Yerevan threatens to leave Russia-led blocs in latest diplomatic row with Mosc

OC Media
April 6 2026

Armenia has threatened to leave Russian-led economic and security blocs in response to possible economic pressure from Russia. The two countries have been engaged in a contentious back-and-forth following a meeting between Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

During the meeting on 1 April, the sides discussed bilateral issues, as well as Armenia’s relations and ongoing projects with the EU and the US.

Although both Armenian and Russian officials assessed the talks positively, developments in the aftermath suggest cracks and deeper tensions in the bilateral relationship.

Even so, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated that ‘understanding was demonstrated’ by the Armenian side regarding the concerns expressed by Russia. Lavrov added that the development of relations remains to be seen.

Separately, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Aleksei Overchuk issued another warning, saying that if Armenia joins the EU, there would be no flights between Armenia and Russia, considering that ‘there is currently no air travel with EU countries’.

Overchuk had previously accused Armenia after the meeting of coming ‘very close to the point where we will have to restructure our economic relations with this country’.

Shortly after, Russia announced ‘stricter requirements’ on the import of Armenian products.

Russia applies ‘stricter requirements’ for Armenian goods following tense Pashinyan–Putin talks

Armenia threatens to withdraw from the EAEU and CSTO

In response to comments suggesting that the Russia had given Armenia ultimatums during the Pashinyan–Putin meeting, Yerevan has suggested it could leave the Russian-led security and economic blocs, the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) and the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CTSO), if economic pressure from Russia continue.

Asked about the threats last Saturday, Armenian Parliamentary Speaker Alen Simonyan noted that such conversations ‘have been going on for years’.

‘If they make such a decision, Armenia will also make its own decision and will withdraw once and for all from the CSTO, and the EAEU, and from the remaining structures as well’, Simonyan said. He further assessed this as unlikely, noting that following the tense public statements, Pashinyan and Putin had ‘a very good’ and ‘very effective’ conversation.

During the talks, Putin underscored the impossibility of being in a customs union with the EU and the EAEU. He additionally addressed gas prices, highlighting the significant discount Armenia receives from buying Russian energy.

‘The price of gas in Europe exceeds $600 per 1000 cubic meters, and Russia sells gas to Armenia for $177.5 per 1000 cubic metres’, Putin said.

Similarly to Simonyan, Armenian Economy Minister Gevorg Papoyan expressed confidence that gas prices would not change, because ‘Armenia is needed by its partners so that it remains both in the CSTO and in the EAEU’.

‘If Armenia is not supposed to receive those benefits, then why should it remain in that union? A process of joining another union will begin, and it will happen in a more accelerated manner’, Papoyan said.

He also questioned the benefits the CSTO provided to Armenia, at the same time highlighting Armenia’s value as a member, serving as a passage for goods to the bloc.

Following Armenian official statements, on Monday, Belarusian President Aliaksandr Lukashenka suggested that CSTO Secretary General Taalatbek Masadykov visit Armenia to speak with Pashinyan and ‘learn their position on the future’ regarding Armenia’s membership.

Armenia had ‘frozen’ its membership in the CSTO in February 2024, citing its refusal to aid Armenia in the face of Azerbaijani attacks in 2021 and 2022.

However, Armenian officials, including Pashinyan, appear to be more inclined towards leaving the CSTO, rather than ‘unfreezing’ Armenia’s membership. In an interview with RFE/RL last Friday, Armenian Deputy Foreign Minister Vahan Kostanyan stated that Armenia was ‘practically out of the CSTO’.

‘I do not see any possibility that Armenia will return, and the remaining steps should be taken when necessary and at the appropriate time’, Kostanyan said.

Armenia appears to reject Russia’s aid to tackle hybrid threats

In the same interview, Kostanyan also responded to Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova, who recently expressed Moscow’s readiness to assist Armenia in tackling hybrid attacks, citing its resources and capabilities.

‘Russia has other resources too, the same “Matroshka” and “Storm” networks. We would be happy to receive information from them, for example, how these Telegram bots connected to them work’, Kostanyan said.

The two bot networks, affiliated with Russia, were launched in 2023. Records indicate they have been active in Armenia, Moldova, France, Germany, and other countries.

Kostanyan further accused Russia of often being more interested in the continuation of the Armenia–Azerbaijan conflict rather than finding a resolution to it.

‘It has shown over the years that it is often more interested in the existence of conflict than in the presence of peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan’, Kostanyan said.

Zakharova’s statement followed remarks by Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan in March.

