Outburst of a political has-been in the face of inevitable peace Sargsyan’s new theatre of absurdity

What unfolded yesterday, August 26, in the courtyard of Yerevan’s Anti-Corruption Court can hardly be described as anything other than a clumsy attempt by a political corpse to show signs of life. Former president Serzh Sargsyan—himself a defendant in an ongoing criminal case—once again sought the spotlight with a “loud” declaration. This time, he took aim at the outcome of the Washington meeting between Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, held with the participation of Donald Trump. According to Sargsyan, “The Washington document is not a peace agreement, but a tale of how a capitulator fulfilled Azerbaijan’s demands.”

Every word, if I may say so, of Sargsyan’s so-called commentary drips with falsehood and is nothing short of blatant manipulation. More troubling still, his remark effectively takes a swipe at Donald Trump, who hosted the meeting and oversaw the signing of the Joint Declaration. To dismiss as “capitulation” the outcome of serious diplomatic work involving a global leader is not only absurd but also deeply ungrateful.

It is also worth reminding Armenia’s third president that the Washington Declaration contains a series of provisions aimed squarely at normalising relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan and ensuring stability in the South Caucasus—opening the door to economic development for all regional states.

Most notably, the document reaffirms the mutual recognition of territorial integrity, establishes an agreement to reopen transport links—which promises tangible economic dividends for both countries—and underscores the United States’ role as the initiator of the process. Washington’s explicit backing gives the agreement durability and lends real weight to the prospect of lasting peace.

Contextually, a perfectly reasonable question arises: how can one possibly call “capitulation” an agreement that opens Armenia’s path to development, investment, and integration into international projects—while preserving its sovereignty and making it part of both the regional and global security architecture? The answer, for anyone with even a shred of common sense, is clear and unequivocal: "No one can!"

But sound judgment has never been Serzh Sargsyan’s strong suit. Instead of choosing the path of constructive reflection on new geopolitical realities, he charges headlong down the road of populism, blinders firmly in place, scattering criticism and insults in every direction.

He acts so by neglecting the fact that Armenians vividly remember the disastrous period of his presidency — when the republic was cut off from all regional projects, stripped of the ability to conduct an independent foreign policy, and saw its army suffer a crushing defeat during the Four-Day April War. That very defeat marked the beginning of the end for Armenia’s third president as a political figure. The 2018 revolution sealed his fate, reducing him to a political bankrupt — a status he has yet to escape.

Incidentally, the word “capitulant” — which Sargsyan so arrogantly hurled at the current prime minister — fits him far better. After all, it was he who resigned under the pressure of the street. By contrast, Nikol Pashinyan managed to retain power even after Armenia’s defeat in the 44-day war of autumn 2020, maintaining a high approval rating despite relentless criticism.

Today, Serzh Sargsyan is little more than a marginal figure. His political rating hovers near zero, and his status as a defendant in a criminal case only reinforces the sense of his final political irrelevance. Against this backdrop, his “loud” statements appear as nothing more than a pitiful attempt — a kind of self-inflicted torment — by a political “corpse” to imitate resurrection. But such a return is impossible: history has already placed everything in its rightful order.