The results of the Armenian elections. “is the glass half empty or half empty?”

According to the official results of the Armenian parliamentary elections held on June 7, three political forces entered the National Assembly. The “Civil Agreement” party received 49.7456% of the votes (726,819 votes), businessman Samvel Karapetyan’s “Strong Armenia” alliance received 23.2710% (340,060 votes), and former President Robert Kocharyan’s “Armenia” alliance received 9.9231% (144,983 votes). Businessman Gagik Tsarukyan’s “Prosperous Armenia” Party (PAP) was considered a possible participant in the new parliament at a certain stage of vote counting, but as a result, it received 58,287 votes (3.9893%) and could not overcome the 4% temporary threshold established by law.

In the newly elected parliament, the “Civil Agreement” party received 64 mandates, the “Strong Armenia” bloc – 29, and the “Armenia” bloc – 12 mandates.

so the ruling party has retained the parliamentary majority, but does not have the constitutional majority necessary to unilaterally make changes to the Mother Law of the country. On the other hand, a powerful opposition bloc consisting of 41 deputies was formed in the National Assembly, which can turn any legislative process into a tough political battle.aof the field.

At the same time, 7 of the 18 political forces that participated in the elections on June 19, including the “Strong Armenia” and “Armenia” blocs that entered the parliament, appealed to the Constitutional Court (SC) demanding to invalidate the election results or to schedule a second round of voting.

This is an unprecedented situation for the first time in the history of Armeniar: was created when so many political forces appealed to the CC to challenge the election results. According to the applicants, the conditions of an equal election contest were not observed.

During the pre-election campaign, those who directly disagreed with the decisions of the authorities were repressed.  They continue even after the vote, and even against the representatives of the opposition forces, who were elected or may enter the parliament as a result of the elections. The pressure campaign continues today՝ up to the intention of the authorities to arrest them.  Isn’t it?՞ that a significant number of voters voted for them.

Even the OSCE international observers announced that the pre-election campaign in Armenia was confrontational, that the parliamentary elections were accompanied by criminal prosecutions of opposition representatives and other factors that negatively affected the equality of the conditions of the pre-election struggle. The organization also noted that the pressure on public sector employees to force them to participate in the events of the ruling party, as well as socio-economic measures dedicated to the elections (increased pensions) raised questions about the equality of opportunities for campaign participants.

On the day of voting, there were quite a few violations and questionable results. On the eve of the elections we warned about possible manipulations by government structures, if the counting of votes leads to a disappointing result for them.  For example, by canceling voting in certain precincts, they will try to prevent the third opposition force from overcoming the 4% barrier to enter parliament in order to take advantage of its votes and increase its own representation.

Our prediction came true. The CEC announced that the votes of only a few dozen voters were not enough for the PAP. After a selective recount at the opposition’s request, the CEC admitted serious violations and canceled the vote in three polling stations where PAP had good results. CEC also admitted that as a result the votes given to Tsarukyan’s party were credited to other organizations, mostly to CP. If PAP entered the parliament, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s party would not be able to appoint, for example, the head of the Central Bank and the members of the Supreme Court.

Candidate of Legal Sciences Arsen Tavadyan կարծիքով՝ After canceling the results in 3 precincts, the CEC should either hold re-elections in those precincts, or schedule new elections for the National Assembly.

At the same time, he refers The decision of the Venice Commission on a similar situation during the 2025 presidential elections in Romania was completely annulled by the Constitutional Court and new ones were appointed.

However, CEC, violating the Constitution, refused to hold re-elections. By invalidating the results without ordering a repeat vote as required by law, the CEC effectively changed the electoral implications of the vote while simultaneously depriving voters of those precincts from the mechanism of restoration of their voting results.

The opposition criticized such a decision, because Article 101 of the Election Code the article allows to correct the committed violations “by double voting in separate polling stations”. Nevertheless, CEC chairman Vahagn Hovakimyan (former CP member, Pashinyan’s close friend, who collaborated with him in his family daily “Haykakan Zhamanak”) stated that there are no legal grounds for canceling the results of the parliamentary elections on June 7, and that violations in individual precincts cannot be grounds for canceling the results of the elections, after which he again suggested the complainants to apply to the Constitutional Court.

