On the eve of the anniversary of the Third Republic, which has been almost completely destroyed by him, the Turkish satrap Nikol Pashinyan announced a new strategic goal – the ‘Fourth Republic’. We have already heard this somewhere: at a time, former President Armen Sarkissian spoke about the vital necessity and even the inevitability of establishing the Fourth Republic. However, he had suggested turning Spyurk (foreign Armenian communities) and its human capital into an ‘essential part of the Armenian state’ (which is probably why Pashinyan has done everything to prevent this program from becoming a reality). He had suggested, then abandoned it.
The reality of the collaborationist himself is very Turk-centric – in his universe, the regional peace has been established, corruption has been defeated, the rule of law has been established, while kitchen politicians (or, as he poetically put it in his last speech, ‘nursing mothers’) run the country without attracting the attention of the ward assistants of the Ijevan psychiatric hospital. Therefore, the only thing that separates us from the ‘new’ fourth republic is, of course, the new constitution, the adoption of which is demanded by the Azerbaijani curator of the Turkish satrap, or rather, first of all, the new ‘Declaration of Independence’ (read – the party programme of his ‘Civil Contract’ party) – without obligations towards Artsakh and recognition of the Armenian Genocide.
So, what is so new about ‘Real Armenia’ for the sake of which we need a new constitution (not for the sake of concessions to Aliyev and the dissolution of the state after all?). We learn about this from Pashinyan’s latest outburst at the 7th congress of his Young Janissaries. It mainly consisted of ranting about ‘Real Armenia’ and the ‘peace treaty’, which we have already translated into the language of real politics. In an effort not to repeat ourselves, we will edit or supplement the most deceitful fragments of his long speech as they would be recordeed in Pashinyan’s sincere confession before the court of Armenian history.
Statement 1. ‘Since gaining independence, we have not had such a year and seven months, when not a single soldier was killed or injured as a result of shelling on the border.’
The subscript. Once, in January 2020, Pashinyan already recorded a ‘historical minimum’ of Armenian servicemen’s combat deaths. 8 months later, the 44-day war began. By the way, for the entire year of 2019, there were as many deaths as on that single February day in 2024, from which the Turkish satrap starts his countdown of ‘1 year and 7 months’. If serving in the Armenian army ‘under Comrade Napoleon’ is so safe, then why now, when there is no need to send their sons to Artsakh, which he hates so much, do parents take their sons out of the country on an even larger scale, why do soldiers continue to die in the ‘era of peace’ under ‘unclear circumstances’, and why is his party trying to legalise evasion from military service in every possible way?
Statement 2. ‘Now I am a patriot according to the model of patriotism bequeathed to me by nursing mothers’.
The subscript. The culprit of all the troubles that Pashinyan brings to our heads will always be the ‘people’ or the ‘exes’– now not just the presidents of the Third Republic, but the Soviet leaders too. Having desecrated all our shrines and values, the Turkish satrap got to the most fundamental one – the Armenian mothers. Those same mothers who have raised generations of fearless warriors and genuine, fashion-oblivious patriots. Those same mothers, who for thousands of years were our first guide to the Motherland – before a certain declaration of 1991 ‘outlined’ its borders (in fact, it did not outline any borders). What can you do – the chasm with public opinion always goes hand in hand with reinforcement of a repressive occupation regime. Tomorrow he will be a patriot according to the model of sultan Erdogan and curator Aliyev.
Statement 3. ‘And in 2019, I was a patriot according to the only model of patriotism that existed in Armenia at that time. But how did it form, that model of patriotism, who devised it? That model was imposed by the Soviet Empire, or rather, by its leaders – Stalin, Khrushchev, and Brezhnev.’
The subscript. The Turkish servant Pashinyan implies that supporters of the Turkish-Azerbaijani colonisation and the surrender of Artsakh such as he, Levon Ter-Petrosyan, Ashot Bleyan, Khachatur Sukiasyan (on the one hand) and heroes of the national liberation movement (on the other hand) were the carriers of ‘the same model of patriotism’ until 2021. In his alternative reality history, the writer Raffi, who warned about the threat of Genocide back in the second half of the 19th century, the hero Monte Melkonian, who grew up in the United States, as well as Movses Silikyan, Yeghishe Charents, Garegin Nzhdeh, and other warriors and thinkers, who were tortured in Soviet prison camps, were victims and conduits of Soviet propaganda. While mapping independent Armenia on the ruins of the Ottoman Empire after World War I, U.S. President Woodrow Wilson apparently also consulted with Stalin, Khrushchev and Brezhnev.
Statement 4. ‘And it was our social psychology formed in this way that led to the Karabakh movement’.
The subscript. The Turkish satrap sees no historical need for the fact that in 1988, oppressed by the Azerbaijani government and ousted from Artsakh, the Armenians living there (!) finally rebelled against their extermination, and they were massively supported by the Armenians of the then-Soviet Armenia, and that in the early 1990s Armenia succeeded to defend one of the most ancient civilisational and spiritual centres of the Armenian world. After all, if Pashinyan pretends to be so disgusted with the Soviet Union, then why should Armenia be content with the borders imposed by it? And why should an Armenian living in Tigranashen (which, by the way, has never been an Azerbaijani enclave) and, as Pashinyan puts it, who has already ‘found his Homeland’ and ‘is not looking for it somewhere else’ not worry that tomorrow the leader of his country will invite Azerbaijanis to his house? Well, one can understand that the Turkish collaborationist prefers the ‘social psychology’ of denying any spatial ambitions and ambitions in general, mass mutual distrust, denial of any authority and values, worrying only about own stomach.
