In July 2025, there was a dramatic rise in political pressure after the arrest of seven members of the opposition, the nationalistic and pro-Russian Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF). The arrests came as planned raids in Yerevan where state investigators mentioned the suspicion of terrorism. One of them was actually indicted on the charges of preparing a terrorist act, whereas the rest of them are under investigation.
These detentions are considered to be part of a larger sweeping movement that has involved former officials, priests and other opponents of the government of Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan. The context is important too: an election will take place in parliament in June 2026, and talks with Azerbaijan, to settle the long-standing conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, are heating up. According to critics, the arrests might be more political than security in nature.
The Government’s Security Narrative
Evidence And Charges
Officials claim the arrested individuals were planning acts of terrorism. The National Security Service released details of the confiscated items: an electric detonator, grenade fuses, a live grenade, gunpowder, and radios. The government says these findings confirm the group’s intent to destabilize Armenia.
One detainee, Andranik Chamichian, was charged with terrorism-related planning. His defense lawyer countered that the items were associated with a sport called “strikeball,” where players use mock combat equipment. The Investigative Committee labeled the explanation a “deliberate misinformation campaign,” insisting the case was built on credible evidence.
National Security Concerns
The arrests by the government, as it defines, show the level of the gravity of threats to the stability of the country. There are allegations that have been leveled against a wide range of groups, including clerics and political actors, by the administration of Prime Minister Pashinyan, on the basis that they were planning to assume power illegally. Another motivation to this justification of the state is pegged on the conception that the existence of internal threats is potentially able to stall currently existing peace efforts with Azerbaijan.
Such a security-centered position by the government demonizes the political opposition and does not see any validity in the political disagreements with the government.
Opposition’s View: Political Repression
Allegations Of Silencing Dissent
According to the opposition leaders, the arrests have nothing to do with terrorism; rather they are aimed at destroying political opposition. The crackdown has been reiterated by the ARF and the Armenia Alliance as a way of intimidating their opponents in the forthcoming elections. Authorities have taken activists, in particular those who have opposed the government, demonstrating a selective move to silence those opposed to the government.
They submit that this repression complies with the trend of mass arrests, the intimidation of protestors by the police and censorship of opposition media.
Fragmented Opposition And A Divided Electorate
Despite facing repression, Armenia’s opposition remains splintered. There are still groups who side with previous presidents of the so-called Karabakh clan, which has a long dominating history in politics but currently has limited people’s trust. Other groups find it difficult to take off simply because they are plagued by internal wrangles and organization.
This polarization undermines mutual defense but the denunciation of this political repression tends to have an echo between the parties and the organizations of civil society interested in erosions of democracy.
The Role Of The Armenian Revolutionary Federation
Historical And Political Roots
One of the ancient political parties in Armenia is the ARF, which is also called Dashnaktsutyun as it has the elements of the nationalistic ideological framework as well as its strong connections with Russia. Though it has a rich history and political influence with the diaspora of the Armenian people, it regularly conflicts with their more Western outlook of the current government.
The ARF has stood at one time or the other in power position with the opposition as the opposition in the past decades. It is included into the Armenia Alliance coalition today, so it is an important subject of government investigations.
Organizational Setback From Arrests
The detention of ARF members, including the son of sitting parliamentarian Gegham Manukyan, disrupts the party’s ability to organize ahead of the elections. The symbolism of these arrests sends a warning to other opposition groups. The party has condemned the actions as unconstitutional and demanded the immediate release of its members.
The accusations against the ARF deepen the ideological divide within Armenian politics and test the durability of party structures under government pressure.
The Broader Political Environment
Peace Talks And Strategic Shifts
The detainments took place at the time when negotiations over the possibility of a peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan were going on in Abu Dhabi. These negotiations are meant to put to rest almost forty years of war status over Nagorno-Karabakh. Prime Minister Pashinyan has shifted towards the long-standing Russian dependency on the part of Armenia pursuing closer relationships with the Western institutions and neighbors.
This strategic realignment complicates domestic politics. The shift of Pashinyan is considered as a betrayal by pro-Russian organizations such as the ARF, though it is accused by the opponents of giving up to the Azeri demands. This makes the already tense environment volatile because of an internal conflict on the geopolitical orientation of Armenia.
Public Sentiment And Civil Liberties
The popularity of Pashinyan is rather low, and the lowest rates reach below 20%. However, the opposition parties have disunity, which makes a coordinated electoral challenge hard. In the meantime, the heavy-handed measures of the government have created concern by international observers and watchdogs at home.
Mass arrests have been used against the protests and some civic activists are saying they have been monitored or intimidated. Such actions are laws against security threats the government insists but to the majority of the citizens, they are repressive measures.
Expert Analysis And Perspectives
Arsen Torosyan, a political analyst and former minister, addressed the arrests in an interview with Eurasianet, offering a balanced view of Armenia’s challenges. He noted,
“The government faces genuine security threats but risks undermining democracy through excessive repression. The opposition is fragmented, yet the crackdown deepens political polarization.”
New arrests in Armenia with searches in houses of several figures that position themselves as “homeland saviors” though they’re simple terrorists. Prevented military coup d’etat all traces must be found and legally prosecuted. pic.twitter.com/7uLvgXqIar
— Arsen Torosyan (@ArsTorosyan) July 10, 2025
Torosyan’s remarks underscore the dilemma at the heart of Armenia’s governance: how to protect the state without compromising political rights. His perspective reflects broader concerns about the state’s direction and the potential erosion of institutional checks and balances.
Navigating Between Security And Democracy
The leadership of Armenia is faced with a tough balancing situation. On the one hand, there are actual security threats, in a country that comes out of war, and faces unstable alliances in its region. Conversely, labelling political rivals as terrorists without clear trials and general citizen confidence is likely to result in the drift of authoritarianism to democracy fragility.
Using anti-terrorism measures as a device of domestic politics might provide temporary regulation but have a high cost in terms of legitimacy, cohesion, and stability within the region.
This arrest dragnet has seen demands of judicial control and increased visibility. Civil groups are pressing the international community to be alert as to what is developing and some European MPs have been owning up the question of Armenia not being a democratic nation in reactive debates.
The Uncertain Road Ahead
With the elections in Armenia in the year 2026, there are concerns as to whether democratic standards can survive in the face of pressure. Unless the government changes its course, the repression of opposition may turn into a norm, and it will de-legitimize the institutions and result in the outbreak of civil unrest.
But the final result is not given. Intermediaries between the government and opposition, including activists in the civil society, can yet influence the political course in Armenia. It will be a matter of extremely high importance to guarantee that elections are not only free, inclusive, and competitive.
It might be a turning point that led to the arrests. The capability of the government and the opposition to tackle the crisis will prove to be decisive criteria as to whether Armenia will come out with better democratic systems or heightened authoritarianism.
The future of Armenia is on a precipice, and in the next several months what the country does will establish whether it remains a weak democracy or becomes something that is much stiffer and closed.
