June 10, 20266:13 AM PDTUpdated 13 hours ago
The Reuters Daily Briefing newsletter provides all the news you need to start your day. Sign up here.
After Nagorno-Karabakh, Armenians vote for peace over nationalism
Nikol Pashinyan’s victory suggests Russia’s influence in the country is waning.
Supporters of Armenia’s ruling Civil Contract party, led by Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, react as they gather in Republic Square in Yerevan, Armenia [Anthony Pizzoferrato/AP]
At a campaign rally in Armenia’s capital, Yerevan, on Saturday, one day before Armenia’s election, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, outfitted in a white button-up shirt and a red-brimmed baseball cap, held a look of determination.
Flanked by supporters waving their arms and flashing his campaign’s signature heart-shaped hand gesture, Pashinyan was perched centre stage, pounding away on a drum kit for the crowds – literally drumming up support.
RECOMMENDED STORIES
list of 4 items
- list 1 of 4Why are Armenia’s elections being so keenly watched abroad?
- list 2 of 4Armenia votes in test of PM’s pivot to Europe amid Russian pressure
- list 3 of 4‘Fear mongering is the main narrative’ in Armenia’s elections
- list 4 of 4Pashinyan’s pro-Europe party wins Armenia election
end of list
By election day, his governing Civil Contract party appeared to have drummed up something more consequential: public backing for his vision of Armenia’s future following the loss of the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh to a crushing military defeat by Azerbaijan in 2023.
Pashinyan, who formed a band earlier this year and campaigned with a series of concerts around the country, secured 49.8 percent of the vote in Sunday’s ballot, enough to retain a parliamentary majority.
His victory is seen as a test of his handling of the loss of the Nagorno-Karabakh region and his ability to steer the country away from Russian influence.
He has ultimately prevailed despite Russian meddling in Armenian politics, and the country now looks set to reorient itself away from its former ruler – signalling Armenians’ willingness to embrace a new direction, analysts say.
“Many Armenians are prepared to give his new vision a chance: an Armenia less defined by conflict, more open to normalising relations with Azerbaijan and Turkiye, and increasingly focused on building its future within its internationally recognised borders,” Zaur Shiriyev, an analyst at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center, told Al Jazeera.
-
Now Playing
PM Pashinyan’s party wins Armenia election, preliminary results show
-
Next
World Cup 2026 unveils three mascots to represent three host nations
-
Bodies of Evidence: Sexual violence in Israeli prisons
-
Living in an ageing world
-
The Light Within | Ep 5 – El Salvador
‘Tired of conflict and war’
The loss of Nagorno-Karabakh could have spelled political doom for Pashinyan. By handing him a second term, Armenians have signalled that they are ready to put the conflict that has intermittently reared its head for decades behind them, analysts say.
“Nationalism no longer resonates among the public, which is demonstrably tired of conflict and war,” Richard Giragosian, director of the Yerevan-based Regional Studies Center, told Al Jazeera, even if the loss of the region remains an “open wound”, he said.
Nagorno-Karabakh, meanwhile, no longer features at all in the Armenian government’s defence reform, nor in its national security strategy, “a final confirmation of the new strategy of diversification”, Giragosian explained.
Peace efforts instead took centre stage in Pashinyan’s campaign, including the agreement he signed at the White House last August with Azerbaijan, finally ending the on-again-off-again war that had raged since the late 1980s.
Unlike in 2021, when Pashinyan’s campaign was shaped by the immediate aftermath of war and questions of political survival, Sunday’s vote became a clearer test of public support for his peace agenda, Shiriyev said.
Peace over nationalism
The result also demonstrates that the nationalist mantras peddled by opposition leaders have not been able to sway the majority of Armenians, said Svante Cornell, director of the Institute for Security and Development Policy and its Central Asia-Caucasus programme.
“The opposition represented a return to oligarchy, nationalism and forever conflict,” Cornell told Al Jazeera.
“While the Pashinyan government has its flaws, it represents something different than the past.”
The election saw the two main opposition forces – Strong Armenia and Armenia Alliance – win 41 seats combined in the new parliament, against the 64 seats the government holds, out of a total 105.
But Giragosian cautioned against overstating the opposition’s strength as, he said, the two opposition parties are unlikely to cooperate given the friction between their leaders – Russian-Armenian oligarch Samvel Karapetyan, whose Strong Armenia took 29 seats, and former President Robert Kocharian, whose Armenia Alliance won just 12.
“The division and dissent within the opposition will present a profound obstacle,” he said.