Statement 5. ‘Today, yes, including with our support, they [the people of Karabakh] will change their refugee status to the proud citizenship of Armenia’.
The subscript. The fault why these people have a ‘refugee status’ (which, by the way, Pashinyan’s Armenia has made inapplicable in any other country with a more supportive government towards Artsakh Armenians) lies solely with Nikol Pashinyan himself. Moreover, the citizenship so generously offered to them is not a privilege, but an undisguised insult towards people, who have been holders of Armenian passports since birth. Today, these survivors of wars, blockades and deportations are forced to justify themselves in front of the ‘Civil contract’ and change their Armenian passport to the same Armenian one. To do this, they have to stand in gruelling queues and pay large sums to notaries and lawyers, since the Armenian government agencies demonstrate no appreciation for the fact that the refugees could not take a complete package of documents with them, while fleeing the massacre. For some reason, it did not occur to Pashinyan to accept their current passports, simplify the filing procedure for them, or request the originals of the lost Soviet documents from Azerbaijani archives. Would his curator Ilham Aliyev have dared to refuse?
Statement 6. ‘We tell the billionaire emissaries of the Diaspora: you can behave in Armenia only the way you behave in the country of your main activity, and not one iota more. The Republic of Armenia is not a yacht or a sailboat for you to come and say: ‘Turn around, we are leaving’. The Republic of Armenia will wrap up those who think of such a thing and place them in appropriate places. So that the taste of the Republic of Armenia remains in their mouths’.
The subscript. To begin with, a philanthropist from Spyurk is not required to know the words ‘airplane’ and ‘yacht’ in Russian, as Pashinyan pronounced them. The Republic of Armenia is the common heritage of the entire Armenian world, for which it has paid with the blood, tears and sweat of his best sons and daughters – over centuries. It is not for the Turkish satrap to determine where the Armenians of Spyurk will set up their main activities and what rights they have on the territory of the Republic of Armenia. If Spyurk accepts his rules of the game, gets scared and does not start building the only force capable of reviving the Armenian state – a national aristocracy, then the taste of Armenia will indeed remain only in our mouths.
Statement 7. ‘Our active dialogue with Turkey gives us confidence that in the near future we will have land transport links with Turkey, and therefore with the European Union’.
The subscript. The collaborationist will open the doors to his masters and nip the Armenian small business and agriculture in the bud. His current tax policy has already paved the way for the complete economic absorption of Armenia by Turkey, which, unlike its colony, actively subsidises its producers. How successfully will he use Turkey for trade with the EU can be inferred from the way he handles transit through much friendlier Georgia. The Economy Minister Gevorg Papoyan came to Georgia and reached an agreement with his colleagues there only after 3 months of truck downtime on the border. By the way, this is the second most popular person in the party – based on the votes at this party congress.
Statement 8. ‘Dear party comrades, it is hard to even comprehend how you were able to survive. How you endured that heavy burden, suffering, and upheaval. How you got through it all. Threats and insults against you and your families, lies and slander, fake news, attacks – all these were and still are the toolkit that has been used against us.’
The subscript. For Pashinyan, the measure of human suffering is exposure and well-deserved criticism by society, and not the need to bury a child, husband and brother before leaving (and their graves to be then torn apart by advancing enemies) and closing the door of their family home forever. At the same time, for some reason, among those under attack today, deadly ones, we see not the long ‘suffering’ party members of the Turkish collaborationist, but journalists, bloggers and politicians.
Statement 9. ‘The Civil Contract is a party that does the impossible, and together we have done and are doing the impossible.’
The subscript. Indeed, we could see such a scale of Homeland loss, dilettantism, hypocrisy, arrests of clergy and political dissidents, encouragement of mass emigration, only under the Bolsheviks and in the most absurd combination of Levon Ter-Petrosyan, Robert Kocharyan and Serzh Sargsyan. Which, obviously, Nikol Pashinyan is. The ‘Civil Contract’ is a party that votes for a law on European integration, trade with Russia on unprecedented scale and membership in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. Few people could really be so inconsistent and incompetent.
Statement 10. ‘The Civil Contract Party proclaims the establishment of the Fourth Republic of Armenia as its next strategic objective.
The subscript. Pashinyan knows that he cannot force the people of Armenia to abandon the Declaration of Independence and its mission – except by deception and manipulation. The ‘new’ republic will be sweetened with populist social bonuses to present the new constitution and order as a positive renewal, rather than abandoning our own state and our path to independence. Our reader knows well what his phantom ‘Real Armenia’ really means, which will one way or another culminate in elimination of even ceremonial attributes of the Armenian statehood.
So, Pashinyan has new captive accomplices, whom he has decided to smear in his betrayal – Armenian mothers; a new tool for achieving the goal set by Aliyev – the ‘Fourth Republic’; and, of course, inexhaustible reserves of arrogance to openly threaten the Armenians of Spyurk, lie about the ‘era of peace’, the ‘fight’ against corruption, the ‘rule of law’ and ‘support’ for refugees from Artsakh.
Is this the ‘news’ that the Armenian world deserves to see? We do not think so. In order for Pashinyan’s next speech at the Civil Contract congress not to be the last one for Armenia itself, this congress should be the last in the history of the party, which in reality is just a Turkish fifth column.
