In a message to the nation on May 24, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan announced this significant change, as reported by Armenian media.
“This border delimitation process has been the most discussed topic in recent months, and I believe it is crucial for each of us, every citizen, to have clear answers to the following questions: what is happening in our country, what is happening to our country, why is this happening, and what are the possible scenarios and alternatives from this point onwards?
The key factor driving these current processes is the strategy that the Government of the Republic of Armenia follows in its work. This is the strategy of Real Armenia, the strategy of the Armenia whose golden map-model I show to all of you at every opportunity. It is precisely this Armenia that is being discussed.
And why should this map provoke disputes and passions? For one simple reason: not only in the past 33 years, but even before that, the object, goal, and purpose of our social psychology was not this Armenia.
For centuries, due to our national misfortune of not having a state, our consciousness and subconsciousness maintained the dream of restoring statehood, which was a crucial component of our national identity.
But while dreaming of a state, we relied on memories stemming from the state traditions we had in the past: the Armenia of the Yervanduni, Artaxiad, Arsacid, Bagratuni dynasties, and Cilician Armenia. These Armenias were not identical or comparable to each other in terms of territory and sometimes geographical location, which created an objective obstacle to concretizing and objectifying our concepts of Armenia.
Imagine wanting to build a house but not being sure where, on what land, and of what size. Until your ideas on these questions become concrete, you will not be able to build this house, and your efforts will never materialize. At most, you will engage in chaotic actions because you are not oriented about where, on what land, and of what size you want to build the house.
In the brief period of the First Republic’s existence, we did not manage to concretize our concepts of the Republic of Armenia.
The Second Republic, being Soviet, was not a sovereign state but a state within the USSR, and thus it represented a hostile environment for thoughts of independence and an independent Armenia. Those with such ideas were prosecuted and posed a threat to the USSR’s integrity.
One method the Soviet Union used to combat strong Armenian national consciousness was to direct dreams of independence outside the territory of Soviet Armenia and the Soviet Union, sometimes for geopolitical purposes and sometimes to weaken and eradicate the perception of Soviet Armenia as a potential territory for restoring Armenian statehood. The Soviet Union promoted the formula of seeking a homeland beyond Soviet Armenia among Armenians.
Due to this and other factors, the search for a homeland became one of the pillars of the Armenian subconscious. This formula of seeking a homeland in the homeland was harmless to the Soviet Union because dreams of restoring statehood were diverted outside Soviet Armenia, sometimes even outside the USSR, becoming a geopolitical factor the Soviet Union could use in its international relations.
Those who tried to link Armenian statehood sentiments to Soviet Armenia ended up in prisons as anti-Soviet elements, on the political sidelines, without growing support.
Amid this thinking, the Third Republic of Armenia was formed, not as a means of ensuring the freedom, security, and well-being of its citizens but adopting a vision entirely aligned with the Soviet Armenian formula of seeking a homeland.
Thus, we find ourselves in the described situation, unsure where, on what land, and of what size we want to build a state.
The search for a homeland was reaffirmed as a key social-psychological task of the Third Republic.
Many deep-rooted problems of the Third Republic are connected to this issue.
I cannot boast that I had this understanding and awareness of these conceptual nuances throughout my tenure. I systematically engaged in this agenda after becoming Prime Minister, seeing the threats to Armenia’s security and the existence of our state.
Therefore, the conceptual question I deemed vital as Prime Minister is: how will we ensure a stable and prosperous future for the Republic of Armenia?
Strategic contemplation on these questions led me to the Peace Agenda and the concept of Real Armenia, which are deeply interconnected.
If our strategic vision is not Real Armenia, the already difficult peace becomes impossible because our surroundings will view us as a strategic threat and do everything to either physically destroy our statehood or hinder its development.
Secondly, when we do not allocate our limited resources and energy to the strategic needs of Real Armenia, we do not achieve the results we could have, and Armenia’s development, the future of our children, becomes doubly difficult. The peace Armenia needs becomes increasingly unattainable.
In these conditions, our country’s sovereignty suffers significantly. When your concepts of the homeland do not align with the internationally recognized legitimate borders of your country, you open the way for disproportionate influences from others, thinking you gain strength and support for agendas outside your legitimate borders.
Thus, we return to the Soviet Armenian model of patriotism. This model separated the concept of homeland from the concept of state, solving the practical task of ensuring the Armenian people did not view Soviet Armenia as even a partial homeland and state, because the next step, viewing it as a homeland, would deepen the consciousness of independence.
Contrary to various assessments, our government does not divide but tries to reunite, make identical the concepts of homeland and state, because this is the only way to establish and strengthen the Republic of Armenia. Otherwise, we will spend our limited resources on searching for a homeland, doubting the future of the homeland-state.
As one of you, having received your mandate to work on formulas ensuring Armenia’s future, I spent years contemplating this epochal agenda, both before and after the 44-day war. My thoughts led me to the unequivocal conviction that our duty to future generations and the real people living in Armenia today requires us to make the sovereign and democratic Real Armenia with delimited borders our national and state ideology and concept.
The discussions in our country do not surprise me because I personally went through this painful path from the psychology of Historical Armenia to the psychology of Real Armenia, and we are going through this path together.
We are on this path, and at the end of it lies our Promised Land, the Republic of Armenia, with the difference that we are already here but often do not notice our Promised Land. Not noticing it, we continue our search for the Promised Land. Our country is not ideal partly because our endless search for the Promised Land within the Promised Land prevents us from concretizing and formulating an answer to the question of where, on what land, and of what size we want to build the house-state. The delimitation process answers this question with each border post.
We must walk this path together. It is not a red carpet but a path through thorns and traps, complex and difficult decisions, disappointments, and misunderstandings. Yet it is the only path with a horizon leading to the real Promised Land, the Real Armenia – the Republic of Armenia. It is a decisive path. One philosopher says the best path is the one that brings you to where you are. This path brings us to where we are, in the Republic of Armenia, allowing us to see our reality from a different perspective. Only from this perspective can we see the future and the path leading to it.
There is only one guarantee to successfully complete this path: national awareness and conviction in the mission of political leadership.
Our political team and I live this mission, and we see that we have put forward a formula guaranteeing 29,743 sq.km of internationally recognized legitimate territory of the Republic of Armenia and the borders surrounding this territory. Our task is not only to lead but to inspire the people, the citizens of the Republic of Armenia, with this vision and formula because it is a formula, a movement leading us to real independence and sovereignty, territorial integrity, and border inviolability. It is a formula enabling our talented people, each of you, and all of you to concretize and enjoy the results of your labor in a free, fair, safe, prosperous, and happy Armenia.
How and in what sequence of steps we will achieve this goal? I detailed all this at the May 7 press conference, and I see no need to repeat it in other speeches and this format.
The main purpose of this message is to clarify and comment on what is happening in our country and why it is happening.
In our lives and consciousness, Real Armenia is being formed. This is a difficult, painful process we are going through together and must go through. It is a movement towards independence and sovereignty we must complete. My political team and I see it as our mission. Our mission is to make the state, independence, and sovereignty serve the citizen, not the other way around.
In 2018 and 2021, the proud citizens of the Republic of Armenia gave us a mandate to ensure the future of the Republic of Armenia, and this mandate must be fully realized,” said Pashinyan.
