Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s unusually blunt comments to Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow last week indicate he was playing as much to a domestic audience ahead of the June general election as at recalibrating ties with Armenia’s long-time ally.
During an April 1 meeting at the Kremlin, both leaders struck a formally cordial tone, emphasising continued cooperation. Yet beneath the surface, the joint press conference revealed widening differences over Armenia’s political direction, its democratic processes and its evolving foreign policy.
Putin used the occasion to signal concern over Armenia’s internal political climate ahead of the vote, highlighting the role of pro-Russian figures. “In Armenia we have many friends, many, we know that. Many Armenians live in the Russian Federation… we consider it more than 2mn people,” he said. “And there are many political forces that have a pro-Russian position.”
He added pointedly: “We would very much like all these political parties, political figures to be able to participate in this internal political work during the elections. Some, I know, are in places of detention, despite the fact that they have a Russian passport. That is your decision, we do not interfere, but we would like them to be able to participate, at least, in this internal political process.”
Pashinyan responded with a firm defence of Armenia’s democratic credentials, pushing back against what appeared to be an implicit criticism of his government. “As for our domestic political processes… Armenia is a democratic country, and we almost always have political processes,” he said. “In fact, twice a year we hold municipal elections… I want to say that we have citizens who think that there is too much democracy in Armenia. But this is a matter of principle for us.”
On the question of whether Russian citizens can participate, he said: “Only those citizens who have exclusively Armenian passports can participate in these elections… with all due respect, but persons with Russian passports… cannot be either candidates for deputies or candidates for prime minister.”
He also highlighted freedoms in Armenia, which contrast with the recent clampdown in Russia. “Social networks are 100% free in our country, there are no restrictions at all,” he told the Russian president. Addressing Putin’s remarks on detained figures, Pashinyan added that there are no political prisoners in Armenia.
The unusually direct rebuttals, delivered in Moscow, were a departure from the more cautious language Yerevan has traditionally used with its strategic partner, and the timing is unlikely to be coincidental.
With parliamentary elections approaching in June, Pashinyan faces a complex political landscape shaped by the aftermath of Armenia’s defeat in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, which resulted in the enclave’s return to Azerbaijani control. Since then, he has pursued a peace process with Azerbaijan, and a gradual but unmistakable shift away from Russia’s orbit.
His Civil Contract party remains the frontrunner, but support has been eroded by territorial losses and domestic controversies, including a bitter confrontation with the Armenian Apostolic Church. Opposition blocs with closer ties to Moscow have sought to capitalise on this discontent, accusing the government of conceding too much to Azerbaijan and pursuing unrealistic Western ambitions.
While the political contest does not fall neatly along pro-West versus pro-Russian lines, divisions over the nature of Armenia’s relationship with Moscow are increasingly central. None of the main political forces advocate a complete rupture with Russia, widely still seen as a key partner, but they differ sharply on how much autonomy Yerevan should assert.
That debate is unfolding alongside a broader change in the geopolitical situation in the South Caucasus. Since the 2018 “Velvet Revolution” and the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War, Armenia has moved to diversify its foreign relations. Long dependent on Russia for security guarantees and economic stability, Yerevan has stepped up engagement with the European Union and the United States, while seeking to redefine ties with both Azerbaijan and Turkey.
Differences over this trajectory surfaced clearly in Moscow. Putin adopted a cautionary tone on Armenia’s growing links with the EU. “We see that Armenia is discussing developing relations with the European Union. We are completely calm about this,” he said. “We understand that any country seeks maximum benefits from cooperation with third countries.”
However, he warned: “Being in a customs union with the European Union and the Eurasian Economic Union is impossible. It is simply impossible by definition… this isn’t even a political issue, but a purely economic one.”
Pashinyan acknowledged the tension but signalled that Armenia would continue its balancing act. “As long as it’s possible to combine these agendas, we will do so,” he said. “And when processes develop to the point where a decision must be made, I am confident that the citizens of the Republic of Armenia will accept it.”
At the same time, he sought to reassure Moscow: “Our relations with the Russian Federation have never been and never will be in question, because these ties and relations are very deep and non-negotiable.”
Security tensions, however, remain unresolved. Armenia has effectively frozen its participation in the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), the Russian-led military alliance, after it failed to intervene during military clashes with Azerbaijan.
Putin linked that inaction to Armenia’s own political decisions. “After you accepted in Prague in 2022 that Karabakh is part of Azerbaijan, the CSTO’s intervention… was simply absolutely wrong,” he said.
Pashinyan reiterated his frustration. “We have never hidden our problems with the CSTO,” he said. “In 2022 we had a specific situation… and, in my opinion, the CSTO mechanisms should have been activated, but they were not activated.” As a result, Armenia has stepped back from the bloc: “We are not currently participating in the work of the CSTO for a simple reason: we are still unable to explain to our people… why the CSTO did not respond, despite the obligations that exist.”
The dispute reflects a deeper erosion of trust that began during the war with Azerbaijan, when Russia did not provide the level of support many Armenians expected. That perception has fed a gradual shift in public opinion.
Recent polling by the International Republican Institute suggests a growing openness to a Western orientation, particularly among younger voters, though most Armenians still favour maintaining balanced relations with both Russia and the West. The latest poll from the institute showed that almost half of Armenians want Yerevan to pursue a pro-Western foreign policy, though most also want to maintain relations with Russia.
External pressure is also becoming a factor. Armenian authorities have warned of possible foreign interference ahead of the election, with intelligence officials citing attempts to mobilise diaspora communities.
The European Union stepped in at the Armenian government’s request, agreeing to deploy a specialised team to help Armenia counter potential hybrid threats. EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said the bloc had already observed disinformation patterns similar to those seen elsewhere. “The European Union will do everything to be there for you,” she said, adding that support would focus on “detection, analysis and response to foreign interference”.
The situation echoes developments in other post-Soviet states. Moldova has moved to exit the Commonwealth of Independent States as part of its push towards EU integration.
Even Kazakhstan’s President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev defied Russia over its annexation of parts of Ukraine’s Donbas region, when he publicly refused to recognise the Luhansk People’s Republic (LPR) and Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) in Ukraine as independent republics.
In Armenia, the balancing act is particularly delicate. Russia remains deeply embedded in the country’s economy and infrastructure, and millions of Armenians live and work in the Russian Federation.
By publicly asserting Armenia’s sovereignty and democratic credentials, Pashinyan appears to be appealing to voters who favour a more independent course, while still stopping short of a full break with Russia.
—