The last interview of Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexei Overchuk is a clear assessment of the foreign policy of the current government of Armenia.
Overchuk is articulating publicly what usually remains the realm of closed diplomatic negotiations: The agreements with Armenia do not correspond to the actual actions of Yerevan. In other words, it is about a clear crisis of confidence.
It is noteworthy that Nikol Pashinyan has repeatedly stated that he has discussed railway management and infrastructure issues with the Russian leadership, trying to show that there is an agreed policy. However, the reaction of a high-ranking Russian official proves the opposite. In Moscow, Armenia’s actions are perceived as changing, inconsistent and often contradictory.
This is a characteristic of political behavior.
The problem is not that the state is revising its positions. It is a natural process in international relations. The problem is that these changes do not have a clear strategic basis and are not presented to partners as a calculated policy. As a result, a dangerous perception is formed: Armenia acts with situational logic, not with a predictable strategy.
The policy of the Armenian government has been really inconsistent in recent years, especially after 2020. On the one hand, announcements to stay in EAEU and CSTO, on the other hand, active rapprochement with the USA and EU, review of Russian concessions, steps to withdraw from CSTO. This creates the impression of a “multi-vector” policy, but without a clear strategic direction and without the willingness to pay the open “price” to the partners.
Such an approach can produce short-term results by maneuvering between different power centers. However, in the long run, it leads to one inevitable consequence: loss of trust.
Trust in international relations is one of the most important resources of the state. It does not recover quickly and is not replaced by other tools. And for a country in a complex security environment like Armenia, the reputation of being a reliable partner is vital.
The context of Overchuk’s statement is also telling. Russia clearly signals that it considers its involvement in regional transport projects as a long-term and systemic factor. On the part of Armenia, the change of positions is perceived not only as an economic risk, but also as a political risk. This raises a key question. Does Armenia have a clearly formulated foreign policy strategy or is it moving in different directions without a unified logic?
If such public assessments are already made at the level of high-ranking officials and publicly, it means that there is a deep mistrust of the Armenian government.
And this is where the main danger lies. When the state loses trust in one center, but does not strengthen it in others, it appears in a military-political vacuum.
In this sense, Overchuk’s statement is a political verdict aimed at politics that is built on volatility, contradictions and short-term calculations.
And the price of that judgment can be paid by the state.
Political scientist Suren Surenyants
—
Disclaimer: This article was contributed and translated into English by Garnik Tadevosian. While we strive for quality, the views and accuracy of the content remain the responsibility of the contributor. Please verify all facts independently before reposting or citing.
Direct link to this article: https://www.armenianclub.com/2026/04/04/verelq-overchuk-announced-the-verdict-of-pashinyans-policy/