is not peace, but defeatism’: a dissenting view on Armenia’s securi
Armenian Owned Development Firm Expands to Sacramento to Develop Stadium and D
LAS VEGAS — Pegasus Development, a Las Vegas-based boutique project management firm that oversees experiential corporate and entertainment ventures for various clients such as Universal Creative, Netflix, Meow Wolf, Goldman Sachs, Museum of Ice Cream, Aquarian, and The Neon Museum, has expanded its operations to Sacramento as a key member of the stadium development team for Republic FC. Pegasus owner and CEO Art Zargaryan will oversee the club’s development projects, including its soccer stadium and the surrounding 31-acre neighborhood that will become a new downtown district in the years to come.
The 31-arce project has advanced past the groundwork phase, and stadium construction will begin later this year. In addition to building a new outdoor downtown home for sports and entertainment, the project will help double the size of downtown, revive a plot of land that has sat vacant for a half-century and restore vitality to the Railyards area, the ancestral home of Wilton Rancheria.
Founded in Las Vegas, Pegasus Development has rapidly emerged as a national leader in complex, experience-driven real estate projects. In just eight years, the firm has managed more than $7.2 billion in development totaling 8.1 million square feet, spanning luxury resorts, themed attractions, museums, multi-use retail destinations, and multifamily communities.
“I am immensely proud of the projects we have done in Las Vegas and am excited to expand to work on this monumental project in Sacramento,” said Art Zargaryan, owner and CEO of Pegasus Development, who recently opened a second office in Sacramento to support the company’s business activities there. “Our projects in Las Vegas, such as Universal Horror Unleashed and The Museum of Ice Cream, are unique immersive experiences that have prepared our team to design and develop not only Republic FC’s soccer stadium but the entire downtown entertainment district that it will anchor.”
“Our Republic FC stadium is the catalyst for transforming the Railyards into a thriving new district for Sacramento,” said Chris Franklin, Chief Operating Officer of Wilton Rancheria and Republic FC board member. “Pegasus brings the experience needed to help turn this long-awaited project into reality, and we’re excited to continue building momentum toward the permanent home for Republic FC that the community deserves.”
Republic FC is an American professional soccer team based in Sacramento that competes in the Western Conference of the USL Championship.
Since founding Pegasus Development, a boutique project management firm headquartered in Las Vegas in 2017, Zargaryan has led the development of a distinguished portfolio of real estate and entertainment projects across the United States. Under Zargaryan’s leadership, the firm has become a trusted partner for immersive experiences and commercial developments that harmonize creative vision with disciplined execution. As of 2025, Pegasus Development oversees more than 5.5 million square feet in active development, with a total construction value exceeding $4.2 billion.
Born in Armenia and raised in California, Zargaryan has a distinctive blend of cultural fluency, adaptability, and strategic foresight. He earned his Bachelor of Arts from the School of Architecture at Woodbury University in Southern California, where he developed a foundation in both creative and business disciplines.
Prior to launching Pegasus, Art held senior project management and design roles at several notable firms. He served as project manager at BluePoint Development in Las Vegas (2014–2016), overseeing hospitality and healthcare projects; project manager and lead designer at Nextep Design International (2011–2014), leading international architectural and themed entertainment initiatives; and project manager at Oks’n Associates in Los Angeles (2005–2011), managing architectural documentation for a range of commercial and institutional developments.
With more than two decades of project management experience, Zargaryan has become known for guiding complex, high-impact projects with hands-on oversight and outcome-driven focus. His proven track record includes managing multimillion-dollar hospitality, cultural, and experiential ventures while consistently bringing together cross-disciplinary teams to deliver complex initiatives with clarity and impact.
Looking forward, Zargaryan is focused on expanding Pegasus Development’s national presence, driving innovation in mixed-use experiential environments, and fostering the next generation of leadership in real estate and entertainment development. He is currently spearheading initiatives in experiential placemaking and sustainable design across key markets, continuing to shape the evolving landscape of immersive and urban environments.
Zargaryan is a board member of several nonprofit organizations, including the Mayor’s Fund for Las Vegas LIFE, Make A Wish Nevada, and Communities in Schools of Nevada. He is also an active member of the Las Vegas Executives Association (LVEA), a professional network of business leaders across the city, and mentors rising professionals in the field. He is the husband of Nelli and father to their three daughters Juliana, Olivia, and Nazeli.
Haroutiun Galentz: The Form of Color
A new English-language monograph repositions the Armenian–Lebanese painter as a cosmopolitan modernist whose work demands to be read beyond national canons.
Armenian Arts Council
Haroutiun Galentz: The Form of Colour (Skira, 2025) reassesses a major 20th-century modernist whose work has long resisted categorization. Edited by Vartan Karapetian and Marie Tomb, the first English-language monograph devoted to the artist brings together works from the Janibekyan Collection and the National Gallery of Armenia alongside holdings from museums and private collections across Europe, Asia, and North America. Through paintings, archival documents, correspondence, and memoirs, the book situates Galentz as a cosmopolitan modernist whose work demands to be read across borders rather than within national canons.
Haroutiun Galentz occupies a difficult place in 20th-century art history. A survivor of the Armenian Genocide, Galentz rebuilt his life and practice in Beirut, where he emerged as a key figure in the formation of modern painting during the interwar and immediate postwar years. Between 1920 and 1946, he was deeply embedded in the city’s artistic and intellectual circles, participating in a cultural milieu that was at once cosmopolitan and politically fragile. His contribution to the Lebanese Pavilion at the 1939 New York World’s Fair marks an early moment in the international visibility of Lebanese modernism — one that complicates later narratives that situate its emergence after the 1950s.
