Korkmaz: Armenia’s security concerns persist amid shifting regional balance

ANF News

July 7, 2026

Korkmaz: Armenia’s security concerns persist amid shifting regional balance

Dr. Toros Korkmaz said the shifting balance of power in the Caucasus continues to fuel Armenia’s security concerns.

The balance of power in the Caucasus is undergoing a profound transformation. As Armenia reassesses its long-standing Russia-centered security policy, it is seeking closer ties with Europe and the United States. Political scientist Dr. Toros Korkmaz said this shift has been driven by Russia’s stance during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and the new geopolitical realities created by the war in Ukraine. He also assessed for ANF how these regional changes could affect Turkey, Azerbaijan and the Kurdish question.

Korkmaz said the weakening of Russia’s influence has been the defining factor behind the recent transformation in the Caucasus, describing the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh War as the turning point. He argued that Russia failed to meet Armenia’s expectations during the war and was unable to play an effective mediating role, allowing Azerbaijan to establish control over Nagorno-Karabakh.

According to Korkmaz, this prompted Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s government to move away from a Russia-centered foreign policy and diversify its relations with the European Union, the United States and other Western actors.

Korkmaz added that Pashinyan’s renewed electoral victory demonstrated public support for this foreign policy direction. He also said the prolonged Russia-Ukraine war has further weakened Moscow’s influence in the Caucasus. He said: “Russia has had to devote much of its attention and resources to the Ukrainian front. As a result, its influence in the Caucasus has diminished.”

Russia turned a blind eye to Turkey’s policies

Korkmaz said the relationship that developed between Russia and Turkey during this period was shaped by mutual strategic considerations. He said: “During the Russia-Ukraine war, Moscow wanted Turkey to adopt a more restrained position toward Russia. After all, Turkey is a member of NATO and part of the Western bloc. Russia attached great importance to preventing Turkey from giving full support to Ukraine or becoming a direct security threat.

For that reason, it largely turned a blind eye to Turkey’s support for Azerbaijan during the Armenia-Azerbaijan war. Officers from the Turkish military provided Azerbaijan with substantial technical and military assistance, which had a significant impact on the outcome of the war. Russia’s approach was essentially: ‘You maintain a more limited position on Ukraine, and I will overlook your policies in the Caucasus.’

Pashinyan’s re-election also sent a clear message that Armenia intended to deepen its relations with the European Union and the United States. That, in turn, opened the door to a new period in which Western actors are likely to play a greater role in the Caucasus.”

Assessing Armenia’s recent foreign policy direction, Korkmaz said the country has increasingly prioritized normalization and peace because of its security concerns and the changing regional balance. Korkmaz said:“Armenia has grown weary of war and wants peace. At the same time, it recognizes that Azerbaijan, backed by Turkey and Israel, has become significantly stronger. There are serious concerns that, if another war were to break out today, Azerbaijan would have the upper hand and Armenia’s territorial integrity could come under threat.

Armenia also did not receive the support it expected from Russia in either 2020 or 2023. For many years, it based its foreign and security policy largely on Russia. When those expectations were not met, it began diversifying its foreign policy. By bringing the European Union and the United States more actively into the region, Armenia hopes to increase pressure on both Azerbaijan and Turkey in favor of a peaceful settlement. The Pashinyan government is seeking to offset the security vacuum left by Russia by strengthening ties with Europe and the United States.”

Russia’s influence in Armenia has not disappeared

Korkmaz rejected claims that Russia’s influence in the region has come to an end, arguing that Armenia continues to maintain strong ties with Moscow. He said: “It would not be accurate to say that Russia’s influence in the region has completely disappeared. First of all, Armenia remains economically dependent on Russia. Most of the country’s natural gas is supplied by Russia. In addition, a large number of Armenians live and work in Russia, and that diaspora provides Armenia with significant foreign currency income. Russia also maintains a military presence in Armenia, where it still operates a military base.

