The internal political processes forming around the Armenian Apostolic Church have long since gone beyond the purely personal or spiritual sphere. According to public administration expert Hovhannes Avetisyan, this is not about one individual—not about the Supreme Patriarch—but about an attempt to subordinate or destroy a national institution.
The Agenda of the “Temporary Catholicos”
According to Avetisyan, in his public statements, Armenia’s prime minister has essentially openly outlined the agenda: removing the Supreme Patriarch, appointing a “temporary Catholicos,” changing church canons, and holding elections for a new Catholicos. The expert notes that in reality, this means one thing—a desire to ensure the formation of clergy convenient for the authorities.
He also recalls the prime minister’s statements that historically, during periods when Armenia lacked statehood, the appointment of the Catholicos occurred with the consent of the rulers of the states under whose power the country found itself. “In this context, a quite unambiguous hint is being made: Armenia is a state, I am the head of the state, therefore the Catholicos must be appointed with my consent,” Avetisyan emphasizes.
Why the Authorities Have Targeted the Church
In the expert’s opinion, the reason is obvious: the current authorities have abandoned national interests and do not want a large, influential institution with authority and real impact on society to function in the country—one capable of speaking about these interests and trying to promote them.
“If the church ends up under full control of the authorities, tomorrow we could find ourselves behind bars just for mentioning Artsakh,” Avetisyan warns, stressing that the authorities will act step by step: starting with major institutions and eventually reaching every individual.
Consolidation Around the Church
Under these conditions, the expert believes it is pointless to expect decisions from individual figures or political forces. He emphasizes the importance of consolidating the people around the Armenian Apostolic Church and the Supreme Patriarch to prevent the implementation of the current authorities’ plans.
“The church is not just a structure satisfying spiritual needs. It is a national institution that not only has the right but is obligated to speak when the national interests of the country are being trampled,” says Avetisyan.
In his view, this thousand-year-old institution, which stands at the foundation of Armenian statehood, cannot remain silent at a moment when the authorities are abandoning national interests.
Election Scenario: Not a Change of Power, but a “Change of Opposition”
Speaking about the possible scenario for the upcoming elections, Avetisyan skeptically assesses the prospects for a change of power through electoral processes. In his estimation, under current conditions, elections will not lead to real political changes.
According to the expert’s forecasts, Nikol Pashinyan could gain around 50 percent or even 51 percent in the elections. And if the force he leads does not surpass the 51% threshold and, for example, gets 45 percent, then with high probability it will form a coalition with the most unexpected small force that, however, will be ready to join the authorities and ensure a parliamentary majority.
“I see a situation in which Pashinyan once again becomes the majority in the National Assembly,” Avetisyan notes. In his assessment, what may change in parliament is not the power, but the composition of the opposition. Instead of the current “Armenia” bloc, second place could be taken by a force called “Our Way,” and third place by either the same “Armenia” bloc or some other political force.
In this context, the expert emphasizes that the upcoming elections will most likely lead not to a change of power, but to a redistribution within the opposition camp.
The Phenomenon of “False Opposition”
Avetisyan harshly criticizes those political forces that position themselves as opposition in public disputes but in reality do not set themselves the goal of changing power. According to him, their main goal is presence in the National Assembly in the status of opposition, rather than taking real responsibility.
“For many, the agenda is not changing power. Their agenda is to be in parliament in the role of opposition,” he stresses.
In the expert’s conviction, such “constructive” or “convenient” opposition is fully beneficial to Nikol Pashinyan. When issues of Artsakh, national losses, and the responsibility of the authorities are raised in the public agenda, it irritates the current prime minister. That is why, Avetisyan believes, Pashinyan is interested in having an opposition that speaks softly instead of raising painful questions and systemic problems.
Under such conditions, the expert particularly emphasizes the role of spiritual leadership as a factor of consolidation. In his opinion, it is spiritual leadership that can consolidate political forces and society, returning to Armenia its subject role in international processes.