The person currently occupying the post of the prime minister of the Republic of Armenia who often strives to appear original in his expressions, made surprising statements on the subject of the armed forces, speaking during “Crossroads of Peace: uniting the democracy and security” conference, organized on October 12 by the Konrad-Adenauer Foundation and the Armenian Civil Contract political party. In his view, a mindset that equates “security” solely with military means does not provide true security.

“Undoubtedly, the army has a key role in ensuring security; however, its role is neither primary nor secondary. If it were either, it would imply that the entire security system is fundamentally undermined.” Strangely, despite rejecting the army’s supremacy in state security, the head of the executive did not clarify what he considers to be the foremost guarantee of the country’s security in this context.

If, as he claims, the army does not hold the primary position in terms of security, then his statements lack sincerity. In other words, either he is lying now when he asserts that the army is not the top priority in security, or he lied earlier when he declared that the border markers installed at the Armenian village of Kirants during the April-May 2024 demarcation process would ensure our security. Naturally, border markers alone cannot guarantee security without the presence of armed forces. The head of government understands this well enough, yet he continues to insist that the army plays a secondary role in guaranteeing the state’s security, sovereignty, and territorial integrity.

Pashinyan is always deliberate in his statements. Downplaying the role and importance of the armed forces aligns precisely with the spirit and logic of his domestic and foreign policy direction. Since coming to power in 2018, the Civil Contract party has targeted three key national institutions, one of which is the army (the other two being the school and the church - Ed.). This raises a question: why does Pashinyan avoid placing the army on par with his favored security measures and prioritizing a combat-ready military, as was the case before 2018?

If we set aside all conspiracy theories, it appears that a strong army might simply be an unwelcome burden for the person working as the prime minister of the Republic of Armenia. To maintain a well-armed, combat-ready military would require the following: a) exemplary military officers driven by patriotism, honor, and dignity; b) an educational system designed to instill patriotism, national values, and traditions; c) a robust military-industrial complex; d) free, independent, critically thinking citizens; e) a state-organized and efficient Diaspora; and f) a cohesive network structured around the church, among others.

However, a significant issue emerges here. A principled officer, a dedicated teacher, a conscientious citizen, a tireless scientist, a free-thinking Diaspora compatriot, and a steadfast nation-keeping church will not tolerate the person occupying the post of the prime minister and his Civil Contract team, who seem to be steering the country toward ruin. This suggests that the nation’s security system—with all its integral parts—is fundamentally incompatible with the current government.

Only a weakened, undignified public, fearing external threats, would support the incumbent regime. And only a weak, opportunistic government could place its faith in the supposed protective power of mere border markers.