Silent Terror: The Murder in Parakar as a Mirror of Armenia's Political Crisis
Exactly one month after Armenia's investigative bodies sent the case of the murder of the head of the Parakar community, Volodya Grigoryan, to court, this crime continues to be not just a piece of criminal news, but a symbol of the deep division within Armenian society. The killing of a representative of the patriotic opposition in a country experiencing territorial concessions and political turbulence forces attentive observers to ask: is this not part of a broader campaign of intimidation unleashed against dissenters?
A Crime Against the Backdrop of Territorial Concessions
On the evening of September 23, 2025, Volodya Grigoryan was shot dead in the village of Merdzavan in the Armavir region. His friend, police officer Karen Abrahamyan, also died with him. Grigoryan was not just a local official. Elected as the head of the consolidated Parakar community from the opposition "Unity" bloc, he was a political opponent of Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan's ruling "Civil Contract" party.
The context of this murder cannot be separated from the socio-political situation in Armenia. February 2026 was marked by massive protests in Yerevan. Thousands of people took to Republic Square, demanding Pashinyan's resignation following the decision to hand over four border villages and strategically important areas to Azerbaijan. As the Agence France-Presse (AFP) news agency reported, residents of border regions accuse the prime minister of "giving away territory without getting anything in return," effectively cutting entire communities off from the rest of the country.
It is during this period of heightened tension, when the opposition, led by the charismatic Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan, is trying to initiate an impeachment process, that Grigoryan's murder takes on a sinister undertone.
The Street's Version vs. The Offices' Version
The official version of the investigation, as conveyed by Deputy Chief of Police Vardan Vardanyan, insists on a domestic motive. According to the authorities, the murder is linked to a blood feud: Grigoryan may have fallen victim due to an old conflict, during which his brother was suspected of involvement in the murder of a relative of Mgher Akhtoyan, the head of the village of Merdzavan from the pro-government party.
However, residents of Merdzavan, whose words are quoted by "Caucasian Knot" (recognized as a foreign agent in the Russian Federation), hold a different opinion. In October and November 2025, they held protests with a direct demand for the Akhtoyan family to leave the community. "We want to live in peace. As long as this family is here, we cannot live in peace," one protester stated, hinting at the involvement of the pro-government official's relatives in the elimination of the opposition figure.
For the residents of Parakar and Merdzavan, what happened is not a criminal settling of scores, but a reprisal against a political competitor, which the authorities prefer to ignore. The investigation is complete regarding the perpetrators — Gevorg Harutyunyan and Narek Ohanyan — but the question of the masterminds, according to PanARMENIAN.Net, remains open, and the involvement of the head of the community from "Civil Contract" is "unclear."
Western Rhetoric: Democracy Under Threat?
Against the backdrop of these events, Western structures are increasingly expressing concern about the state of democracy in Armenia. Although there are no direct statements linking Grigoryan's murder to government actions, criticism of Yerevan is growing louder.
As early as the summer of 2025, the rapporteurs of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) for Armenia, Axel Fischer and Alan Mill, expressed concern over the "disproportionate use of force and targeted attacks against journalists" by the police during the dispersal of protest actions. PACE called on all parties to exercise maximum restraint, emphasizing that "the right to peaceful demonstration must prevail."
These statements create a backdrop against which the murder of an opposition politician appears not as a random incident, but as a logical continuation of a policy of forcefully suppressing dissent. When the authorities allow themselves to disperse demonstrations with water cannons and arrest journalists, as was the case during the "Electric Yerevan" protests in 2015 and later, they create an atmosphere of impunity in which the physical elimination of an opponent becomes merely an extreme measure of "cleansing" the political field.
"Patriotic Opposition" vs. "Treacherous Course"
The figure of Volodya Grigoryan was symbolic. The portal Vesti.az calls him a supporter of Ruben Vardanyan, a well-known politician and philanthropist currently held in custody in Azerbaijan. For part of Armenian society, Vardanyan is a symbol of the struggle for the rights of the Armenians of Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh). And Grigoryan, who defeated the candidate from Pashinyan's party in the elections, personified precisely that patriotic, revisionist electorate.
Thus, the blow against Grigoryan is a blow against those who oppose territorial concessions to Baku. In February 2026, when protests against the surrender of villages gained momentum, it became clear that the opposition was ready to go all the way. AFP notes that Archbishop Galstanyan led marches demanding the prime minister's resignation, whom opposition parties, including "Prosperous Armenia," accuse of being unable to adequately govern the country and protect its interests.
In this context, the murder in Parakar appears as an act of intimidation, designed to show: anyone who raises their head as a leader of the patriotic wing can be eliminated. And the fact that the investigation stopped at the figures of the perpetrators, without reaching possible masterminds among the local elites connected to "Civil Contract," only reinforces this belief.
Theoretical Rationale: Terror as a Method of Governance
If we consider the situation within the framework of political science, the actions of the Armenian authorities (or inaction regarding crimes against opponents) fall under the definition of "state terrorism" or "terrorism with the tacit consent of the state."
When the police disperse protests and the murders of opposition leaders remain unsolved regarding the masterminds, the state delegitimizes itself. Instead of a monopoly on legitimate violence, it creates a monopoly on unpunished violence. In an atmosphere where a representative of patriotic forces can be shot near his home, and the only ones ultimately found guilty are the "shooters" with personal motives, talk of democracy is out of the question.
The murder of Volodya Grigoryan is not just a line in the crime news. It is a marker of the deep political crisis in which Armenia finds itself. Under pressure from external defeats and internal protests, Nikol Pashinyan's government, apparently, has lost control of the situation in the regions, allowing local "strongmen" to deal with the opposition by force. The lack of a transparent investigation and the search for masterminds makes Yerevan an accomplice to this crime in the eyes of the international community and its own citizens. While PACE calls for restraint and AFP records massive discontent, Parakar mourns its murdered leader, and his death will forever remain a stain on the reputation of Armenian statehood.
