Ilham Aliyev announced the preparation of the project for the construction of a power transmission line through Armenia within the framework of the TRIPP project.

According to Aliyev, Azerbaijani specialists have already conducted an analysis in Armenia and determined the places where power transmission line supports can be installed.

Azerbaijan hopes that the Armenian side “will not delay the solution of this issue”.

According to Aliyev, if the Metsamor nuclear power plant is closed, Armenia “could face a serious energy crisis, and having an additional source of energy would be useful.”

Aliyev also made other statements about the so-called “Zangezur Corridor” and the interests of the European Union.

“The creation of Zangezur corridor was our initiative. Connecting the main part of Azerbaijan with its inseparable part, Nakhichevan, was our long-standing dream,” Ilham Aliyev stated in Nakhichevan.

“We were moving confidently and very skillfully, we were approaching that goal and we have already approached it,” he said, adding that Nakhichevan will become one of the irreplaceable transport hubs.

“Of course, the passage of 15 million tons of cargo here (the so-called “Zangezur Corridor” – ed.), and maybe even more, will cause great excitement.

More jobs will be created, economic activity will increase, and Nakhijevan, I can say, will become one of the irreplaceable transport hubs. It is completely possible,” said Aliyev.

He also stated that the representatives of the European Union are interested in participating in the Nakhichevan section of the Azerbaijan railway.

According to Aliyev, the EU representatives had already left for Nakhichevan, where they got acquainted with the situation on the spot.

The President of Azerbaijan noted that the European Union, as well as a number of other international organizations and states, is interested in this transport route and wants to become a participant in it.

“Many international structures, some countries are interested in this railway, especially the Nakhichevan section of Azerbaijan railways. One of them is the European Union,” Aliyev said.

—

Davit Ananyan, a member of the management board of the “Wings of Unity” party, former chairman of the SRC, wrote:

“It is no longer a secret for anyone that Armenia-Russia relations have entered a dangerous stage. In the near future, not only the expansion of restrictions on Armenian products, but also the tightening of migration administration, revision of gas supply conditions, logistical problems and strengthening of political pressure on Armenia within the EAEU framework are possible.

No one claims that all these developments will inevitably happen. However, the responsible state is obliged to prepare not only for the desired developments, but also for any unfavorable scenario.

Meanwhile, the current government has brought the country to strategic uncertainty. On the one hand, it announces European integration without having an EU membership proposal, official bid or economic transition plan, on the other hand it claims that it wants to stay in the EAEU. This is no longer just an unbalanced foreign policy, but a dangerous and irresponsible gravity.

Today, Armenia needs:

* a full calculation of the impact of export restrictions and a protection plan for affected producers,

* A management system for the legalization of the status of RA citizens in Russia and their possible return,

* scenarios of diversification of gas and energy supplies and management of possible price shocks,

* a practical plan for access to new markets and real diversification of exports,

* A public assessment of the economic, social and security consequences of a possible EU-EEU dilemma.

Armenia should not make an election either under the influence of external pressure or propaganda slogans of the government. However, to run a sovereign policy, state capacity, professional calculation and responsibility are necessary.

The behavior of the current government so far has shown their absence. And the citizens of Armenia and the economy will pay the price for that political incompetence.”

—

RPA GM member Eduard Sharmazanov writes. “The unfair, forced and one-sided process full of concessions cannot lead to guaranteed and long-term real peace.

Let me remind you that back in July 2024, the speech of the US representative James O’Brien was published, according to which the US strives to bypass Russia and China and establish transport communication with the countries of Central Asia through Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Moreover, the US official said this in the context of taking economic countermeasures against Russia, which would lead to Russia’s strategic defeat.

It is no secret that from the beginning, the West considered Georgia an important platform for the fight against Russia, but after receiving the rejection of the Georgians, it turned its attention to Armenia.

A few years ago, the Georgian authorities even announced the inadmissibility of the West interfering in Georgia’s internal affairs.

According to press reports, the honorary president of the ruling “Georgian Dream” Bidzina Ivanishvili even refused to meet with the American officials who arrived in Tbilisi.