Responding to a question about the possibility of requesting similar support from Russia to tackle hybrid attacks, as they did from the EU, Mirzoyan noted: ‘If Russia has its own experience in combating hybrid attacks and is ready to share it, we are not against it. Let them share it, and we will see what kind of experience it is’.

Mirzoyan says hybrid attacks against Armenia can be partly ‘traced’ to Russia

The Nagorno-Karabakh question and CSTO mechanisms

On Monday, the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry responded to Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov’s recent comments where he said ‘the question of Karabakh’s ownership is in no way related to Russia; that decision rests with the Armenian authorities’. Peskov had made the remark following Putin’s meeting with Pashinyan.

Baku noted that ‘no country, including Russia, […] has ever questioned the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Azerbaijan, including the Karabakh region’. It also urged that ‘issues related to Azerbaijan’s sovereignty will not become a subject of public clarification at a time when Russian–Armenian relations are complex’.

Addressing Armenia’s frozen status in CSTO, Putin repeated previously debunked claims in the meeting, insisting that following Pashinyan’s government’s recognition of Nagorno-Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan in Prague in October 2022, ‘the CSTO’s intervention in this process […] was simply absolutely wrong in this matter’.

Armenia had only appealed for CSTO assistance following the Azerbaijani attack on Armenia in September 2022. In his response during the meeting with Putin, Pashinyan insisted that in 2022, ‘CSTO mechanisms should have been activated, but they were not activated, and this, of course, led to the situation that we have in relations with the CSTO’.

He also said that before Armenia’s recognition of Nagorno-Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan, ‘the top leadership of Russia […] twice publicly announced this’.

Lukashenko: “The situation in Armenia is complicated”

MediaMax, Armenia
April 6 2026

Yerevan /Mediamax/. Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko stated today that the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) “needs to be very careful and correct while dealing with Armenia.”

According to BELTA, at a meeting with CSTO Secretary General Taalatbek Masadykov, Alexander Lukashenko noted:

 

“You know, Armenia doesn’t seem to support the CSTO, but at the same time, it remains a member. We need to be very careful. Armenia is in a complicated situation in this regard, especially during the election period. Therefore, we need to be very careful and cautious in our relations with Armenia.”

 

“If you had visited Armenia and held discussions with the prime minister, the president, and the secretary of the Security Council to understand their position on the future, it would have been nice,” the president of Belarus said, addressing Taalatbek Masadykov.

Lukashenko urges CSTO to be more careful with Armenia

EurasiaDaily
April 6 2026
Lukashenko urges CSTO to be more careful with Armenia

The Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) needs to be very careful in working with Armenia. This was announced today, April 6, by President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko at a meeting with CSTO Secretary General Taalatbek Masadykov.

Lukashenko recalled that along with certain achievements in the CSTO, there are also problematic issues, which he has repeatedly openly talked about, including at international meetings and events. The Belarusian leader called the relationship with Armenia one of such issues requiring special attention.

“We need to be more correct and careful in our work with Armenia. You know that Armenia does not seem to support work in the CSTO, but at the same time remains in Organizations. You have to be very correct. The situation in Armenia is difficult in this regard, especially during the electoral period (parliamentary elections are scheduled in the summer – EADaily). A very difficult situation. Therefore, we need to be very careful and careful in our relations with Armenia,” he said.

In this regard, Lukashenko considers it important to organize meetings at the level of the CSTO Secretary General and the leadership of Armenia.

“Especially now, in this acute electoral period, when the Armenian leadership will speak honestly and frankly about the situation, including on the CSTO track… If you would visit there and talk with the Prime Minister, the president, the Secretary of the Armenian Security Council, find out their position for the future, it would be nice,” the Belarusian leader said.

Recall that Belarus and Armenia is a member of the CSTO. However, they are due to the close ties between Minsk and Baku- Yerevan has almost completely frozen political contacts with the Belarusian authorities.

Read more: class=”gmail_default” st1yle=”font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small”>

Armenian PM’s Moscow pushback plays to a domestic audience pre-election

Intellinews
April 6 2026
By Clare Nuttall in Glasgow April 6, 2026

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.


Armenia And Former Soviet Republics To Choose Between European Union And EAEU/

Eurasia Review
April 6 2026

By Kester Kenn Klomegah

Armenia, a former Soviet republic, and Russia were members of the Soviet Union, and were strictly guided by rules and regulations. After the collapse of the Soviet empire in 1991, the republics have legitimacy to their severeignty and territorial integrity. But that has not been the case. Kazakhstan operates a liberal economic system, so are other republics including Armenia. These republics, mostly have a tough time and, to some extent, control from Russia.

