Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s recent remarks on Armenia’s Armed Forces’ 33rd anniversary outlined several ideas about a revised patriotism model, the burden of responsibility on the military, and promised reforms. However, these statements appear to serve more as a means to mask unresolved issues and justify poor governance rather than introduce real, actionable change. Below is a critical analysis of his statements.
Pashinyan claims that Armenian society places the entire burden of patriotism and responsibility on the military. In reality, the opposite is true. During the 44-day war, Armenian civilians bore immense burdens, from financial aid to personal sacrifices. Meanwhile, the government failed to fulfill its duties, consistently relying on the military to cover for its shortcomings in state-building, foreign policy, and economic reforms.
Armenian soldiers have consistently defended the country’s borders at the cost of their lives and health. Yet, the government has exploited their sacrifices, even conceding territories and attempting to justify these losses through negotiation. Furthermore, the deployment of Armenian troops to regions like Syria under non-friendly frameworks such as the CSTO not only heightened regional tensions but also allowed adversaries like Azerbaijan to use Syrian mercenaries in the war against Armenians.
The reforms presented by Pashinyan’s administration lack transparency and public trust. They have not been subject to public referendum, nor has there been any attempt to engage the Armenian population in decision-making. Policies are dictated by closed circles, excluding meaningful consultation. Examples such as the failed transport reforms, increased income tax, and the universal declaration scheme demonstrate a recurring pattern of poorly implemented and unpopular initiatives.
Currently, the compensation for border guards and soldiers is significantly lower than that of police officers serving in urban areas. While police deserve competitive salaries, soldiers—especially those defending Armenia’s borders—should receive higher pay to meet their needs and uphold their morale. Without addressing this imbalance, the state risks weakening its armed forces.
Pashinyan’s apology for past government failures in burdening the military lacks substance, as there are no guarantees that similar patterns won’t recur. His policies remain disconnected from the realities of military service, and his advisers are unrecognized figures whose competence and strategies remain opaque to the public.
The Prime Minister boasts of diversifying Armenia’s security alliances, but this so-called diversification is riddled with contradictions. Past administrations also explored such opportunities, but this government has dismissed many of those efforts, resulting in a lack of preparedness during the 2020 Artsakh War. Furthermore, Armenia’s reliance on Russian troops to guard its borders yielded no tangible support during critical conflicts, leading to further territorial losses.
Pashinyan’s proposed models and reforms reveal significant flaws rooted in a lack of transparency, accountability, and strategic vision. His administration’s failure to address existing challenges is now masked by new narratives designed to justify ineffective governance.
To ensure Armenia’s security and stability, the government must prioritize genuine collaboration, engage the public in meaningful discussions, and implement reforms that are transparent and well-structured. Without these measures, the current approach risks deepening the nation’s crises, jeopardizing both its sovereignty and the well-being of its people.