Rustamyan says Armenia is “on the table, not at the table” in TRIPP talks, urges coordinated opposition efforts
20 January 2026 Armen Rustamyan, representative of the ARF Bureau and a member of parliament from the “Armenia” faction, delivered sharp criticism of the current authorities during a briefing today, stating that Armenia has effectively lost its standing as a sovereign negotiating actor.
(Horizon Weekly) – Armen Rustamyan, representative of the ARF Bureau and a member of parliament from the “Armenia” faction, delivered sharp criticism of the current authorities during a briefing today, stating that Armenia has effectively lost its standing as a sovereign negotiating actor.
Rustamyan said that Armenia no longer functions as a state in the full sense, asserting that decision-making is concentrated in the hands of Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan. According to him, the country is no longer acting as a subject in negotiations but has instead become an object, present formally at the table while others determine outcomes and terms.
Addressing the proposed Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity, known as TRIPP, Rustamyan said the initiative could function effectively only if Armenia conducts proper negotiations and frames the project as a unifying tool for all strategic partners rather than a source of dispute. He stressed that the logic of TRIPP cannot be confined solely to Armenian territory. If the concept is presented as a regional crossroads, he argued, Azerbaijan must also provide communication access from its side, rather than limiting expectations to a forty-three-kilometre stretch within Armenia.
Rustamyan maintained that the current approach to negotiations reflects Armenia’s weakened position, where concessions are discussed without reciprocal guarantees. He warned that this dynamic reinforces the perception that Armenia is being acted upon rather than acting in its own right.
Turning to domestic politics, Rustamyan emphasized the need for broader coordination among the opposition. He said political change requires not only the success of individual parties but the overall success of the opposition as a whole. In his view, a united front of major opposition forces is necessary, alongside efforts to encourage public participation in elections and meaningful choice among opposition alternatives.
