Pashinyan's populism and stalling tactics Experts weigh in on Armenia-Azerbaijan negotiations

In recent days, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has made a number of statements regarding the current negotiations with Azerbaijan. However, experts are left with the impression that he is attempting to justify yet another stagnation in the resolution of contentious issues related to the peace agreement. 

Pashinyan stated that the sides have agreed on 15 out of 17 points of the peace treaty, but there are disagreements on two key issues, including the presence of European observers on the border. He also emphasized that Armenia is ready to further simplify railway communications with Azerbaijan on a reciprocal basis. Similarly, Pashinyan views the opening of the road to Nakhchivan through Armenian territory as equivalent to alternative routes through Iran.

It seems that Pashinyan is once again resorting to populist statements. A logical question arises: why has he intensified this rhetoric now, and what goals is he pursuing? To answer this question, Caliber.Az asked foreign political analysts for their opinions.

Political analyst Ravshan Nazarov, PhD in philosophy and senior researcher at the Institute of State and Law of the Academy of Sciences of Uzbekistan, notes that the domestic political situation in Armenia remains complex and tense.

"Opposition forces actively exploit public dissatisfaction to regularly criticize the government, exerting additional pressure on Pashinyan. In these circumstances, he is forced to balance between societal expectations and the need to maintain constant dialogue with Azerbaijan. Political instability and growing discontent complicate the progress of his 'peace initiatives,' requiring him to simultaneously strengthen internal support. This forces Pashinyan to seek a delicate balance between his desire for dialogue and the need to take into account the sentiments of various segments of Armenian society.

Nikol Pashinyan should consider one aspect – the need to inform his population about the importance of a peaceful resolution to the conflict. Many Armenians still harbor concerns that a compromise could jeopardize their security and national interests. Therefore, the Armenian government must actively work on building public consensus, demonstrating how peace initiatives contribute to stability and improved living conditions in the region. Pashinyan must consistently raise citizens' awareness of the benefits of compromise and peaceful coexistence. Long-term peace requires time, patience, and goodwill from both sides," says the political analyst.

Russian political analyst Dmitry Gradov believes that Pashinyan now needs to create a favorable environment for promoting the narrative of constitutional change within the framework of the "Real Armenia" project and a popular referendum. This, in turn, could strengthen his power and potentially extend his tenure as prime minister.

"Pashinyan's main goal, regardless of his statements, is early parliamentary elections. He seeks to guarantee his continued stay in power under any possible scenario. And the scenarios may be unpredictable even for Pashinyan himself, as part of Armenian society actively resists Yerevan's new Western course and even considers it anti-popular.

Pashinyan is creating the illusion of dialogue with Baku, trying to solve two tasks simultaneously. First, to mislead external players, showing that Yerevan is actively working on peace initiatives and putting forward counterproposals. Second, to misinform the Armenian public, creating the illusion of a search for consensus on resolving the situation in the South Caucasus. However, it is clear that his team is not making real efforts to reach a mutual understanding with Baku.

The notorious 'two disputed points' of the peace agreement have long become a symbol of Pashinyan's inflexibility in negotiations, if not his stubbornness. The same applies to the issue of the transport corridor through Armenian territory, which he has raised again. What is the point of revisiting this issue if there are no real steps for its implementation, and all the statements remain mere wordplay? Yerevan is not ready to accept Baku's proposals, preferring instead to put forward its own conditions.

In other words, we are witnessing classic populism, the aim of which is to delay time, create the appearance of activity, and find justifications in case of accusations from Baku regarding the lack of initiatives," concluded Gradov.