At a tense meeting in early April with Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, Vladimir Putin issued an ultimatum to its neighbour Armenia over maintaining closer ties with European Union (EU). 

“We see that there is a discussion in Armenia about developing relations with the European Union,” Putin said at the meeting with Pashinyan, adding that Moscow treats it “absolutely calmly”. But it should be obvious and honestly stated upfront that membership in a customs union with both the EU and the Eurasian Economic Union is impossible,” Putin told Pashinyan as recorded on camera.

The Russia-led Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) created in 2015 includes Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, and it is meant to enable the free movement of goods, capital and labour among its members. Azerbaijan, Armenia, and others have an increasing interest to get closer with trade and establish a working mutual economic cooperation with the EU, with Pashinyan even declaring an intention to join the 27-member bloc in the future.

During the meeting at the Kremlin, Putin followed up on Moscow’s gas supplies to Armenia, saying that Russia now sells gas to its neighbour at a “substantially” lower price than the EU does. “Gas prices in Europe exceed 600 dollars per 1,000 cubic metres, whereas Russia provides gas to Armenia at 177.5 per 1,000 cubic metres,” he told Pashinyan, adding that “the disparity is vast, the difference is substantial.”

The Case of Kazakhstan

Kazakhstan, one of the Russian neighbours and former Soviet republics, also opens its doors for a broader external expansion. Given its geographical location and combined with current political reforms aim at transforming the its economic from the Soviet system to a more modernized system infused with western culture of life, President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev has chosen multi-vector policies, consistently advocating for more openness and improving necessary conditions for attracting foreign business and investors to participate in the various economics sectors and including the cultural and educational sectors.

Declaring that the creation of a fair Kazakhstan as its main goal, Tokayev has emphasized that the foreign policy course must also aim at protection of national interests, strengthening of mutually beneficial cooperation with all interested states, international peace and security. As part of promoting multi-culture and friendly society, Kazakhstan has seriously made in-bound tourism as one of its priority spheres, so it has established a visa-free regime for citizens of 54 countries, including the European Union and OECD member states, the United States, Japan, Mexico, Australia and New Zealand.

Kazakhstan has a GDP of $179.332 billion and an annual growth rate of 4.5%. Per capita, Kazakhstan’s GDP stands at $9,686. It’s increased role in global trade and central positioning on the new Silk Road gave the country the potential to open its markets to billions of people. Further to this, it joined the World Trade Organization in 2015.

According to some reports, Kazakhstan has an abundant supply of accessible mineral and fossil fuel resources. Development of petroleum, natural gas, and mineral extractions has attracted most of the over $40 billion in foreign investment in Kazakhstan since 1993 and accounts for some 57% of the nation’s industrial output (or approximately 13% of gross domestic product).

 The Concept of the Foreign Policy of Kazakhstan for 2020–2030, as announced and was made public, the document outlines the following main points: 

– An open, predictable and consistent foreign policy of the country, which is progressive in nature and maintains its endurance by continuing the course of the First President – the country at a new stage of development;

 – Protection of human rights, development of humanitarian diplomacy and environmental protection;

 – Promotion of the country’s economic interests in the international arena, including the implementation of state policy to attract investment;

 – Maintaining international peace and security;

 – Development of regional and multilateral diplomacy, which primarily involves strengthening mutually beneficial ties with key partners, for example: Russia, China, the United States, Central Asian states and the EU countries, as well as through multilateral structures – the United Nations, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Commonwealth of Independent States.

Kazakhstan is the world’s largest landlocked country, located in Central Asia and partly in Eastern Europe. It declared independence on 16 December 1991, thus becoming the last Soviet republic to declare political independence. Nursultan Nazarbayev became the country’s first President. Kazakhstan was the last Soviet republic to declare independence after Soviet’s collapse in 1991. With population approximately 25 million, Kazakhstan strictly recognizes its political freedom, national interest and territorial sovereignty.

Comparing EU with EAEU

The European Union (EU) and the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU/Eurasia Union) are distinct regional blocs with major differences in scope, purpose, and scale. The EU is a deeply integrated economic and political union of 27 democratic, mostly Western European nations, while the EAEU is a Russia-led economic union focusing on trade among post-Soviet states, featuring smaller GDP and less political integration. 

Here are Key Differences:

Membership & Leadership: The EU includes 27 mostly Western/Central European countries (e.g., Germany, France). The EAEU consists of Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Russia.

