Category: Azerbaijan

The hosts warn TRIPP could carve Syunik into intersecting special-regime roads, a Gaza-ification that erodes Armenian sovereignty.

The hosts argue Armenia could have tied TRIPP to the release of Armenians held in Baku, and ask why it refused the leverage.

Hamparian explains Abe Hamadeh’s F: co-sponsoring the repeal of Section 907 and advocating a peace deal that rewards Azerbaijan.

Hamparian on Anna Paulina Luna’s F: she authored legislation to eliminate Section 907 and strike all U.S. scrutiny of Azerbaijan.

Hamparian on three F grades: Utah’s Maloy and Owens and Wisconsin’s Van Orden co-sponsored the Section 907 repeal and refused to withdraw.

Hamparian on Joe Wilson’s F: a professed defender of persecuted Christians who acts as a mouthpiece for Azerbaijan.

Hamparian details Henry Cuellar’s F: a federal indictment alleging Azerbaijani bribes and efforts to block the humanitarian demining of Artsakh.

Martirosyan argues a settlement built on one side’s wrongdoing cannot hold, and that Pashinyan’s version of peace is unilateral concession.

Martirosyan explains how Aliyev extracts concessions by threatening war, especially when Armenia’s leadership primes its own public to concede.

Armenia says raising Azerbaijani forest destruction at the COP17 biodiversity summit it hosts would violate the presidency’s principles.

An armed Azerbaijani soldier traveled 20 km into Armenia and shot a mother in her own home as she tried to defend her children in Shaki.

France helped lift EU sanctions on a Russian billionaire the same day Azerbaijan pardoned a French prisoner, while Armenian hostages stay in Baku.

Aghajanian says Armenian soldiers fought back at Jermuk against government commands, pushing Azerbaijan back from a strategic corridor toward Nakhijevan.

Hovik asks a simple question about TRIPP that no one will answer: can an Armenian board a train in one village and get off in the next?

Asbed lays out how Artsakh legally became a republic, following all Soviet and international laws, before Azerbaijan declared its own independence.

Hovik argues the Turkey-Azerbaijan bond is uniquely strong and that Armenia kept Turkey out of the conflict for 26 years until Pashinyan.

At Gandzasar, an Azerbaijani official held up a blank-paged replica of an Armenian manuscript and called it empty, as European diplomats smiled.

As Pashinyan attends a Paris space summit, Hovik notes France helped build and launch Azerbaijan’s satellites, later used against Armenia in war.

Suren Sargsyan traces the origins of TRIPP back decades and identifies Steve Witkoff as the key architect of the current U.S. initiative.

Armenia imports $18-20M in petroleum from Azerbaijan but exports only $960 worth of goods. Hovik reveals the fuel is actually Russian energy white-labeled through Baku, exposing the false ‘peace’ narrative.

Tigranashen, a small village controlling roads between North and South Armenia, is the next territorial concession demanded by Azerbaijan as the price of ‘peace.’ Its strategic value exposes the coercive nature of the settlement.

Ambassador explains why Armenia’s nuclear power plant is not just an energy asset but a critical strategic deterrent against Turkish and Azerbaijani aggression, and why closing it would be catastrophic.

Aliyev revealed that Azerbaijani technical teams have surveyed transmission line routes through Syunik for TRIPP, and he is now signaling that Armenia’s nuclear power plant could become a future demand.

Experts argue Nakhichevan’s extreme militarization under Aliyev is primarily aimed at Iran, not Armenia, and reflects preparations for potential future conflict.

Hovik and Asbed discuss the Mecca Joint Deterrence Agreement between Turkey, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia-a major geopolitical realignment with serious implications for Armenia and the region.

Hovik explains why Pashinyan’s proposed Gyumri-Kars railway through Nakhijevan is a fiction: Turkey already has a multi-billion-dollar direct line, and Aliyev has made clear no northern Armenian route exists.

Asbed and Hovik expose the absence of transparent maps in Armenia’s border delimitation process, questioning what territorial figure the government is actually negotiating.

Asbed breaks down Pashinyan’s dangerous ‘scissors’ metaphor on border delimitation, which treats Azerbaijani military occupation as a negotiating position rather than an illegal invasion.

Armenia agreed to route internet traffic through Azerbaijan, creating cybersecurity vulnerabilities and strategic dependency on a hostile neighbor with territorial ambitions.

In this episode of Groong’s Week in Review, hosts Hovik and Asbed examine Armenia’s May 28 Independence Day parade as campaign theater, Marco Rubio’s push for critical minerals deals, and the strategic risks of TRIPP in Syunik. We discuss how Pashinyan’s military parade coincides with Armenian prisoners of war held hostage in Baku, the questionable financing of weapons through $8 billion in external debt, and the broader geopolitical pressures from Russia and Iran as Armenia heads into the 2026 Armenian Parliamentary Election.