The review of claims challenging the results of the parliamentary elections in the CC began on June 26 (the deadline for making a decision was July 4). It turned into a detailed electoral manipulation of the government disclosure.

For example, in 20% of polling stations are available discrepancies between the number of ballots and the number of voters, and in almost all precincts (98%-99%) the CP won with a larger (than average) margin. The process initiated by the opposition forces shows not only the crisis of confidence in the official results of the vote, but also the direct involvement of state institutions in ensuring the victory of the ruling CP party. The leader of the opposition “Armenia” bloc, former president Robert Kocharian to the RA Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan accused in the fact that, on his instructions, the CEC “stole 60,000 votes of citizens given in favor of the PAP during the elections”.

In general, the elections in Armenia showed that the society is deeply divided. Opinions among the voters were almost equally divided, if we do not take into account the votes collected by the ruling party at the expense of administrative resources.

The political science interpretation of the results of the parliamentary elections in Armenia through the prism of “opportunities” and “limitations” clearly reveals the two opposite sides of the “glass half full or half empty”.

On the one hand, the party of the current Prime Minister of Armenia, Nikol Pashinyan, has collected more votes. CP secured a majority in the National Assembly, 3/5 of the total number of deputies. This allows the party to pass laws and elect important officials. Moreover, the ruling party has not received a constitutional majority, in particular, it will not be able to change the Constitution.  And here already problems arise for the current government.

The point is that the entire pre-election rhetoric of the CP was built under the slogan of achieving peace with Azerbaijan. However, official Baku demands to remove from the basic law of Armenia the provisions with reference to Nagorno Karabakh, which it interprets as an obstacle to the peace treaty.

For that, Pashinyan needs not only “his” cabinet of ministers.  He needs legal instruments to manage the country’s strategic future, a mandate for a geopolitical turnaround: a new Constitution, a final solution to the Karabakh problem with Azerbaijan, a settlement with Turkey, and maintaining neutral relations with Russia in case of deepening the Western course.

Passing such decisions in the new parliament will be very difficult for Pashinyan. Under these conditions, the official Yerevan will have to continue the complex policy of “two seats”, balancing between the drift towards the EU and the obligations regarding the EAEU, while the high tension will be maintained inside the country. That is why the absence of the constitutional majority of the prime minister becomes not only an internal but also an external problem for him.

The Armenian mass media note that the opposition parties have passed the electoral threshold for a long time were a decisionIs it worth taking the parliamentary mandates, or is it necessary to give up them, following the example of our Georgian colleagues, in order to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the current state government? On the one hand, Pashinyan has already received congratulations from the USA, the European Union, Turkey, Ukraine and Kazakhstan, which seem to have already recognized the legitimacy of his government.

But if the opposition refused the mandates, then the CP, having no opposition in the parliament, can solve any issue without taking into account with anyone.. If the opposition is represented in the parliament, it will deprive Pashinyan of the constitutional majority. In that case, it can prevent the adoption of the new Constitution by joint actions in the National Assembly.

In this situation, it can be assumed that any radical step by the ruling party will inevitably cause a deep internal political crisis.

The relative success of Nikol Pashinyan in the elections was positively received in the USA, Europe, Turkey, Azerbaijan, Ukraine, as well as in a number of Central Asian countries.

The New York Times attention concentrates on the fact that Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan was close to receiving a mandate to promote peace negotiations with Azerbaijan, which were organized with the mediation of President Trump.

The final agreement has not yet been signed, as the countries have not agreed on the border that should emerge as a result of the settlement agreement. “For the final conclusion of the agreement, Azerbaijan insists that Armenia exclude its claims to the disputed region from its fundamental documents, which are mentioned in the Constitution of Armenia.

However, to make changes in the Constitution, a two-thirds majority of the votes in the Armenian Parliament is required, which, according to all, Pashinyan’s party will not achieve,” the newspaper reports. It reports that the Armenian government has called on the United States to continue its involvement in regional affairs and help Armenia and Azerbaijan reach a final agreement.

British The Guardian-ը notes, that the parliamentary elections were the first national elections since Armenia lost control of Nagorno-Karabakh to Azerbaijan in 2023, a painful defeat that ended more than three decades of Armenian control over the disputed region.

According to the author of the article, Pashinyan managed to turn this issue into a political asset.