Galentz’s postwar relocation to the Soviet Union opened a second, no less complex, phase of his career. In this new ideological environment, his painting retained a luminous, introspective quality that sat uneasily within official aesthetic frameworks. His first solo exhibition in 1962 — welcomed by critics and writers such as Ilya Ehrenburg and Alexander Gitovich — took place just weeks before Nikita Khrushchev’s infamous denunciation of nonconformist art at the Manège. The proximity of these events is telling: Galentz’s work did not operate through overt dissent, but through ambiguity, interiority, and formal risk.
Across portraiture and landscape, Galentz’s practice registers a continuous negotiation between inherited traditions and lived circumstance. Early training in the Beaux-Arts system and sustained engagement with the French avant-gardes informed his approach to colour and composition. Rather than rejecting Socialist Realism outright, he absorbed and reconfigured it, gradually pushing toward increasingly abstract forms in his later years. What emerged was not a linear stylistic evolution, but a body of work shaped by displacement, adaptation, and a sustained commitment to painterly autonomy.
To order Haroutiun Galentz: The Form of Colour, visit bookshop.org.
The book is also available on skira-arte.com and artbook.com.
Bishops summoned to investigative committee in Armenia
Panarmenian.net
Several members of the Supreme Spiritual Council have received notices from Armenia’s Investigative Committee ordering them to appear for questioning.
According to Aysor.am, those summoned include Bishop Hovnan Hakobyan, primate of the Gugark Diocese; Bishop Makar Hakobyan, primate of the Syunik Diocese; Archbishop Haykazun Najaryan; and Bishop Mushegh Babayan.
Lawyer Armine Fanyan said the clergy were called to the Investigative Committee within the framework of the same criminal case as before — allegedly obstructing the enforcement of a court decision.
The Investigative Committee declined to comment on the matter.
“We do not comment,” the committee’s spokesperson told the media.
On March 12, the lay members of the Supreme Spiritual Council had also been summoned to the Investigative Committee.
Currently, six bishops and one priest from the Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin hold the status of defendants in the case.
They are accused of obstructing the enforcement of a court ruling that requires the reinstatement of Arman Saroyan as primate of the Masis Diocese.
Earlier, the Investigative Committee had summoned Bishops Makar, Hovnan, Nathan, Haykazun, Mushegh and Vahan, as well as Father Movses.
As a preventive measure, the authorities imposed a ban on leaving the country for them.
—
Armenian language courses open at Azerbaijan’s National Defense University
This was reflected in the “Report on the activities of the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Azerbaijan for 2025,” which was discussed at Friday’s session of the country’s parliament.
The Donroe Doctrine Explained by the Blimp
By Jirair Tutunjian
Hello, hello…good evening to the Super Incredible Fans of the Great MAGA family. It’s a tremendous, beautiful, and smashing superevening. Although it’s 3:35 ayam, I am fully awake and roaring for action. I don’t need more than two hours of sleep a night. I am super-powerful…like a bull. Every pound of my 300 lbs. is hard muscle. Ask Melania, hah. Tonight I will not talk about the corrupt Ayatollahs, the assorted towel heads, and Governor Carney of Canada. Instead, I will talk about something personal.
You might have heard that our enemies have tagged my foreign policy the Donroe Doctrine, a reference to the Monroe Doctrine of 1823. I am extremely unhappy about the comparison. I am insulted. Compared to me, President Monroe was a big-time loser, a pipsqueak, milquetoast…and worse. By the way, milquetoast means an ineffectual girlie man compared to me…the leading macho man of the century. More macho than Rambo, Tarzan, and James Bond put together.
Inter alia…it means “by the way.” So, inter alia, to be compared to a fuddy-duddy U.S. president is demeaning to me because, as you know, I am the greatest president ever.
Lemme explain what I mean.
Compared to that 30-word wishy-washy declaration, my version warns the whole wide world to think twice before sticking its nose into our Americas.
Compare the above with my doctrine: “From Nome, Alaska to Tierra del Fuego (Chile-Argentine), we will not allow non-American countries to set root on our hemisphere. We will knock the crap out of these carpetbaggers who want to steal our natural resources, poison our water, our blood, our Western Hemisphere.”
One more thing: Although the U.S. occupied less than 30 percent of the North American land mass when Monroe was president, Monroe made no effort to conquer the rest of the continent and assert our divine right to the continent. Do you realize that when Monroe was president, 24 North American regions were still not part of the Great United States…states like Texas, California, Arizona, Michigan, Florida, Wisconsin…joined the U.S. long after Monroe was toast. He also made no effort to move the so-called Natives to the deserts of the Southwest.
Now I will take calls. Hello, hello.
Caller: I would like to ask you something.
Trump: Shoot.
Caller: I understand you wear pampers because you can’t control your urination. I carry a portable gizmo which I call S—t detector. It counts the number of lies one fabricates in one day.
Trump: Shud up. Get lost.
Caller: My gizmo exploded while you were babbling.
Trump: What’s your last name…My people would like to talk to you.
Caller: You say you hate the Donroe Doctrine. I have a better word for your hallucinations: Dumbroe Doctrine.
Statement on Aliyev’s Recent Holocaust Analogy
The Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention expresses grave concern over recent remarks by Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev in which he compared Armenian political detainees and prisoners of war to Nazi leaders convicted at the Nuremberg trials. During a 13 February interview with France 24 TV channel, Aliyev stated: “[c]alling for the release of the former [Nagorno-]Karabakh leaders is the same thing, even worse. Their crimes are worse than what the Nazis did during World War II.” Aliyev then argued that requests that he release Armenian detainees are akin to asking the Allies to free Nazi officials before their sentences. This statement is particularly dangerous in the context of the Israel-U.S. war of aggression against Iran, which has catapulted Azerbaijan into a position as a critical wartime ally, granting President Aliyev even greater impunity than he has thus far enjoyed.Aliyev’s comparison does not reflect historical reality. It distorts it. It weaponizes it.
