On July 1, in the article entitled “What role has Baku allocated to the National Security Service of the Republic of Armenia in having an IDMS system related to missing persons, are there any risks in the proposal addressed to the citizens of the Republic of Armenia?” we have alerted we are talking about specific risks.

A few days ago we have reminded  The agreements reached in 2025 with the former director of the NSS, Armen Abazyan, with his Azerbaijani partner.

And only yesterday, the relics of 3 martyrs who were considered missing from the first war in Azerbaijan were found on the ground give up: In general, from 2025 on the Azerbaijani side, the remains and burial places of their own missing persons began to be found often, but despite this, Baku continues to raise this topic on international platforms and point accusing arrows at Armenia.

Let’s return to the IDMS system related to missing persons and to the offer of Baku to RA citizens to disclose confidential information, which was voiced by the Deputy Head of the State Security Service of Azerbaijan Sharafat Hasanov, and add that recently Azerbaijan already launched Online Inquiry Center (OIC) as: a digital platform for collecting, processing and coordinating data on missing persons:

There are several noteworthy passages here that support the claims and warnings made in our articles cited above.

In particular, in the area of ​​location or search, a preliminary assessment is made of the missing martyr’s circumstances, as a result of which it happened, according to which it is required: “specify the year, the date of the commission of the crime”. as well as other questions with ulterior motives are asked, which can be completed by the citizens of Armenia and Azerbaijan.

In our latest publications, we wrote that Azerbaijan also keeps the “Khojalu Genocide” issue on the agenda in the context of the issue of missing persons, and even names those “responsible” for it: former presidents of the Republic of Armenia, former soldiers, commanders of the first war.

For example, as we mentioned in one of the articles, in the context of the “Khojalu incidents” Baku often remembers the missing national hero of Azerbaijan. Natig Gasimov and claims that he was “killed by Vitaly Balasanyan”. And the Gasimov family is in the center of Aliyev’s constant attention, which, of course, is also done for propaganda purposes.

This claim of ours is confirmed by the latest propaganda machine of Baku publication, where several questions are raised in the context of the process of registration of missing persons:

■ Families and relatives of missing persons have the right to know the truth, to achieve justice and to receive compensation, and this should be ensured by the state.

As for what Baku might understand by justice, we can make assumptions, although the next point actually gives the answer.

■ It is necessary to give a legal assessment of the “perpetrated genocide” of Armenians against Azerbaijanis, and it becomes more relevant.

Here, Azerbaijan specifically refers to the “capture of Azerbaijani civilians” during the First World War.

And Azerbaijan brings these issues to the international community under the name of humanitarian issues and international humanitarian law.

What is going to be done, to what extent is the RA National Security Service, which is directly subordinate to Nikol Pashinyan, participating in the above-mentioned process? We are waiting for the answer to our written request, after which we can say whether the National Security Service of Armenia cooperates in any way with the National Security and Foreign Intelligence Services of Azerbaijan in the context of the registration and search of missing persons by written or unwritten law, and what is the nature of it, to what extent Armenia will benefit from it, to what extent Baku will merely supplement its legal, political and military forces against Armenia. the information base, which will definitely not remain on the shelves. Let’s wait for the response of RA NSS.

Before that, let’s draw attention to the fact that Mehriban Aliyeva, the first vice president of Azerbaijan issues of digitization in the state systems of the country are under control, problems of artificial intelligence development, cyber security.

And if everything is written here according to the laws, then, according to Azerbaijani and non-Azerbaijani political analysts and experts, Mehriban Aliyeva has a huge “unwritten” influence on all power structures, including the State Security Service, which has happened since 2017, when Aliyeva became the first vice president of Azerbaijan, personnel appointments are made through her “dabro”.

For example, the acting director of the National Security Service of Azerbaijan, Ali Nagiyev, with whom Armen Abazyan had once reached some agreements regarding the implementation of joint search operations for missing persons, to that position. has been appointed In 2019, he was born in Nakhichevan.

According to various reports, the Foreign Intelligence Service of Azerbaijan actively cooperates with the diplomatic corps, and Mehriban Aliyeva also has a serious influence on the latter. And the head of the Foreign Intelligence Service of Azerbaijan? This is Orhan Sultanov, he has been in that position since 2015.

