Armenia after 2018. Social and Political transformations

2018

"Armenia. Social Trends" is an electronic periodical which aims to analyse and briefly inform the society on main trends of social and economic development in Armenia. This periodical is published by the team of the Scientific-Educational Laboratory for Social Research (SELSR) of ASUE. The opinions and conclusions expressed in the periodical belong to the authors and do not necessarily coincide with the official views of ASUE. While citing the content, proper reference to the document is obligatory.

In the military dimension, the Four-Day War in Nagorno-Karabakh (2–5 April 2016) changed little in the conflict zone. It has, however, had a significant impact on the situation in Armenia. The country was shocked out of the political malaise that had been the dominant mood in the last few years, and the Karabakh question, which used to animate political life in the late 1980s and early 1990s, once again became a driving force behind developments. In the internal dimension, the renewed fighting galvanised the political scene, triggered a rise in nationalist sentiments, mobilised the public and consolidated it around the Karabakh question, overshadowing the frustrations caused by the country’s difficult economic situation. In the external dimension, the war, which was viewed as Moscow-endorsed Azerbaijani aggression, undermined people’s trust in Russia and the Armenian-Russian alliance. It also made it clear for Armenians how uncertain the Russian security guarantees were and exacerbated their feelings of vulnerability and isolation on the international stage. One of the main consequences the events of recent weeks has had is that Armenia has adopted a more rigid position on the Karabakh conflict; it is now a much more distant prospect that a compromise resolution will be reached and the military scenario is more likely to come to pass than it was in previous years. The new dynamics of political life in Armenia may be seen as a kind of comeback of politics and may, in turn, give new momentum to the country’s internal political processes and Armenia’s activities on the international level—in both cases this will be in a nationalist spirit. As a result, developments in Armenia in the coming months may be unpredictable and may trigger certain geopolitical processes in the Caucasus region and the entire post-Soviet area.

Ararat Institute for Near Eastern Studies , 2021

November 9th, 2020 was not only the end of the active stage of hostilities between Armenian and Azerbaijani-Turkish armed forces on Artsakh's territory but also the end of Armenia's third republic, something that the present government doesn't appear to realize. Presently, Armenia's government doesn't have the same public support that it had a few years ago and symbolizes Armenia's defeat not only on the battlefield but also in the diplomatic arena. Armenia's present political and geopolitical situation is similar to a drowning person with hands handcuffed behind his back on his way to hit the bottom of the pool. Attempting to break the handcuffs at this point and try to swim up to the surface will do more harm than good and become the cause of his eventual drowning. The solution to the present situation is to wait until it hits the bottom and then spring up towards the surface while breaking the handcuffs in the process. To accomplish that, the Armenian people must take their future into their own hands and through grassroots efforts, rebuild Armenia from the bottom up, shaking away its upper echelons of power who no longer represent the Armenian people and pursue foreign and false agendas to the detriment of Armenian people and the security of the Armenian state. The sooner Armenian people wake up, the more time they will have to change its present trajectory leading the country and the nation to its final demise. The defeat in Forty-Four Day War provided Armenia and the Armenians around the world the opportunity to reflect and reevaluate their previous beliefs, thoughts, and actions, put aside false impressions about its ally and the world community at large, understand its limited capabilities and the geopolitical volatility that surrounds the fundamentals of Armenian statehood, and focus on self-improvement not only on an individual level but also as a country and a nation at large. To recover from the present knockdown, Armenia must become relevant again within the regional and global contexts. For that purpose, it must have something of great value to offer its regional and international partners. Another goal that Armenia must accomplish is to reimagine its future, formulate a new vision and mission that will strengthen Armenia's military capabilities, and propel its economic development towards sustainable growth. Armenia must reevaluate its priorities and develop a dynamic foreign and domestic policy that will strengthen Armenia's national sovereignty, unify its people and restore public trust in government institutions. Armenian people must believe in themselves once again. Otherwise, its end will be near. For Armenia to survive and prosper, it must unify itself not only territorially but also unite its people because its power lies within its unity.

2008

Economic progress has been evident in Armenia since 2000, but inequalities between social groups are still present. These factors have combined to impact critically on the health status – including mental health – of the population. The rapid changes have also signifi cantly affected the general health and mental health status of children and young people. Indeed, the whole population has been forced to change their behaviours and overall lifestyle to adapt to the new situation.

Journal of Political Science: Bulletin of Yerevan University

This article deals with the problem of reconstructing the political future of post-war Armenia and overcoming modern turbulence in the context of regional instability. Characteristic features of overcoming widespread anxiety in the Armenian society, which manifested itself on the political stage in different ways, from popular protests and early elections to heated debates about the political future in recent years, are highlighted and described. The most important condition for the development of post-war Armenia is the extent to which Armenian society is able to form a concept for its future. Ideas about the future were of particular importance in critical epochs, when the traditional picture of the world was destroyed and new opportunities for social development opened up. But for many centuries, these ideas did not go beyond prophecies, predictions and various kinds of hoaxes, which essentially became the first attempts to predict the future. This article attempts to uncover the...

The April 2016 four-day “war” in the area of the Nagorny Karabakh conflict, as well as the developments that followed, have unveiled a whole stratum of serious problems in “stable” Armenia, including ones relating to defence issues. The aftermath of these events will continue to strongly influence internal processes in all three state entities: Armenia, the unrecognized Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, and Azerbaijan. This article aims to analyse some long-term consequences of the 2–5 April 2016 events in terms of their influence on Armenian internal political and social developments. The political transformations ongoing currently in Armenia can be best described as a “palace coup d’état”: they have been initiated by a ruling elite which benefited from general population’s low levels of public participation and social mobilization. In the absence of a charismatic leader and strong leadership in general, a tangible programme of action, or unity among the different components of civil society, the ruling elite retains the capacity to influence the varying reconstitution of groups and to alleviate, through small-scale concessions, tensions in Armenian society.

In post-Soviet Armenia, political, social and economic activity could only be fully understood in relation to three differing political-economic orders: the constitutional state, the networked, oligarchic state; and the nationalist-expansive state. These were not competing and discrete entities that must supplant one another; rather, understood as ‘state spaces’, produced by political, social and economic activity, they were deeply interlinked and mutually reinforcing.

Aylěntrank', 2024

The Armenian Revolution: Ideologies and Challenges, 2018

What is the political basis of the revolutionary movement of April 2018 in Armenia and which social groups were the driving forces for the movement? Is it based on an ideology, set of values, or a rationale? The answers to these questions will determine the form and the content of the new political majority, and whether it will succeed in changing the economic policies of the previous administration. In this brief analysis I will try to address a few key points and discuss some of the challenges facing the new government.

2013

Edited by Mikko Palonkorpi and Alexander Iskandaryan Copy editing by Richard Giragosian and Nina Iskandaryan Translations by Nina Iskandaryan Cover design by Matit www.matit.am Layout by Collage www.collage.am