Economic Scale: The EU’s economy is significantly larger—roughly four times larger in GDP than the EAEU (approx. $19.4 trillion vs. $4.8 trillion in 2024).

Integration Level: The EU is both a monetary (for most) and political union with strong democratic institutions, shared policies, and a common market. The EAEU is primarily an economic union focused on free movement of goods, labor, and capital, but it lacks the deep political integration of the EU.

Geopolitics & Values: The EU is built on shared democratic values and legal frameworks (EU law). The EAEU is often seen as a political tool for Russia to retain influence over post-Soviet states.

Conflicts & Stability: EAEU members are closely tied to Russia, which has created tensions in the post-Soviet space, especially following the war in Ukraine. The EU has increasingly become a preferred partnership for Eastern European nations over the EAEU. 

According to the Kutafin Law Review, in essence, the EU is a deep political and economic integration project, whereas the EAEU is a smaller, trade-focused, post-Soviet initiative.

Exchanging Thoughts Over Political Sovereignty

The Armenian leader made it clear that when the time comes to make a choice, it will be solemnly made by the citizens of Armenia, without any interference. “And when the processes reach the point where it will be necessary to make a decision, I am sure that we, I mean the citizens of the Republic of Armenia, will make that decision,” Pashinyan told Putin, not mincing words.

With its long-standing influence in the South Caucasus fading and what appears to be the Kremlin’s ongoing intent to have a say in Armenia’s political decision-making, Putin told Pashiyan that Moscow hopes pro-Russian forces will be allowed to compete freely in Armenia’s parliamentary elections set for June.

Without mentioning names, Russia’s president claimed that some of their representatives have been put in custody, saying, “Some are in detention despite having Russian passports.” Putin, however, referred to Russian-Armenian billionaire Samvel Karapetyan, who was arrested last year after calling for the ouster of the government.

Pashinyan, also without naming Karapetyan, noted that Armenian law requires political candidates to hold exclusively Armenian citizenship, adding that “no restrictions” are being imposed on political opposition under such circumstances. “Persons with Russian passports, according to the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia, cannot be either a candidate for deputy or a candidate for prime minister,” Pashinyan explained to Putin.

Pashinyan firmly stated to Putin that “Armenia is a democratic country”, where the political processes are ongoing at all times. “In fact, twice a year we hold municipal elections, which are also very politicised, because as a result of our political reforms, people there also vote for or against political parties,” Pashinyan said.

The Armenian prime minister, then, referred to the internet outrage in Moscow and the Kremlin-introduced restrictions on the popular Telegram messaging app. “Our social networks, for example, are 100% free, with no restrictions at all,” Pashinyan told Putin on camera, and added that, unlike Russia, there are no political prisoners in Armenia, stating that “in the general context, to be honest, we do not have participants in political processes in places of detention.”

“We have citizens who think that there is too much democracy in Armenia. But this is a matter of principle for us,” Pashinyan said.

Yerevan’s Balancing Act

Armenia’s relations with Russia have grown increasingly strained after Azerbaijan fully reclaimed the Karabakh region in 2023. Decades of bloody conflict ended as the two former bitter rivals embarked on a historic peace process, launching an economic revival in the region amid new stability in the South Caucasus. In 2024, Armenia suspended its membership in the Russia-led Yerevan Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO) after Moscow failed to support Yerevan during the 2022 Karabakh escalation.

“In my opinion, the CSTO mechanisms should have been activated (in 2022),” Pashinyan told Putin, adding that “they were not activated, and this, of course, led to the situation that we have in relations with the CSTO.” He confirmed that Armenia is currently not participating in the CSTO for what he described as a “simple reason”.

“We are still unable to explain to our people, our citizens, why the CSTO did not respond, and did not respond despite the obligations that exist under the Collective Security Treaty,” the Armenian leader told Putin.

Putin called Armenian concerns “certain grievances” as he argued that Moscow’s decision not to intervene was on Yerevan and Russia did not see a point in stepping in. “It is obvious that after you accepted in Prague in 2022 that Karabakh is part of Azerbaijan, the CSTO’s intervention in this process, which has acquired an intra-Azerbaijani nature, was simply absolutely wrong in this matter,” Putin told Pashinyan.

“This is not an assessment, I am not saying that this is good or bad, from the point of view of organising peaceful life, I think that, probably, it made sense,” the Russian president added. “Here we simply need to look for ways to further strengthen relations. But it seems to me that here too we need to finish here,” Putin concluded.

