Why victory destroyed the Way Out Alliance

0:00You're listening to a podcast right now, driving, working out, walking the dog. If you're in a podcast, chances are you have something to say too. With RSS.com, starting your own podcast is free and easy. Upload an episode and we distribute it to Apple podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music and more. Track your listeners, see where they're from, and start earning from ads just like this. If you've been thinking about starting a podcast, this is your sign. Or your new podcast for free today at RSS.com. Imagine forming a political coalition, taking to the streets to spark this massive nationwide revolution, completely overturning the establishment. And then the very moment you actually win, you just immediately break up your alliance. Right. It sounds totally made up. Exactly. I mean, if you saw that in a movie, you'd think the scriptwriter just got bored halfway through a political thriller. Yeah, they just didn't know how to end the third act. Right. Today, we are looking at a real political supergroup that did exactly that. From formation to dissolution in under two years.

1:03So welcome to the deep dive. Glad to be here. Today, we are examining a single really detailed historical source that maps out the way out alliance, which is also known as the Yelk dashing. It was a short-lived but massively impactful coalition in modern Armenian history. It really is an absolutely perfect case study in, you know, political momentum, because the source material we have gives us the complete lightning fast life cycle of this coalition. It's like having a friend who reads the political spark notes for you, but actually makes the drama interesting. Exactly. We are going to explore how they pulled this off, what it teaches us about political strategy, and why victory sometimes destroys the very coalitions that made it possible in the first place. Before we get into the mechanics of all that, we do need to establish a quick ground rule based on the text we're working with. Let's set the table. Right. This is important. So the source material explicitly cites terms like anti-Russian sentiment, pro-Europeanism,

2:03and Armenian civic nationalism as the foundational bedrock of this alliance's platform. Right. So I want to be entirely clear with you, the listener. We are strictly analyzing these positions as they exist in the historical record. We are definitely not taking sides here. Exactly. We are not endorsing any geopolitical stance, whether that points east, west, or anywhere in between. Our focus is purely analytical. We're just looking under the hood of this political engine to see how it ran so fast and why it ultimately dismantled itself. I'm really glad we put a pin in that because our goal here is to dissect the strategy, not to debate the ideology. Because I mean, if you were looking at this alliance on paper back in 2016, you would probably think it was a massive gamble. Oh, absolutely. So let's go back to the origin story. How does a coalition that ultimately reshapes a country's trajectory actually get built? I mean, they didn't just spontaneously generate out of thin air. Far from it. The way out alliance officially came into existence on December 12, 2016.

3:05And to really understand its DNA, you have to look at the three distinct political parties that decided to merge their efforts. It was fundamentally a liberal political alliance. So first, you had civil contract, which was led by a rising political figure named Nikol Pashinyan. Right. Then you had Bright Armenia, led by Edmund Maruchian. Got. And finally, rounding out the trio, you had the Henroppa-Tuchin party. And they were led by Aram Sarg-San. Okay. Let's unpack the weight of those names for a second because specifically, Aram Sarg-San, the text notes he was a former prime minister of Armenia. It was, yeah. So if we look at this like a political supergroup, you know, taking lead singers from different bands and putting them on one stage, bringing in a former prime minister is a massive strategic play. He's huge. It takes a group of rising insurgent politicians and just instantly gives them legacy credibility. Exactly. It signals to the voters that this isn't just some fringe protest movement.

