With a week left until what is considered to be an all-important parliamentary election in Armenia, the market consensus appears well-formed. It posits, first, that the vote might have wide-ranging economic and geopolitical implications for the country. More importantly, it anticipates that, in the case of the incumbent Civil Contract (and Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan) carrying the day, there will be a positive market reaction given expectations for a continuation of the current drift away from Moscow and towards the EU. 

Armenian assets have been benefiting for some time now from this geopolitics-centred view, with tightening spreads, an appreciating currency and increasing non-resident participation in the local government bond market. Alternatively, an opposition win is generally viewed with apprehension as this is associated with heightened uncertainty about the future path of political economy development, up to the possibility of a resumption of hostilities with neighbouring Azerbaijan. 

It is fair to say that the outcome of this election is much harder to predict relative to the 2018 and 2021 ballots.  Even within the ruling Civil Contract party there is an acknowledgement that the street mood is no longer what it was during the 2018 street protests that brought Pashinyan to power. Citizens now approach the prime minister with demands, complaints and difficult questions rather than the pure admiration that he was basking in before. The simulations that I have done based on the existing polls suggest that Civil Contract would be expected to win slightly more than half of the total 101 parliamentary seats — a clear majority, yet a far cry from its dominance in 2021 when it won 71 seats. However, this is by far not guaranteed. The wild card in the elections are the undecided voters, and there are many of them — roughly 35-40% of the electorate. In theory, undecided voters could swing the election. In practice, as my calculations have also shown, the bar for doing so might be quite high. In any case, this is not impossible, so that a vote count that brings Pashinyan down should definitely not be viewed as anything close to a surprise.

Opposition win would not be an economic, political or geopolitical disaster

The question then is to what extent market fears about an opposition win are justified. In my opinion, and in contrast to the consensus interpretation, even an opposition win may not be that market-disruptive. The alternative, as unlikely as it might appear at this stage, may actually offer an upside given current positioning. The core argument rests on the assumption that Armenia’s course is pretty clear for anyone who follows the geopolitics of the region. The country is now facing a fait accompli in the necessity of fully normalising its relations with Turkey and Azerbaijan even under conditions that it deems unjust and unfair. Losing the 2020 war, the emptying of Artsakh, and the weakening of its ally Russia may have essentially taken any suspense out of the elections. Even if the opposition wins, it will have to more or less continue the policy of this government (with some bells and whistles). The “4th Republic” and “Real Armenia” slogans represent the varnished and well packaged submission of Armenia to its eastern and western neighbours, and one should not necessarily be critical of it as it has little other choice. This is arguably the best Armenians can get (if they are lucky) at this point in history. Ultimately, the average Armenian on the street has no desire for another armed conflict with Baku, and I don’t think the opposition has either. 

Let me flesh this idea out. Passions on the ground are running high and the debate about a possible opposition victory is highly polarised. Many supporters of the current government portray it as potentially catastrophic, which is probably best captured by Pashinyan’s dubbing of the opposition forces as “the three-headed war monster”. This is an extreme view that does not reflect reality. A more cautious, fair and balanced assessment would easily put away assertions of a state collapse and/or economic disaster. Armenia, after all, has functioning institutions, a pluralistic political system and experience with political change. Hence, an opposition victory would likely have the following implications:

1. Foreign policy and Russia: Pashinyan has banked on diversification and closer ties with the EU/US while drifting away from Moscow. The opposition favours rebuilding ties with Russia and is more skeptical of Western integration. By no means does this imply that Yerevan would turn outright pro-Russian again, especially given the less enthusiastic general mood towards the Kremlin that has set roots in the country in the last number of years.

2. Peace process with Azerbaijan: The current government says an opposition win would mean war, ostensibly with Azerbaijan. This could hardly be further from the truth. None of the three opposition forces has voiced anything remotely close to that assertion. While it has indeed criticised Pashinyan’s approach as one conceding too much and weakening Armenia’s bargaining position, it has simply called for a better security infrastructure around the pre-peace deal with Baku, namely explicitly involving the EU, US and Russia as formal guarantors of the final peace agreement. Going to war with Azerbaijan is not only not on the agenda of the opposition, but it would also be rather shortsighted given that Baku spends three times more on defence than Yerevan and given that Azerbaijan has powerful sponsors (read Turkey) while Armenia has mostly burned its bridges with any possible backers. There is no country, including Russia, that would send its troops to fight for Armenia in a possible new conflict with its neighbour. Finally, and most critically, there is no popular demand for a resumption of war hostilities in the country itself.