In this context, it should be noted that the other day, the President of Azerbaijan Aliyev assigned the State Security Service of the country the powers to carry out operative-intelligence activities for the protection of strategic objects and persons, the protection of which was the responsibility of the State Agency for the Protection of Strategic Objects of Azerbaijan until now.

And Azerbaijan places the proposal related to the missing persons to the RA citizens in the logic of the peace agenda, as well as the provision of maps of mined areas, claiming that a stable and lasting peace is possible not only through political agreements, but also by solving humanitarian problems, and here Baku is not very satisfied with Armenia, although it has started to find the remains of its missing persons from the first war, received maps of mined areas at different times, and finally, kept in RA there are no Azerbaijani prisoners, hostages and imprisoned persons, which we cannot say in the case of Azerbaijan.

Another question is to what extent the RA government puts the issue in this way and considers the return of the Armenians held in Baku as a condition for the establishment of a solid peace in the negotiations, why not support the finding of the remains of our missing persons? We are still not talking about the fact that people left the graves of their sons and children who died in the 44-day war in Artsakh. In other words, Armenia also has many humanitarian issues to raise, even if they require a political solution.

—

It is surprising when opposition leaders or figures consider July 4 as a dry border day. Even if there is a partial miracle on the 4th of July, it will not change anything by and large, although those small miracles will obviously not happen, and there will not even be a redistribution of mandates. CP did not even show formal restraint to wait until the mandates are distributed. They are already dividing positions among themselves, filtering, and promoting some. 168TVof « expressed such an opinion during the program “Democratic Alternative” party chairman Suren Surenyants.

“The president of the European Commission was in Armenia, and he welcomed the “strong democracy” here. This is carte blanche, and under this Western pseudo-democratic applause, Nikol Pashinyan is establishing authoritarianism in Armenia. This is its highest level, stable authoritarianism, and authoritarianism has existed since the revolution.

On the one hand, we are talking about the permissiveness, complacency and recklessness of the government, on the other hand, it is obvious that the crisis of the government has not been overcome in these elections, moreover, it has deepened. Nikol Pashinyan’s aggressive behavior and rhetoric, as well as the set of external and internal challenges, which cannot be called a crisis, speak of that,” said the opposition figure.

“The opposition leaders, who fortunately have both human, organizational and financial resources, are obliged to form effective political systems. The main opposition associations, with the exception, perhaps, of the “Armenia” alliance, which is more or less a political system, are not stable political systems, rather they are pre-election associations that become irrelevant after the end of the pre-election process, or will have to be transformed into serious political tools and systems. Otherwise, in a few months we will have to talk about the failures of the opposition, even if the crisis of the government is obvious,” the politician said.

According to Suren Surenyants, on the night of June 7-8, at 2:15, when Nikol Pashinyan’s famous announcement about declaring himself the winner was made, at that moment the counting was going on in the majority of Yerevan precincts, that is, his proxies could not have informed him about the supposedly convincing victory. “This is usurpation of power. But this opposition, unfortunately, is not revolutionary in nature. In addition, they did not manage to form stable political systems, which is perhaps the main omission of the opposition. And June 7 painfully reflected that reality.”

“Authoritarianism is growing, targeted arrests are taking place, they are working in all directions. Intellectuals or leaders of parties are arrested: Chalabya, Tevanyan. It is clear that several political institutions are being paralyzed at the same time, and no matter how many other figures there are in these political forces, the role of the leader is completely different,” said Suren Surenyants.

Details in the video

—

5 political forces issued a statement, which specifically states: “Today, the Constitutional Court published the decision regarding the lawsuits disputing the results of the last parliamentary elections.

This decision of the Constitutional Court:

• does not solve the issue of the legitimacy of the emerging government. the government formed under such conditions and with recorded results lacks legitimacy.

• does not correct the election frauds and does not eliminate mass election violations and does not solve the deep political and legal crisis in the country.