Aliyev’s comments were made just a few days after his meeting with U.S. Vice President JD Vance, in which Vance raised the issue of releasing Armenian hostages still being held by Baku. Aliyev’s comments demonstrate his ongoing disrespect for U.S. leadership, whose small requests on behalf of Armenians he routinely dismisses. His rhetoric is further a prime example of “mirroring,” a common tactic used by leaders accused of serious abuses of international law. While there is absolutely no credible evidence that any of the Armenians currently being held by Baku have committed any crimes, much less crimes against humanity and genocide (some of them are in fact POWs that Azerbaijan was supposed to return to Armenia in 2020), Aliyev and his government stand accused by credible observers and international legal experts, including at the Lemkin Institute, of genocide and crimes against humanity for conduct in Nagorno-Karabakh.
In September 2023, Azerbaijan’s military attacked and invaded the Republic of Artsakh, a de facto independent state with a population that was 99 percent Armenian, resulting in the forced displacement of the entire population of the region – more than 100,000 Armenians. Independent experts, including former International Criminal Court Prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo, have determined that Azerbaijan’s prior 10-month blockade and the September military assault demonstrated genocidal intent. The Lemkin Institute’s 127-page report, Risk Factors and Indicators of the Crime of Genocide in the Republic of Artsakh: Applying the UN Framework of Analysis for Atrocity Crimes to the Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict, published on 5 September 2023, discusses Azerbaijan’s genocidal intent towards Artsakh Armenians in detail. The International Association of Genocide Scholars later also found that Azerbaijan had committed acts of genocide against Armenians. As part of its attack, Azerbaijan took many officials in the Artsakh government hostage. They have since been subjected to inhumane conditions of detention and show trials.
The Lemkin Institute considers President Aliyev to be the leader of a genocidal state – a state whose institutions are suffused with genocidal ideology, whose policies are formed by genocidal agendas, and whose genocidal rhetoric serves as an important ballast for domestic legitimacy. President Aliyev has institutionalized genocidal Armenophobia across state agencies and public life. Before 2023, he frequently referred to Armenians as “dogs,” “jackals,” “rabbits,” and terrorists in public speeches. After the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war, he built a “Trophy Park” in Baku to celebrate Azerbaijan’s supposed victory in the war, which included dehumanizing wax models of dead and dying Armenian soldiers with exaggerated, grotesque features that Azerbaijani visitors were encouraged to mock. Being one of the most openly and unapologetically racist acts of the 21st century, the Trophy Park garnered some attention and criticism in the Western world, and Azerbaijan was forced to remove the figures. However, the Trophy Park itself remains, as does the genocidal Armenophobia that informed it.
It appears that in exchange for a green light from the international community to invade Artsakh, the Azerbaijani President has had to tone down his Armenophobic rhetoric. Now, instead of shouting epithets, he pursues false charges against the Armenians still in his control and justifies his illegal actions by comparing them to Nazi war criminals and architects of genocide. The only “crime” committed by the Armenian representatives of the former Artsakh government being held in Baku is that they exercised their right to self-determination and sought to protect the Armenian residents of the enclave – whose presence dates back four thousand years – from Azerbaijani aggression. Unfortunately, the leaders of the world seem all too willing to countenance international crimes from the now respectable genocidal dictator whom their appeasement has enabled, even granting him the honor of hosting COP29 in 2024.
Beyond mirroring, President Aliyev’s remarks are illustrative of another common and very effective tactic employed by genocidal states – what psychologists call DARVO: Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender. Aliyev denies credible allegations of atrocity. He attacks Armenians as supposed war criminals. He then reverses reality by portraying Azerbaijan as the real victim and Armenians as existential threats. Such rhetoric does more than increase tensions. It encourages people to see genocide as justified.
Aliyev’s remarks constitute a dangerous form of genocide denial. In a few sentences that diminish the Holocaust, he simultaneously denies the destruction of Armenian life in Nagorno-Karabakh. He denies responsibility for the mass forced displacement his government engineered. And he inexcusably minimizes the Holocaust by abusing its memory as cover for his overall genocidal aims in the South Caucasus. The Holocaust, it must be remembered, was a systematic attempt to annihilate European Jewry and is one of the most comprehensive and all-encompassing genocides in human history. Six million Jews were murdered by the Nazis and millions more people were killed in the global war that the Nazis started. It is impossible for any international crime to be “worse than” the Holocaust, or, to quote Aliyev, “worse than what the Nazis did.” Invoking it to justify the continued detention of Armenian prisoners who were defending their homeland diminishes the Holocaust’s unique history and moral weight.
Genocide prevention requires accuracy. It does not allow leaders to use false comparisons to distract from present abuses. The international community must push back against President Aliyev’s ongoing genocidal rhetoric against Armenians and sovereign Armenian territory in order to support clarity within discussions of genocide. It must not tolerate his genocidal denial.
The continued detention and prosecution of Armenian prisoners in Azerbaijan raise serious concerns under international humanitarian law. The Third Geneva Convention requires humane treatment and prohibits coercive prosecutions of prisoners of war. Throughout the entire process of the trial, there has been evidence of torture of the Armenian prisoners by the relevant Azerbaijani agencies. Amnesty International and others have expressed concerns over the rights of the captured former leaders of Artsakh, particularly in terms of their right for fair trial. Azerbaijan must either release these detainees or provide transparent legal proceedings consistent with its international obligations.
History shows that perpetrators of atrocity often rely on extreme rhetoric to legitimize extraordinary measures. They cast targeted groups as criminals, terrorists, or existential enemies. They invoke past traumas to justify present repression. They frame collective punishment as a moral necessity. Such patterns function as early warning indicators of further abuse.
