{"id":7083,"date":"2025-12-10T13:31:37","date_gmt":"2025-12-10T10:31:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/armtribunal.com\/?p=7083"},"modified":"2025-12-10T13:36:51","modified_gmt":"2025-12-10T10:36:51","slug":"argishti-kivirjan-o-krizise-vlasti-i-cerkvi-v-armenii","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/armtribunal.com\/en\/2025\/12\/10\/argishti-kivirjan-o-krizise-vlasti-i-cerkvi-v-armenii\/","title":{"rendered":"Argishti Kiviryan on the Government\u2013Church Crisis in Armenia"},"content":{"rendered":"

Political analyst Argishti Kiviryan, in an interview with news.am, assesses Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan\u2019s actions toward the Armenian Apostolic Church (AAC). He addresses several key issues: the political psychology of the authorities, the ideological transformation of the state, regional risks, and processes around Armenia that, in his view, are being orchestrated from outside.<\/p>\n

1. Pashinyan vs. the Church: Personal Motivation or Political Project?<\/strong>.<\/h2>\n

Kiviryan believes that Pashinyan\u2019s confrontation with the Armenian Apostolic Church has evolved into a personal campaign by the prime minister against the Catholicos of All Armenians.<\/p>\n

He characterizes the prime minister\u2019s behavior as typical of leaders who seek to control all key institutions. Among the manifestations of this approach, he notes:<\/p>\n

    \n
  • Attempts to impose a new order of church services (including the use of the national anthem and state flags in churches);<\/li>\n
  • Statements that diminish the historical and theological foundations of Christianity in Armenia;<\/li>\n
  • An aspiration to \u201cappoint a Catholicos loyal to him\u201d;<\/li>\n
  • A desire to fully subordinate the Church to the state.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

    Kiviryan draws parallels with religious reformers of Europe \u2014 such as Luther and Calvin \u2014 arguing that Pashinyan imagines himself a reformer, yet lacks the necessary knowledge and competencies for such a role.<\/p>\n

    2. \u201cOmnipotence Syndrome\u201d and Lack of Competence<\/strong><\/h2>\n

    Kiviryan points to what he describes as a total lack of professionalism among the current authorities, particularly the prime minister. He emphasizes:<\/p>\n

      \n
    • A lack of fundamental education;<\/li>\n
    • Poor knowledge of history and theology;<\/li>\n
    • Systematic mistakes in public speeches;<\/li>\n
    • The prevalence of willfulness instead of competent governance.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

      He compares Pashinyan\u2019s style of behavior to historical examples of eccentric dictators (Caligula, Nero), underscoring the danger of concentrating power in the hands of an unprofessional individual.<\/p>\n

      3. Resistance Within the Church: The Shirak Diocese Factor<\/strong><\/h2>\n

      Despite pressure, the Armenian Apostolic Church continues to resist, Kiviryan says, pointing to the following facts:<\/p>\n

        \n
      • Clergy of the Shirak Diocese refused to serve the Divine Liturgy, omitting the name of the Catholicos [at the request of the prime minister];<\/li>\n
      • The figure of Mikayel Ajapahyan remains influential even after his detention;<\/li>\n
      • There remains a group of hierarchs within the Church capable of blocking the government\u2019s plans.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

        The key conclusion, according to Kiviryan, is that if Catholicos Karekin II does not resign, attempts to replace him are doomed to failure.<\/p>\n

        The Catholicos of the Armenian Apostolic Church cannot be \u201coverthrown,\u201d as no such provision exists in the canons of the AAC. Consequently, the idea of electing \u201cten Catholicoses\u201d in order to impose a loyal one will inevitably fail.<\/p>\n

        4. The AAC\u2019s Struggle as Part of a Broader Picture: The Dismantling of Institutions<\/strong><\/h2>\n

        Kiviryan links the ongoing pressure on the Church to broader trends of recent years. Among them, he highlights:<\/p>\n

          \n
        • The undermining of the army, which began with a conflict with the General Staff in 2019\u20132021;<\/li>\n
        • The degradation of the system of state governance;<\/li>\n
        • The loss of essential elements of national identity;<\/li>\n
        • Armenia\u2019s transformation into an object managed by external powers.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

          From this perspective, he draws the following conclusion: The Church is one of the few institutions that has not been subordinated to the authorities.<\/p>\n

          This, according to Kiviryan, explains Pashinyan\u2019s attempts to establish control over the Armenian Apostolic Church.<\/p>\n

          5. Economic Integration with Azerbaijan as Part of a Foreign Scenario<\/strong><\/h2>\n

          Kiviryan draws particular attention to recent developments:<\/p>\n

            \n
          • Armenia has begun purchasing Azerbaijani oil;<\/li>\n
          • Earlier, Azerbaijani grain was imported into the country.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

            According to him, these steps were not initiated by Armenia itself. Rather, decisions are imposed on Yerevan, while the authorities merely carry them out.<\/p>\n

            Kiviryan believes that external \u201cmoderators\u201d are seeking to establish an Armenian\u2013Azerbaijani alliance that could be used in the future:<\/p>\n

              \n
            • Initially, as an economic cluster;<\/li>\n
            • Later, as an instrument to exert pressure on Russia following the Ukrainian conflict.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

              He draws parallels with British projects in the South Caucasus during 1917\u20131920, when London attempted to form regional alliances aimed at restraining Russia.<\/p>\n

              6. Russia, Europe and the International Game Around Armenia<\/strong><\/h2>\n

              Kiviryan states that:<\/p>\n

                \n
              • Russia is preoccupied with Ukraine and reacts only to most critical steps taken by Yerevan (for example, harsh statements by the Armenian Foreign Ministry following the signing of an Armenia\u2013EU strategic document);<\/li>\n
              • Europe, by contrast, is interested in shifting zones of confrontation to the South Caucasus;<\/li>\n
              • Armenia risks being drawn into someone else\u2019s scenario as an instrument of geopolitical pressure.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                In this context, all regional processes are now viewed through the prism of the war in Ukraine.<\/p>\n

                7. Kiviryan\u2019s Key Conclusion<\/strong><\/h2>\n

                According to Kiviryan, Armenia has found itself in an extremely vulnerable situation, characterized by:<\/p>\n

                  \n
                • Unprofessional governance;<\/strong>,<\/li>\n
                • External powers shaping the regional order;<\/strong>,<\/li>\n
                • The Church as the last remaining barrier against the complete dismantling of national institutions.<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                  In Kiviryan\u2019s view:<\/p>\n

                    \n
                  • If the Armenian Apostolic Church withstands the pressure, the government\u2019s plans to establish control over it will fail;<\/li>\n
                  • If it does not, Armenia risks losing a key element of its statehood and historical identity.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n