Pashinyan is actually trying to attribute the responsibility of TRIPP not continuing through the territory of Armenia to Russia. Suren Surenyants

Political scientist Suren Surenyants wrote about Armenia in TRIPP: an object, not a subject. "Nikol Pashinyan's latest statements regarding regional transport projects, particularly the TRIPP initiative, mainly demonstrate domestic political manipulation in order to hide real responsibility and shift strategic failures in another direction. Pashinyan is actually trying to attribute the responsibility of not continuing TRIPP through the territory of Armenia (after Nakhijevan) to Russia, justifying it with the fact that the railways of Armenia are under Russian control. Meanwhile, the political architecture of TRIPP did not initially assume the involvement of Armenia (after Nakhijevan). If Turkey is building the Kars-Igdir-Nakhijevan railway, openly bypassing Armenia, it is obvious that the strategic decision was made in the Washington-Ankara-Baku axis, not in Moscow. In this context, Russia turns into a convenient external factor, on which it is possible to place the responsibility of its own negotiation inefficiency. In fact, TRIPP in its current format does not imply the lifting of the blockade of Armenia, and this is a consequence of the political and diplomatic failure of the Armenian government. The railway of Armenia is the property of the Republic of Armenia. The Russian side implements only fiduciary, concessional management, which is in no way equivalent to sovereign control. There is no example in international practice where a large infrastructure or transport project is rejected solely because the given infrastructure is managed by a third country company. If that factor were really decisive, dozens of interstate routes in the world would simply not work. Therefore, the circumstance of the Russian administration cannot be considered as a real "weighty" reason. At most, it is a retrospective justification for a political decision that has already been made.