Armenia Power Struggle Intensifies Before Elections

Tensions are mounting in Armenia ahead of next year’s parliamentary elections, with the nation’s future hanging in the balance. Despite the excitement surrounding the Trump-brokered Washington Declaration in August, it is unclear whether it can overcome the lingering division that set in after defeat by Azerbaijan in the 44-day war. Recent surveys have shown a slight majority against the proposed TRIPP.

At the weekend, supporters of Russian-Armenian billionaire Samvel Karapetyan, currently under pre-trial detention, took to the streets of Yerevan and Etchmiadzin. Karapetyan is charged with calling for the overthrow of the Pashinyan government though many believe that his detention was unwarranted and politically motivated because of the coming vote.

According to the survey conducted in August by local pollster MPG, 77 percent of respondents disapproved of the government’s approach. If elections were held that weekend, 13.4 percent also said they would vote for Karapetyan’s new political movement if it were to run. That might not sound like much but Pashinyan’s Civil Contract does not fare much better at 17.3 percent.

The furore stems from an interview given by Karapetyan in June during which he said that the opposition would defend the Catholicos of All Armenians, Karekin II, if Pashinyan moves to forcibly remove him from his position. That same month, two archbishops and other clergy were detained and charged with planning to instigate a coup. It is believed that the church's opposition to a compromise deal with Azerbaijan is the reason.

Pashinyan also seeks to establish a fourth republic in the country in order to turn the page on the rule of his predecessors, Robert Kocharyan and Serzh Sargsyan, and to end over three decades of conflict with its neighbours.

Such a move would not only secure Pashinyan’s political future but also create an environment conducive to specifically normalise relations with Azerbaijan and Turkiye. The problem is that Pashinyan's popularity is incredibly low. This was also highlighted by the results of the last International Republican Institute (IRI) survey conducted in June that virtually identical to the later MPG poll.

Pashinyan faces mounting challenges. In 2023, his Civil Contract party almost lost Yerevan. And in March 2025, it lost the second largest city of Gyumri as well as the Parakar community just outside of the capital. In September, incidentally, the opposition mayor of Parakar was shot dead just five months after taking office, though this is believed to be a personal feud and not political.

On Monday, however, Vartan Ghukasyan, the opposition mayor of Gyumri, was detained in a dramatic raid by police that was clearly political. Scores of police were deployed from Yerevan to Gyumri to detain the controversial municipal head. There were reports of clashes between special units and the mayor's supporters as church bells rang out to sound the alarm.

Ironically, he seemed jubilant as he was whisked away by masked men. Nonetheless his powers have already been suspended. Like many others, he is now in pre-trial detention.

Ghukasyan is no stranger to controversy and has been implicated in many cases of violence and financial malfeasance over the past 25 years. He is a staunch supporter of establishing a Russia-Armenia Union State and a vehement opponent of normalisation with Azerbaijan and Turkiye. Earlier this month, the city’s top cleric had already been sentenced to two years imprisonment on coup charges.

Pashinyan’s battle against local government is not new. Armenia’s third largest city of Vanadzor has been without a mayor for four years now. Next month in Etchmiadzin, seat of the Catholicos, more local elections are planned that could prove another test of the premiere's electoral chances. It could also demonstrate if any of traditional propensity towards violence in domestic politics still lingers.

Pashinyan has already vowed to remove Karekin II and had hoped to force his resignation this summer. He appeared to have backed down at the last moment but has not disavowed his clearly stated intent. There are other reasons why. All of Pashinyan’s political foes represent discredited previous regimes that he had ousted in 2018 after two decades of criminality and corruption.

The problem is that pursuing these objectives carries with it major risks. It was clear even last year that the upcoming parliamentary elections could prove existential in nature. While it is understandable that a showdown was inevitable, the outcome is unpredictable. It could be that Pashinyan is now attempting to prevent any later unrest by nipping it in the bud sooner rather than later.

At stake is more than just political power. It is the prospect of a long-awaited peace agreement with Azerbaijan that could finally close that chapter in the modern history of both countries. If the coming months are instead disrupted by infighting and clashes, progress made since the Washington Declaration could easily unravel.

But if the country can ensure stability and start to heal its many divisions then it would prove the first successful test for Pashinyan’s since his much touted velvet revolution.

source: Onnik James Krikorian is a journalist, photojournalist, and consultant from the U.K. who has covered the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict since 1994. Photo: Prime Minister Pashinyan addressing a media conference in July 2025/Government of Armenia
The views expressed in opinion pieces and commentaries do not necessarily reflect the position of commonspace.eu or its partners.

Latest

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Making peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan was never going to be simple, nor easy, nor quick. It is taking time, writes Dennis Sammut in this Monday Commentary. “There is a sense of realism coming from the leaders of the two countries – President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and prime minister Nikol Pashinyan of Armenia, that frankly, is necessary and welcome”, he writes. At a time when conflicts are raging all over the world – from Ukraine to the Gulf, from Africa to South Asia, the prospect that Armenia and Azerbaijan had finally, after decades of conflict that left thousands of dead and many more displaced, decided on embarking on a journey of peace was welcomed. Peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan can be top-down up to a point. Both leaders have spent political capital preparing for a peace deal. But both are aware that their people are not ready for peace yet. In fact, in Armenia, most of the elite are negative toward a peace deal with Azerbaijan. Pashinyan needs time to persuade his countryfolk. That is why 2031 is realistic. Ilham Aliyev runs a tighter shop, but he is also not immune to public opinion. Every time someone hits a landmine in Karabakh, which unfortunately happens often, peace comes into question. Which is why Aliyev chooses to sound hardline, more often than not. In pursuing the peace agenda, both Aliyev and Pashinyan need to proceed cautiously. But they are right in making peace the central issue in their agenda. It is the main issue, and the one that will define them in history. So forward, cautiously but resolutely! In pursuing the peace agenda, Aliyev and Pashinyan need to be supported clearly and unambiguously. There are too many people in Baku and Yerevan who are sitting on the sides, waiting. The international community is not doing enough. It is time to be counted. Otherwise, the spoilers will win, and the region will go back to its bad habits. (Click the image to read the full commentary).

