Nikol Pashinyan attended the official opening of the controversial Amulsar gold mine near Jermuk on October 10, declaring that public concerns had been addressed, even as environmental activists accused his administration of keeping the ceremony out of public view.
The Amulsar Without a Mine initiative said its members discovered the opening by chance during a visit to Jermuk, raising questions about transparency surrounding one of Armenia’s most disputed mining projects.
Speaking at the ceremony, Pashinyan claimed that the absence of protests demonstrated that his administration had successfully answered the public’s concerns and created conditions for citizens to regard the mine as their own project.
However, the initiative’s statement directly challenged that portrayal, warning of potentially devastating consequences for the mountain, surrounding ecosystems, water resources, and Jermuk’s future as a resort town.
“Dear residents of Jermuk, concerned Armenians, are you prepared to witness the destruction of a massive mountain before your eyes, the devastation of the entire area’s ecosystem, the poisoning of water resources, and the decline of Jermuk itself?” the initiative asked.
The opening marks a significant reversal from the political climate of 2018, when protests and road blockades effectively halted construction at Amulsar. Pashinyan, who came to power that year amid promises of greater accountability and responsiveness to public concerns, has since backed the project’s continuation.
Construction resumed in August 2025 despite longstanding concerns about acid mine drainage, potential contamination of the Arpa and Vorotan river systems, and risks to Jermuk’s mineral water resources. The mine’s operator, Lydian Armenia, maintains that appropriate environmental safeguards are in place.
The timing is particularly contentious as Armenia prepares to host COP17, the United Nations biodiversity summit, in Yerevan. While Pashinyan’s administration prepares to present Armenia’s environmental commitments on an international stage, it is simultaneously celebrating the opening of a mining project that environmental groups have opposed for years.
The contrast raises questions about the consistency of the administration’s environmental priorities and its handling of public opposition.
Pashinyan’s assertion that the absence of demonstrations signifies public acceptance also leaves a central question unanswered: whether the lack of protests at a ceremony activists say they were not informed about can reasonably be presented as evidence that public concerns have been resolved.
For opponents of the mine, the opening represents not the end of the Amulsar controversy, but another stage in a dispute over environmental protection, public accountability, and the future of Jermuk.