Although united in their shared pro-Russian leanings, Karapetyan is seen by Kocharian as an “interfering interloper”, with Kocharian himself resenting his third-place position behind Karapetyan, the analyst said.
“This is further exacerbated by Kocharian’s sense of entitlement, and his frustration of being rebuffed by Moscow in his prior attempts to gain direct Russian backing and support,” Giragosian added.
Still, Cornell said, the persistence of pro-Russian, nationalist sentiment in Armenia generally should not be taken lightly.
Until 2020, Armenia was governed by successive administrations that spent three decades pushing a nationalist identity, he said.
“To expect such views, such sentiments would just disappear – would be unrealistic,” Cornell noted.
Supporters of Armenia’s ruling Civil Contract party led by Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan gather in Republic Square in Yerevan, Armenia, Friday, June 5, 2026, for the party’s final campaign rally [Anthony Pizzoferrato/AP]
Russian influence weakened – but not gone
In the lead-up to Sunday’s election, international observers had accused Russia of attempting to interfere – but its inability to change the result reflects Moscow’s limited reach in the country today, analysts say.
“Moscow still has tools in Armenia, but it no longer has the authority it once had,” Shiriyev said.
“In today’s Armenia, being seen as Russia’s preferred candidate can mobilise voters against you as much as for you.”
As Armenia strives to resist what Shiriyev refers to as the “gravitational pull” of the “Russian orbit”, a window of opportunity has been created by Moscow’s preoccupation with its invasion of Ukraine and a new openness from Western partners.
“The larger risk is from not altering strategy, and the benefits of a pivot to the West are both demonstrable and popular in Armenia today,” Giragosian said.
Russia, he added, is now increasingly viewed in Armenia as a “dangerously undependable so-called partner”.
Benyamin Poghosyan, an Armenia analyst at the Italian Institute for International Political Studies, argues that the primary foreign policy drivers of the election, however, were regional actors – not Russia or the West.
“The reality on the ground is far more nuanced,” Poghosyan told Al Jazeera. Armenia’s future relations with Azerbaijan and Turkiye, as well as the regional fallout from the conflict in Iran, are far greater influences, he said.
There are good reasons not to count Moscow out completely, however. While pro-Russian forces did not prevail this time, they will continue to assert their influence, Cornell said. He referred to the cautionary tale of another Caucasus country.
“In Georgia, the work of undermining a reformist and pro-Western government and turning the country around to a more pro-Russian line took over 15 years,” he said.
At the same time, Moscow still holds massive economic leverage over Yerevan, said the analysts.
Russia remains the primary export destination for Armenian agriculture and wine, is the main source of critical imports like wheat, and supplies the country with heavily discounted gas, Poghosyan noted.
“Because Russia has the capacity to inflict severe economic pain, Yerevan must tread carefully to protect its core interests without completely rupturing its relationship with Moscow,” he said.
Shiriyev added that many Armenians work in Russia, with families depending on remittances, and business ties running deep.
“By contrast, Western integration can still feel abstract and uncertain to many voters. That is why pro-Russian forces can still gain traction, even as Russia’s political image in Armenia has weakened,” he said.
Why are Armenia’s elections being so keenly watched abroad? | Inside Story
A constitutional hurdle
But while Pashinyan’s re-election has strengthened his hand in the country’s peace process, it has not resolved one key sticking point for constitutional change to ensure it, said Shiriyev.
Azerbaijan has demanded a change to Yerevan’s constitution as a means of guaranteeing that no future Armenian government might revive claims related to Nagorno-Karabakh or Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity.
“But Pashinyan lacks the two-thirds majority needed to move easily toward a referendum, and even a referendum would be politically uncertain,” said Shiriyev.
This election, Cornell said, was “a necessary but not sufficient condition for the peace process to advance”.
Poghosyan warned that if Baku refuses to drop these preconditions, “the peace agreement will remain stalled, leaving both nations trapped in a volatile state of ‘no war, no peace’”.
On the question of regional normalisation, however, the outlook has shifted.
Since the bilateral peace treaty was signed at the White House last August, Azerbaijan has lifted restrictions on trade and transit with Armenia and restarted talks on border demarcation – moves that Giragosian said have also accelerated the opening for Armenia-Turkiye normalisation.
“For Armenia,” said Shiriyev, “the West may offer the road, Russia increasingly acts as the roadblock, and normalisation with Azerbaijan and Turkiye is the real prize.”
