Pashinyan under pressure from Baku? Experts weigh in on 'Real Armenia' concept
Real Armenia concept
Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan introduced the concept of “Real Armenia” in a national address on 19 February, defining it as the Republic of Armenia within its internationally recognized borders of 29,743 square kilometers.
He presented the ideology as a path to progress and development, emphasizing “prosperity,” “well-being,” and the “happiness” of each citizen. According to Pashinyan, this vision requires an environment where Armenians feel free, justly treated, and secure.
A central point of his proposal is the adoption of a new constitution, as he argued that all previous constitutional referendums lacked full legitimacy.
He suggested a nationwide vote to ensure the new constitution reflects the genuine expectations of Armenian citizens.
Pashinyan also framed patriotism within the ideology of “Real Armenia,” aligning it with the interests of the internationally recognized state and its system of rights and responsibilities.
However, political analysts in Armenia have linked the initiative to Azerbaijan’s long-standing demands. Baku has insisted that Armenia amend its constitution, claiming it contains territorial claims against Azerbaijan and remains the main obstacle to a peace treaty.
Critics point to the Armenian constitution’s reference to the 1990 Declaration of Independence, which cites a resolution on the unification of the Armenian SSR and Nagorno-Karabakh—something Azerbaijan sees as justification for its demands.
While Armenian authorities have previously dismissed such demands as interference in internal affairs, analysts note that Pashinyan’s proposal aligns with Azerbaijan’s pressure. The Armenian Foreign Ministry maintains that constitutional reform discussions began in 2018 and that Baku’s intervention undermines the peace process.
Armenian citizens can submit feedback and suggestions on the “Real Armenia” concept via email at [email protected].
- Armenia fulfills Aliyev’s demand? Pashinyan proposes a new constitution
- “There can be no ‘Western Azerbaijan’ on Armenian territory” and other statements by Pashinyan
- Pashinyan’s 12 proposals to Baku: ‘Drop escalatory rhetoric’
- Opinion: ‘Aliyev makes threats because he cannot neutralise Armenia’s potential’
Key tenets of the ‘Real Armenia’ concept
The state is the best tool for citizens and the nation to determine their own destiny. A better life for an individual is only possible within their own state.
Enrich yourself and enrich others—these are the key incentives for creating societal well-being. This incentive should not be seen through the lens of a race for money but rather through the logic of competition in achieving results. This develops both the individual and the state.
Living well must become the standard, based on the logic of well-being, with the understanding that the only way to a good life is to work hard, earn a lot, and spend a lot. This applies to both individuals and the state.
The individual is the highest value. This means that meeting a person’s basic needs is a priority.
The ideology of Real Armenia is founded on the national values of the Armenian people.
The national values of the Armenian people (the Republic of Armenia) include:
- The Republic of Armenia,
- Independence, sovereignty, citizenship, democracy, the army,
- Armenian history,
- The Armenian language and script, literature, knowledge, science,
- The pan-Armenian potential, the Armenian diaspora,
- The Armenian Apostolic Church, the Armenian Catholic Church, the Armenian Evangelical Church, Christianity [the list continues in the document].
The future of Armenia depends on one person—and that person is you! Individual effort is the key condition for the development of the state.
A state is only as strong as its economy. Therefore, policy must focus on strengthening the country’s economy.
Independence means replacing dependence on a few with dependence on many. Independent states have always been, and will always be, those that depend not on a select few, but on a broad range of partners. The goal of a balanced foreign policy is to prevent disproportionate dependencies, even when relying on many.
Peace is the ability to coexist with neighbors without external support. It is the ultimate goal of foreign relations, expressed through economic, political, and cultural cooperation.
The future depends on the ability to learn from the past and transform those lessons into knowledge and skills for today’s work. The future is the result of today’s efforts.
Armenian political analysts’ comments
Tigran Grigoryan:
“Instead of all these fabrications, the school essay called a strategy, and the semi-literate interpretations of various terms, it would be more honest to come out and tell the people directly: ‘Four and a half years have passed since the war, and for one reason or another, we have failed to implement real reforms. Now, we are forced to amend the constitution at Azerbaijan’s demand because we have no choice—we are weak. We cannot guarantee that this will be the end of it, but we believe the alternative is even riskier.’”
Narek Sukiasyan:
“A truly sovereign Armenia would not amend its constitution simply because of external demands, but only in response to internal necessity. However, the ruling political force finds the current system—with its super-prime ministerial status and electoral guarantee of a stable majority—far too convenient to change voluntarily. The only reason the constitution is being amended now is that they cannot say no to Azerbaijan. Due to their own mistakes, they have created a situation where resistance is no longer possible.”
Suren Surenyants:
“The real Armenia was the one founded in 1990–91, based on the values of the 1988 national movement. Nikol Pashinyan, with his reckless policies before and after the war, has become the gravedigger of that real Armenia. At a time when high-level U.S.-Russian contacts offer some grounds for optimism, Pashinyan once again engages in reckless calculations. These calculations contradict the international context and have nothing to do with our statehood or its interests.
His so-called ‘ideological address’—as Pashinyan himself calls it—is nothing more than an open offer to Turkey and Azerbaijan from a man rejected by the neoliberal circles of the West. He is proposing a deal to Ankara and Baku: ‘power in exchange for turning Armenia into an Azerbaijani sub-state.’ On the eve of the anniversary of the national movement, Pashinyan is essentially proposing the dismantling of our republic. We must confront this challenge by removing Aliyev’s proxy from power in Armenia.”*
Robert Gevondyan:
“Like all those who have ruled Armenia single-handedly for years, Pashinyan is beginning to believe in his own role as a ‘messiah’ or ‘savior.’ Setting aside the fact that parts of his ‘address’ are complete nonsense from the standpoint of philosophy, political science, psychology, biology, economics, and other disciplines, the real issue is that he deeply believes in everything he says.
It would be beneficial for Armenia to restore a semi-presidential system, with a mandatory two-term limit for the president—four years per term instead of five. Alternatively, at the very least, such a restriction should be imposed on the prime minister. Eight years is the maximum duration before a leader’s detachment from reality becomes dangerous for the state. Otherwise, this deterioration will inevitably affect the quality of relations between the authorities and society.”
