According to reports citing government sources, Nikol Pashinyan held a tough conversation with Defense Minister Suren Papikyan regarding the situation in the army. Suren Papikyan was reappointed to the post just days ago. It remains unclear whether the conversation took place before or after his reappointment. However, that may not be particularly important. Nor is it essential whether such a conversation actually took place or whether government sources have an interest in circulating this information in order to shape a particular public perception. That, too, is difficult to determine. It is, however, quite possible that both are true: that the tough conversation did take place and that there was also a motive for making it public.
In any case, the picture fits entirely within the logic of the system that Nikol Pashinyan is attempting to build. He is seeking to establish an authoritarian system of governance, the hybrid version of which emerged after 2018, became more clearly defined following 2020, and now appears to be transitioning toward a more “classical” form of authoritarianism. Nikol Pashinyan considers this an almost unalternative option for strengthening his political position and the governability of the ruling system he leads.
An inevitable and essential propaganda companion of an authoritarian system is the widespread promotion of the “good tsar, bad boyars” formula, creating the impression that responsibility for existing shortcomings lies not with the supreme leader but with lower-ranking subordinates. And since deaths in Armenia’s Armed Forces under so-called peacetime conditions have recently become alarmingly frequent, Pashinyan apparently believes that the time has come to “insulate” himself from responsibility.
He had, of course, taken the first step in that direction long ago, repeating once again just days ago that all the problems in the army stem from society. At the same time, however, Pashinyan apparently believes that this argument may not be equally persuasive for all segments of the public. Therefore, the motivation behind another ploy cannot be ruled out either—namely, one within the framework of the “good tsar, bad boyars” principle.
Read also
All the more so because what makes Nikol Pashinyan more motivated regarding this formula is not only the “construction” of an authoritarian system of governance, but also the outcome of the 2026 parliamentary election, which was achieved at the cost of severing virtually the last thread of legitimacy—by being deprived of electoral legitimacy.
Hakob BADALYAN