It can be assumed that such behavior of the Georgian government “forced” the West to turn its attention to Armenia.

In an open text, O’Brien spoke about the need for transport communication between Azerbaijan and Armenia, which actually contradicted the interests of Iran, Russia, and why not China.

It is obvious that the implementation of the transport project connecting the countries of Central Asia with Azerbaijan, Armenia and Turkey was improbable as long as there was the problem of Artsakh.

And after Artsakh was handed over to Azerbaijan, the implementation of such a project could be real as a result of pressure from Turkey and Azerbaijan.

The obstacle to that “program” was the previous authorities of RA led by Serzh Sargsyan, whose political credo was the thesis “Artsakh cannot be part of Azerbaijan”.

Therefore, the West, and I do not exclude Turkey, first carried out a “color revolution” in Armenia in 2018, and in the following years, with the tacit consent of the RA rulers, carried out the surrender and depopulation of Artsakh.

In such a situation, Iran began to publicly express its concerns.

A few years ago, during a meeting with Nikol Pashinyan, Iran’s spiritual leader Ali Khamenei stated that “foreign states should not interfere in the relations of neighbors and that the Zangezur Corridor is not in the interests of Armenia.”

It is no secret that Iran has expressed its displeasure several times against the deployment of EU observers in RA and the strengthening of the West’s position in the region.

Iran has categorically opposed that plan, understanding very well that it will serve the interests of Turkey and the West.

It is for this reason that the Strategic Research Council of Iran expressed an opinion in 2024, according to which the last Karabakh war was necessary for the West to create a “Turanic Corridor”.

It is no coincidence that in Iran that corridor was not called “Khalhaptian Crossroads”, but “Turanian Corridor”.

RPA has always expressed its concern about such a program and even adopted a special GM statement on August 11, 2025.

Let me remind you of the key points of the announcement of the General Assembly of the Republican Party of August 11, 2025. “Highly appreciating the peace-loving efforts of US President Donald Trump, it should be noted that by signing this agreement, the adventurous rulers of Armenia are putting Armenia’s sovereignty to a dangerous test, as well as sacrificing the rights of the Artsakh people, legitimizing the fact of ethnic cleansing and depatriation carried out by the Baku regime in Artsakh.

Մասնավորապես՝

The memorandum ignored the mandatory demand for the withdrawal of Azerbaijani forces from the occupied territories of the Republic of Armenia.

The memorandum does not establish any obligation regarding the release of Armenian prisoners and military-political leaders of Artsakh who are illegally detained and kept in Baku prisons.

Instead of real international guarantees of the inviolability, security and territorial integrity of Armenia’s borders, the agreement contains vague and vague promises.

In the memorandum, provisions regarding the protection of property, cultural and spiritual heritage, as well as political rights of Artsakh Armenians are missing.

Armenia’s agreement to dissolve the OSCE Minsk Group, the only internationally recognized negotiation format, is an unacceptable retreat from the well-known principles of conflict settlement, which is a consequence of the obvious pressure on official Yerevan from Azerbaijan, and an international justification for the forced displacement of Artsakh Armenians.

In such conditions, any document regulating Armenian-Azerbaijani relations, including the agreement “On the establishment of peace and interstate relations between the Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Azerbaijan”, cannot contribute to the establishment of a stable and just peace. It will significantly limit the security and sovereignty security tools of the Republic of Armenia and will tie the hands of the country’s foreign policy.”

In the announcement of August 11, 2025, the General Assembly of the RPA demanded.

a) make the issue of immediate release of all Armenian prisoners and illegally held persons arrested by Azerbaijan a priority on the agenda.

b) withdrawal of the Azerbaijani armed forces from the occupied territories of the Republic of Armenia without any preconditions, without linking it to the uncertain process of border demarcation.

Referring to the real and long-term peace in the region, the RPA presented its approaches in a clear formulation.

“True peace and lasting stability in the region requires justice-based, balanced and mutually acceptable solutions, not residual outcomes built and imposed on coercion and geopolitical trade.”

