The so-called diversification of RA’s foreign policy and the strategic turn towards uncertain European integration have led to an open polarization of relations between Yerevan and Moscow, where the Kremlin directly turns the economic toolkit into a lever for political pressure.

Launching a chain of asymmetric dependencies, Russia applies restrictions against Armenian exports and creates obstacles in the EAEU economic area, with the aim of inhibiting the rapprochement of Yerevan and Brussels and showing the “economic price” of changing the foreign political vector. And while Moscow at the highest level calls on Yerevan to take a stand, even hinting at its intentions to withdraw from the EAEU, Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation Alexey Overchuk announced that no one wants Armenia to leave the Eurasian Economic Union, but the situation, in his assessment, is extraordinary.

“It is a very strange, unusual situation. We are in favor of Armenia staying in the EAEU, prospering and continuing to develop at the same pace as it did in recent years when it was in the EAEU. The leadership of Armenia also declares that it wants to remain in the structure,” the Russian Deputy Prime Minister emphasized.

“No one is pushing Armenia out of the EAEU, they just said that they want to join the EU. It is necessary to decide. The sooner this is done, the better it will be for everyone,” Overchuk added.

The Russian official also claimed that the fact that the Prime Minister of Armenia will not participate in the EAEU summit to be held in Astana at the end of this month indicates his priorities. In turn, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated that the West is trying to divide Russia’s allies, especially its neighbors, and this tactic is now being applied, including to Armenia.

“The West is trying to divide our allies, first of all, starting with our neighbors, as it did with Georgia, Moldova, as it is now doing with Ukraine, as it is now trying to drag Armenia into the same wrong logic,” Sergey Lavrov stated. These days, while the pre-election campaign in Armenia was divided, Shoigu, Volodin, Lavrov, Overchuk, Putin, Galuzin and other Russian figures harshly criticized Yerevan.

In parallel with the Russian State Consumer Protection Agency: From “Rospotrebnadzor”. today, another unpleasant information appeared that low-quality alcoholic beverages produced in Armenia were discovered, and their sale in Russia was suspended.

According to the structure, they did not meet the mandatory requirements Products of “VEDI-ALCO”, “Abovyan brandy factory” and “Shahnazaryan” wine and brandy house: The day before yesterday, “Rospotrebnadzor” announced that it had temporarily suspended Armenian of all batches of “Jermuk” mineral water import and sale in Russia, on the grounds of higher than normal content of certain substances, although the Food Safety Inspection Authority of Armenia announced that it had checked and found no violations in “Jermuk”.

Since yesterday, “Rosselkhoznadzor” has temporarily restricted The import of flowers from Armenia to Russia. According to the report, “Rosselkhoznadzor” plans to check Plant breeding enterprises operating in Armenia. There are problems related to supplies from Armenia, not only flowers, but also in terms of vegetables and fruits, according to the TASS agency, the head of “Rosselkhoznadzor” Sergey Dankvert announced yesterday on the air of “Vesti”.

The activation of economic restrictions and sanitary bans applied by Moscow against Armenia is definitely not accepted in the Russian expert and analytical circles. Although the Kremlin’s official agenda is aimed at “punishing” Yerevan’s political leadership and preventing a foreign policy turn, industry analysts are increasingly speaking out about the opposite effect of this tactic. According to this approach, harsh administration and export bans may weaken the positions of the current government of Armenia, but they become an additional tool in their hands to mobilize the public around the “external threat” and to justify their own political failures with external force majeure.

In this context, the key thesis of the expert discourse is that the economic strikes are not targeting the political elite, but ordinary producers, farmers and businessmen, most of whom have always been pro-Russian. The applied sanctions, whether they are restrictions on the import of flowers or other products, directly hit those layers that are connected to the Russian market. Therefore, “shooting at the political power, but touching the whole of Armenia”, Moscow runs the risk of eliminating the remnants of public trust and with its own hands creates the foundations of anti-Russian sentiments in friendly circles.

In conclusion, experienced representatives of the expert community call for separating political conflicts from public diplomacy and economic partnership.

The idea is emphasized that waging an economic war against the people is strategically losing, as it closes the future doors of dialogue and accelerates Armenia’s departure from the Russian economic orbit. Political expediency should not prevail over long-term alliances and human ties, and Moscow’s current tactics need to be reviewed to avoid more disastrous geopolitical consequences.

And the representatives of the Russian political elite and the key wing of decision-makers perceive the situation in a cardinally different way, being guided exclusively by strict geopolitical pragmatism and the rules of power balance. In these frameworks, sentimental memories and theses about friendship have long been excluded from strategic calculations, taking into account the policy of the RA authorities and the nature of the statements. For Moscow’s ruling elite, Armenia’s foreign policy rapprochement with the West is considered a violation of “red lines”, which implies the most drastic, clear and demonstrative opposition.

Proponents of this course are convinced that the period of selective approaches has passed, and the full use of economic instruments is the only effective method to prevent the rapid geopolitical turn of Yerevan.

According to their interpretation, the “shock therapy” of economic pressures should be comprehensive, so that the Armenian political and business elite clearly realize the immediate and irreversible price of breaking security and economic ties with Russia. Therefore, judging by the statements, this radical wing of the Moscow elite is inclined to continue and tighten the tactics of strict restrictions.

—