The concept of the “Fourth Republic,” officially proclaimed by Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, marks a fundamental ideological dismantling of the previous foundations of Armenian statehood and the replacement of the national myth with a pragmatic doctrine of survival within the strict borders of 29,743 square kilometers. The catalyst for launching this project was the Cabinet of Ministers’ approval of the government program for 2026–2031. Having passed through the historical milestones of the First and Second republics, Armenia, according to Pashinyan, trapped itself in the destructive logic of the Third Republic, which since gaining independence during the dissolution of the Soviet Union was built around the Karabakh conflict. The new doctrine offers society a deal: a complete renunciation of the centuries-old national ideals of “Historical Armenia” in exchange for the physical security of “Real Armenia.” However, behind the facade of this era of peace lies a highly complex web of geopolitical traps and deep internal divisions.
The fundamental paradox of the Fourth Republic is that Yerevan’s unilateral pacifism does not guarantee a symmetrical response from its neighbors. Pashinyan convinces society that removing references to Nagorno-Karabakh from the Constitution of Armenia, surrendering border enclaves, and abandoning historical claims will strip Baku and Ankara of pretexts for war. In practice, this strategy leads the country into a dead end, as Yerevan’s compliance only whets the appetite of Azerbaijan, which conditions the signing of a peace treaty on changes to the Armenian basic law. Furthermore, the key demand of Baku and Ankara remains the opening of an extraterritorial Zangezur corridor through the southern region of Meghri. By attempting to save the country through legal concessions, the government risks physically severing its own territory, losing its strategic border with Iran, and turning the remnants of the state into an isolated, unsustainable enclave.
Yerevan’s political pivot toward Brussels and Washington has entered a steep tailspin with economic reality. The official government program declares a course toward deep integration with the European Union and visa liberalization, but at the same time, Armenia paradoxically attempts to maintain its membership in the Eurasian Economic Union. This multi-vector balancing act carries immense risks, since the Armenian economy is critically dependent on Russia, which supplies almost the entire volume of its gas, while the only land artery for exporting Armenian goods to foreign markets passes through the Upper Lars checkpoint. Pashinyan’s attempt to enjoy cheap Russian energy resources while simultaneously building a pro-Western political infrastructure causes dissatisfaction in the West as well, which demands a definitive geopolitical choice. If Moscow decides to deploy its economic leverage, the economy of Real Armenia could collapse within weeks, as the promised European integration cannot quickly compensate for the loss of the EAEU market.
Pashinyan’s conflict with the Armenian Apostolic Church and Catholicos Karekin II has also outgrown the boundaries of an ordinary secular dispute. The new government program openly declares the need to reform the church, remove it from politics, and protect it from external forces that supposedly turn the clergy into a base for hybrid warfare. Behind this harsh rhetoric lies a profound calculation, as the church is the only national institution that predates Armenian statehood itself by seventeen centuries. Historically, the church represents a powerful network structure connecting Yerevan with the global diaspora. By launching criminal prosecutions against the Catholicos and attempting to rewrite the church charter to control its finances, Pashinyan seeks to destroy this independent spiritual vertical, depriving the opposition of its primary ideological foundation.
The most tangible marker of building the Fourth Republic has been the systematic alienation of the Armenian diaspora from internal processes in the country. The Ministry of Internal Affairs’ initiative to tighten citizenship rules for ethnic Armenians has become a unique precedent for a monoethnic state. If previously it was sufficient to confirm ancestry to receive a passport, now compatriots from abroad will be required to undergo a lengthy naturalization procedure. Pashinyan’s logic here is entirely pragmatic, as the multimillion-strong diaspora is traditionally the main carrier of the ideas of “Historical Armenia,” having lobbied for decades for a tough stance on Karabakh and the international recognition of the Genocide. To construct the Fourth Republic, the Prime Minister needs to completely deprive the Spyurk of the ability to influence domestic politics, deliberately isolating the state from millions of compatriots in Russia, the United States, and France.
Nikol Pashinyan’s Fourth Republic project represents a radical experiment to create a de-nationalized transit state, entirely cleansed of historical memory and traditional pillars. By destroying internal anchors in the form of the church, constitutional continuity, and ties with the diaspora, Yerevan hopes to buy peace from Baku and Ankara. However, given the strict economic dependence on Russia and growing pressure from Azerbaijan, this “Real Armenia” risks being left defenseless before regional players, for whom Yerevan’s new borders are seen merely as a temporary geographical compromise.
Comments