Accepting the love of peace and the absolute sovereign operation of the channels of communication as a principle of RA’s foreign policy, the RPA cannot accept the declaration of an unfair, forced and unguaranteed peace as a real solution to the current situation, especially when the vital rights of the Armenian people, territorial integrity and the dignified attitude of a sovereign state continue to be violated.”

As in August 2025, today the RPA is a supporter of real and dignified stable peace, but never unilateral concessions under the guise of peace.”

—

The declaration of independence is the birth certificate of our country, we do not agree that it should be burned, it is the wrong way for our country and future. Narek Karapetyan, head of the “Strong Armenia” faction, said this during the briefing.

“The declaration of our independence is the birthday of our country, how can we do without the birthday of our country? We are supporters of peace, but we also do not agree with the approach that we should light our birthday and pass the Constitution brought by Aliyev.

It is a wrong way for our country and future, we cannot light our birthday and accept a Constitution that they say. When the time comes, we will work hard to explain to the public how we see the way to peace. We will work for the establishment of peace, but we will offer such options that will not subordinate the interest of our country and nation,” Karapetyan said.

Answering the question whether he excludes that there will be people from his team who will vote in favor of the decisions of the CP, Karapetyan says that before entering the National Assembly, they agreed with their teammates that if they fear for their safety or freedom, they should come, understanding that they may be subject to political repression.

—

Ilham Aliyev has announced the preparation of the project for laying the power transmission line through Armenia within the framework of the TRIPP project.

He informed that the Azerbaijani specialists have already conducted an analysis in Armenia and determined the places where power transmission line supports can be installed.

Narek Karapetyan, head of the NA “Strong Armenia” faction, said in a briefing with journalists that they were aware of the visits of Azerbaijani specialists to the Meghri region, but not through state institutions, but through their own connections, and that it was 2-3 months ago.

“It is a road in the sovereign territory of Armenia, and no country has the right to call it a corridor. And if they want to run power transmission lines through the territory of Armenia, they have to pay us for it. Let them pay us, spend if they want. Our country should benefit from it, that is, they should pay after getting our country’s consent.

Every country from the south, north, east, west, if it wants some kind of transport, logistics line to pass through the territory of RA, it must pay to our state,” he noted, refraining from talking about other possible arrangements in the context of the visit of the Azerbaijanis to Meghri, but stressed that he would not be against the construction of payment lines, if there is no problem with sovereignty.

Details in the video

—

A court hearing with the participation of the Catholicos as an accused, this sounds strange and unprecedented, but it has already taken place in modern Armenia.

It is true that the first session lasted quite short and with great, perhaps even excessive enthusiasm, it was presented that the judge had recused himself.

That is not heroism.

Expectations are slightly inflated: if one judge is not there, another one will be.

After all, if they intend to continue the trial, they will definitely find someone who will take the stigma on themselves.

Details in the video

—

Human rights defender Roman Yeritsyan wrote:

“I make a public appeal to the parliamentary and extra-parliamentary opposition forces, the media, representatives of all public and human rights organizations, as well as to all persons concerned and interested in the issue outlined below.

The Appellate Administrative Court decided to examine the appeal filed by me against the decision regarding the expropriation of Artsakh from the building of the permanent representation of the Republic of Artsakh in Armenia, and scheduled the publication of the judicial act in November of this year.
This speed is just lightning fast for the Administrative Court of Appeal.

For comparison, I should mention that in the period following the same complaint, that is, after the legislative changes, with the appeals submitted on behalf of or against my clients in other cases, the Appeals Administrative Court, due to its workload, set the date of publication of judicial acts in 2027, 2028, and in some cases even 2029.

Moreover, the subject of examination in those cases are social, labor, healthcare, migration and other issues of human vital importance.

It turns out that a person’s health, the issue of residence, work, provision of income and earnings, or the activity of a legal entity do not have the urgency and importance for the Appeals Administrative Court, which has the issue of expropriation of Artsakh.

I would also like to remind that the RA General Prosecutor’s Office put the factual basis of the claim to invalidate the state registration of ownership rights of the representation building, made back in 2007, the fact that although the decision of the RA government to expropriate the building to the Republic of Artsakh is still valid, there is no donation agreement. Among others, provisions of the law that did not exist at the time of the legal relationship and other normative legal acts were cited as a legal basis.