On the contrary, direct refusal to register violations by the last legal instance deepens the current crisis in the country, does not contribute to the formation of an atmosphere of domestic solidarity and moves the struggle to the field of political resistance. Therefore, in order to overcome the existing political crisis and restore the constitutional order, the undersigned political forces declare consensus on the following principle directions and form a unified political agenda:

1. Prevention of forced changes to the Constitution of Armenia. Considering the constitutional amendments being prepared by the current administration as external coercion, we will use all legislative, public and political means to prevent the amendment of the Mother Law, which is a direct and irreversible blow to the sovereignty of the Republic of Armenia.

2. Protection of the Armenian Apostolic Holy Church. Considering the systematic illegal campaign against the Church, the Catholicos of All Armenians, the cornerstone of our political agenda will be the protection of the exclusive mission of the Armenian Apostolic Holy Church, its rights, property and reputation from any encroachments guaranteed by Article 18 of the Constitution.

3. Protection of the rights of political prisoners. A new wave of political repressions has started in the post-election period. Along with the electoral and political processes, the repressive practice in the country led to a sharp increase in the number of political prisoners. Our joint steps will be aimed at protecting their rights and demanding their immediate release.

4. Removal of the current government. The examination of the complaints of the opposition forces in the Constitutional Court only proved that the removal of the current regime is an imperative without an alternative. Therefore, the change of power and the formation of a new quality national government remains the only prerequisite for the restoration of constitutional order, establishment of solidarity and security in the country.

We realize that in the conditions of the disintegration of legal institutions, the citizen of the Republic of Armenia remains the only guarantor of the preservation of the state and the constitutional order.

Therefore, dear citizens,

This decision of the Constitutional Court is not the end of the struggle, but the beginning of a new, more systematic, institutional and large-scale political resistance phase.

The discussions between the opposition political forces on what to do on the above-mentioned points are continuing. We will inform you about further steps resulting from the discussions, including possible joint projects, in the near future.

Alliance of “Strong Armenia” parties

Alliance of “Armenia” parties

“Prosperous Armenia” party

“Armenian National Congress” party

Pan-Armenian Party “National-Democratic Pole”.

—

Nikol Pashinyan, who went to Iran to participate in the official farewell ceremony of the leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei, had a meeting with the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Masoud Pezeshkian.

According to the message of the RA government, Pashinyan once again expressed his condolences on the death of the supreme leader of Iran Ali Khamenei, emphasizing that Armenia shares the grief of the people of Iran.

President Pezeshkian thanked and noted that the Islamic Republic of Iran highly appreciates the position adopted by the Government of Armenia and the humanitarian support it has shown towards Iran in a difficult situation.

“The President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Masoud Pezeshkian, congratulated Nikol Pashinyan on his victory in the parliamentary elections and expressed confidence that bilateral relations will continue to develop and strengthen consistently. The parties also exchanged ideas on issues of regional importance, emphasizing the implementation of consistent steps aimed at strengthening peace, stability and regional cooperation,” the RA government’s message said.

It is noteworthy that the message spread by the Iranian side and the key emphasis in President Pezeshkian’s speech were absent from the RA government’s message. Iranian Mehr agency presented the message from the Iranian side, noting that Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian thanked Armenia for its support and expressed solidarity for the country in a difficult period, stressing that the strengthening of relations between Tehran and Yerevan is in the interests of both sides.

According to this report, the president of Iran characterized the relations between Tehran and Yerevan as based on mutual respect, neighborliness and common interests, noting that the countries are constantly expanding constructive cooperation in various fields.

“He also thanked Armenia for its cooperation during the last conflict and expressed hope for the quick conclusion of the negotiations on the bilateral comprehensive cooperation agreement. According to Pezeshkian, this document can open new opportunities for interaction and at the same time strengthen cooperation in the fields of customs, transport, transit, trade and economic relations.

The President of Iran stressed that the relations between Tehran and Yerevan should be free from external interference and should be determined exclusively by the independent will of both countries. He also noted that the presence of forces outside the region often complicates regional problems, rather than contributing to their solution.

Reaffirming the principles of Iran’s foreign policy, Pezeshkian stressed respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all states and emphasized Tehran’s commitment to diplomatic settlement of disputes. He also stated that, in his opinion, the main source of instability in West Asia is the Israeli regime, referring to the events that took place in Lebanon, Gaza, Syria and Iran,” said the message from the Iranian side.