Since reaching an agreement to put an end to almost four decades of a bloody conflict in Karabakh, Armenia and Azerbaijan have been working on normalising and strengthening their bilateral relations, as well as the cooperation in the region, with one exception. Russia has been notably absent from the Karabakh peace process, both during and after the agreement was reached, and both Yerevan and Baku have been distancing themselves from Moscow while jointly redirecting their foreign policy focus toward the EU and the US.

Tracking the Argumentative Sequence

In this analysis, tracking the argumentative sequence, with notable precision, the difference between European Union and Eurasian Union, sometime referred to as ‘Greater Earasian Union’ are noted.

In whichever either case, Armenia is a sovereign republic, has its own right to determine the political system of governance, the parameters of economic development, and shape its own diplomacy directions with external partners without any restrain or restrictions. Armenia operates within the constitutional framework, and the Prime Minister, Nikol Pashinyan, has the mandate from the electorate of Armenia. The choice of political sovereignty and foreign relations are stipulated in the constitution. 

Russia’s political regulatory architecture, the system of restraints and mechanisms of instructing directives, are optional but not necessarily compulsory. The logic that any former Soviet republic must only maintain membership with Eurasia Union, and not at the same time to both is rather illogical, particularly when Russia is a staunch advocate of ‘multipolarism’ which ascribed to flexible and broad practice, openness, to global integration. An argument for making choices based on restrictions does not, precisely, fit into the context of global unity, new liberal architecture, and emerging multipolarism.

Opinion: ‘Russia ‘blackmails’ Armenia with threat of gas price hikes’

JAM News
April 6 2026
  • JAMnews
  • Yerevan

Statements by Russian President Vladimir Putin during a recent meeting with Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan have been interpreted by Armenia’s expert community as a threat.

Putin said Moscow remains calm about Armenia’s desire to develop ties with the EU.
He also said Yerevan cannot expect to be a member of the European Union. It also cannot remain in the Russia-led Eurasian Economic Union. He also stated that Yerevan cannot expect to be a member of both the European Union and the Russia-led Eurasian Economic Union. He stressed that Armenia’s economy is growing steadily. He added that exports to EAEU countries have increased tenfold in recent years.

Putin also addressed energy issues. He warned that gas prices in Europe exceed $600 per 1,000 cubic metres. He added that Russia sells gas to Armenia for $177.5. He said this difference is significant.

“It is your decision in the end — the decision of your team and your experts — where, with whom, and on what basis to work,” Putin said.

The day after the meeting, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexei Overchuk also spoke on the issue. He said Armenian counterparts had “come close to a point after which we will have to structure our economic relations with this country differently”.

Armenian authorities say gas prices will not change. They argue that otherwise Armenia’s participation in the EAEU would lose its meaning.

They also do not rule out that, if gas prices change, Yerevan could leave Moscow-led structures. This includes both the Eurasian Economic Union and the CSTO military alliance.

At the same time, Armenian analysts say Russia would face losses if it took drastic steps against Armenia. They add that Yerevan could turn to alternative options, such as importing gas from Kazakhstan.

Reactions from Armenian authorities, as well as expert commentary, follow.


  • ‘Armenia’s security guarantor led us to slaughter’ — Nikol Pashinyan
  • ‘Russia trying to send tens of thousands of voters to Armenia’s elections’: debate in Yerevan
  • Opinion: Armenia would benefit from returning its railways to state control
  • Awaiting end of war in Ukraine: Russia’s intentions in South Caucasus

‘If gas prices change, Armenia will leave the EAEU and CSTO

Armenian journalists asked representatives of the ruling party whether Moscow had adopted an ultimatum-style tone towards Yerevan.

In response, National Assembly Speaker Alen Simonyan said Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan spoke with Putin “from the position of an independent, sovereign state”. He added that discussions about prices for Russian goods and gas are not new and have continued for many years.

Simonyan said that if a decision is made to change prices, Armenia will decide to leave Russia-led integration blocs — the CSTO and the EAEU.

However, he does not believe the situation will reach that point. He also said that after their public statements, the two leaders held a “very good” conversation:

“We discussed this, and I will repeat: we have done nothing against Russia, we are doing nothing, and we are not going to do anything. At the same time, we have defended and will continue to defend Armenia’s interests.”

Economy Minister Gevorg Papoyan expressed confidence that gas prices will not change, as partners need Armenia to remain within Russian-led structures:

“Partners need Armenia to remain both in the CSTO and in the EAEU. And if Armenia is not meant to benefit, then why should it stay in this union? [In response] a process will begin in another union — and it will accelerate.”

