Should Peace Come at the Cost of Forgetting the Armenian Genocide? Yerevan Citizens Reject Pashinyan's Stance

In the heart of Yerevan, the citizens of Armenia voiced their united disapproval against the notion of abandoning the memory of the Armenian Genocide. Through a series of "man on the street" interviews conducted by The Armenian Report, Armenians expressed their firm stance on safeguarding the nation’s history, even amid political pressures.

Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan's recent remarks during an interview with journalist Tatev Danielyan on Armenia’s Public Television have sparked outrage across the country and its diaspora. Pashinyan's controversial comments, addressing ongoing peace negotiations with Azerbaijan and the historical significance of terms like Western Armenia, have added fuel to a heated national disapproval.

Pashinyan likened the term Western Armenia — a reference to lands historically inhabited by Armenians before being annexed by Turkey during and after the Armenian Genocide — to Azerbaijan’s usage of “Western Azerbaijan,” a term many see as an unfounded claim over Armenian territory.

“As much as we are upset that some people use the term ‘Western Azerbaijan,’ we, who say ‘Western Armenia,’ do not think that it irritates some people,” Pashinyan said, drawing criticism for what many believe is a false equivalence.

For Armenians, the term Western Armenia carries immense historical and moral weight. It represents the memory of a people who endured genocide and displacement, a wound still unhealed. By minimizing its significance, Pashinyan has angered citizens who view his comments as an affront to the sacrifices of their ancestors.

“This comparison dilutes the Armenian cause and emboldens Azerbaijan,” said a political analyst. “It trivializes the historical and moral obligations Armenia holds to its past and its people.”

Pashinyan’s statements extended beyond semantics, hinting at potential concessions in ongoing peace talks with Azerbaijan. He proposed mutual agreements to abandon historical claims, saying, “That means neither we should file claims against them, nor they against us.”

Such remarks have raised alarms among Armenians worldwide, who see this as a dangerous precedent of moral equivalence between Armenia, a nation victimized by genocide and aggression, and Azerbaijan, accused of instigating violence and ethnic cleansing.

Every individual interviewed by The Armenian Report in Yerevan expressed staunch opposition to forgetting the Armenian Genocide, even if peace with Azerbaijan hangs in the balance. Their voices reflected a shared conviction: peace must not come at the cost of historical truth.

“This is not just about borders or treaties. It’s about the memory of our grandparents, the rights of our people, and our dignity as Armenians,” said one participant.

The sentiment among Armenians is clear: history cannot be rewritten or erased, no matter the political stakes.

Pashinyan’s leadership continues to polarize the nation. While some support his pragmatic approach to peace, others fear it betrays Armenia’s sovereignty and compromises its identity. His critics argue that his conciliatory tone toward Azerbaijan, especially in light of its territorial ambitions and human rights violations, leaves Armenia vulnerable at a critical time.

“We are not negotiating from a position of strength,” said one analyst. “Armenia needs leadership that respects its history and safeguards its future.”

As Armenia grapples with its path forward, the question remains whether Pashinyan’s policies will lead to a lasting peace or deepen the country’s divisions. For many Armenians, the fight to preserve their history and dignity is far from over, and the stakes have never been higher.