4:05There is actual executive experience in the room. Right. They've actually governed before. That is a crucial dynamic to highlight. You blend that insurgent energy with establishment weight. But you know, having famous leaders sharing a stage is tough if they don't actually agree on the set list. Yeah. What was the actual ideological genre they all agreed to play? Well, according to the source, the glue holding them together was liberalism, combined with a very strong commitment to Armenian civic nationalism and pro-Europeanism. Okay. And this is especially pronounced for bright Armenia and Henroppa-Tuchin. Let me pause you right there because civic nationalism is one of those really dense terms that gets thrown around in political science textbooks. But we need to know what it actually meant for this specific group. Right. It can mean a lot of things. Yeah. How does civic nationalism function as an actual political platform? So in a broad analytical sense, civic nationalism focuses on shared citizenship, political values, and loyalty to the state's institutions, rather than, you know, defining the nation strictly

5:07by ethnic, ancestral, or cultural lines. Ah. Okay. Right. Right. But a theoretical philosophy about modernizing the state doesn't just win elections on its own. No. Definitely, mom. You need a target. You need an enemy, or at least a very clear grievance, to rally voters around. Right. Right. Right. But a theoretical philosophy about modernizing the state doesn't just win elections on its own. No. Definitely, mom. You need a target. Right. Right. Right. It's your own country. It's your own country. You need a target. Right. Right. Fascinating here is how specifically targeted their foreign policy goals were right out of the gate. What was the specific grievance? Their unifying grievance was Armenia's foreign relations strategy, specifically regarding the Eurasian economic union or EAU. The alliance stated unequivocally that Armenia's decision to join the EAU was a mistake.

6:08They argued it was having a demonstrably negative impact on the country's development. I want to dig into the mechanics of that. Because saying we made a mistake is one thing, but did they have a fully formed alternative? They did, yeah. What was their actual pitch to the voters regarding how to fix this perceived error? They really weren't just a party of no. They proposed a highly detailed alternative roadmap. Which was? The alliance wanted to renegotiate with the European Union to sign an association agreement along with a deep and comprehensive free trade agreement, which is often referred to as a DCFTA. Which is a massive pivot. Let's break down the difference there because this is really the core of their platform. It is. What does a deep and comprehensive free trade agreement actually offer that made them willing to stake their entire political identity on it? Well, it represents a fundamental shift in a country's economic and political compass. How so? So the EAU implies closer economic, customs, and regulatory integration with Russia and its allied regional partners, right?

7:09A DCFTA with the European Union, on the other hand, isn't just about lowering tariffs on goods. It's deeper than that. Exactly. The deep and comprehensive part means aligning your domestic regulations, your market standards, and often even your judicial and institutional frameworks with European standards. Oh, wow. So it's a structural overhaul. It is. It opens up completely different trade corridors and usually requires significant internal reforms just to meet EAU requirements. So the way out alliance was effectively arguing that integrating with European markets was the only viable path for the country's economic future. Precisely. So they formed a supergroup. They blended insurgent energy with executive experience and they built a highly specific technical platform focused on European economic integration. Right. It sounds great in a manifesto, but having a strong manifesto and famous leaders is great on paper, but the real test is the ballot box. A manifesto means nothing if voters don't buy it. Absolutely true. To see if this actually resonated,

8:10we have to look at their first real stress test, which was the parliamentary elections on April 2, 2017. Right. Less than four months after officially forming, they stepped into the national arena. That's incredibly fast. It is. And for this specific electoral push, Edmund Merukhin, the leader of Bright Armenia, served as the leader of the alliance. I actually have the numbers from the source right here, and they are fascinating. Let's hear them. In that April 2017 election, the way out alliance secured 122,049 votes. OK. That translates to 7.78% of the national vote, and at 7.78% earned them exactly nine seats out of 105 in the national assembly. So they successfully go from a piece of paper to a recognized parliamentary opposition force in just a few months, which is a really significant achievement for a brand new coalition. It gives them a foothold. OK, here's where it gets really interesting. Let me push back on that idea of a foothold. Sure. Because nine seats out of 105 is less than 10% of the legislative body.