The Lemkin Institute calls on the Azerbaijani government to cease its dehumanizing, genocidal rhetoric against Armenians, to refrain from using the Holocaust to justify its crimes, and to release all Armenian prisoners immediately. Since President Aliyev has himself stated that he will not do this, the international community must pressure him to do so. Coordinated pressure must be placed specifically on the person of President Aliyev, who relies a great deal on the good graces of the Western world in particular for his continued power. If the Western world does not act and continues to embolden the Azerbaijani President, they will face even worse problems down the road. The greater the impunity extended to President Aliyev, the more he will seek to realize his dreams of a “Greater Azerbaijan” encompassing the current independent Republic of Armenia.
Genocide prevention requires clarity. Leaders who project their own actions onto victims promote mass atrocity rather than address it. They undermine justice rather than uphold it. The international community must not allow historical memory to be manipulated in service of ongoing genocidal agendas.
CC: Grokipedia AI Presents Harut Sassounian’s Life-long Activities
Born in Aleppo, Syria, Sassounian immigrated to the United States in 1969, earning a Master’s degree in international affairs from Columbia University in New York in 1975, and after moving to Los Angeles , he earned an MBA from Pepperdine University in 1977, while working for Bank of America.[2] Fluent in five languages, including Armenian, Arabic, Turkish, and French, he has built a career centered on Armenian advocacy, serving as a non-governmental delegate on human rights at the United Nations in Geneva for a decade.[1][2] His syndicated opinion columns, which address topics such as the Armenian Genocide and geopolitical challenges facing Armenia, are reprinted in numerous outlets worldwide and have positioned him as a prominent voice in Armenian media.[3]Sassounian’s humanitarian efforts include presiding over the United Armenian Fund, and subsequently, the Armenia Artsakh Fund which together raised $1.1 billion of aid to Armenia and Artsakh from 1979 to 2026. He also held a vice chair role at the Lincy Foundation, contributing $242 million in Armenian infrastructure projects.[1][2] In recognition of his journalistic impact, he received Armenia’s Golden Pen Award—the nation’s highest journalism honor—in 2016, and he authored The Armenian Genocide: The World Speaks Out, 1915-2015: Documents and Declarations to compile historical evidence on the topic.[1] In 2024, he digitized The California Courier, expanding its reach to daily updates and a global online audience without subscriptions.[3]
Early Life and Background
Childhood and Family
Harut Sassounian was born in 1950 in Aleppo, Syria, to Armenian parents within a diaspora community shaped by the aftermath of the Armenian Genocide, as some of his grandparents’ relatives had survived the Ottoman-era massacres.[4] Aleppo hosted one of the largest Armenian populations outside Armenia, fostering institutions for cultural preservation, language maintenance, and communal solidarity amid historical displacement and minority status in the region.[5]Sassounian later recalled a happy childhood in this environment, free from overt discrimination during his early years in Syria, which allowed immersion in Armenian traditions and family narratives of resilience.[4] These familial ties to genocide survivors instilled an early awareness of Armenian historical trauma and the imperatives of cultural continuity in exile.[6]In 1965, at age 15, Sassounian’s entire family departed Aleppo for Beirut, Lebanon, reflecting broader patterns of Armenian migration amid regional instabilities.[2] He immigrated to the United States independently in 1969, arriving at age 18, with his family reuniting and settling in California in the following years, marking the transition from Middle Eastern diaspora life to American integration.[2]
Education
Sassounian completed his secondary education at Sofia Hagopian Armenian High School in Beirut, Lebanon, an institution emphasizing Armenian language, history, and culture alongside standard curricula, which cultivated his early proficiency in Armenian studies and multilingualism.[7][8]He then earned a Master’s degree in International Affairs from Columbia University in New York City, between 1973 and 1975. This graduate-level training focused on global political dynamics, diplomacy, and international relations, equipping him with analytical frameworks for examining ethnic conflicts and state policies.[9][5][10][2]Subsequently, Sassounian obtained a Master of Business Administration (MBA) from Pepperdine University’s Graziadio School of Business and Management in Los Angeles, where coursework in business strategy, management, and operations provided practical skills in organizational leadership and media economics.[9][5][10]
Professional Career
Journalism and The California Courier
Harut Sassounian assumed the role of publisher of The California Courier in 1983, taking over from its original founders, George Mason (Elmassian) and Reese Cleghorn, who had established the English-language weekly newspaper in Fresno, California, in 1958 to serve the Armenian-American community, particularly those less fluent in Armenian.[11] Under Sassounian’s leadership, the newspaper relocated its operations to Los Angeles in 1988 to better reach the expanding Armenian diaspora in the region, which had become the largest outside Armenia.[11]The publication grew from an initial base of approximately 700 subscribers, primarily in Glendale and Fresno, by serving as a dedicated platform for diaspora news, community achievements, and non-partisan discourse on Armenian matters.[10] Under Sassounian’s management, the newspaper evolved into a consistent voice for English-speaking Armenians across California and beyond, reflecting the community’s demographic shifts from the Central Valley to urban centers.[11]Editorially, The California Courier under Sassounian prioritized factual reporting and open discussion of social, cultural, civic, and political issues affecting Armenians, with a commitment to countering distortions of historical events such as the Armenian Genocide.[12] This approach included dedicated coverage of genocide recognition efforts and regional conflicts involving Armenia, emphasizing vigilance to preserve accurate narratives amid denialist claims.[12] The newspaper maintained a non-partisan stance, fostering debate without endorsing specific political factions, which helped solidify its role as a milestone in Armenian-American journalism.[11]