Pashinyan’s words were also quoted in the statement. Let’s remind that back in January, Iran’s Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to Armenia Khalil Shirgholami said that an agreement on strategic partnership is being prepared. He expressed hope that it will be signed during this year, during a meeting of high-ranking officials.

Pezeshkian’s statement that “relations should be free from external interference and determined exclusively by the independent will of both countries” is not an accidental diplomatic expression. This is similar to another statement made by high-ranking officials of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the previous period: “the presence of third forces in the region is unacceptable.” Official Tehran did this at the stage when the EU civil observation mission started its activities in RA.

In the Iranian political vocabulary, the concept of “external forces” has a clear addressee. First of all, we are talking about the military-political involvement of the United States, the European Union, NATO’s influence, as well as Israel’s regional presence. This time, Tehran is trying to convey to Yerevan that the Armenian-Iranian agenda should not turn into a platform where third parties can influence the strategic communication of the two countries. This emphasis is heard in the background, when Armenia activates cooperation with the European Union and the United States day by day.

For Iran, the problem is not the fact of cooperation between Armenia and the West. For Iran, it remains a red line that such an architecture should not be formed in the South Caucasus, through which the Western or Israeli influence can directly approach the northern borders of Iran. For that reason, Pezeshkian’s statement should be considered not only as an assessment of Armenian-Iranian relations, but also as another political message of Iran regarding regional security.

It is also noteworthy that in the Iranian message, the topic of foreign intervention follows the section on the comprehensive cooperation agreement. It is obvious that the Iranian side is interested in the process, which was the first to speak publicly about this agreement, and now officially the Iranian side continues the topic. In the context of current Armenia-US, Armenia-EU relations, it is difficult to say when Yerevan will sign such an agreement with Tehran.

However, in the context of current regional realities, the topic of strategic partnership or comprehensive cooperation agreement also becomes important. If the document is signed, it can become not only a legal basis for economic cooperation, but also a political impulse that Armenia is not going to revise its fundamental approaches to Iran, even in the conditions of new foreign policy priorities.

For Tehran, such a document will also be an indicator of confidence that Yerevan continues to consider Iran as a key regional partner. At this stage, this agreement seems to become an important cornerstone in Armenian-Iranian relations, on which the Iranian side will expect progress. There was another remarkable emphasis in Pezeshkian’s statements: the reaffirmation of respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states. This wording directly coincides with Iran’s long-standing position, according to which the change of borders in the South Caucasus or the implementation of projects with an extraterritorial logic are unacceptable. Therefore, Tehran actually reaffirms that it continues to consider the issue of territorial integrity of Armenia not only as a component of bilateral relations, but also as part of its own national security system.

All this proves that the Pashinyan-Pezeshkian meeting had a much broader political content than the current meeting. If the Armenian side mainly emphasized sympathy, peace and the general development of bilateral relations, the Iranian message actually included the outline of Iran’s red lines and political expectations. In that sense, the difference between the two messages was political. Yerevan presented its agenda in the message without presenting Tehran’s red lines and positions, while Tehran deliberately emphasized its geopolitical priorities and red lines.

—

The session of the Armenian-Turkish commission for the joint use of Akhuryan and Araks rivers was held for the first time in the last 10 years at the end of May in Yerevan, the Water Committee of Armenia reported, without providing any details.

It is noted that the meeting of the representatives of the permanent border water resource management committees “Operation of Sardarapat Regulator” and “Operation of Akhuryan Reservoir” took place first at the border of the two countries (Akhuryan), then continued in the administrative building of “Jrar” CJSC (Yerevan).

Director of “Jrar” Tigran Vardanyan briefly noted that the signed documents “were drawn up on mutually beneficial terms”. It is reported that some important agreements have been reached. Although the details are not published, according to unofficial information, firstly, the Armenian side was allowed until this year. to carry out 12% more water intake including August. Secondly, the parties have agreed to take joint measures to prevent flooding in Akhuryan (including work-related reservoirs) and Araks, increase water supply during dry periods, and joint reproduction of fish resources. S. year by the end of the third quarter, it is planned to coordinate the ecological complex monitoring program of transboundary water bodies.

The length of the Akhuryan River is 186 km, about 2/3 of which passes through the Armenian-Turkish border. The major tributaries of Akhuryan are (from both sides) East Turkish Kars (the largest), Karakhan, Kars, Charyun, Ani, Tekor and Karangum.