—
Armenia’s Pashinyan wins election, observers allege Russian interference
Add Yahoo on Google
(In June 8 story, corrects misattribution of quote in paragraphs 5-6)
By Lucy Papachristou
YEREVAN, June 8 (Reuters) – Armenia’s governing Civil Contract party won an election seen as a test of its handling of a peace deal with Azerbaijan and its growing turn to the West, despite what international election observers called blatant interference and pressure by Russia.
Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s party won 49.8% of votes with all polling stations counted from Sunday’s ballot, enough to secure a parliamentary majority under Armenia’s electoral system, the Central Election Commission (CEC) said on Monday.
The results, based on a strong turnout of nearly 59%, also showed a better-than-expected tally for the two main pro-Russian opposition groups, which won a combined 31% of votes and are set to enter parliament.
International election monitors said the run-up to voting was marked by efforts by traditional patron Russia to influence the outcome.
“Russia exercised unprecedented pressure, using public threats and trade measures, trying to substantially alter the results of the election,” said Nathalie Loiseau, a member of European Parliament and the head of the EP observer delegation.
“As members of the European Parliament, we strongly condemn this blatant interference in the domestic affairs of a sovereign state.”
Russia accused the West of interfering in the vote and joined Armenia’s opposition in alleging election violations.
“There is clearly broad demand within Armenian society for the steady development of Russian-Armenian ties,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said.
Sunday’s vote was Armenia’s first parliamentary election since a 2023 war in which Azerbaijan retook Nagorno-Karabakh, a breakaway territory that had an ethnic Armenian population.
Pashinyan’s victory will boost his efforts to diversify Armenia’s allies and trading partners away from Russia and more towards Western countries. Key to that effort is securing a peace deal with Azerbaijan and normalising relations with Azerbaijan’s ally Turkey.
PASHINYAN HAILS VICTORY, OPPOSITION CRIES FOUL
Pashinyan hailed a “historic victory” and pledged to continue building ties with both the West and Russia, while some opposition groups cried foul.
“The Armenian people voted for regional prosperity and cooperation and I hope this will draw a positive response from Turkey and Azerbaijan,” he said.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen congratulated Pashinyan and said Armenia could count on European support, saying on X: “We deeply value our partnership with a democratic Armenia that is drawing ever closer to Europe.”
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio also congratulated Pashinyan, saying in a social media post that the U.S. stands with him in pursuit of peace. “We look forward to working together to deliver peace, stability, and prosperity to the South Caucasus and beyond,” Rubio said.
Pashinyan has not secured the two-thirds majority in parliament needed to call a constitutional referendum demanded as part of a peace deal by Azerbaijan and to re-open the border and restart trade with Turkey.
Azerbaijan wants Armenia to amend its constitution to remove what it says is an implicit claim on Nagorno-Karabakh.
Zaur Shiriyev, a non-resident scholar at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center, said it was unclear whether Azerbaijan would want to move forward with the peace process if Armenia failed to call a referendum on amending its constitution.
“The (Armenian) government would then face a very difficult domestic situation,” Shiriyev said. “Cooperation with the opposition on such a sensitive issue is almost impossible.”
Opposition alliances Strong Armenia and Armenia Alliance won 23.2% and 9.9% of the vote respectively, the CEC said. A fourth party, Prosperous Armenia, failed to meet the 4% threshold to enter parliament.
Election observers from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe said voting went smoothly in most areas, but that prosecutions of opposition figures before the vote contributed to perceptions of selective justice.
Arrests before the election targeted the opposition, including parliamentary candidates for Strong Armenia. Party founder Samvel Karapetyan, who is under house arrest and campaigned on close ties with Moscow, said over 700 people associated with the group had been detained.
The Armenia Alliance, led by former pro-Russian president Robert Kocharyan, said Pashinyan’s early victory claim constituted “pressure on the CEC and usurpation of power,” Russian news agency Interfax reported.
(Reporting by Lucy Papachristou; Editing by Guy Faulconbridge, Kirsten Donovan and Timothy Heritage)
—
Armenia Votes to Shun Russia
The parliamentary elections in Armenia ended in the incumbent prime minister Nikol Pashinyan and his party Civil Contract’s victory. Winning nearly 50% of the vote on an increased turnout, the ruling party will hold 64 seats in the 105-member National Assembly.
This is enough to form a government, but it fell short of the seats needed to reshape the country’s constitution. This is important because Azerbaijan has repeatedly said that changing the constitution was a key condition for finalizing a comprehensive peace agreement with Armenia, in particular, the reference made to the conquered enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh. It also sends a clear message to the Kremlin, which sought to influence the result and failed. The government’s efforts at re-election had also received clear backing from the US.