Syndicated Column and Media Presence
Harut Sassounian authors a weekly syndicated column originating in The California Courier, distributed to Armenian-American publications including the Armenian Weekly.[13][14] The column emphasizes detailed examinations of Armenian diplomatic and security matters, drawing on verifiable reports and historical records to support its assessments.[15] Its syndication extends Sassounian’s commentary to broader diaspora audiences, with contributions also appearing in outlets like LA Progressive.[16]In addition to print syndication, Sassounian serves as a frequent television commentator on Armenian networks, providing analysis during key events in regional politics.[17] He has appeared on programs such as Horizon TV, offering insights into diaspora organizational efforts.[18]Sassounian also engages in audio media, guesting on podcasts including the Armenian News Podcast and WiseNuts, where episodes focus on historical philanthropy and community structures without delving into partisan endorsements.[19][20]Sassounian is among the most widely circulated writers addressing Armenian topics internationally, attributing this to the column’s consistent publication since 1983 and its reliance on documented evidence over unsubstantiated narratives.[3] This reach positions his work as a staple reference for diaspora readers seeking fact-based perspectives on geopolitical developments.[21]
Other Professional Roles
Sassounian served as an international marketing executive for Procter & Gamble in Geneva, Switzerland, from 1978 to 1982, focusing on business development in a multinational corporate setting.[17] This early role involved applying strategic marketing principles across global operations, distinct from his later media endeavors.[22]Leveraging his MBA from Pepperdine University’s Graziadio School of Business, Sassounian has held CEO positions emphasizing media production and operational scaling, including leadership in entities that expanded fundraising and infrastructure initiatives.[9] These experiences highlight his entrepreneurial approach to business growth.[17]In addition to executive roles, Sassounian chairs the Board of Directors for HyeID, a diaspora-focused organization, where he directs strategic governance and development efforts.[23] This position underscores his involvement in leadership structures beyond publishing, prioritizing organizational trusteeship and policy direction.[19]
Activism and Philanthropy
Armenian Genocide Advocacy
Harut Sassounian has utilized his platform as publisher and columnist for The California Courierto advocate for the recognition of the Armenian Genocide, emphasizing historical evidence from Ottoman-era telegrams, U.S. diplomatic records, and eyewitness accounts that document systematic deportations and massacres resulting in approximately 1.5 million Armenian deaths between 1915 and 1923.[24] In his columns, he critiques Turkish denialism as a state-funded effort to distort primary sources, such as German and Allied archival materials confirming Ottoman orders for extermination, arguing that these policies causally led to the near-total eradication of Armenian populations in Anatolia, with pre-war numbers exceeding 2 million dropping to under 100,000 by 1922.[24] [25] Sassounian attributes denial to political expediency rather than evidentiary disputes, citing scholarly consensus and U.S. acknowledgments, including a 1951 State Department filing to the International Court of Justice and Ronald Reagan’s 1981 proclamation referencing the genocide.[24]As a former United Nations human rights delegate, Sassounian led the lobbying effort for the 1985 recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the U.N. Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, which adopted a report affirming the Armenian Genocide by the overwhelming vote of 15 to 1.[26] He continues educational efforts through lectures and events, such as his scheduled keynote address on April 6, 2025, at the “Forgotten, Unforgettable” commemoration marking the 40th anniversary of this U.N. milestone, hosted by Armenian organizations in Watertown, Massachusetts, to highlight the sub-commission’s role in countering revisionist narratives.[26] These initiatives focus on disseminating verifiable documents, including Ottoman memos revealing centralized planning of relocations that resulted in documented mass atrocities, to educate diaspora communities and policymakers on the empirical basis for genocide classification.[24]During the 2015 centennial commemorations of the genocide’s onset, Sassounian participated in global events to amplify calls for U.S. federal recognition, including speaking at the “Responsibility 2015” conference in New York City, where he addressed reparations grounded in legal precedents like insurance claims awarded to survivors’ heirs in U.S. courts.[27] He also attended the launch of the “100 LIVES” initiative, engaging with international figures to underscore the demographic and cultural devastation evidenced by pre- and post-war censuses, while advocating against normalization of denialist claims that minimize causal links between Ottoman directives and the resulting humanitarian catastrophe.[27] [24] His work prioritizes primary-source-driven arguments over symbolic gestures, linking recognition to demands for restitution based on successor-state liability under international law.[24]
Armenia Artsakh Fund and Donations
Harut Sassounian serves as president of the Armenia Artsakh Fund, a non-profit organization he founded in 2015 to continue humanitarian aid efforts to Armenia and Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh) that began following the 1988 Spitak earthquake, with cumulative deliveries exceeding one billion dollars.[13][10] The fund’s contributions include medicines, food, and support for displaced populations, with public financial reports from GuideStar verifying distributions to economically disadvantaged families and medical aid recipients in these regions.[28]In response to the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war, the Armenia Artsakh Fund provided $15 million in humanitarian assistance to Armenia and Artsakh over the subsequent five months, aiding war-affected civilians through direct shipments of essentials.[29] This included partnerships for delivering $486,000 worth of medicines to displaced Artsakh Armenians sheltered in Armenia, as documented in fund announcements and partner reports from organizations like Direct Relief.[30] These efforts prioritized verifiable outcomes, such as medical distributions tracked via shipment logs, rather than unquantified appeals.