9:12It is a tiny minority, yeah. In any parliamentary system, if you control less than 10% of the room, you cannot pass laws. You literally cannot block laws if the majority is unified. That's true. So how does a newly formed coalition running on a highly specific pro-European platform actually wield any real influence with under 8% of the vote? I mean, how do you maintain the morale of a supergroup when you are vastly outnumbered in the room where it happens? That is the ultimate challenge of minority opposition politics, isn't it? Yeah. Now, the source doesn't detail their daily legislative maneuvers, but politically speaking, when you only have nine seats, you don't use the parliament as a legislative tool. What do you use it as? Use it as a megaphone. You leverage your seats on committees to access documents and ask really difficult questions. You use your guaranteed speaking time on the assembly floor to force debates that get broadcast on the evening news. You're playing to the cameras. Exactly. You position yourself as the most articulate, relentless,

10:12watchdog in the room. A tiny block can wield outsized influence if they are disciplined and constantly forcing the majority to defend its actions publicly. That makes a lot of sense. You aren't trying to win the vote in the chamber. You are trying to win the argument in the living rooms of the voters watching at home. Precisely. But a megaphone only works if you can prove people are actually listening. Which perfectly explains their very next move. Because shortly after the National Parliamentary elections, they throw their hat into the ring for the 2017 Yeruvon City Council election. Yes, shifting from the national stage to the municipal stage. And for this run, they change up their leadership strategy. Nickel Pashinian, the leader of civil contract, steps up as their candidate for mayor of Yeruvon. And the results in the capital city are drastically different from the national numbers. How massively different. They secured 70,730 votes in Yeruvon, which gave them 21% of the total vote. Wow. And that translated to 14 seats at a 65 in the Yeruvon City Council.

11:14They nearly tripled their vote percentage in the capital compared to their national performance. It was a massive proof of concept. Yeah, it really was. It demonstrated that while their pro-European reformist platform might have only captured 7.78% nationally, it resonated deeply in the country's urban, economic, and cultural center. Right. Yeruvon isn't just any city, it's the heart of the country. Securing 21% there proves you are a rising force. But there is a detail in the source about this municipal election that I am genuinely stuck on. What's that? So Pashinian runs for mayor, right? He leads the ticket. He secures this massive 21% victory and gets 14 seats for the alliance. Right. And then the text notes that he gave up his hard one mandate for the city council. He did. He chose not to take the municipal seat, opting instead to continue his work in the national assembly as an MP. I look at that and think, why would you abandon the post you just fought tooth and nail to win? That almost feels like a betrayal to the urban voters who just backed him.

12:15I can completely see why it looks counterintuitive. You fight for local power, win it, and then stay in a national parliament where your team only holds nine out of 105 seats. But if you analyze the political calculus, it is incredibly shrewd. Oh, so. The city council election was essentially a stress test for his personal brand and the alliance's platform. Taking the seat would mean bogging himself down in municipal administration. Right, like fixing potholes, managing zoning laws, dealing with city budgets. Exactly. While the real fight regarding the EAU and the future of the country's foreign policy is happening where? In the national assembly. Exactly. Giving up the local seat means Pashinian recognize that the ultimate lever of power remained on the national stage. Oh, I see. He used the local election to build his profile, to validate his popularity and demonstrate his political weight. He leveraged that 21% urban victory to amplify his voice in the national parliament, rather than, you know, changing his career path

13:16to become a city administrator. It was a highly calculated allocation of their leadership resources. It really was. And speaking of calculated moves regarding who goes where, there is this bizarre historical footnote in the source material that really highlights how fiercely they guarded their specific brand. Oh, the Union for National Self Determination. Yes, it involves this other political party called the Union for National Self Determination. Right, prior to the 2017 elections, the Union for National Self Determination, which was another liberal pro-European party, officially requested to join the way out alliance. On paper, they shared very similar ideological goals. They seemed like a total natural fit. You would think so. But according to the historical record, their request was simply never responded to. The alliance completely ignored them. This is another moment that baffles me initially. If you are a minority opposition group sitting at under 8% of the national vote, conventional political wisdom says, you need every single ally you can get. Right, build the coalition.