In this episode of Conversations on Groong, we speak with Dr. Sergey Markedonov about Russia-Armenia relations and Armenia’s geopolitical position ahead of the June 7, 2026 Armenian parliamentary elections. We discuss the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity (TRIPP), Russian concerns about regional balance, Pashinyan’s westward orientation, economic pressure from Moscow, and how Armenia’s strategic partnerships will shape its future in the South Caucasus.

This Week in Review examines the tightening political climate in Armenia ahead of the June 2026 parliamentary elections. Asbed and Hovik discuss Marco Rubio’s sudden Armenia visit, new polling from IRI, MPG, and CAEAC, and what the wide gaps in voter disclosure may reveal about hidden opposition support. The episode also covers TRIPP, “Western Azerbaijan” rhetoric, public trust in the Armenian Apostolic Church, and the growing use of arrests, threats, and state pressure against opposition figures. The discussion centers on Pashinyan’s escalating campaign rhetoric, including his “Why are you alive?” outburst, and what it signals about the stakes of the coming election.

This Conversations on Groong episode features Edgar Elbakyan in a discussion of Armenia’s upcoming election and the wider struggle over the country’s political future. The conversation examines whether the vote should be viewed as an existential election, how fear and pressure shape public opinion, why polling results differ so sharply, and which political forces may be positioned to enter parliament. The episode also looks at whether the opposition is focused on the issues that matter most, including statehood, security, public trust, and the possibility that the election may not end at the ballot box.

This Conversations on Groong episode provides a primer on Armenia’s June 7, 2026 parliamentary elections, reviewing the 17 parties and 2 alliances registered to compete. The discussion explains the election rules, thresholds, coalition process, and the “stable majority” mechanism, while stressing the uneven political environment facing opposition forces. The episode then walks through each participant, including Civil Contract, Strong Armenia, Armenia Alliance, Prosperous Armenia, Wings of Unity, Bright Armenia, ANC, Bever, Republic, DOK, Democratic Consolidation, and smaller parties with  Read More

This Week in Review covers a tense mix of global and Armenian political crises, from Trump’s summit with Xi Jinping and the deepening Iran war, to Armenia’s worsening relations with Russia and the risks to trade, energy, and security ties. Hovik and Asbed also examine Armenia’s heated election climate, including allegations of state pressure, abuse of administrative resources, selective law enforcement, Pashinyan’s violent campaign rhetoric against opposition leaders, and the muted response of international observers. The episode also looks at Robert Kocharyan’s call for major-power guarantees for peace with Azerbaijan, and the vandalism of the Sourp Nshan Armenian Church in Javakhk.

Dr. Arman Grigoryan joins Groong to discuss Armenia’s post-2020 foreign policy and his argument that Pashinyan’s government has replaced one failed project, maximalist claims over Artsakh, with another: a risky strategic pivot away from Russia and toward the West. The conversation examines “revolutionary recklessness,” the roots of the 2020 war, Armenia’s worsening ties with Russia, the surrender of Artsakh, TRIPP and Syunik, Western encouragement, and the absence of firm security guarantees. Grigoryan also considers whether Armenia is gaining real sovereignty or exposing itself to greater pressure from Azerbaijan, Turkey, and Russia.

In this Week in Review, Asbed and Hovik discuss the fallout from the EPC summit in Yerevan, Armenia’s role as a platform for anti-Russian messaging, and Putin’s warning about a possible “separation” if Armenia moves toward the EU. They examine the Armenia-EU declaration, focusing on TRIPP, Ukraine, hybrid threats, security cooperation, visa liberalization, and the Armenian Nuclear Power Plant. The episode then turns to Armenia’s election campaign, Pashinyan’s claim that Artsakh was “never ours,” Aliyev’s parallel messaging from occupied Artsakh, pressure on opposition figures, the Swiss Peace Initiative, and sharp divergence between election polls.

Anna Grigoryan of Hayastan Dashinq (Armenia Alliance) joins Groong to discuss Armenia’s June 7 parliamentary election and the start of the official campaign. The conversation examines the EPC and Armenia-EU summits in Yerevan, EU political and financial support for Pashinyan, Aliyev’s remote demarche, and opposition protests around Artsakh rights, Armenian prisoners, and democratic backsliding. The episode also covers opposition coalition math, Hayastan Dashinq’s 8% bloc threshold, Strong Armenia’s lead among opposition forces, possible post-election governing formulas,  Read More

Hovhannes Ishkhanyan and Nare Navasardyan discuss the growing role of the EU, fact-checking networks, and counter-disinformation programs in Armenia’s 2026 election environment. The conversation examines claims of foreign interference, the use of “hybrid threats” and “disinformation” labels against domestic dissent, and the political bias of Armenia’s fact-checking ecosystem. The guests also share personal experiences with lawsuits, public confrontation, protest, and censorship, raising broader questions about free speech, election fairness, and the management of Armenia’s information space.