Russian Political Strategists’ Plan to Remove Pashinyan from Power Exposed

A new political bombshell exploded in Armenia today, pointing to what appears to be a large-scale Russian plan to interfere in Armenia’s parliamentary elections and remove Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan from power.

A series of documents allegedly exposing Kremlin-linked operations was published by the outlet Caucasus Chronicle. According to the publication, the source of the confidential leak was the hacked mobile phone of an employee of the Russian special services.

The documents reportedly contain a detailed strategy developed by Russian operatives, including propaganda methods aimed at undermining the current Armenian government, as well as assessments of political risks and opportunities. The central objective is clearly stated: the implementation of measures designed to remove Nikol Pashinyan from office.

The leaked materials also refer to the financing of several Armenian opposition parties. One analytical document outlines five possible scenarios for a change of power. The first four are described as unlikely. These include an “internal coup” similar to the events of 1998 or an impeachment procedure against the prime minister. The authors acknowledge that Armenia’s security structures remain loyal to Pashinyan and that there are no signs of panic or fragmentation within the ruling Civil Contract party.

Scenarios involving Pashinyan’s voluntary resignation or his departure under pressure from mass street protests are also described as improbable. As a result, the authors conclude that the only viable path to removing him is through the parliamentary elections scheduled for June 7.

According to the analysis, supporters and opponents of  Nikol Pashinyan each account for roughly 15% of the electorate. The main target for Russian political strategists is therefore the remaining 70% — voters who want Pashinyan removed but are firmly opposed to the return of former presidents Robert Kocharyan and Serzh Sargsyan.

To attract this crucial segment of the electorate, Moscow is reportedly placing its hopes on businessman Samvel Karapetyan. In the documents, he is openly described as an “Armenian Ivanishvili” — a reference to Georgian billionaire Bidzina Ivanishvili, who was credited with having “peacefully changed the political course of his country”.

Karapetyan’s party, Strong Armenia, is positioned as a “third force” unconnected to Armenia’s old political elites. Its program is tailored to public demands: improving social conditions, attracting investment, rebuilding ties with the Armenian diaspora abroad, and restoring relations with Russia.

How is the seizure of power supposed to be carried out?

In a section titled “What Should Be Done?”, the authors move from political analysis to detailed tactical planning. Their main recommendation is the abandonment of fragmented opposition activity in favor of maximum consolidation — following the Georgian model of 2012, when a united opposition succeeded in defeating Mikheil Saakashvili’s government.

Under this strategy, Samvel Karapetyan is expected to serve as a unifying figure capable of reconciling rival factions and offering opposition leaders positions in a future government.

Russian political strategists reportedly advise Karapetyan’s supporters to create a powerful territorial network consisting of 100 cells across Yerevan, as well as throughout Armenia’s cities, communities, and major villages.

The documents also outline a contingency plan in the event Karapetyan is placed under house arrest or denied registration as a parliamentary candidate. In that case, the proposed “Plan B” would rely on the Mother Armenia party led by Andanik Tevanyan ( was arrested several days ago on charges of spying for Russia ).

This party is viewed as a more compact structure, and Russian curators allegedly recommended establishing cells only in Yerevan’s 12 administrative districts and in 10 regional centers across the country.

In addition, Russian special services reportedly envision Prosperous Armenia, led by businessman Gagik Tsarukyan, as part of this broader alliance.

To legitimize this oligarchic coalition in the eyes of the public, the plan calls for the creation of a parallel “Civic Platform”. Human rights activists, political analysts, journalists, and non-partisan public figures are expected to be recruited into this structure.

Officially, the platform’s purpose would be the “defense of the church, constitutional rights, and political prisoners”.

By promoting the idea of a “non-partisan struggle” and calling for national unity, the platform would serve as a vehicle for transmitting messages from the Church and Karapetyan-linked structures so that “all subsequent actions would be perceived by society as representing common national interests”.

In the concluding part of this section, the authors stress that all four forces — Karapetyan’s party, the Mother Armenia bloc, Prosperous Armenia, and the Civic Platform — must operate under a single political command structure with a strict division of responsibilities.

The analytical note also examines the situation within Armenia’s “traditional” opposition camp. Russian strategists describe deep internal divisions between the camps of Robert Kocharyan and Serzh Sargsyan.

According to the documents, the two groups are currently “fighting each other with greater enthusiasm than they are fighting Nikol Pashinyan”.

The leaked materials identify Serzh Sargsyan as the main disruptive element. He is accused of attempting to “push Robert Kocharyan out of the game” in order to promote his son-in-law, Mikael Minasyan.

The proposed strategy toward the former presidents is to wait until street activism and the growing success of the new coalition place Kocharyan and Sargsyan before a stark choice: either recognize Karapetyan’s leadership and join a broad coalition or risk being permanently pushed “outside the political field”.

The role of the media and social networks

In the final section of the documents, titled “Elections-2026”, the authors summarize the overall strategy. The key element of the campaign is described as a direct organizational confrontation based on the formula “pyramid against pyramid”. In effect, the documents contain a direct call for confrontation between the opposition and the authorities.

At the same time, the papers identify media resources through which the required political narratives should be disseminated to the public.

The appendices to the plans also include lists of loyal opinion leaders — journalists, bloggers, and public figures expected to help shape a favorable information environment for the campaign.