The Armenian government, shaped by historical experience, does not want to rely solely on the West for its security. Rather than severing ties with Russia altogether, Pashinyan is seeking to diversify Armenia’s foreign policy. His government’s announcement that it will not withdraw from the Eurasian Economic Union is a clear indication of this. Armenia’s current direction is therefore not one of breaking away from Russia, but of pursuing a more balanced foreign policy among different centers of power.”

There is still a strong pro-Russian opposition in Armenia

Korkmaz also pointed to the balance of forces within Armenian politics, arguing that assessments claiming Russia’s influence has vanished are unrealistic. Although Pashinyan emerged as the winner of the elections, he said, the prime minister did not secure the level of support he had hoped for.

Korkmaz said: “There is still a significant pro-Russian opposition within Armenia. Pashinyan won about 49 percent of the vote. Had the opposition been united, it could have secured support in the range of 35 to 40 percent. That means the political balance could still shift. The Armenian Church, business circles with commercial ties to Russia and parts of the economic elite continue to favor close relations with Moscow. Moreover, a considerable portion of the Armenian diaspora in Europe and the United States does not support Pashinyan. These are influential communities that make important economic contributions to Armenia.

For that reason, I do not believe relations between Armenia and Russia will completely rupture in the coming period.”

Turning to the regional implications of Turkey-Armenia normalization, Korkmaz said diplomatic progress is expected to lead to the reopening of border crossings and the restoration of railway connections. He argued that normalization could create significant economic opportunities for both countries and said: “Trade relations will expand. Turkey is an important market for Armenia. Likewise, Turkey could gain easier access to Central Asia through Armenia. Border cities such as Kars, Iğdır, Ağrı and Doğubayazıt could experience greater economic activity. A revival of tourism around Mount Ağrı (Ararat) is also among the possible outcomes of this process.”

The democratic Kurdish movement has made important progress over the past 15 years

Korkmaz said normalization would have not only economic but also social consequences, emphasizing the importance of strengthening relations between peoples. He said: “The opening of the borders will help people get to know one another more closely. In particular, the democratic Kurdish movement has made important progress on the Armenian issue over the past 15 years. One example was the parliamentary motion submitted by Sebahat Tuncel in 2013, followed by statements from figures within the Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP).

A significant part of the Kurdish population in the region views Armenians with sympathy. This could provide a positive basis for expanding dialogue and increasing contact between the two peoples.”

Pashinyan has adopted a more open approach to minority cultural rights

Korkmaz also addressed Armenia’s internal transformation, saying the Pashinyan government has taken a more liberal approach to minority rights than previous administrations. Korkmaz said: “Although their numbers are small, the Pashinyan government has created greater space for minorities to preserve their identities and develop their cultural rights. This reflects Pashinyan’s more liberal and democratic political orientation. If the normalization process with Turkey produces positive results, its impact will extend beyond the economy to cultural and social life.

Greater contact between peoples could encourage cultural exchange, strengthen pluralism and, in the long run, reduce mutual distrust.”

Armenia’s security concerns will persist

Korkmaz stressed that Armenia’s security concerns would not disappear even if the normalization process advances, arguing that Azerbaijan and Turkey approach the issue from a more pragmatic perspective. He said: “Armenia views this process primarily as a search for lasting peace and security because it understands the consequences another war could bring. Turkey and Azerbaijan, on the other hand, appear to approach the issue more pragmatically and through the lens of geopolitical interests. For that reason, even if normalization moves forward, it would not be accurate to say that Armenia’s security concerns have disappeared.”

The ruling bloc views peace through the lens of the Turan ideology

Korkmaz also criticized the Turkish government’s approach, concluding: “The official state ideology and the ruling political bloc approach this issue from a different perspective. Devlet Bahçeli’s recent description of the Zangezur Corridor as the ‘Turan Corridor’ (a Pan-Turkic geopolitical concept) is one example. Pan-Turkism remains one of the ideological currents that continues to influence the Turkish state tradition, and its traces are visible within today’s ruling bloc.

For that reason, I believe some circles view Turkey-Armenia normalization not only as a process of peace and cooperation but also through the broader geopolitical objectives associated with the idea of Turan.”