14:17You want to build the biggest tent possible? Why on earth would you turn away voters and activists who already agree with you? It reveals a lot about their internal strategy. By ignoring another pro-European party, the way out alliance was signaling that they weren't just a generic catch all bucket for anyone who liked Europe. Oh, okay. They were a highly specific curated organization. Adding a fourth party, especially a legacy party with its own history and baggage could easily muddy their messaging. It could dilute the brand. Precisely, it could dilute the brand or worse, introduce leadership struggles. Right. The chemistry between Pishinian, Maruchian, and Sargsyan was clearly functional. They had a delicate balance of power between their three factions. And adding a fourth completely throws off that balance. Exactly. Introducing outside variables could disrupt that internal cohesion. It suggests they firmly believed that a tight, unified, disciplined minority was far more dangerous to the establishment than a large, disorganized, fractured coalition.

15:18So we have this tight, highly disciplined alliance. They've tested their strength in parliament. They've proven their urban appeal in the capital. And they've fiercely protected their internal chemistry. Right. They're playing a very calculated game of political chess. But as we see so often in history, you can play chess all you want, but sometimes the board just gets flipped over entirely. Yep. And that brings us to the defining moment of this story. It's 2018. The 2018 Armenian Revolution. This is where the political arena fundamentally shifted. The real shift in their power happens outside the legislative chambers entirely. Exactly. The way out alliance transitioned from being a parliamentary minority making speeches to being an active physical participant in a nationwide movement. The source explicitly notes that the alliance supported the goals of the revolution and actively took to the streets in protest supporting Nikol Pishinian. Think about that physical shift for a second. They move from debating trade agreements and padded chairs to mobilizing citizens on the streets with megaphones.

16:20It's a massive leap. They are riding a massive unprecedented wave of revolutionary momentum. The political landscape is shifting beneath their feet in real time. The establishment is crumbling and they are standing right at the forefront of it. They've arrived. They have finally reached the mountaintop. They've been climbing since December 2016. And this is where we hit the paradox you mentioned at the very beginning of the deep dive. The breakup. Right, right at the peak of this historical wave, having successfully navigated the revolution on September 12, 2018, the way out alliance officially dissolves. It's wild. The constituent parties agree to participate in the upcoming 2018 parliamentary elections entirely separately. So what does this all mean? I keep trying to wrap my head around the logic of breaking up right when you win. It's definitely unusual. Let me try metaphor to explain the mechanics of this because I think it helps visualize what actually happened. Sure, go for it. Think of the way out alliance, not as a permanent political party,

17:20but as a booster rocket on a space shuttle. Okay. The old political regime was the Earth's atmosphere. It had immense gravitational pull. To break out of that gravity, you need a massive, concentrated burst of energy. Right. You need three different engines. Civil contract, bright Armenia, and Hanover Patuchin, all burning their fuel together just to achieve escape velocity. That is a very apt way to look at it. But here's the thing about a booster rocket. Once you actually hit orbit, once you break through the atmosphere and the revolution succeeds, that booster rocket is suddenly empty. It's served its purpose. Exactly. It's no longer providing thrust. It's just dead weight. So what do you do? You detach it. You dissolve the alliance because the specific mission it was built for breaking the gravity of the old regime has been accomplished. Or it's like a disruptive tech startup. They build a revolutionary product, successfully disrupt the entire industry, and then the founders immediately break up to launch rival companies. That metaphor tracks perfectly

18:22with the historical aftermath outlined in the source. If we look at the trajectory of the detached pieces, it explains the dissolution completely. Let's look at where the party's actually landed. So bright Armenia and the Hanover Patuchin party decided to stay together, right? They formed a new group called the Brayda Alliance. And how do they fare without the thrust of civil contract? Well, they participated in the 2018 year of UnCity Council elections, and they came in third place. They secured just three seats out of 65. Let's put that in perspective for a second. The United Way Out Alliance secured 14 municipal seats just the year prior. Now, without civil contract, two-thirds of the original alliance drops down to just three seats. It's a huge drop. So what happened to civil contract and Nikolaan Pachinian? Civil contract went on an entirely different trajectory. They teamed up with the Mission Party to form the My Step Alliance. OK. And they completely dominated the political landscape. Wow. In those same municipal elections, the My Step Alliance swept the board.