Political analyst Ruben Meghrabyan said:

“The conversation between Pashinyan and Putin showed that Russia views gas as one of its levers of pressure on Armenia. We remember how Serzh Sargsyan was ‘brought in’, and as a result Armenia became a victim of trafficking into the so-called EAEU bloc — a structure we still cannot free ourselves from. Gas was one of the reasons back then as well.

This refers to 3 September 2013, when Armenia’s president Serzh Sargsyan announced in Moscow that the country would join the Russia-led Eurasian Customs Union. The decision came as a shock. Before that, Armenia had been negotiating an Association Agreement with the EU. Armenian analysts openly said at the time that Russia forced Sargsyan to commit to joining the Customs Union, which later evolved into the EAEU.

Armenia must resist this. The idea of transporting Kazakh gas to Armenia and Europe via Azerbaijan is quite promising.

This would make gas even cheaper for Armenia, since consumption in the country is not that high.

Armenia’s energy system does not depend heavily on gas. Gas is mainly used for fuelling cars, heating homes and cooking.

And now Putin has decided to blackmail us with gas, comparing it to the current price of 600 euros in Europe, amid a sharp market surge.

What should Armenia do? It must resist all of this. There should be no retreat in connection with this new Russian package of measures from 3 September [referring to the events of 3 September 2013], which Russia is now promoting.”

Civil society representative Daniel Ioannisyan said:

“Some groups in Armenia try to create the impression that Armenia lives off Russia like a parasite, and that if we fail to please the Kremlin, everything will collapse. That is not true. It is a false narrative promoted on Moscow’s instructions.

The reality is that if Russia blocks imports of Armenian goods or raises gas prices for us, Russia will also suffer.

If Russia takes such drastic steps, we could, first, leave the CSTO military alliance and remove the Russian military base from Gyumri. That would deal a major reputational blow to Russia. The whole world would see how much the former superpower has weakened.

We could also leave the EAEU. This would close a channel for importing certain Western goods through Armenia that are important for Russia’s economy.

It is important to note that customs duties paid to Armenia for goods imported through the country do not remain here.We transfer about 98.7% of them to other EAEU member states. Yes, they would lose that money as well.

In addition, the Russian economy and consumers would lose access to affordable food products from Armenia, which would further worsen rising prices in Russia. Not to mention ‘smaller’ steps such as shutting down Russian TV channels or nationalising railways.

If Russia significantly raises gas prices for us, we can buy gas from other countries. Russia would lose revenue from gas sales, just as it has already lost major income from gas exports to Europe.

I am not saying these scenarios are favourable or beneficial for us. But they are not beneficial for Russia either — and they are not masochists.”

Armenpress: Bulagaria Fuel Prices Up by Between 18.7% and 37% During First Fiv

World18:36, 5 April 2026

The price of diesel at gas stations in Bulgaria has increased by 37% since the beginning of the conflict in the Middle East, while the price of petrol has risen by 18.7%, according to data published on Sunday on the National Revenue Agency’s website.

The average price of diesel in the country reached EUR 1.74 as of Saturday, April 4, representing a 37% increase compared to February 28, when the United States and Israel launched strikes against Iran.

During the same five-week period, the average retail price of A95 petrol increased by 18.7% to EUR 1.46 per liter, according to NRA data.

The NRA publishes daily updates on its website with current average retail fuel prices, as well as monthly statistical data on the changes in diesel and A95 gasoline prices. To calculate the average prices, information is used from fiscal receipts issued at fuel sales, which the NRA receives from traders.

On February 28, the average price of A95 petrol in Bulgaria was EUR 1.23 per liter, and diesel fuel was EUR 1.27 per liter.

Following the start of the US-Israeli offensive against Iran at the end of February and the subsequent Iranian retaliatory strikes against countries in the region, crude oil prices surged sharply, leading to an increase in fuel prices worldwide. Many countries implemented measures to counter rising energy costs.

In Bulgaria, the caretaker government of Prime Minister Andrey Gurov approved a compensation scheme, under which end consumers of A95 petrol and diesel can receive a monthly compensation of EUR 20 if, over three consecutive days, the price per liter of A95 or diesel reaches or exceeds EUR 1.60. The average diesel price reached EUR 1.60 per liter for three consecutive days on March 24, triggering the measure.

The compensation is available to all individuals who, in 2025, received an average monthly income of EUR 652.41 or less, which is twice the poverty line for that period, or an average monthly gross income for 2024 of EUR 537.88 or less, also twice the poverty line for 2024.

