What mechanisms do Nikol Pashinyan and Anna Hakobyan use to form a new electoral list?

On May 7, another government session was held in the Armenian parliament, and Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan “traditionally” returned to the podium, once again sparking discussions among the public and experts about whether his actions and statements should be analyzed seriously. The answer is obvious: they should. And we will substantiate this claim with two specific examples.

1. Some time ago, Pashinyan became increasingly interested in cycling. Moreover, at one point, he announced an open call for those who wanted to ride with him, and to be “among the chosen ones,” applicants needed to send their resumes to the government mail. This is one of the easiest ways to expand the “human resource base.” Obviously, interest in riding alongside Pashinyan was expressed not only by cycling enthusiasts but also by people loyal to Pashinyan’s policies. Moreover, among them there may be people with a serious biography, with a well-traveled path.

Their career path and a bike ride with Pashinyan may be enough to secure a spot in the Civil Contract party. Consequently, “those who walked with Pashinyan” may be replaced by “those who rode” with him. Current members of Pashinyan’s team should take note—they are going to be thrown into the dustbin of history before their political leader ends up there.

2. Pashinyan and Anna Hakobyan’s new hobby is their “Learning is Trendy” marathon, during which they visit various Yerevan municipalities, districts, and regions of Armenia and “give lectures about our history and our future.” Through this marathon, Pashinyan can personally assess the work of certain actors on the ground. He can assess how the head of a municipality, village, city, or region mobilizes the masses and organizes events. In other words, Pashinyan is gauging the organizational skills of his subordinates.

Preparations for the elections are underway, and the process of the “personnel replenishment” has been launched. Given that for seven years Pashinyan has not been able to identify fully committed people in his team, he is forced to travel with Anna Hakobyan to cities and communities to evaluate everything with his own eyes.

Armenia’s governance is, quite literally, conducted manually; everything— from negotiations with Baku to the “moral and ethical” principles of parenting and personnel recruitment— is controlled by one person. Isn’t this authoritarianism? Isn’t this evidence that over the years Pashinyan has failed to build an effective management model and cultivate dedicated professionals?

Can Armenia afford another cycle with such inefficient manual governance?

Think about it…