“Arguing that Armenia’s pursuit of Karabakh has led to the country being mired in perpetual conflict…, he presented that painful chapter as a necessary starting point for a safer and more prosperous future.” The newspaper considers Armenia’s economic growth, which is largely due to the inflow of Russian business and capital, to be another factor in Pashinyan’s success.

This has allowed him to make significant investments in the regions of Armenia, where his support remains strongest. At the same time, the newspaper notes that on the eve of the elections, the Armenian authorities arrested oppositionists, including members of Karapetyan’s party, on various suspicious charges. from bribery and financial crimes to calls to overthrow the government.

During the election campaign, Pashinyan sometimes behaved erratically, contrary to his previous statements, engaging in fierce public arguments with refugees from Nagorno-Karabakh, whom he accused of “fleeing” the region instead of staying and fighting. The author of the article notes that the EU largely ignores the criticism of Pashinyan, not hiding its support for the current Armenian leadership’s secret desire to stay away from Moscow. 

At the same time, the main post-election problem in London is considered not the violation of democratic principles in Armenia, but the suspension of negotiations with Azerbaijan due to the complexity of the constitutional amendment, which Baku demands.

 An international human rights activist, “Amsterdam

Macron, von der Leyen and Trump were quick to praise the unbalanced dictator Pashinyan. It is already becoming clear that the West is not interested in the fate of the Armenian people. their goal was only to attack Russia. Now they turn a blind eye to the obvious overthrow of democracy for their own geopolitical interests.”

Nikol Pashinyan’s victory in the parliamentary elections gives Ankara a chance to implement its plans. it is an opportunity to secure the new regional architecture of the South Caucasus under its auspices. On the eve of the NATO summit to be held in Turkey (Ankara, July 7-8), former Turkish ambassador and UN representative in Baku Ismail Alper Joshkun and former deputy of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey Garo Paylan are appearing came to the “Carnegie Center” website (recognized as undesirable in Russia) “Next steps on the road to peace after the elections in Armenia” program by article։

The authors of the article hint that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is preparing to use the NATO summit in Ankara, in addition to the main agenda, as an opportune moment to organize a quadrilateral meeting with US President Donald Trump, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, the purpose of which “should be to prevent the stagnation of the peace process and to create a political and economic base for its further advancement through the joint commitments of Turkey, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and interested international financial institutions.”

The latter is a new “road map” for Armenia without CSTO and EAEU.

Such an approach, if it happens, will clearly contradict Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan to the announcements During the working visit to Moscow and Kazan (June 16-17), “that the issues of the South Caucasus should be resolved by the countries of the region and close neighbors on the basis of dialogue and cooperation within the framework of the regional platform: 3 3”.

In this context, Fidan’s visit to Armenia a day after the publication of the final results of the parliamentary elections does not seem accidental. Especially considering the fact that, according to him, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan regularly holds consultations with Russian leader Vladimir Putin on regional issues.

It can be assumed that he came to “agree” with Russia on the new balance of interests in Transcaucasia. There is almost no information about the results, but I do not exclude that his task was to convince the Russian leadership to recognize the legitimacy of the Armenian elections, to find a compromise on this issue and to build cooperation with Ankara, taking into account the further deviation of Yerevan to the west, and taking into account the geography, conventionally in the “Turkish” direction.

Western and Turkish politicians directly call Armenia the “missing element” of the organization of Turkic states. (Armenia as the missing element of the Organization of Turkic States // AlphaNews. 26.11.2025. – URL: alphane ws.am/en/projects/armenia-as-the-missing-element-of-the-organization-of-turkic-states/ (date of access: 01.12.2025)։ Such judgments should be evaluated as a political order to expand the zone of Turkish control. Moreover, the obvious subordinate position of Armenia in the proposed geopolitical structure is outlined.

According to me, Azerbaijan’s supremacy with Turkey’s support in the conflict settlement process with Armenia was a practical confirmation of the Western project of reconstruction of the South Caucasus. The local project of such restructuring is the pro-Turkish regional architecture, which, by accepting, Armenia will inevitably lose its identity and, most importantly, its sovereignty.

Alexander Ananev

Retired senior adviser to the Russian Foreign Ministry

interaffairs.ru

Translation by Zhanna Avetisyan

—