Out of a total of 16 political parties and two electoral alliances that participated in the election, the race was dominated by three principal groups: Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s Civil Contract party, the Strong Armenia bloc headed by Russian-Armenian businessman Samvel Karapetyan, and former president Robert Kocharyan’s Armenia Alliance.
To be sure, Pashinyan is not a highly popular figure, but his success is reasonably easily explained. First, the opposition lacked a unifying national figure capable of appealing to a broad cross-section of society. The opposition figures were cast as representatives of old, corrupt, and largely pro-Russian parties. They also were accused of wanting to drag Armenia into a new confrontation with Azerbaijan — a scenario that would further weaken Yerevan, given the glaring difference in military capabilities between the two sides.
The elections attracted widespread interest beyond the country’s borders. Russia’s leaders pressured Armenia to make a clear decision on whether the country will choose the EU or remain within the Russian-run Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). It also barred some Armenian exports and threatened to block Armenians from working in Russia.
There were other efforts to sway the vote. A May open-source investigation documented one alleged plan. Beyond such covert work, prominent advocates gave the opposition a Western face. In 2025, Robert Amsterdam, the lawyer representing jailed Samvel Karapetyan, and previously retained by Vadym Novynskyi, the sanctioned oligarch who is regarded as a financier of the Moscow-aligned Ukrainian Orthodox Church, took Karapetyan’s case onto Tucker Carlson’s show, casting Pashinyan as an enemy of Christianity.
The “divorce” initially went smoothly, with Moscow rarely protesting openly or in strict terms. But as the elections neared, the prospects of a radical break emerged with Russian officials stating that Armenia is no longer considered a trusted ally and warning Moscow would take drastic measures to rein in its (official but wayward) South Caucasus ally.
In contrast, Western capitals signaled clear support for Pashinyan. In May, Yerevan hosted two major gatherings involving European leaders, and just before the elections, the US Secretary of State Marco Rubio paid a short visit to the Armenian capital to sign several agreements, including a strengthening of Washington’s engagement in the TRIPP road route from Azerbaijan to its exclave in Nakhchivan that runs through Armenia.
Thus, it was clear from the very beginning that the vote would function as a de facto referendum on Armenia’s geopolitical orientation: whether the country would continue deepening ties with the European Union and the United States, or it would be drawn back into Russia’s strategic orbit.
The electoral success gives Pashinyan sufficient political space to continue the strategic course he has pursued since 2023, and that Moscow fears will take Armenia further away from Russia. This is particularly true in foreign policy.
Since the loss of Nagorno-Karabakh in September 2023, Armenia has sought to diversify its external partnerships and reduce its near-total reliance on Russia. Over the past two years, Yerevan has expanded ties with a range of European and Asian states, seeking to build a network of strategic relationships that can partially compensate for Russia’s intermittent arms supplies and Armenia’s excessive economic dependence on Moscow.
Thus, Armenia’s drift from Russia is real, and for the West, Pashinyan’s victory is an opening to forge closer links, and perhaps even further widen the wedge between Yerevan and Moscow. For the latter, Pashinyan’s re-election is a geopolitical challenge because it forces the Kremlin to reassess its approach not only toward Armenia but toward the South Caucasus as a whole.
Though Russia still remains powerful, its ability to project influence in the region has notably declined since the Ukraine war began. As a result, Moscow now enjoys stable relations with none of the three South Caucasus countries.
This also coincides with the growing influence of other regional powers. Turkey has been pushing for a normalization of ties with Yerevan. The US is engaging each of the regional countries, while China and the wealthy Gulf Arab states are investing in transport and data links in Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia.
Yerevan, nevertheless, is unlikely to seek a complete break with Moscow. Russia retains considerable economic and security influence. Whether Russia will accept this is another matter — its dream of holding sway in what it likes to term the near-abroad is undiminished.
Emil Avdaliani is a research fellow at the Turan Research Center and a professor of international relations at the European University in Tbilisi, Georgia. His research focuses on the history of the Silk Roads and the interests of great powers in the Middle East and the Caucasus.
Europe’s Edge is CEPA’s online journal covering critical topics on the foreign policy docket across Europe and North America. All opinions expressed on Europe’s Edge are those of the author alone and may not represent those of the institutions they represent or the Center for European Policy Analysis. CEPA maintains a strict intellectual independence policy across all its projects and publications.
—