19:22Their candidate, Hake Maroutin, one decisively and was appointed as the mayor of Yerevan. So civil contract essentially absorbs the entire momentum of the 2018 revolution. Basically, yeah. They realize they don't need the original booster rocket anymore. They've captured the public's imagination to such an extent that they can find a new partner, form a new alliance, and completely take over the Capitol. If we connect this to the bigger picture, it's a stark reminder of the pragmatism of politics. Yeah. When they were a weak opposition force in 2016, they desperately needed each other just to survive. They needed to pool their resources. Exactly. To gain that initial 7.78% foothold, they needed the combined weight of their leaders to legitimize their platform. But the revolution blew the doors open. Everything changed. Civil contract, writing the crest of that wave, realize their power had grown exponentially beyond the confines of the three-party coalition. The environment that necessitated their union literally no longer existed.

20:23They changed the country. And in doing so, they simply outgrew each other. It really reframes how we think about political failure versus success. How do you mean? What we tend to view alliances like marriages, where a breakup is inherently seen as a failure or a tragic collapse? Right, like something went wrong. But in this case, the dissolution of the way ad alliance wasn't a failure at all. It was the direct byproduct of absolute unquestionable success. Exactly. The ignored request from the union for national self-determination in 2017 showed they were entirely unsentimental about who they led into their ranks. The 2018 dissolution showed they were equally unsentimental about when to pack it up and move on. They treated the alliance as a strategic tool, not a permanent identity. Which brings us to why this all matters to you, listening right now. Why spend time unpacking the mechanics of an Armenian political alliance that lasted for less than 20 months? It's a fair question. Because it is an absolute masterclass in how incredibly fast political landscapes can shift.

21:25If you're trying to understand how change happens in the modern world, this is the blueprint. You're really is. It proves that you don't always need a decade's old institution with endless financial resources to make history. Sometimes, a temporary, highly focused alliance. A political supergroup built on a very specific set of grievances lasting just a matter of months is enough to completely alter a country's trajectory. Yeah. The way out alliance were from a sign piece of paper in December 2016 to holding nine seats, to a 21% urban victory to a nationwide revolution to dissolving entirely by September 2018. That is breathtaking speed. It truly is. And as we consider the mechanics of power, it leaves us with a lingering, somewhat provocative question to mull over. What's your name? If a political alliance dissolves immediately after achieving its greatest victory, was that alliance ever truly a unified vision for the future? Or is it always merely a tool of convenience for ambitious leaders? Ooh, that's interesting. It makes you wonder, does the very nature of victory

22:26destroy the need for compromise? When a group finally acquires the absolute power to enact its will, perhaps the very first thing it discards is the necessity of sharing that power. Does victory destroy the need for compromise? That is a brilliant and slightly unsettling point to end on. Definitely something to chew on the next time you see politicians smiling and shaking hands on a debate stage, promising unity. Thank you for joining us on this deep dive. Keep questioning the structures around you, keep looking for the why and the how behind the headlines, and remember sometimes the most impactful political super groups are the ones that only say together for one tour. We'll catch you next time. You're listening to a podcast right now. Driving, working out, walking the dog. If you're into podcasts, chances are you have something to say too. With rss.com, starting your own is free and easy. Upload an episode, and we distribute it to Apple podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, and hundreds more. Track your listeners, see where they're from, and start earning from ads like this,

23:27even with just 10 listeners a month. If you've been thinking about starting a podcast, this is your sign. Start free at rss.com.