Popular

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Last week I visited Baku, Azerbaijan. My visit was relatively short, but very intensive, and had many meetings with stakeholders and colleagues. When I arrived in Baku first time in 1996,  Azerbaijan was a different country: weak, poor, and shaken by defeat in war. For thirty year the Karabakh issue dominated the agenda: the political agenda but also the popular mindset. Now, thirty years later, Azerbaijan has returned to Karabakh, and peace with Armenia is on the horizon. It is a new era for Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, for the South Caucasus, but also for Europe.  But we cannot be complacent: the Peace agreement has been initialed but not signed; borders remain closed; TRIPP is ambitious but remains an idea; and there are spoilers who want to turn the clock back. We must not allow them, and in this Europe and Azerbaijan must work together. Europe’ vanguard organization is the European Union – it is a free union of 27 member states; it is a strong global economic force, and increasingly a diplomatic and military force too. But it remains “work in progress” and can often appear dysfunctional. It often lacks collective and institutional memory. In its dealings with Azerbaijan the EU has made many mistakes – not least opening the delegation here late – in 2008. It sometimes appears condescending. Some utterances from the European Parliament and from some quarters in some member states are not understandable even for me. They irritate the Azerbaijanis, but serve no other purpose But Azerbaijan has also not handled relations with the EU well. It has failed to respond when the hand of friendship reached out; and it confused irritating actions, sometimes by well-meaning people; sometimes by outright spoilers, with strategic action. In short, EU-Azerbaijan relations have suffered from a lack of proper dialogue. This dialogue must be frank, honest and multi-faceted involving different segments of society on both sides.   Is Azerbaijan Europe? When Azerbaijan applied to join the Council of Europe in the 1990s, there were some who opposed, saying this was not Europe. I was one of the people who argued that Armenia and Azerbaijan may be on the periphery of the continent geographically, but were European in essence. Certainly their elites. During the discussion on 4 September in Baku, my friend Farhad Mammedov, mentioned that Azerbaijan is not interested in joining the EU, and was now close to the Central Asian countries in the 5 plus 1 format. Neither things mean that Azerbaijan is not Europe. There are several European countries that are not in the EU, and do not want to be, for example Norway and Switzerland. Iceland has recently voted to stay out of the EU. The UK was a member and left. Europe is bigger than the EU, and the holding of the European Political Community summit in Baku in 2027 proves that. Despite all the rhetoric, I never heard the president of Azerbaijan  saying that Azerbaijan is not Europe, nor have I heard any European president say it either. Not wanting to join the EU and forging close relations with neighbouring regions does not make Azerbaijan any less European. It is only logical that when Europeans talk to Azerbaijan they talk like family. The conversation is often frank. It must also be honest, and Europeans need always to remember this too. A frank, honest and multi-faceted dialogue A frank, honest and multifaceted dialogue will contribute to relations between Azerbaijan and the rest of Europe: it will avoid misperception, which unfortunately is very common on both sides; it will provide a forum where problems can be discussed and resolved, and it will increase mutual trust, so that together common problems can be addressed. (click image to read the full Monday Commentary)
Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

There are two early 20th-century tunes that mark foreign attempts to occupy and “pacify” Yemen. The Scottish tune “The barren rocks of Aden” marks the mobilisation of Highland soldiers, enlisted to be deployed to the Yemeni port of Aden, that in 1837 became the last colony to be incorporated into the British Empire. The tune talks of the harshness of the terrain, but is celebratory, It was even played as a farewell tune to Sir William Luce at the parade in Sharjah celebrating his end as “British Viceroy” in the Middle East in 1966. The second tune is an Anatolian lament. As Ilker Sezer reminded us this weekend, in his weekly feature on “Turkiye Today”, it “mourns the tragic fate of Ottoman soldiers dispatched to the harsh, remote deserts of Yemen during the fall of the empire, young men who marched away from their villages and never returned home. Most of their names, and numbers, were never recorded. Yet, their fate left a mark on the Turkish psyche.” Subsequent invaders have discovered that Yemen is a grave that cannot be overcome by the strength of modern technology, and that whilst Yemeni society is splintered and divided, building a reliable alliance with Yemeni factions is difficult. These are the harsh lessons facing Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom faces its biggest challenge in its modern history. The leadership of the Kingdom now has to respond decisively. At stake is their very credibility. This is likely to be a long and messy conflict. Saudi military objectives need to be focused: to box in the Houthis rather than destroy them. This is likely to include: (a) regaining territory lost on the Red Sea coast; (b) control over Bab el Mandeb Strait; (c) some kind of cordon sanitaire on the Saudi-Yemeni border; and if things go well (d) the capture of Sanaa. All this would not eliminate the Houthi problem, but it will contain it. In the end the Saudis will have to continue managing Yemen with a mixture of carrot and stick. For the moment, the stick is likely, but the carrot cannot be forgotten either. (click the image to read the Monday Commentary in full)