Armenia’s government has witnessed yet another “shake-up,” with several high-ranking officials removed from their posts. The latest dismissals include the Minister of Internal Affairs Vahe Ghazaryan, Minister of Territorial Administration and Infrastructure Gnel Sanosyan, Chairman of the State Revenue Committee Rustam Badasyan, Chairman of the Investigative Committee Argishti Kyaramyan, and Chairman of the Anti-Corruption Committee Sasun Khachatryan. Yet, the question remains: will anything substantial change? The answer seems to be no.
These officials were all appointed by Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan during his earlier rounds of personnel decisions. Their removal does not signal a new governance style or vision, as it is evident that their replacements will also align with the same political framework and approach. The “new” appointees are unlikely to bring any meaningful reforms, maintaining the status quo of Pashinyan’s administration.
Under Pashinyan’s leadership, frequent personnel changes have become a recurring theme. However, the results of these reshuffles have been negligible at best. If anything, they highlight the continued inefficiency and lack of accountability within Armenia’s government.
The issue lies not with individual officials but with the overarching governance system, which remains tightly controlled by the prime minister’s decisions. Pashinyan’s personnel policies appear more focused on loyalty than on actual effectiveness. This has perpetuated a cycle of underperformance in state institutions, with little to no accountability for failures or inefficiencies.
From stalled anti-corruption efforts to the absence of systemic reforms, the government’s approach under Pashinyan has fallen short of addressing critical challenges. Personnel changes without a clear strategic framework are nothing more than a façade, diverting attention from the real structural problems.
Unless the government adopts a fundamentally new approach to governance, future personnel changes will likely yield the same ineffective results. Blaming individual officials for systemic failures only distracts from the need for genuine reforms and sustainable improvements.
True progress requires a qualitative shift in governance, including mechanisms to enhance efficiency and ensure institutional accountability. Without such changes, these “shake-ups” will remain mere symbolic gestures, devoid of real impact.
This latest wave of dismissals underscores that the problem is not limited to the departing officials but is rooted in the governance system itself and the political leadership driving it. Until these foundational issues are addressed, Armenia will remain locked in a cycle of ineffective management and stagnation.