Political Commentary on Armenian Issues
Harut Sassounian has sharply critiqued Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan for interfering in the Armenian Apostolic Church, accusing him in a July 28, 2025, column of seeking control over ecclesiastical leadership amid governance failures, including demands to verify the moral integrity of Catholicos candidates without clear mechanisms.[31] He further alleged Pashinyan’s use of divide-and-rule strategies, such as pressuring Catholicos Karekin II to resign and inciting clergy divisions, as detailed in a December 1, 2025, piece, which Sassounian framed as undermining the church’s independence to consolidate power.[32] These criticisms align with Sassounian’s broader concerns over Pashinyan’s hostility toward religious institutions, dating back to early tensions where the prime minister denigrated church figures.[33]Sassounian has also questioned the integrity of Pashinyan’s political operations, highlighting irregularities in donor lists for his party’s Yerevan mayoral candidate in February 2024, where fake names appeared, contradicting claims of transparent elections and suggesting systemic deception.[34] In external affairs, he has voiced skepticism toward concessions in Artsakh disputes, citing a May 26-28, 2022, Gallup poll showing 89% of Armenians opposing placement under Azerbaijani rule, and arguing that yielding territory signals weakness that invites aggression rather than ensuring security, as concessions historically dishonor sacrifices without deterring threats.[35]On diaspora relations, Sassounian has advocated unity with Armenia, warning in a February 2010 analysis that policy rifts—such as over Turkish protocols—must not fracture ties, as diaspora support bolsters national resilience, even amid criticisms of government actions that alienate overseas Armenians.[37] He contends that internal divisions, fueled by Pashinyan’s rhetoric, weaken collective bargaining power against external foes, prioritizing causal links between cohesion and deterrence over short-term political expediency.[38]
Writings and Publications
Books and Edited Works
Sassounian compiled and introduced The Armenian Genocide: The World Speaks Out, 1915-2005: Documents and Declarations, published in 2005 by the 90th Anniversary Committee of the Armenian Genocide to mark the Ottoman Empire’s systematic extermination campaign against Armenians.[39] The volume aggregates dozens of primary documents, including diplomatic cables, eyewitness testimonies, parliamentary resolutions, and media reports from 1915 onward, prioritizing raw archival materials over interpretive narratives to substantiate the genocide’s scale and international awareness at the time.[40]An expanded edition, The Armenian Genocide: The World Speaks Out, 1915-2015: Documents and Declarations, was released in 2015 for the centennial commemoration, incorporating additional post-2005 materials such as U.S. presidential statements, European Parliament declarations, and scholarly analyses grounded in declassified records.[1] Sassounian’s editorial approach emphasizes verifiable evidence from governmental archives and contemporary observers, avoiding unsubstantiated claims while highlighting patterns of denial and delayed recognition by major powers.[17]
Key Columns and Opinions
Sassounian’s columns frequently address tensions between the Armenian Apostolic Church and the Armenian government, particularly highlighting divisions in 2024-2025 over ecclesiastical appointments and state influence. In a January 2024 piece, he criticized Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s administration for attempting to install a government-aligned candidate as Catholicos, arguing that such moves undermine the church’s autonomy and risk alienating the diaspora, which views the institution as a symbol of national resilience. He contended that historical precedents, including Soviet-era interferences, demonstrate the perils of politicizing religious leadership, potentially eroding public trust in both entities.On economic matters, Sassounian has opined on Kirk Kerkorian’s investments in Armenia, acknowledging their tangible benefits. He balanced this by noting Kerkorian’s philanthropy but emphasized that sustained foreign investment requires domestic reforms to convert capital inflows into self-sustaining growth.Sassounian advocates for Armenian self-sufficiency in columns debunking over-reliance on foreign aid, arguing that diaspora remittances—totaling over $2 billion annually to Armenia—foster dependency rather than innovation. In a 2023 analysis, he countered narratives of perpetual victimhood post-Armenian Genocide by urging policy shifts toward export-driven economies, citing Israel’s model of technological self-reliance despite similar historical traumas as evidence that internal reforms outperform aid petitions. He supported this with data showing Armenia’s GDP growth stagnating at 4-5% pre-2020 without diversification, warning that unchecked aid expectations could perpetuate cycles of corruption observed in post-Soviet states. This stance includes critiques of U.S. congressional resolutions for genocide recognition, which he views as symbolic but insufficient without accompanying economic empowerment strategies.
Controversies and Criticisms
Stances on Armenian Government and Diaspora Politics
Sassounian has been a vocal critic of Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s administration, particularly regarding alleged corruption and electoral manipulations. In a 2021 column, he accused Pashinyan’s Civil Contract party of fabricating funding documents for Yerevan mayoral candidate, citing discrepancies in reported donations from diaspora sources that were later revealed as non-existent or misattributed. He argued this undermined electoral transparency, drawing on public financial disclosures and opposition reports to substantiate claims of systemic favoritism toward ruling party candidates.On ecclesiastical politics, Sassounian has questioned Pashinyan’s influence over the Armenian Apostolic Church, alleging in 2019 that the prime minister harbored ambitions to install a loyalist as Catholicos to consolidate power. He referenced Pashinyan’s public statements and church election interferences, such as the 2018 push against Karekin II, as evidence of politicization eroding the church’s independence. Sassounian defends his positions with verifiable timelines of government actions, such as delayed church reforms post-Velvet Revolution.In diaspora politics, Sassounian advocates for a confrontational stance toward Turkey, opposing Pashinyan’s normalization protocols signed in 2022, which he deemed a betrayal of Genocide recognition efforts without reciprocal concessions. He has praised diaspora organizations for funding military aid to Artsakh, contrasting this with government policies he views as appeasing Ankara at the expense of historical justice, supported by analyses of trade data showing minimal Turkish economic benefits to Armenia by 2023. Sassounian asserts with evidence of Turkey’s unfulfilled 2009 protocol commitments, emphasizing causal links between diplomatic softness and territorial losses in 2020-2023.