Labor Minister Hasan Ademov said on Sunday that around 50,900 applications have been submitted for the additional EUR 20 compensation for the rise in fuel prices. Additional applications are expected through the Ministry of e-Government, which means the total number of submitted applications will likely exceed 60,000, Ademov added.

(This information is published according to an agreement between Armenpress and BTA).

Published by Armenpress, original at 

168: Depreciation of money and increase in the price of loans. why is the government a card to the banks?

April 5, 2026

The authorities gave freedom to the banks, and the banks enjoy that freedom. By setting widespread high prices for intermediary services, they have been emptying the pockets of citizens and businesses for years. Nikol Pashinyan and members of the Communist Party, who once thought that banks were engaged in robbery, have turned the banking system into a scourge for citizens and businesses. Despite widespread complaints, nothing is being done to curb the banks’ appetite.

After massive complaints, recently, of course, the Central Bank decided to slightly reduce the commissions charged for cashless transactions with bank cards for small businesses. But they did it not because they are worried about small business and decided to curb the appetite of banks, but because the interests of the government demand it before the elections. Although it seems that the banks have also found an option to get out of that situation dry. They decided to replace those “losses” by increasing the price of other services.

The appetite of banks is great, especially in the credit market. There is no way they want to reduce the interest on loans, despite the fact that money has become cheaper in the last few years. We are talking about the money leaving the Central Bank.

Three years ago, the price of money coming out of the Central Bank was 10.75 percent, today it is only 6.50 percent. It decreased by 4.25 percentage points.

Read also

  • From seizure of power to seizure of business. how does the government “interfere” in the economy?
  • What should a citizen do now: eat green onions or mixed greens?
  • Serzh Sargsyan supported Onik Gasparyan’s proposal to stop the war and accused Pashinyan of violating the negotiation agreement

This is a serious devaluation of money, which implies that the banks should also reduce the interest rates on loans provided by them to citizens and businesses. But the banks, enjoying the patronage and assistance of the government, continue to keep the price of loans high. Not only do they not reduce the loan interest, but they also increase it.

Three years ago, the average interest rate of dram loans with a term of up to 1 year in the banking system was 11.76 percent. At that time, the price of money or refinancing rate was extremely high, it was at the peak of the last years, it was 10.75 percent. And in the conditions of that peak, the loan interest rate was incomparably lower than now.

One year later, in 2024. in January, the price of money was 9.25 percent, and the average interest rate on short-term dram loans increased from 11.76 to 12.76 percent.

They increased the price by 1 percentage point, although the price of money decreased by 1.5 percentage points during that time.

Next: 2025 in January, the price of money coming out of the Central Bank fell sharply, making 7 percent, while interest rates on dram loans with a term of up to 1 year continued to rise, reaching 13 percent.

At the beginning of this year, banks increased the price of such loans again.

Now the price of money coming out of the Central Bank is 6.50 percent, and the average interest rate of short-term dram loans has reached a record 13.41 percent.

Over the course of three years, money became cheaper by 4.25 percentage points, and dram loans with a term of up to 1 year, instead of becoming cheaper, became more expensive by 1.65 percentage points. In the case of this type of loans, the bank margin is already incredibly high. As a result of this, banks get big profits, and these profits are primarily at the expense of citizens, taking into account the fact that short-term dram loans are primarily consumer loans, which citizens are often forced to use to solve their household problems.

Just 3 years ago, in the case of short-term dram loans, the bank margin was only 1 percentage point, now it is almost 7 times larger. The price of these loans is more than double the refinancing rate. This means that when the bank borrows money from the Central Bank at 6.50%, it raises that percentage at least twice and gives it to the citizens.

With such means, money is made at the expense of the citizens, and the authorities follow all this indifferently. Moreover, they do everything so that the banks do not reduce the interest rates on loans. What is needed for that? You just need to subsidize loan interest and keep demand artificially high.

Now they have decided to provide interest-free loans to the villagers on the eve of the elections. Interest-free to the extent that the state budget should cover those interests instead of the peasants. Banks will benefit from this. The victim, naturally, is the state budget. But who pays attention to this? The state’s money has no owner, and the government can afford such extravagances for political purposes. They take the money out of the budget and put it in the banks’ pockets.

According to the latest data, the loans of the banking system approach 21 billion dollars, of which the largest portfolio is short-term dram loans. Such loans, which are primarily of consumer importance, approach 5 billion dollars. They are not only expensive loans, but also, as we see, they are getting more and more expensive. The government is not doing anything to curb the appetite of the banks.