3. Economy: Herein the predictions about an imminent disaster are most overrated. Exactly the opposite is likely to transpire as an opposition win would mend relations with Armenia’s largest trading partner, Russia. Gas would keep arriving at preferential prices, remittances would continue to flow in (13.0% of GDP were sent from Russia in 2025), agricultural produce (98% of it goes to Russia with a hefty 25% of the population employed in agriculture) would be readily welcome, hard liquor (70% of the famous Armenian cognac also gets exported to Russia) would still be enjoyed in Moscow and St. Pete, and, more broadly, Armenia would continue to enjoy its status of benefitting enormously from Russia’s current constrained geopolitical position (as demonstrated, for example, by the well-known “diamond trade”). None of this would be guaranteed in the same manner and scope in the case of Pashinyan’s win.

The Georgia 2.0 scenario that the market has learned to at the very least accept, if not enjoy

Georgia has borne the brunt of European and US criticism in the last couple of years. The political cycle of 2024/2025 saw Georgian Dream emerging victorious in local and national elections, which has invited all kinds of accusations from the West, the most biting one probably reflecting the view of a pro-Russian drift. I have always resisted such premature conclusions. First, Georgia is too deeply integrated with the West to implement any kind of foreign policy reversal. Second, the political opposition is taking a radical position in rejecting Russian influence and demanding alignment with the West immediately. In contrast, the ruling party is of moderate hue, prioritising Western integration but conflict-averse towards Russia. The 2024 parliamentary elections and the 2025 local vote showed that ordinary Georgians are largely comfortable with this approach. Third, the Georgian authorities want to join the European Union by 2030, despite Brussels’ current attitude toward Tbilisi.  

The West’s current dissatisfaction is not due to any pro-Russian stance by the Georgian authorities (there is none), but because Western capitals failed to turn Georgia into a “second front” against Russia by exploiting its territorial issues with Moscow. Georgian Dream is not, even remotely, a pro-Russian party. However, amid the broader confrontation between Russia and the West, even this moderate stance appears pro-Russian.

Critically, the market has now learned to look past politically motivated statements and, rather, focus on the strong fundamentals of the Georgian economy and the professionalism of its policy-makers. Georgia has been delivering upside growth surprises recently, including because tourism and income from foreign travel have been beating records. FDI has recovered, the currency has strengthened and FX reserves have reached record-high levels. I feel that Georgia is much better understood by the market than by politicians. The constant barrage of accusations of “democratic backsliding” by the EU (mostly) and US has little to do with Georgia’s strong economic performance, quality macro policy-making and astute pro-Georgian foreign policy. Concerns about democratic backsliding are now largely disregarded by financial markets, and correctly so.

To summarise, the current Georgian model implies a pragmatic balance between Russia and the West, avoiding hard geopolitical alignment, prioritising economic growth and stability and pursuing a country-first foreign policy. This has delivered well beyond initial expectations.

This is the kind of a paradigm that may likely emerge in Armenia in the case of an opposition win. Yerevan would transition from its current activist geopolitical posture to a more transactional, economy- and stability-focused model. In foreign policy, this would be tantamount to maintaining economic and diplomatic ties with the West, yet avoiding direct confrontation with Russia. In the sphere of economic policy, this would be best characterised by macroeconomic pragmatism, infrastructure and investment focus, and tourism and business development. The peace process with Azerbaijan would not be halted, but augmented by efforts to secure stronger guarantors, including possibly from the UN Security Council, to ensure non-recurrence of hostilities.

This kind of approach would fit well the movement centred around Samvel Karapetyan and his Strong Armenia party (the key opposition force). This is important, because the only realistic chance of the opposition to form a united movement is to coalesce around Karapetyan and form a government post-election.  Karapetyan is a businessman, not a traditional ideologue and, hence, his government would mean more managerial type of governance, focus on infrastructure and investment, support for domestic enterprises, mending relations with Russia, but not at the cost of undermining ties with the West. Even if his government might be skeptical of concessions to Azerbaijan and Turkey, the peace process with Baku will not stop and there will be no war. 

In essence, an opposition victory is unlikely to be an automatic disaster, economically, politically or geopolitically. Far from it. The initial market reaction would most likely be negative as markets are inherently averse to uncertainty, but, in a Georgia 2.0 scenario, such weakness could ultimately present an attractive buying opportunity. 

