The last protest movement in Armenia ended in complete success in May 2018. The country's former leader Serzh Sargsyan resigned. He was replaced by the leader of the protest movement, Nikol Pashinyan.

The [Azerbaijan's breakaway Nagorno]-Karabakh clan, which has been running the country since 1998, is highly likely to be ceding ground. If the new political landscape is preserved, the fundamental result will be as follows: The Armenians of Armenia will now determine Armenia's faith, rather than the Armenians of Karabakh, as this was before.

As is known, those living in Karabakh would not hear a word of anything except secession from Azerbaijan. Meanwhile, despite having paid the ultimate price for this, citizens of Armenia realise the futility of the war until exhaustion and feel concerned about their children's gloomy future.

Now, it is time for experts to make guesses about who Nikol Pashinyan is, what he is going to do and what he will be able to do.

As noted, Nikol Pashinyan:

– Is a longstanding fighter against [the political] establishment; he is not corrupt;

– Is pro-Western;

– Is ignorant of politics and has no administrative experience;

– Is no stranger to populism and even chauvinism;

However, let us consider the aforementioned qualities and the aims, which Pashinyan has publicly voiced.

Nikol Pashinyan is not corrupt, but he is inexperienced. And it has not been proven yet which version is better.

Making a speech in parliament before his appointment, he said that from now on, elections, human rights, courts, attitude to businesses, and all the rest was going to be honest!

He is not going to take revenge on anyone. The country's new government is going to be the government of national accord.

He is not going to break with Russia. "If the nation wants this…" (these words are worth focusing attention on [as they imply] that he does not want this very much, but since the nation wants this, what can he do?), Armenia will continue to be a member of the [Russian-led] CSTO [Collective Security Treaty Organisation] and the EEU [Eurasian Economic Union] in the future, too, but this membership should become more efficient. At the same time, cooperation with the United States and the EU should be further enhanced. (Observers insist that Pashinyan is oriented on the French diaspora.)

To cut it short, everything is going to be honest and in a new fashion…, but Karabakh will remain as it has been!

"Karabakh should secure recognition of its independence at the global level and then it should reunite with Armenia", "To this end, we need to seize yet another major city from Azerbaijan to make it more compliant", "Our soldiers need to be properly fed", [he said]. In other words, military expenses should rise.

"We need to carry on demanding that the 1915 Armenian genocide [in Turkey] be recognised internationally," [he said].

Pashinyan is going to build "a new Armenia together with the Artsakh republic [Armenian name for Nagorno-Karabakh] and the diaspora"…

Is this target package implementable? Is it possible to reform domestic affairs in the country pursuing the same course in foreign policy? Most experts insist that this is impossible.

It would be appropriate to call him a semi-reformer. If Pashinyan's Armenia is going to carry on fighting with Azerbaijan, it will need Russia's help. And for this help, they will have to repay by their independence and development.

Apart from this, at the start of his political activities, Pashinyan made statements about the need in revising the country's relations with Russia and cooperation with the West. However, what he came to face was as follows: Armenian society, which had shown massive support for Pashinyan, does not want this. Society wants to go on fighting for Karabakh.

And Pashinyan has to cede ground: "If the nation wants this…,"Pashinyan said, [Armenia] will maintain membership in Russian-led military and customs unions, securing Moscow' support in the war for Karabakh by doing so…

What we can see in this case is old Armenia, the country, which has been living in myths about Armenia's exclusiveness, hostile surrounding, its innocence, and unjustified misfortunes befalling it throughout history.

It can be said that Pashinyan is old Armenia's last hope for a miracle. The course he has declared is highly likely to be dashed when confronting reality. Perhaps, only afterwards, Armenian society will finally renounce confrontational myths and at that point, we will see new Armenia.