Hakob Badalyan writes on his Telegram channel:
During the days of Cop29 in Azerbaijan, I have repeatedly touched upon the topic that Baku is planning a very consistent and methodical attack on the Armenian economy, and in particular on Syunik.
We are focused only on possible military provocations, but both Azerbaijan and Turkey are actually operating with much more mature tactics and methodology. They have perfectly mastered the hybrid nature of confrontations in the modern world and are masters of them.
On the one hand, they are effectively reaching agreements with capital circles that have investment potential in practically all directions, and on the other hand, they are essentially targeting Armenia's investment credit by all possible means. In the modern world, it is a matter of technique and technology to use ordinary citizens with their problems and emotions in these hybrid wars.
What is happening today around the Zangezur plant is increasingly giving the impression of a hybrid attack on Armenia, in which the sincere motives and emotions of hundreds of factory employees are being used. Armenia With each day of downtime, the company loses one hundred million drams, and the enterprise loses about 400 million. This is a published number. Now let's imagine how many important projects Armenia could have done in Syunik itself with the almost 700 million drams it lost during this week. With its 400 million drams per day, the factory, if it did not lose during the downtime, could have supported how many projects in the same Syunik. And for this, it is required that the state in this case assess the situation in its full strategic depth, and not remain in the role of an observer, but try to actively intervene and, so to speak, mediate between the employer and the employee.
Because, yes, in order to be resilient in hybrid wars, the reasons that can allow long-range players to use people's problems and emotions, sincere aspirations, must also be effectively resolved.
Armenia's number one taxpayer has been idle for days, Armenia has been losing hundreds of millions of drams, but this issue has not actually received any significant state attention. And many rightly suspect that perhaps there is state "participation" in the developments that have led to the idleness.
If not, then the state's inaction is truly puzzling, because in addition to economic losses, the current failures also lead to losses in the state's image.
If the state is unable to ensure a stable working environment for its number one taxpayer enterprise, an industrial giant, and to ensure a process of institutional solutions to existing problems that will not disrupt the company's work, then the question arises of what the state is capable of at all.
Only simple propaganda videos on social networks?
And this question arises not only among citizens, with the public, but also with foreign investors and political centers. As I recently said during the Status Quo program, in the outside world, an opinion about the political leadership of a state is formed according to the internal management capabilities of that leadership.
If someone is unable to ensure stable governance, for example, in the conditions of an economic giant, as well as an enterprise of re-economic strategic importance, the number one taxpayer, then any foreign actor has a question: how can that leadership be a viable and reliable partner in the most serious external economic and political agendas? And this is also one of the essences of hybrid warfare.
That is, for example, not only denazification and demilitarization, as is now widely talked about, comparing Azerbaijan's policy with the "narratives" of Russian aggression in Ukraine, but also the "dismantling" of any prospect of international trust in this state.