Ivan Tchakarov is partner for the Caucasus and Central Asia at GlobalSource Partners.

https://www.intellinews.com/tchakarov-armenia-after-an-opposition-victory-georgia-2-0-445878/

Armenian Su-30SM fighter jets flew over Yerevan’s Republic Square on May 28, 2026, carrying what open-source analysts identified as Iranian-made precision-guided glide bombs, presenting the clearest public evidence yet that Armenia has armed its Russian-built fighters with weapons from Tehran rather than Moscow, resolving a procurement scandal that had dogged the aircraft since their arrival in the country.

The parade showcased military equipment from seven countries simultaneously, reflecting the breadth of Yerevan’s post-2020 weapons diversification drive. Among the hardware on display, the Su-30SM aircraft drew particular attention from open-source defense analysts who identified what appeared to be Iranian Yasin-class precision-guided glide bombs mounted on the jets’ hardpoints. If confirmed, the weapons visible on the Su-30SMs during the flyover would represent a significant operational milestone: Armenian fighters that have previously lacked serviceable air-to-ground munitions finally equipped with precision standoff weapons capable of striking targets at ranges reportedly up to 120 kilometers (75 miles).

The Su-30SM is a Russian-made fourth-generation-plus multirole fighter built by IRKUT Corporation, a derivative of the export-oriented Su-30MK family and one of the most capable aircraft in Russia’s own inventory. Armenia contracted for four of them in early 2019, with the first pair delivered in December of that year. Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan personally announced their arrival on social media, describing the purchase as “our most important acquisition this year.” The aircraft are two-seat, thrust-vectoring, super-maneuverable jets capable of carrying up to 8,000 kilograms (17,640 pounds) of weapons across twelve hardpoints and reaching maximum speeds of Mach 2 with a combat radius of 1,500 kilometers (932 miles).

The problem, which became a national political controversy, was that Armenia bought the jets without a missiles package. Pashinyan confirmed this publicly in March 2021, acknowledging that the Su-30SMs had arrived without the air-to-air or air-to-ground munitions that would make them combat-capable. That admission came months after the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war, in which Armenian forces suffered a catastrophic defeat against Azerbaijani drone and precision strike operations, and in which the Su-30SMs played no role because they lacked weapons to carry. The revelation that Armenia had paid for advanced fighters it could not effectively employ in its most consequential military conflict in decades generated significant public anger and parliamentary criticism of the Pashinyan government’s defense procurement decisions.

Armenia’s subsequent efforts to arm the Su-30SMs have traced an unconventional path through multiple countries. In September 2024, Armenia formally reached out to India requesting assistance in procuring Astra air-to-air missiles, the Indian-developed radar-guided interceptor that would give the Su-30SMs a credible beyond-visual-range air combat capability. HAL, India’s state-owned aerospace manufacturer which builds the Indian Su-30MKI under license from Sukhoi, was simultaneously approached for expertise in upgrading the Armenian aircraft. Those discussions remained ongoing as of the parade date, without a confirmed agreement.

The Iranian weapons appearing at the May 28 parade represent a parallel track. Iran unveiled what it describes as the Yasin precision-guided glide bomb system in 2019, entering it into operational service the same year, and has described it as compatible with the full range of Iranian fighter-bomber platforms in all weather conditions, day and night. A glide bomb is a precision weapon released from an aircraft at altitude that uses wings and a guidance system to glide toward its target, dramatically extending the effective range compared to a conventionally dropped bomb while keeping the launching aircraft outside the range of most ground-based air defenses. The 120-kilometer (75-mile) standoff range attributed to the Yasin class by Iranian state sources would allow Armenian Su-30SMs to engage targets deep inside Azerbaijan’s territory without entering range of Azerbaijani air defense systems. Iranian-state weapons performance claims have historically required independent verification before being accepted at face value, and no external assessment of the Yasin’s actual combat performance has been published.

The broader context of Armenia’s weapons acquisition from Iran sits within the same diplomatic framework that produced the Majid air defense systems also displayed at the May 28 parade. Armenian and Iranian officials have confirmed that a defense cooperation agreement, reported by multiple outlets to carry a value in the range of $500 million, was signed in 2024 covering multiple weapons categories. The Iranian weapons reaching Armenia arrive via a transaction structure that bypasses both Russian and Western export control frameworks, which is significant for different reasons in each case: Russia would typically expect to be the weapons supplier for its own Su-30SM export customers, and Western partners including the United States have concerns about Iranian weapons transfers to any country regardless of that country’s political alignment.

