Azernews.Az

By AzerNEWS Staff

For decades, a society shaped by constructed narratives can reach a point where even hearing the truth becomes a struggle. It is a psychological condition in which the shadow of falsehood settles over reality like a dark presence, distorting perception and blurring judgement. In such an environment, individuals may become so deeply conditioned by implanted ideas that even the most straightforward truths provoke irritation rather than reflection.

This ideological framework does not recognise international law, nor does it respect state sovereignty, nor does it allow societies to coexist in peace. It becomes a permanent source of instability, a mechanism driven by endless resentment and hostility, ultimately working against reconciliation and human coexistence. Today, what has spread through parts of Armenian society like an epidemic, namely separatism, is beginning to appear increasingly disconnected from the realities of a region that is weary of conflict, even to the point of seeming untenable.

In a footage, Nikol Pashinyan speaks to an Armenian woman, an ordinary citizen, in the Yerevan tube station, referring to her as a “fugitive” and stating that they (Armenians once allegedly lived in Garabagh) fled.

The exchange began when Pashinyan attempted to hand the woman’s child a small map of Armenia. The mother responded that they were from "Artsakh" and had a different map. Pashinyan replied, “Your son will live in this map. Keep that in mind. We will not allow your ideology.”

He then raised his voice, pointed his finger at the woman, and tried to somehow explain the reality. During the exchange, Pashinyan stated: “Now you’ve arrived here and say you want to return. We’ve spent the billions earned by the citizens of Armenia for you to stay. Why didn’t you stay?.. Next time, you runaways, don’t you dare say that I gave up Karabakh.”

This confrontation appears to have taken place as part of Nikol Pashinyan’s public outreach and opinion-gathering campaign ahead of the upcoming elections.

This dispute does not in any way prove that Nikol Pashinyan is wholly peace-loving or a steadfast defender of justice, even if he remains one of the central figures on Armenia’s democratic stage. On the contrary, this episode resembles the outcry of an individual who understands and has come to terms with present-day realities, directed at a society that is either unable or unwilling to accept them.

This moment can be interpreted in various ways. Some may portray Pashinyan as a hero for his conduct, while others may place the responsibility on society itself. Yet, regardless of differing views, the true architect of this reality is Azerbaijan.

Naturally, against the backdrop of these realities, Nikol Pashinyan seeks to present himself as a genuine leader for his people. It is possible that those who fail to grasp this today may come to realise tomorrow that he has, in fact, been the only figure attempting to guide Armenian society through a difficult period of transition.

The truth is both harsh and painful. A society that has failed to draw lessons from the events of 2020 appears to revolve around the remnants of an extinguished volcano, attempting to reignite it. Such a struggle inevitably raises a pressing question: what can this lead to, if not the decline of a nation’s future or a profound social cataclysm?