The total area of ​​the water catchment area is 9670 sq km (almost identical to the area of ​​Cyprus).  Karnut (small) and Akhuryan reservoirs are built on the river, which are mainly used for agro-improvement/irrigation.: Near Gyumri, on Akhuryan, there is the medium-capacity Gyumri HPP, built in the late 1920s, which is one of the oldest in Armenia.

1973 The USSR and Turkish governments have signed an indefinite-term agreement “On the construction and cooperation of a dam and a reservoir on the Akhuryan border river”. Accordingly, Armenia, according to additional documents of this agreement of 1973-1975, has the right to use half of the flow volume of two transboundary rivers, Araks and Akhuryan, which additionally increases the balance of water resources of the republic by 0.945 cubic kilometers per year.

The parity principle of water use in this basin (as between the Georgian SSR, the Nakhichevan Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic of Azerbaijan, and Turkey on the other) was first established by the 1927 Soviet-Turkish Convention on “Water Use in Boundary Rivers”, which is also not limited by the period of validity.

The Akhuryan Reservoir, located in the northwest of the Armenian SSR, on the border with Turkey, was built by both countries in 1974-1982 and put into operation in 1982-83. 62.5% of its surface is located in the territory of Turkey (Yerevan proposed to create 55-58.5% of the reservoir area in the Armenian SSR, but this option was not implemented). The average seasonal capacity of the reservoir is approximately 521.5-525 million cubic meters, which often reaches 545-550 million cubic meters during periods of excess water.

These water resources are allocated for use on a strictly equitable basis, 50%/50% for agricultural irrigation and land reclamation on both sides (with minimal deviations due to uneven reservoir filling). A maximum of 13-14.5% (usually 10-11%) of the total water supply is used for local municipal and domestic needs. Akhuryan dam is 45 meters high.

Cooperation between Ankara and Yerevan on the mentioned issue has been saved also after 1991, in the absence of diplomatic relations, although the frequency of joint water economic commission meetings remained low until approximately the second half of the 2010s. At the end of 2017, the head of the Water Committee of Armenia, Arsen Harutyunyan, noted: “…Except for the Araks River, Armenians and Turks jointly clean the bed of the Akhuryan River. Most often, Armenian-Turkish working meetings (within the framework of the Water Economic Commission) are held on the banks of the Akhuryan Reservoir.

If it is dry season, we meet more often. We discuss, regulate the water intake, coordinate the work. decisions are always taken exclusively on the basis of consensus. In 2017, more than 10 such meetings were held. The issues are raised more often by the Armenian side, because the issue of agricultural irrigation is more acute on the Armenian side of the border. As for the Turks, they are generally willing to make concessions.”

In recent years, practical interaction has been an additional incentive get, which is quite logical in the context of the diversification of the foreign policy course of the republic, emphasizing the dialogue with the Turkic neighbors.

Alexey Baliev

vpoanalytics.com

Translation by Zhanna Avetisyan

—

168TVof “Trigger” the guest of the program Davit Jamalyan is a military expert.

During the program, the key issues of the regional and international agenda were considered in detail, as well as their impact on Armenia’s security and foreign political position.

The upcoming negotiations between the USA and Iran scheduled for July 18, as well as the possible consequences of their results for the Middle East and the South Caucasus, have become one of the central topics.

Special attention was paid to the discussion of Israel’s decision to recognize the Armenian Genocide and its political significance in modern international relations.

The expert also analyzed the visit of President Ursula von der Leyen to the region. His trips to Baku and Yerevan, as well as the interests and policies of the European Union in the South Caucasus, appeared in the center of the discussion.

Within the framework of the program, the internal political processes of Armenia, the Armenian-Russian relations and the possible scenarios of the future development of the situation in the region were considered.

The visit of Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan to Moscow, the role of Russia and Turkey in the South Caucasus, as well as the meeting of the Assistant to the President of Azerbaijan Hikmet Hajiyev and the Secretary of the Security Council of Armenia Armen Grigoryan became a separate topic.

At the end of the program, the main challenges and prospects facing Armenia in the rapidly changing geopolitical situation were discussed.

Hayk Derzyan

—