YEREVAN, Armenia – June 01, 2026 – In the bustling economic landscape of Henan Province, China, a quiet but significant milestone for Armenian enterprise was marked. Armen Pogossian, the 27-year-old owner of Pogossian Luxury Brand House, recently stood before an assembly of China’s brightest young minds at the Forbes 30 Under 30 Summit, becoming the first Armenian entrepreneur to grace the prestigious platform in the country. This was more than a personal achievement; it was a calculated move in the high-stakes game of global luxury, signaling Armenia’s ambition to carve out a space on the world’s most dynamic economic stage.

Pogossian’s presence at the summit, themed “Jumpstarting the Future,” was not merely ceremonial. It represented a confluence of ancient heritage and modern ambition, a story of a small nation leveraging its deep cultural roots to engage with a global superpower. As China’s luxury market recalibrates, moving away from ostentatious logos towards quality, heritage, and experience, Pogossian’s appearance suggests a new chapter in cross-cultural business diplomacy.

A New Ambassador on the World Stage

The two-day summit at Zhengzhou Sias University was a nexus of influence, gathering past and present Forbes China Under 30 honorees, visionary investors, and senior business leaders. Against this backdrop of innovation and capital, Pogossian represented a different kind of disruptor—one rooted in a family legacy of craftsmanship stretching back to the early 1990s, now being reimagined for a 21st-century global audience.

In a high-level dialogue, Pogossian articulated a vision that resonated with the summit’s forward-looking theme. “Future entrepreneurs do not simply follow trends; they create them in an ever-changing market,” he stated. “Bringing together individuals who share this vision of excellence makes transformative change inevitable. My experience at the Forbes Under 30 Summit proved that by exchanging ideas, embracing innovation, and remaining open to borderless collaboration, we can begin to see and shape a part of the future before it even arrives.”

His message taps into a broader narrative unfolding back home. Armenia, a nation of under three million, is experiencing a remarkable entrepreneurial boom, particularly in its tech sector. With a startup ecosystem ranked 55th globally and a government actively fostering innovation, the country is cultivating a generation of globally-minded founders. Pogossian, while operating in the luxury sphere, embodies this same spirit—leveraging a unique national identity to compete on an international level. His participation in China, therefore, serves as a form of economic ambassadorship, showcasing Armenia not just as a repository of history, but as a source of contemporary innovation and quality.

Blending Heritage with Modern Luxury

The core of Pogossian Luxury Brand House’s global strategy was subtly showcased at the summit. While the company’s portfolio is diverse, its presence in Zhengzhou was anchored by an elegantly designed booth for ‘Jardins d’Arménie’, a “Royal Brandy” that encapsulates the brand’s philosophy. Attendees were offered an immersive tasting experience, introducing them to a product deeply tied to Armenian terroir and tradition.

‘Jardins d’Arménie’ is no ordinary spirit. It is a refined interpretation of Armenian heritage, crafted from the indigenous Voskehat grape. The production process itself is a testament to the brand’s blend of tradition and innovation: the brandy is first aged in classic oak barrels before being transferred to apricot barrels—a nod to one of Armenia’s national symbols—and then finished back in oak. This unique method imparts a complex profile that stands apart in the premium spirits market.

This commitment to unique craftsmanship and storytelling is a deliberate strategy. The brand previously made a splash with its European launch in Monaco, an event attended by HSH Prince Albert II, signaling its intent to compete at the highest echelons of the luxury world. By introducing the brandy to an influential Chinese audience at the Forbes summit, Pogossian Luxury Brand House is not just selling a product; it is exporting a piece of Armenian culture, wrapped in a narrative of timeless elegance and meticulous craftsmanship. This approach positions the brand less as a follower of trends and more as a purveyor of authentic, enduring value.

Navigating the Complex Chinese Luxury Market

Pogossian’s engagement in China is particularly timely. The Chinese luxury market, while still projected to be the world’s largest, is undergoing a profound transformation. An economic slowdown and shifting consumer sentiment have led to what some analysts call a move toward “discreet luxury.” Affluent Chinese consumers, especially the younger, digitally-savvy generations, are increasingly wary of overt branding and are instead seeking products with demonstrable quality, unique heritage, and a compelling story.