In turn, the court, not making the registered owner, the government of the Republic of Artsakh, a party to the trial on its own initiative and rejecting dozens of motions submitted in this regard on the basis of not accepting the subjectivity of the Republic of Artsakh, again decided to satisfy the claim with lightning speed.

Having no alternative, I had to represent the interests of the Republic of Artsakh on behalf of “Fides Mortgage Company” UWC PB company, taking advantage of the fact that the latter is registered in the Republic of Armenia and has the right to use the building free of charge.

Dear ladies and gentlemen

For thousands of Artsakh citizens, the representative building is not just real estate or another building in the center of Yerevan.

It has historical, cultural and national significance. For many of us, it is one of the last tangible connections with Artsakh.

From the international legal point of view, it is also the territory of the Republic of Artsakh, which is the only one that continues to be under the rule of Artsakh. The building has a state registration of property rights, it is also registered as a diplomatic body in the authorized body of Armenia and belongs to Artsakh and the people of Artsakh by law.

This building is not just walls and space for me and thousands of Artsakh residents. It is a value connecting us with Artsakh.

It is one of the last symbols left in our possession.

It is the opportunity to preserve the constitutional institutions of Artsakh.

It does not matter to me at all who or who are sitting there today, whether I have disagreements with them or not, or whether they are personally interested in solving this issue.

It is not a question of persons here.

Here is the issue of Artsakh.

We do not have the right to silently watch how Artsakh, after its territorial loss and forced displacement, is now also deprived of its last property and institutional presence in Armenia.

Artsakh cannot be allowed to be finally expropriated.

We cannot allow the last traces of Artsakh statehood to be removed step by step.

We cannot allow that one day we simply record that Artsakh no longer has anything.

Aram Vardevanyan, Narek Karapetyan, Edgar Ghazaryan, Levon Kocharyan, Anna Grigoryan, Gegham Manukyan, Arega Hovsepyan, I am addressing you especially, because I have discussed this topic with you many times, and all of you are more than well aware of the situation.

In my opinion, this issue is no longer a mere legal struggle, or at least an effective struggle through legal means no longer seems realistic.

Therefore, I ask and expect your active participation in order to find a political solution to this issue.

This is not the personal issue of any person, organization or political force.

This is the issue of Artsakh.

This is the question of the dignity of the people of Artsakh.

And this is the limit beyond which silence can already have irreversible consequences.

I also remind you that during the Soviet years, the Drama Theater of Azerbaijan operated in the same building in Yerevan. I do not rule out that if the created processes continue, it may have a similar fate again in the near future. That’s why this building

Preservation of Artsakh’s property rights is not only a legal, but also a matter of historical and national significance for me.”

—

If one pole of dictatorship is the regime that uses violence, then the other is the people who submit to the dictator under conditions of fear or coercion. However, the dictatorship does not always act against the will of the people, it often goes along with the emotions and moods of the people and builds on them its course of targeting individual people or any social, religious, national group.

That task becomes easier when there is already hostility within the society towards the chosen victim. The dictator, after propagandistic and other technological preparations, uses such prejudices in the society to justify the use of violence “by the will of the people”.

The history of ancient Rome has many examples of the use of such political technology. While describing the inhumane persecution of the first Christians, who were an opposition force in the modern imagination, Tacitus emphasizes that the people hated the Christians and, taking advantage of that circumstance, Nero blamed them for the great fire of Rome in 64. The narrator also mentions the change of mood of the people of Rome. the conscience of the Christian-hating pagans was awakened, and their attitude towards the innocent victims instinctively changed, because people realized that Christians were being slaughtered not for the public good, but to satisfy the fears and bloodthirsty cruelty of the dictator.

Thus, the government caught the fermenting public attitude and used it to shirk its responsibility and justify the violence. But the violence, crossing the limit of tolerance, changed the attitude of the society, that is, the public opinion became both the support and the straitjacket of the government.

Dictatorship does not need the universal support of the people, it needs the consent of even a small but lower and aggressive layer of the people and, as a sufficient condition, the silence of the majority. A dictator thrives not only on fear, prejudice, hostility or revenge, but also on the lazy indifference of people.

