Armenia’s increasing militarization and revanchist sentiments endanger stability The countdown to crisis

Following a brief hiatus, Bagrat Galstanyan, the head of the Tavush (Tovuzgala - ed.) revanchist movement, has resurfaced on the political stage of the “land of stones”. This time, the controversial Armenian cleric has drawn attention by urging people to assemble in Yerevan in front of the “representation” of the erstwhile illegal separatist regime in Karabakh to commemorate the fictitious “Artsakh Independence Day”.

It seems that the series of protests, which failed to effect a change in leadership, have not dissuaded Galstanyan from his intention to incite a fresh wave of discontent among the Armenian populace. The unrest in the neighboring country ignited after the announcement of an agreement between Yerevan and Baku to initiate the process of border delimitation on April 19. On May 9, Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan, leading a procession of revanchists from Tavush (Tovuzgala), urged the Armenian Prime Minister to step down.

At that juncture, the priest, buoyed by his own self-confidence, elicited scorn by demanding that Nikol Pashinyan vacate his position within just an hour. Currently, Galstanyan is seeking to capture the attention of Armenian society, portraying himself as the “savior of Armenian national identity.”

Moreover, this situation raises a pertinent question for the Armenian authorities: why has the “office” of the former separatist regime in Karabakh not yet been closed in Yerevan? If the Pashinyan government genuinely acknowledges the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Azerbaijan, why does this “office” continue to operate?

The answer is clear: this ongoing presence unmistakably suggests that Armenia still harbors claims regarding Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity.

This situation aligns with Prime Minister Pashinyan's actions, reflecting his reluctance to initiate a revision of Armenia's fundamental laws. Official Yerevan is in no rush to amend the constitution, insisting that it is a purely internal issue. This stance indicates that the Armenian leadership is disinterested in finalizing a peace agreement with Azerbaijan and may be intent on stalling negotiations until they reach an impasse.
Closing the “office” of the separatist remnants in Yerevan could have been a significant step toward advancing a peace agenda in the region. However, it is evident that such a move is not on the official agenda in Yerevan.

Conversely, there is a notable increase in arms procurement, signaling that militarization and preparation for potential conflict with Azerbaijan remain key priorities of Armenian state policy. Recent large shipments of weapons from France, India, and the United States further underscore this strategic focus.

Recently, Armenian media has been abuzz with reports from the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA), which has enthusiastically announced an upcoming event on Capitol Hill in the United States, celebrating the fictitious “Artsakh” with participation from Congress members and public figures.

The resurgence of revanchist sentiment in Armenia and among the Armenian diaspora, the rapid militarization of the country, incitement from the US and France, the refusal to close the office of the separatist junta, and the reluctance to amend the Constitution—all these factors indicate that Yerevan is fixated on revenge.

However, this dangerous fixation could plunge Armenia into its most severe crisis since its inception. The window of opportunity for the Armenian side to reconsider its path is closing rapidly.