Vyacheslav Volodin, the chairman of the Russian State Duma, joined the almost daily critical statements from Moscow to Yerevan. Volodin stated that Nikol Pashinyan is taking advantage of the opportunities provided by Russia, while making unfriendly political decisions towards Russia.

“According to the deputies of the State Duma, Pashinyan conducts an unfriendly policy towards the Russian Federation, cynically using the opportunities provided by our country,” wrote Volodin on the Russian Max channel, asserting that “this is dishonest and, as the example of Ukraine shows, will not lead to anything good.” A high-ranking Russian official insisted that Moscow should make a decision.

“We can no longer remain silent about the processes taking place in Armenia,” Volodin wrote, again mentioning the law passed by the Armenian parliament last year on starting the process of joining the European Union and Armenia’s membership in the International Criminal Court.

Two days ago, a discussion of a special working group on the issue of Armenia was organized in the Russian Security Council, where Secretary Sergey Shoigu made rather harsh statements, calling the steps taken by the Armenian leadership “incompatible with the spirit of allied relations with Russia”, emphasizing Armenia’s European aspirations among them. However, the RA authorities are sure that Moscow will not take drastic actions, it does not have such a toolkit, and the Armenian-Russian cooperation is mutually beneficial, that is, it is also in the interests of the Russian Federation. Nikol Pashinyan announced today.

“I understand that the number of people who want to cause a crisis in RA-Russian relations is quite large, but as I said, we will not argue with Russia, we will not fight. Russia is a superpower that should be treated with respect, and we treat it with respect.”

He emphasized again that they have no desire to leave the EAEU, and only Armenia can raise this issue in the EAEU.

He also said that they treat the interests of the Russian Federation with respect and do not resort to actions against the interests of the Russian Federation. Pashinyan said that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is the head of the state, why shouldn’t he come to Armenia? According to him, Zelensky came to Armenia in the same way that the president of Azerbaijan visited Russia during the conflict with Azerbaijan.

The head of “Rosselkhoznadzor” Sergey Dankwert announced on the air of “Vesti” that he is recording problems related to the supply of not only flowers, but also fruits and vegetables from Armenia. “The problem is that we have problems not only with flowers, but also with vegetables and fruits,” Dankwert said. The Russian official noted that inspections in Armenian enterprises will continue for another week.

“We will make a decision based on the results of those inspections,” added the head of the service.

“The ban will remain in force until the inspection of the greenhouses is completed and the results are analyzed. Despite the guarantees given by the Food Safety Inspectorate of Armenia, 135 cases of violations of the established phytosanitary rules were registered among the 96.2 million flowers imported to Russia in the first months of this year. This is 77% of the total number of cases detected in 2025,” he emphasized.

The Armenian side reported yesterday that a group of Russian specialists arrived in Yerevan for phytosanitary inspections.

To remind, “Rosselkhoznadzor” has temporarily limited the import of flower products from Armenia since May 22. Today, during his press conference, Pashinyan also addressed this issue, describing them as work problems that happen many times during the year, and they themselves raise these issues on EAEU platforms.

The sharp tightening of public rhetoric between Moscow and Yerevan, which is expressed by direct warnings from the Russian Federation, indicates that the “status quo” in Armenian-Russian relations has run out.

Russia is no longer ready to tolerate the “geopolitical diversification” of Yerevan, when Armenia tries to get closer to the West politically and institutionally, but at the same time preserve and consume the economic benefits of EAEU. Yerevan is convinced that Moscow does not have sufficient tools, and Moscow seems to consider that Armenia’s dependence on Russia is fatal. However, it is certain that the restrictions on the import of agricultural products and flowers by “Rosselkhoznadzor” are not ordinary work problems, but the first economic blows. The “phytosanitary war” seems to indicate the first stage of Russia’s pressure tools.

If the RA authorities try to continue this policy, they should most likely prepare for Moscow’s gradual but consistent use of economic and energy levers.

Russia could artificially paralyze Armenian exports at the Lars checkpoint, limit lucrative re-export schemes and revise energy tariffs, which would short-term hit Armenia’s economic growth and unleash domestic social discontent, even though Pashinyan insists that agreements are in place and cannot be broken.

Nikol Pashinyan’s assurances that Armenia respects the interests of the Russian Federation and is not going to leave the EAEU seem to be perceived in Moscow as tactical maneuvers, as they do not correspond to de facto political steps.

Volodin’s open reference to the example of Ukraine is a signal that Russia is ready to use tools to break the foreign policy course adopted by Yerevan or to put pressure on the government. Moscow is creating a situation where the continuation and privileges of economic cooperation within the framework of the EAEU will be directly conditioned by political loyalty. Russia is creating a situation where Yerevan’s space to maneuver narrows, and RA enters the stage of economic confrontation.

If the Armenian authorities fail to get tangible guarantees from the West, the Russian opposition threatens to mix the economic and political playing cards.

The model of building one’s own economic success on the Russian market and the political future on European hopes does not seem to be working.

—