Suetonius gives a remarkable tone to the same epic events, presenting the massacre of Christians among Nero’s administrative undertakings and calling it a measure applied to the followers of a “new and pernicious superstition.” In other words, what we value today as a bloody persecution was presented 2000 years ago as a routine administrative activity of a monarch to, say, keep the taste of the state in the mouths of abused children…

Government, no matter how it may be called, is not in itself a guarantee of justice, not even a democratic government, because the majority can, through democratic procedure, approve of the course of the monarch (in our reality, the chief executive) which is unfair to the minority and individual people. One of its classic examples, let’s go back deeper into the past, is the trial of Socrates. an accusation, a defense speech, a vote, and finally the death penalty.

It’s a joke, but it’s a fact. In the 5th century Athenian democracy, Socrates was given the right to choose the manner of his execution by judicial procedure.

Joseph Schumpeter viewed democracy, in contrast to its classical understanding of “the general will of the people”, as an institutional method of making political decisions, the core of which is the competition for power and the voice of the people. An important consequence of this approach is that the existence of a democratic procedure still does not mean that every decision made in that way is fair.

The will of the majority and justice are not always identical. The majority can approve of such steps and programs that limit the rights of people who are unpleasant to their taste or simply “other” people (religious minorities or other groups). Voting determines who exercises power, but does not by itself make every decision of government legally true and morally good.

The stability of a democratic state depends on many factors, including what boundaries the society draws for the majority that has become the government. It is not only the state that is responsible for maintaining these borders. Society, the people, are responsible for the borders they draw.

Society as a whole and every member of society must be ready to fight every day so that the government it creates does not violate the boundaries of universal law and public morals. If the government knows very well that people will not tolerate the restriction of the rights of any group, discrimination, persecution, violence, it limits itself, acts within the limits of its powers and according to the law.

But if a part of society welcomes and the majority silently tolerates these steps, the political price of lawlessness for the government decreases, and each subsequent step becomes easier and easier.

The fight against injustice cannot begin only when injustice is standing at your doorstep. The real test of a free society is not only who and how wins the elections. Equally important is how people perceive the actions of the government, which are directed against those whom they consider not their own or strangers.

Democracy is not just the rule of the majority, because without effective and institutionalized control of the people, democracy becomes permissiveness unleashed on behalf of the people.

The early Christians were foreign, obscure and unwanted to a large part of the Roman plebs, and Nero used this sentiment as an opportunity to dispel the suspicions surrounding the cause of the fire and to convict the innocent. And Tacitus’ testimony of how people’s attitudes turned when the emperor’s pathological cruelty exceeded the limits of the unimaginable is a warning addressed to all of us: the government tends to use people’s weaknesses for its own benefit and cross the borders drawn for itself, therefore the people are responsible for constantly guarding those borders, because every border crossing of the disconnected government is disastrous and will one day knock on the door of each of us.

Dictatorship’s father is the punitive machinery of the state, and its mother is the social environment where the injustice done to one group of citizens becomes acceptable or irrelevant to others, therefore, the source of the vitality of dictatorships is our inability to tolerate such a government.

Ara Sahakyan

—

“Azerbaijani specialists conducted an analysis in Armenia and determined the places where power transmission line supports can be installed,” he said yesterday. had announced Ilham Aliyev, the dictator of Baku.

Azerbaijan hopes that the Armenian side “will not delay the solution of this issue”.

According to Aliyev, if the Metsamor nuclear power plant is closed, Armenia “could face a serious energy crisis, and having an additional source of energy would be useful.”

In this regard 168․amsent questions to the RA MFA, in particular, wondering in which areas of the RA the Azerbaijani specialists conducted those studies (if this statement is true), and how the Armenian side reacts to this Azerbaijani proposal, which is made in parallel with the announcements to close the ANPP.

In response, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs promised to respond later, and at the end of the day, the minister’s spokesperson suggested that the question should be directed to “colleagues of the prime minister’s office”.

We forwarded the questions in writing to the Prime Minister’s office.

In case of an answer, we will make them public.

—