Campaign Against the Armenian Apostolic Church: “Reforms,” Pressure, and an Attempt at Internal Division

,
The Public Tribunal regards the ongoing developments as a threat to the national security, national unity, and spiritual sovereignty of the Armenian people. We consider it inadmissible to exert pressure on the Catholicos of All Armenians, to discredit the Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin, or to involve the clergy in political scenarios that serve the interests of the authorities.

Under the Guise of Legality: The Systemic Fusion of Government and Corruption

,
The Public Tribunal appeals to the citizens of the Republic of Armenia, urging them to take into account the true structure of financing of the incumbent authorities, their ties with business interests, and the systemic nature of corruption before deciding whether to support any political force in the 2026 parliamentary elections.

Mina Khachatryan: 20 Rhetorical Questions to Serzh Sargsyan

,
Mina Khachatryan has published 20 questions addressed to Serzh Sargsyan on her Telegram channel, “Mina-Z.”

How the Current Catastrophic Situation in Armenia Began: From Romanticized Independence to Systemic Vulnerability – Part 3. The Era of Robert Kocharyan (1998-2008). BETWEEN TWO TRAGEDIES: OCTOBER 27, 1999, AND MARCH 1, 2008 — ARMENIAN STATEHOOD UNDER THREAT

,
Both the beginning and the end of Robert Kocharyan’s presidency were marked by tragic events that shaped Armenia’s political environment for years to come. The armed attack on the Armenian Parliament on October 27, 1999, shocked the young republic. Nearly a decade later, on March 1, 2008, a deepened political crisis culminated in bloody clashes on the streets of Yerevan. These events were not merely isolated tragedies; they planted explosive charges beneath public institutions, fueled mutual distrust, and led to a profound societal divide.
Серж Саргсян, Артур Амбарцумян, Никол Пашинян

Arthur Hambardzoumyan: Silence as a Key Factor in State Destruction

, ,
In his regular YouTube address, Arthur Hambardzoumyan raises issues that are either deliberately avoided in Armenia’s public discourse or pushed to the margins of public attention. In his assessment, over the past few years, the Armenian people have gradually become accustomed to developments that would have been considered unacceptable not long ago.

How the Current Catastrophic Situation in Armenia Began: From Romanticized Independence to Systemic Vulnerability – Part 3. The Era of Robert Kocharyan (continuation)

,
The tragedy of October 27, 1999, was not merely a bloody act of violence; it became a catalyst for broader political and strategic changes. Before these events, Robert Kocharyan’s policy in the negotiation process was under clear pressure and control from Vazgen Sargsyan. After Sargsyan’s assassination, Kocharyan gained greater freedom of action, which suggests that his earlier steps had been constrained by external influence.

How the Current Catastrophic Situation in Armenia Began: From Romanticized Independence to Systemic Vulnerability – Part 3. The Era Robert Kocharyan (1998-2008)

,
Robert Kocharyan’s rise to power in 1998 was the outcome of a multi-step political combination unfolding between 1996 and 1998. Levon Ter-Petrosyan’s resignation, which at first glance appeared to stem from disagreements over the Karabakh settlement, became a turning point: after victory in the First Karabakh War, society was not prepared to accept capitulation.

The Last National Institution Under Threat: A Crisis of Unity

,
According to experts from the Public Tribunal, the processes under review point to a structural crisis in the interaction between the state, the Church, and society. In its current form, Nikol Pashinyan’s policy contributes to deeper societal division, a reduction of institutional autonomy, and the weakening of mechanisms of national consolidation.

How the Current Catastrophic Situation in Armenia Began: From Romanticized Independence to Systemic Vulnerability – Part 2 (continuation)

,
Levon Ter-Petrosyan’s readiness for concessions in 1997–1998 was neither an impulsive mistake nor the result of short-term pressure. It fit squarely within a stable conceptual model that was widely circulated in Western diplomatic and analytical circles at the time and clearly articulated through what became known as the “Goble Plan.”

How the Current Catastrophic Situation in Armenia Began: From Romanticized Independence to Systemic Vulnerability – Part 2. GOBLE PLAN: A GEOPOLITICAL TRAP SET IN 1997

,
The summer of 1997 became not only a moment of external pressure, but also a moment of internal ideological rupture, for which Levon Ter-Petrosyan bore personal responsibility. His article “War or Peace: The Moment of Seriousness” was presented as an act of sober realism. In reality, however, it amounted to an ideological formulation of a defeatist logic that was inherently unfavorable to Armenia. Instead of challenging the externally imposed “chess game,” the president effectively accepted the role of a lesser piece, justifying strategic concessions by fatigue from war, rather than by the necessity to continue the struggle.