Responses to Opposing Viewpoints
Sassounian has countered Turkish denial of the Armenian Genocide by exposing state-sponsored efforts to fabricate doubt through academic funding. In a 2011 report, he detailed Prof. Taner Akçam’s findings from a Turkish insider source, revealing that the Turkish Foreign Ministry transferred substantial funds to U.S. scholars around 2004–2005 to author denialist books, with transactions documented by signed receipts retained in ministry records.[41] He cited works like Michael Gunter’s Armenian History and the Question of Genocide as exemplars of this strategy, which aimed to normalize skepticism rather than outright rejection, thereby undermining empirical evidence of the 1915–1923 extermination of 1.5 million Armenians.[41]Against Azerbaijani narratives asserting territorial integrity over Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh), Sassounian rebutted claims of sovereignty by emphasizing demographic realities and historical self-determination, arguing that Baku’s blacklisting of Artsakh visitors since 2013 violated international norms and masked revanchist ambitions evidenced by post-2020 encroachments into Armenian territory.[42]In engagements with pro-Pashinyan diaspora factions defending concessions for purported peace, Sassounian highlighted causal failures in the 2023 Artsakh crisis, where Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s directives to Artsakh leaders for direct talks with Azerbaijan abandoned 120,000 Armenian citizens—entitled to protection under Armenia’s constitution—to a blockade initiated in December 2022 and a September 2023 invasion, yielding hundreds killed, thousands missing, and near-total ethnic cleansing via mass flight.[43] He refuted Pashinyan’s assertion that pre-2018 Armenian leaders recognized Artsakh as Azerbaijani, deeming it a falsification unsupported by official records or actions, and warned that such miscalculations ignored Aliyev’s documented expansionism, including occupation of Armenian border villages and rhetoric framing Armenia as “Western Azerbaijan.”[44][43]Sassounian has addressed left-leaning critiques labeling Armenian advocacy as excessive nationalism by invoking data on appeasement’s perils, paralleling Pashinyan’s deference—which sidelined military readiness despite Azerbaijan’s 44-day war victory in 2020—to historical precedents where territorial concessions emboldened aggressors, as seen in the Genocide-era Ottoman expansions unchecked by early deterrence.[43] This approach underscores that verifiable strategic inaction, not defensive nationalism, precipitated Artsakh’s fall, with over 100,000 refugees straining Armenia’s resources by late 2023.[43]
Legacy and Impact
Influence on Armenian Community
Sassounian’s tenure as publisher of The California Courier since 1983 has sustained the newspaper’s role as a primary platform for Armenian diaspora discourse, with his columns on political advocacy reprinted across U.S. and international outlets, fostering heightened awareness of Armenian issues among readers over four decades.[11][45] The publication, established in 1958 as the oldest independent English-language Armenian weekly, has amplified calls for unity and action, influencing community engagement on topics from humanitarian aid to international lobbying.[11]As president of the United Armenian Fund—a coalition of seven Armenian-American charities—Sassounian oversaw the delivery of $575 million in humanitarian assistance to Armenia and Artsakh from 1989 to 2009, exemplifying successful diaspora resource mobilization for post-Soviet reconstruction and crisis response.[45] This effort underscored the diaspora’s capacity to provide economic support independent of government constraints, channeling funds into infrastructure and relief that bolstered Armenia’s stability during vulnerable periods.[46]Sassounian received the ANC-WR Legacy Award from the Armenian National Committee of America, Western Region, in recognition of his over 30 years of volunteer support for the ANC and other organizations.[45]His advocacy advanced Armenian Genocide recognition, including a pivotal role as a non-governmental delegate in securing the United Nations Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities’ acknowledgment in 1985.[45][47] Sassounian’s documentation in The Armenian Genocide: The World Speaks Out, 1915-2005 compiled global declarations, aiding educational and lobbying campaigns that pressured policymakers toward formal recognitions.[45]These initiatives elevated genocide awareness and diaspora activism. Sassounian’s uncompromising rhetoric denounced participation in Turkish-hosted events like the 2010 Akhtamar church service as propaganda. Proponents credit this approach with sustaining vigilance against denialism.[46]
Recent Activities
In response to the 2023 Artsakh refugee crisis, the Armenia Artsakh Fund, under Sassounian’s presidency, intensified humanitarian aid efforts, delivering $486,000 worth of medicines to displaced Armenians in Armenia by November 2023.[49] This included shipments facilitated by partners like Direct Relief, which donated $27 million in medicines to Armenia in the first 10 months of 2023 alone.[49] By October 2024, the fund airlifted an additional $630,463 in medicines to Armenia, addressing ongoing needs from the displacement of over 100,000 Artsakh residents.[50]Sassounian continued publishing critical columns on Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s policies in 2024, arguing in July that only 13% of Armenians supported Pashinyan, urging new elections due to lost mandate amid territorial concessions.[51] In September, he critiqued Pashinyan’s Diaspora summit remarks as misguided, timing errors that alienated overseas Armenians by downplaying eternal struggle narratives.[52] He further accused Pashinyan’s government of internal dismantling through economic mismanagement and foreign policy shifts.[53]On church divisions, Sassounian warned in late 2024 of Pashinyan’s encroachments on the Armenian Apostolic Church, suggesting potential self-declaration as Catholicos amid disputes over Catholicos Karekin II’s authority.[54] These commentaries highlighted tensions between state policies and ecclesiastical independence.In media appearances, Sassounian discussed U.S. election impacts on Armenian issues in a November 2024 podcast, emphasizing diaspora advocacy.[55] He followed with a February 2025 Armenian News podcast interview detailing Kirk Kerkorian’s investments in Armenia, covering Kerkorian’s discovery of the country, funding projects until his 2015 death, and lessons for future philanthropy.[56]
References
-
https://podcasts.Armenian News.org/guest/hsassounian/
-
https://podcasts.Armenian News.org/409-harut-sassounian-kirk-kerkorians-benevolent-engagement-with-armenia/
168: They decreased sharply. Look what happened to wages
March: 16, 2026
Stele was an integral part of the CP members’ power. But lying also has a limit.
The other day, Economy Minister Gevorg Papoyan was talking about last year’s salary increases, making discoveries, publishing figures unknown to official statistics, saying that we see how the average salary in Armenia is constantly increasing.
“For the first time, in December, we had an average salary of 400,000 drams, taxes included, of course.
I look at all this not with the pre-election and electoral logic, but as the economic development of our country,” the Minister of Economy insisted.
Let’s leave aside how well this statement of Gevorg Papoyan fits into the pre-election or election logic, let’s look at the figure he gave about the average salary.
But before that, let’s note that a few days ago, the Minister of Labor and Social Affairs made such a statement.
“2025 in December, the average salary in Armenia was 401 thousand drams.
