To protect his power and freedom, Pashinyan will go to any lengths: Karapetyan must understand this

The attack on the Electric Networks of Armenia (ENA) continues. “Those employees of ENA who engage in political intrigues instead of fulfilling their official duties will be dismissed in July. Those who force the employees of Electric Networks of Armenia to participate in rallies will also be punished,” said Pashinyan, effectively issuing political threats against all staff who disagree with his policies.

Samvel Karapetyan’s Defense Council promptly responded, assuring ENA employees that if they are dismissed in the future for baseless reasons tied to their civil or religious beliefs, their violated labor rights will be restored, and they will be granted equal employment opportunities.

We will not assess the legal twists and turns of this situation, especially since Karapetyan’s lawyer, Aram Vardevanyan, has presented the details of the legal arbitrariness surrounding the philanthropist’s political persecution. Instead, we focus on the political context.

Pashinyan’s post today—with threats directed at ENA’s management and staff—demonstrates the prime minister’s legitimate concerns that organized crowds on the streets of the capital could spark a broader political process that poses a threat to the government.

An important aspect of the situation is that the threats of expropriation and illegal actions aimed at redistributing property are taking place amid complete silence from Western diplomatic missions in Armenia, primarily the United States and the European Union.

They do not have the right to interfere in Armenia’s internal affairs, but it is important to note that the embassies are silent in a situation where one of the foundations of Western civilization—the institution of the inviolability of private property—is being trampled upon.

In this context, it is appropriate to consider that the arrest of Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan under the false pretext of “attempting to seize power by force” was necessary in the current situation as a smokescreen: Pashinyan is trying to “sell” the idea in the West that a terrorist attack was being prepared against the government, and therefore any of his repressions in Armenia are legitimate and justified. First of all, the US and British embassies know what is really happening, but political expediency forces them to remain silent and play along with Pashinyan.

The attempt to seize Electric Networks and the statements about “dismissing employees if they participate in rallies” are illegal and contradict the Constitution. Article 44 of the Basic Law guarantees the right to peaceful assembly without arms. Despite this, from a political perspective, Pashinyan’s actions are understandable. He is acting like someone who does not want to relinquish power—or at the very least, unwilling to transfer authority to figures like Samvel Karapetyan who come from the same “geopolitical area.”

What prevented them from doing the same in 2018? Why didn’t they fire protest participants, censor media, destroy symbols of Pashinyan’s movement, or cut off internet access? Or maybe the goal in 2018 was not to retain power? And after April 23, the goal was to prevent a person from Samvel Karapetyan’s “geopolitical area” from becoming Prime Minister.

Think about it…