Expert calls statements made by Armenian Prime Minister and Finance  Minister on public debt "manipulative and purely populist"

ArmInfo. The statements by Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Finance Minister Vahe Hovhannisyan contradict official statistics and the government's  budget address, as stated by  David Ananyan, PhD in Economics and former Chairman of the State Revenue Committee of Armenia. He called  the statements made by the head of government and the minister manipulation and populism.

Recall, on November 12, Finance Minister Vahe Hovhannisyan, while  presenting the draft budget for the following year in parliament,  stated that Armenia's public debt had increased by 80% since 2018,  not doubled. Moreover, according to him, if the government were to  reduce spending to 2018 levels, it could pay off the debt in a year  and a half. "We're not doing this because our needs, as well as our  ambitions, have changed significantly in the intervening period. "If  we imagine that we were to pay off the debt incurred since 2018, we  would have to cut spending by 58%," Hovhannisyan said. Thus,  according to him, defense spending would be cut by 65%, education by  60%, social spending by 54%, and so on.

The next day, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, in turn, attributed the  sharp increase in the country's public debt to weapons purchases and  COVID-19. "And they also criticize us, saying, 'Why has the foreign  debt grown to $8 billion? What have we done with these funds?' I  didn't want to say, but I will say it: we bought weapons. We bought  weapons on credit because we needed a lot of weapons and right away,"  Pashinyan said. "This is pure populism, without any professional  basis," David Ananyan wrote on social media.

He said it is supported by official data,  showing that the national  debt was $6.8 billion in 2017 and $14.2 billion in September 2025.  This means the debt has increased more than 2.1 times, and the  difference is approximately $7.4 billion, not $8 billion (this is  basic arithmetic, not political commentary).

The expert noted that the $7.4 billion includes everything:  refinancing of old debts, financing of the budget deficit, interest  payments, and only partially defense programs. The 2026 Budget  Address clearly demonstrates that the main areas of growth in  expenditure generated from public debt and taxes are social payments  and pensions, which will reach 1,285.8 billion drams in 2026 (up  193.9 billion, or 17.8%), as well as interest payments on the public  debt: 313.6 billion drams in 2024, 381.1 billion drams in 2025, and  423.2 billion drams in 2026 (approximately 3.5% of GDP).

In other words, government documents confirm that the majority of  borrowed funds went toward social payments, interest payments,  current and capital expenditures, and not toward military spending.  No official document states that the entire increase in public debt,  or even a significant portion of it, went toward military spending.  Therefore, the Prime Minister's statement is a populist  justification, not a report," the economist stated.

As for the Finance Minister's statement, when comparing the period  from 2017-2025 (as the government does), the dollar debt has not  simply doubled, but has actually increased slightly.  "This thesis is  based on two manipulative techniques: the use of mixed bases, i.e.,  the selection of different starting years for political convenience,  and exchange rate manipulation: the debt was calculated in drams,  while the dram strengthened in 2017-2025 (AMD 484 _ AMD 383 per  dollar), making the dollar debt appear "softer." But even with this  "cosmetics," the dollar debt doubled," Ananyan noted.

The former head of the State Revenue Committee is convinced that  their words don't reflect the whole picture. They select only the  initial and final figures that suit them, confuse dram and dollar  calculations, and present the debt as a political justification:  "Look, we took out a loan for weapons," "Look, the debt didn't  double." "The reality is this: the national debt in dollars has  doubled, a significant portion of which has gone toward unproductive  current expenditures and interest, and debt servicing has already  become one of the fastest-growing budget items.

Meanwhile, national debt isn't a game of numbers. It's a measure of  political responsibility.

When officials talk about debt in the language of populism, without  citing government statistics or their own budget address, they don't  take their responsibility seriously and demonstrate a desire to find  politically "proper" justifications. If we want to talk seriously  about the national debt, we should be guided not by statements from  the podium, but by official figures and documents, which,  unfortunately, have little in common with the verbal statements of  today's government," David Ananyan concluded.