Political rhetoric and rising violence in Armenia: the impact of Prime Minister Pashinyan’s language

The brutal murder of Parakar community head Volodya Grigoryan, which law enforcement is currently investigating under charges of murder and illegal possession of firearms, has once again sharpened a public question: is the rise of violence in Armenia purely a criminal phenomenon, or is it also a consequence of political rhetoric?
In recent years, Armenia’s Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has frequently used harsh and, at times, openly threatening expressions in public platforms. These phrases can be perceived by different citizens as direct calls for retribution, revenge, or forceful solutions. Among the most resonant examples are: “The time has come for the citizen’s revenge…”, “We must take the steel hammer…”, “You will eat asphalt and lick curbs”, “If necessary, we will not only pin you to the asphalt, but also smash you against the walls…”, and similar expressions.
This raises the question: when the country’s leader uses such language, might some citizens interpret it literally—as a kind of “permission” to act or attack their “enemies”? Since many of these messages by Pashinyan were accompanied by threats or accusations directed at the opposition, some individuals may fail to understand them as metaphors, instead taking them as legitimization of real action. Thus, rhetoric voiced at the highest levels of power, beyond its political implications, may also carry very concrete and dangerous consequences—encouraging an atmosphere of violence and retribution within society.
Oragir.News spoke on the matter with MP Gegham Manukyan, who stressed that Pashinyan’s mindset, unbalanced behavior, and political rhetoric have become a major trigger for societal crisis. According to him, this phenomenon has not only polarized the political field but has also infiltrated families, interpersonal relations, and even community structures. This, he argued, is undoubtedly an issue requiring serious scholarly analysis and public response.
“Over the past 30–35 years, despite all political clashes, difficulties, and tensions, political conflict had never entered the family environment. Today, almost everyone says it is unprecedented—family members no longer speak to each other, relatives within a clan avoid one another, and all this negative charge stems directly from the government, particularly from Nikol Pashinyan’s unbalanced conduct,” Manukyan emphasized. He then added: “Another serious consequence is the unprecedented rise in crime. Almost every day the media reports news of murders, stabbings, shootings, or acts of retribution.”
Many critics link the surge in crime and social tension to Pashinyan’s rhetoric. In their view, people see that laws and courts hold little meaning, as the Prime Minister himself can attack the church, threaten or insult citizens, or order people to be pinned to the asphalt without facing any legal consequences—while still remaining in office. Ordinary citizens, in turn, begin to imitate the head of state, envisioning solutions to their own problems in the same way—whether in the family, in the street, in the neighborhood, or in the community.