Moreover, in November of the same year, that indicator was 327 thousand drams,” Arsen Torosyan advertised their recorded salary increases during the meeting with the CP faction, probably excited by their own salary gains.
Gevorg Papoyan and Arsen Torosyan are the ministers of this government who are directly related to salaries and hardly knew what the average salary in Armenia was in December. They probably knew, but they lied or gave false numbers, exaggerating the salary indicators.
The data published by the official statistics show that the average salary in Armenia in December last year was 400 thousand drams, moreover, it was not more than that.
According to official data, the average salary was much lower in December. It amounted to 376.7 thousand drams, 23.3 thousand drams less than 400 thousand.
But as we can see, this did not prevent Gevorg Papoyan, who holds the position of Minister of Economy, and Arsen Torosyan, who holds the position of Minister of Social Affairs, to talk about the average salary of 400 thousand or more than 400 thousand. Moreover, to try to create the impression that salaries are growing at a high rate.
Arsen Torosyan says that in November the average salary was 327 thousand drams, in December it became 401 thousand drams.
If Arsen Torosyan and the other officials had given them, let’s say, 17-18 million bonuses in December instead of 7-8 million, the difference would definitely be bigger. But the ministers who received millions of bonuses naturally avoid talking about it. Isn’t it clear that they won’t say that they were given millions in bonuses, that’s why average salary indicators jumped in December? But with that, they did not reach 400 thousand, as they try to present.
The average salary, after the widespread payment of bonuses in December, was much lower than intentionally, perhaps also unknowingly, these people declare. And what we see already in January of this year reveals the secret of salary growth.
In January of this year, compared to the previous month, the average salary in Armenia decreased significantly. If in December last year it was 376.7 thousand drams, in January of this year it was 293.3 thousand drams.
It decreased at once by 83.4 thousand drams or by more than 22 percent.
When we subtract the unseen high bonuses and bonuses distributed to government officials at the end of the year, we see what remains below the average salary. It is still not the real salary, it is the nominal salary, that is, before taxation.
If taxes are deducted, the real average salary is much lower. In January of this year, it was only 217 thousand drams.
This is despite the fact that the average salary in some sectors reaches 900 thousand, sometimes up to 1 million drams, which means that the salaries of hundreds of thousands of citizens in many other sectors are even much lower than the average. There are many people who receive the minimum wage, sometimes even lower.
Last year, the average salary in Armenia increased by 15.9 thousand drams. The growth is not high, only 5.5 percent, but it was also due to higher than average increases in several areas. Let’s say that the average salary in the mining industry increased by 53.5 thousand drams last year, almost 3.4 times more than the average salary.
The average salary increase in the financial system exceeded 50.6 thousand. The rate of growth is almost 3.2 times more than the average salary.
Instead, wages in many sectors of the economy have been much more modestly increased, and sometimes even decreased. And this means that there are no tangible changes in the lives of the citizens included in these groups from the high economic growth that they try to present as a world-viewing event or a world-level achievement. Not counting the fact that they are affected by inflation, increases in taxes and fees for individuals.
Imagine, in January of this year, compared to the same month last year, the average salary in Armenia increased by only 5.4 percent. At the same time, food inflation was 5.9 percent, 0.5 percentage points higher than average wage growth. It is obvious that only due to inflation, there has been a decline in the purchasing power of the society and deepening of poverty.
HAKOB KOCHARYAN
—
“I don’t know what building they are moving to, no one has asked me about it.” M:
March: 16, 2026
Still in early 2024 168.am referred to closing a number of departments in Meghri to the alarm.
At that time, various Telegram channels wrote that: “A number of branches of departments were removed from the city of Meghri in Syunik Marz and moved to Goris or Kapa, in particular, the SRC and Cadastre branches, and the cadastre branch was closed on August 16, 2023, the hospital is in a state of disrepair, there are no doctors there, and it is not heated at all.” On February 1, 2024 scheduled to close The Court of First Instance of Meghri, the mortuary has also been closed, along with the military laundry, even to get a driver’s license, people go to Kapan or Goris again.”
The residents of Meghri were also worried about the fact that the morgue was being taken out of Meghri and Kapa was being moved to the morgue. Armine Avagyan, assistant to Syunik governor, said that by the governor’s office The proposal made to the Ministry of Health was approved, according to which a new morgue will be built in Meghri with state funding.
Back then Cadastre Committee spokesperson Marine Sahakyan Regarding the closure of the Cadastre Committee in Meghri 168.am–had transferred to
“A long time ago, when we started digitizing our electronic platform, the positions in the offices were reduced. In the offices, citizens can only enter an application, we have operators through which they can also do it, for example, there is “Haypost”, banks. Specifically, in the case of Meghri, the few positions I have are actually vacant for objective reasons. We have one employee there who has a serious health problem. I think there were three employees there, the office is there, and it was temporarily closed, at the moment, the positions are simply not filled.”
Bagrat Zakaryan, the former mayor of Meghri, had a negative assessment of the closure of the branches of the departments, saying.
“Meghri is not a less important city for Armenia, and the citizens cannot get to Kapan from Meghri to get any papers from the Cadastre. As for the Meghri hospital, the mayor said that the hospital has always had a serious personnel problem.
Recently, we received another alert from Meghri regarding the closure of a number of departments.
We tried From Khachatur Andreasyan, head of Meghri community to find out which department will be closed in Meghri, does the relocation of these departments not cause problems among the residents?
“To be honest, I don’t know what building they are moving to, I can’t say, I haven’t heard, no one has asked me about it, I can’t answer this question.
They say that they are closing the Prosecutor’s Office building, but we don’t have such a building, there was such a building a long time ago, but now it is not there, it is regional, it is not in Meghri.
As for the building of the morgue, we are opening a new one in Meghri, the new building of the morgue will be handed over in 2 months.” 168.amKhachatur Andreasyan briefly mentioned in a conversation with
—