Opinion: Pashinyan`s five-year government program aims to transform  the current administration`s ideological concepts into state policy

ArmInfo. The draft government program for 2026-2031 is not an ordinary five-year program of action, but a document designed to transform the current  government's ideological concepts into state policy and restructure  Armenia's national and state agenda.  This is how David Ananyan, a  member of the "Wings of Unity" party board and former chairman of the  State Revenue Committee of Armenia, commented on the Armenian  government's new five-year program.

"The most alarming feature of the program is the following asymmetry:  wherever the government's powers are constitutionally limited—such as  on matters concerning the leadership of the Armenian Apostolic Church  and the adoption of a new Constitution—the rigid formulation 'must be  ensured' is employed. Yet wherever the state bears direct  responsibility, such as for the protection of the rights of the  people of Artsakh, Armenians held in Baku, missing persons, cultural  heritage, and international legal proceedings, the program says  virtually nothing," the politician points out in a publication on his  Facebook page.

According to him, the word "Artsakh" is not mentioned once in the  full text of the program, and the word "Karabakh" appears only once,  in the context of a program to provide housing for 10,000 families  displaced from "Karabakh." Thus, Ananyan continued, the Artsakh issue  is reduced from the political, security, and international legal  levels to the issue of social housing, and the program itself  contains no commitments regarding the right to safe return of Artsakh  Armenians, the protection of property, cultural and church heritage,  Armenians illegally detained in Baku, missing persons, or  international legal proceedings.

"Meanwhile, the binding decision of the International Court of  Justice imposes on Azerbaijan the obligation to ensure the safe,  unimpeded, and prompt return of those who had left Karabakh and wish  to return. The absence of the Artsakh issue from the state program  does not legally negate these rights, but at the political level, it  removes them from Armenia's priorities and reduces further state  claims and opportunities for negotiations.

The second most serious issue is the section concerning the Armenian  Apostolic Church. The government promises to ensure the "removal of  the de facto head" of the Armenian Apostolic Church, the election of  a vicar of the Catholicosate, and then a new Catholicos of All  Armenians," the politician continued. He recalled that, according to  the Constitution, religious organizations are separate from the state  and granted autonomy, and the law on relations with the Armenian  Apostolic Church recognizes the Church's self- governance within its  hierarchy. Ananyan emphasized that no legal norm authorizes the  government to remove the Catholicos or ensure the election of his  successor. The politician acknowledged that the state can legally  demand financial reporting, investigate suspected crimes, and protect  public interests, but making a change in the Church's leadership the  goal of a state program constitutes interference in its internal  governance.

"Furthermore, the government declares the depoliticization of the  Church, but it itself makes the issue of the Catholicos a subject of  state and party policy. This could lead to internal schisms within  the Armenian Apostolic Church, opposition from diaspora dioceses,  legal disputes, and an attempt to subordinate one of the most  important national institutions to political power," he continued.

The third key issue, according to Ananyan, is the new Constitution.  He noted that the program presents its adoption as a priority, but  does not explain which specific intractable shortcomings of the  current Constitution require the adoption of an entirely new  Constitution.

The politician believes it is necessary to directly ask the  authorities: what exactly is being planned to change—the governance  model, the connection with the Declaration of Independence, the  constitutional status of the Armenian Apostolic Church, or the  national, historical, and legal foundations that continue to trouble  Azerbaijan. "This issue is all the more fundamental since the  President of Azerbaijan is publicly presenting an amendment to the  Armenian Constitution as a precondition for signing a peace treaty.   Meanwhile, the published agreement makes no such requirement, and the  Constitutional Court of the Republic of Armenia has already clarified  that no territorial claims on Armenia's part flow from the current  Constitution. Therefore, the need for a new Constitution has no legal  basis yet. Instead, there is a reasonable suspicion that it meets an  external demand and is being presented as Armenia's internal  political initiative," Ananyan noted.  At the same time, the  politician noted that at the end of the program, it is announced that  Armenia is entering the phase of the "Fourth Republic," but the legal  and governmental content of this concept is not clarified. The  politician believes that this ambiguity suggests that it is not only  a matter of constitutional reform, but also a rethinking of the  historical and political foundations of the Republic of Armenia,  established in 1991. "Equally dangerous is the security formula that  claims peace is the 'only effective and reliable guarantee' of  security. Peace is a goal, but it cannot replace an army, deterrence,  treaty enforcement, or mechanisms for responding to violations.  Unguaranteed peace is not a security system, but a political hope,"  Ananyan asserted.

The politician emphasized that, overall, the program focuses state  potential on the internal restructuring of national institutions,  historical memory, and identity, while simultaneously weakening the  Artsakh agenda, the rights of Artsakh Armenians, and external claims.

"This is not a balanced transformation of the state, but a dangerous  program of geopolitical and domestic experiments. And for a state  facing serious security challenges, the price of such ideological  adventurism may prove far too high," Ananyan concluded.