Even the steps of the Central Bank to lower the price of money, which at first glance tend to “force” banks to reduce loan interest rates, are not yielding results. But with the same logic that limited the price of trade mediation for small businesses, they do not intend to limit credit interest. Banks, for obvious reasons, do not tend to limit their own appetite.

And it turned out that as much as possible, they oppress people with expensive loans, they advance the interests of banks. Market pricing and demand have become an excuse to keep the price of loans artificially high.

 HAKOB KOCHARYAN




168: Zori Balayan died

April 5, 2026

Writer, public speaker, public and political figure, doctor, active participant of the Karabakh movement, People’s Deputy of the USSR Zori Balayan died. This was reported by his son, Hayk Balayan.

He was 91 years old.

For what price and purpose were people sold in the slave market of the 17th century Caucasus?

April 5, 2026

The 17th century was a period in human history when geographical discoveries, the expansion of trade routes, and the formation of colonial orders fundamentally changed human thinking.

One of the most painful points of those changes was the large-scale development of slavery, which had profound consequences not only economically, but also socially and culturally. Slavery, though existing since ancient times, has become international in this century. People were captured, forcibly displaced and sold or exploited.

 

Thousands of people were deprived of their freedom, family and identity, subjected to inhumane conditions and hard labor. Slavery also became one of the pillars of the economic system of that period.

Read also

  • COME TO YOUR WISE, YOU WILL BE LOST, TRUMP CARES ABOUT ARMENIA, DON’T GET INVOLVED IN THE USA’S GAMES. JEFFREY SACKS
  • A great war is brewing. Russia spoke at Putin’s level. Hrant Melik-Shahnazaryan
  • Moscow’s patience is running out. Suslov, about the results of Pashinyan’s visit to Moscow

In the 17th century, the Armenian historian Leo wrote in detail about the enslavement of people, exploitation of slaves and slave markets, who gives a general overview of the situation in that period, especially in our region. He describes where, in particular, the captives were sold and where they were captured.

“The source of slavery was the slave trade, which took place in specially famous markets. Derbend slave market was very famous in the borders of the Caucasus. There were gathered the captives who were brought from Dagestan and other countries, even from Russia, by the hands of rapacious mountaineers.

Here, in this market, which gained international importance, merchants met each other from all sides, and especially from Persia, which especially needed slaves from the Caucasian countries. Deprived of freedom and reduced to the status of animals, people were not as important for economic affairs, working hands, as they were needed for sexual, procreative purposes.” (Leo, “Collection of Countries”, Volume 3, Yerevan, 1969, p. 70).

Jean Chardin, a well-known French traveler of the period, also wrote in detail about the enslavement of people in that period, who passed through the Black Sea while traveling and tells in detail how people were sold for what price, who bought them and for what purpose. Leo recounts Chardin’s story in detail.

“Chardin traveled on the Black Sea in a ship that collected slaves from the shores. The buyers were Turkish and Christian merchants. They bought and instead gave various products, valuing them much higher than their true value. Here are the values ​​of the human product reported by the French traveler. A man aged 25-40 was bought for 15 AMD. above that height – 8-10 ECU.

Beautiful girls aged 13-18 were valued the most, for which a price of 20 ecus was given. Women cost 12 and children 3-4 ecus. “A Greek merchant, who was in the room next to mine, bought a woman, her nipples with a child, giving 12 ecus…

The woman would be 25 years old, with a face as white as snow, with charming features. I have never seen a more beautiful breast, a more tender neck. It surprised me that the plight of these unfortunate creatures did not have a killing effect on them. It even seemed to me that they did not feel their situation. As soon as they bought them and they escaped, they immediately took off the shawls covering them, put on new linen, new clothes and forced them to work.

Men and boys were put to work on the ship, and women and girls were ordered to sew. It seemed that they had enough of both the clothes and the food they received, but the work was hard for them, so they were often forced to work with sticks.” (Ibid., p. 71).

The above passage states that the basis of enslaving, selling, and exploiting people was the bad social conditions and period. In the 17th century, slavery was not only the result of economic interests, but also a gross violation of human dignity. Man had turned into a commodity whose value was measured by age, appearance and physical abilities.

Such phenomena left a deep mark not only in the destinies of individuals, but also in the history of different peoples. As a result, social inequality, violence and moral crisis were formed.

These historical facts about slavery compel us to realize what freedom is and always fight for it. And in modern times, the struggle for one’s identity and freedom is only with weapons and the preservation of national identity.

Z. Sh:i was late