Armenian opposition fails, peace with Azerbaijan prevails Entailing public apathy to restless revanchism

Amid the agreements reached on August 8 at the White House between the leaders of Azerbaijan, the United States, and Armenia, the hysteria within the Armenian opposition has reached its peak. Driven by fear over the prospect of normalisation in Armenian-Azerbaijani relations and enraged by optimistic statements from official Yerevan about following a regional peace agenda, Armenian opposition figures have launched yet another campaign to tarnish the image of the current government, seeking to gain support and drag Armenian society into the process.

Despite the Armenian government’s public recognition of Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan and the new balance of power in the region, opponents of Pashinyan continue their attempts to stir revanchist sentiments in the country, exploiting the issue of the “Karabakh Armenians” and pontificating on their return to Azerbaijan. The latest wave of criticism from opposition forces targeted Prime Minister Pashinyan following his address to the Armenian people, in which he also touched on the issue of the “Karabakh Armenians” returning.

“Return of the refugees [Armenians from Karabakh who voluntarily relocated to Armenia – ed.] to Azerbaijan is unrealistic and poses a threat to peace. Armenia must, together with the international community, create conditions for their life and integration in our country,” Pashinyan said, putting a definitive end to the issue once and for all.

The prime minister’s statement was immediately met with a reaction from his political opponents. Tigran Abrahamyan, secretary of the opposition faction “I Have the Honor” and known for his fierce anti-government rhetoric, issued yet another absurd statement.

“The struggle of the people of Artsakh for the proclamation and implementation of their right to self-determination was always framed purely as a territorial dispute, according to the Azerbaijani narrative. After coming to power, Pashinyan either claimed he could not make decisions on Artsakh because its people had no role in his election, or he signed capitulation documents and made statements regarding Artsakh — such as the trilateral statement of November 9, 2020, the Prague Summit in October 2022, the Washington agreements, and so on. The Artsakh issue was never a territorial dispute. Artsakh chose the path of self-determination based on the then-Soviet legislation and norms of international law. The current Armenian authorities, however, claim adherence to a different ideological and value system and distance themselves from this topic,” Abrahamyan said, noting that “the page of Artsakh will not be closed as long as the people of Artsakh continue their struggle by all available means with the support of the entire Armenian people.”

Echoing Abrahamyan, Dashnak Ishkhan Sagatelyan described the Washington agreements as a failure of Pashinyan’s policies.

“Today, society is asking simple and uncomfortable questions: why haven’t the prisoners returned, why are Azerbaijani military forces present on Armenian territory, and why hasn’t the right of the Armenians of Artsakh to return been discussed?” he added.

First, it should be noted that the opposition clique seems completely out of touch with time and reality, as Armenian society isn’t even remotely contemplating such ideas. An indisputable proof of this is the fact that the opposition’s endless protest actions have never gained significant traction or led to a change of power in Armenia. In other words, the majority of Armenian citizens, even despite some dissatisfaction with the prime minister’s policies, are not swayed by revanchist sentiments and continue to support the current government. Nikol Pashinyan’s address served as further confirmation, being received appropriately by the public without provoking any negative reaction. Therefore, the opposition’s illusions that the people would rally en masse against Pashinyan are, at least for now, completely unfounded. This is point one.

Second, it seems that Abramyan, Saghatelyan, and the rest of the opposition crew have seriously forgotten that after Azerbaijan fully restored its territorial integrity and sovereignty, such an illegal separatist entity as “Artsakh” simply vanished into the river of oblivion.

We will refrain from delving into further details of the opposition’s absurd statements, but it is worth noting that such provocations by the opposition clique—comprising members of the Armenian high clergy and the Karabakh faction, whose sole aim is to destabilize the domestic political situation—are likely to continue, especially ahead of the Armenian parliamentary elections in June 2026 and the planned constitutional referendum scheduled for the same period.

However, the support shown by the Armenian people for Pashinyan provides grounds to assert the following: the likelihood that the efforts of those opposing peace with Azerbaijan could result in a change of government in Armenia is virtually zero.