Intra-species struggle among Armenian revanchists A New direction in mythmaking

The recent signing of the "Regulations for the Joint Activities of the State Commission on the Delimitation of the State Border between the Republic of Azerbaijan and the Republic of Armenia and the Commission on Border Security Issues" by the leaders of Azerbaijan and Armenia has shocked the Armenian opposition, which has since scrambled to create the appearance of vigorous activity.

For instance, the movement Holy Struggle attempted to rally people onto the streets with slogans that conveyed a sense of despair about their situation. As expected, the event was met with ridicule due to its low turnout. Nevertheless, the leaders of the revanchists have not been deterred, instead choosing to act as if this outcome was part of their original plan.

Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan, when asked whether the timing of their actions was too late given that the President of Armenia had already signed the approved regulations from the National Assembly, responded that their actions were timely. One can only wish Bagrat and his associates continued "timeliness" in their endeavours. However, the effectiveness of their actions correlates with the level of popularity the opposition holds in Armenian society. Robert Kocharyan, the most prominent among Armenian opposition leaders, has a support rating hovering around 2%. The ratings of his associates are even lower.

Interestingly, as the saying goes, "empty vessels make the most noise." Those who frequently boast about their accomplishments are often the ones who have long since ceased to achieve them. In this context, it’s hardly surprising that Archbishop Galstanyan, the leader of the Holy Struggle, claimed that the Armenian authorities are frightened. He conveyed the sentiment that it is merely a distant dream for anyone to believe they have been defeated. It's curious he didn't express his conviction more earnestly, as sincerity often carries more weight than bravado.

However, the discord in Bagrat's statements and promises was brought to light by opposition deputy Anna Mkrtchyan, who addressed a question about why the opposition has struggled to achieve success. Her response was a revealing session of self-reflection that evolved into a search for traitors.

"Among those who oppose Nikol, there are individuals who believe they can challenge him on one front while secretly meeting with someone from his discredited National Security Service on another to discuss personal matters," Mkrtchyan subtly alluded to a troubling reality.

Ah, so that's how it is! The atmosphere began to resemble an intra-species struggle, much like spiders consuming each other in a jar.

"I won’t name names; these individuals shouldn’t be publicized but rather pushed out of public discourse, as they obstruct the formation of a genuine movement against Nikol," Mkrtchyan stated.

Yes, the Armenian version of a "purge of dissenters" has taken on a rather farcical form. However, there is little reason to be surprised by the current situation. In Armenia, there is a tendency to prefer living in myths rather than facing reality. Before the 44-day war in 2020, the Armenian segment of social media and the country's expert community were not just overly confident or boastful; they were steeped in a kind of blind optimism. This was the "golden hour" for various myth-makers who engaged in a sort of correspondence with Pliny the Younger, Herodotus, and even Alexander the Great, extracting all manner of references to the "invincibility" of Armenians.

During the 44-day war, that myth burst like a soap bubble. The figure of 11,000 deserters from the Armenian armed forces left little room for extensive debate on the issue. The outcome of the war, in which the Armenian army was decisively defeated, was equally telling. Yet, after a brief pause, a new Armenian myth emerged. Its essence was the claim that the occupying country didn’t just lose to Azerbaijan but to nearly all the armies of the world at once. This myth was concocted to justify the all-Armenian military-political fiasco. Such attempts are, to put it mildly, pitiful. Unfortunately, the repertoire of Armenian myth-makers offers little else. The only thing that changes is the pretext for inventing yet another myth. This time, against the backdrop of the political impotence of the revanchists, a new myth has surfaced about the treachery within their own ranks.

It is not far-fetched to anticipate claims that Bagrat Galstanyan is also a traitor to the opposition’s interests, likening him to a Trojan horse. Armenian revanchists refuse to acknowledge their own weakness, impotence, and lack of popularity. They are on the final stretch toward becoming relics of history. This is no longer a myth but rather the inevitable conclusion for those who have obstructed the positive developments awaiting the South Caucasus region if lasting peace is established.