This shift presents both a challenge and an opportunity for international brands. Fierce competition from increasingly sophisticated local Chinese brands means that a “one-size-fits-all” Western approach is no longer viable. Success now requires a nuanced understanding of local culture and a genuine connection with consumers who value authenticity over hype.

In this context, Pogossian’s strategy appears prescient. By leading with a product like ‘Jardins d’Arménie’, which emphasizes craftsmanship and cultural identity, the brand aligns perfectly with the current market zeitgeist. The focus is on the intrinsic quality of the spirit and its rich history, not on a logo. This approach allows the brand to sidestep the “luxury shame” phenomenon and appeal to a more discerning consumer. Supporting the Forbes summit as a partner, alongside giants like iSoftStone and Plug and Play China, further embeds the brand within the country’s innovation ecosystem, building credibility and relationships from the ground up.

Jumpstarting a Global Future

Armen Pogossian’s journey from Yerevan to the Forbes stage in Zhengzhou is more than an individual success story; it is a microcosm of a nation’s economic evolution. As Armenia continues to build its reputation as a hub for technology and high-value exports—bolstered by strong growth in sectors like IT and jewelry—pioneers like Pogossian are charting the course in the global marketplace.

His participation in the summit, which included roundtables on AI, new consumer logic, and robotics, highlights an understanding that modern luxury cannot exist in a vacuum. It must be conversant with technology, responsive to shifting consumer values, and open to global collaboration. The presence of Pogossian Luxury Brand House in over 40 countries is a testament to a long-term vision that began in the 1990s and is now being accelerated by a new generation.

By bridging the heritage of Armenian craftsmanship with the forward-looking dynamism of China’s entrepreneurial class, Pogossian is not just building a brand. He is helping to write a new narrative for his country—one defined by creativity, resilience, and a confident embrace of the global future. The connections forged at the summit represent seeds planted in fertile ground, promising future growth for both the brand and for Armenia’s expanding presence in international commerce.

Armenia: Its role in the Eurasian Economic Union

Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has rejected for the moment convening a popular consultation for citizens to choose between the European Union (EU) and the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). Instead of a vote, he has advocated continuing to collaborate with the EAEU until the country officially submits its application for accession to the community bloc and it becomes inevitable to choose only one path.

With this stance, Pashinyan responds to the countries that make up the EAEU –Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan–, who during Friday’s summit in Astana, the capital of Kazakhstan, demanded a clear definition of Armenia’s place in the organization and pressured him to call a referendum as soon as possible.

“We are working and will continue to work within the Eurasian Economic Union until the choice (…) becomes inevitable, and, naturally, it must be made by the people of Armenia through a referendum,” the head of the Armenian government stated in a video released this Monday on his social media.

Pashinyan has stressed that he sees no reason to rush any consultation, recalling that, although Armenia submitted its application related to the EU in March 2024, the procedure is in a very preliminary stage and the country does not even yet have official candidate status. “Holding any referendum is illogical,” he insisted.

The leader has described this debate as a matter of a “theoretical nature” and, consequently, has considered that submitting it to a popular vote right now “is certainly not very reasonable or correct, and lacks foundation.”

“We will continue to work calmly, peacefully, without tensions or disputes within the Eurasian Economic Union, and I am convinced that we still have potential in this direction,” Pashinyan concluded.

The EAEU will review its agreements with Armenia before the end of the year

Meanwhile, the Kremlin has announced that the EAEU member states will analyze in the coming months whether to suspend current agreements with Armenia before the next council meeting, scheduled before the end of the year. “All of this must be discussed before December,” stated Moscow’s spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov.

Peskov also communicated that a telephone conversation took place between the Armenian prime minister and the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, focused on the agenda discussed at the Astana summit, without offering additional details about the content of that exchange.

In the days prior to the meeting in the Kazakh capital, Russia had already warned that it reserves the option to annul the energy agreements it maintains with Armenia if Yerevan continues with its process of rapprochement and eventual accession to the EU.

Mykola Azarov. 

With just seven days left until parliamentary elections in Armenia, news of arrests and investigations into hybrid attacks on the country emerges daily, while Russia is increasingly openly increasing pressure on the South Caucasus republic.

Until a few years ago, a bastion of Moscow in the region, Yerevan is today trying to free itself from the influence of its former ally, secure a lasting peace with its historical enemy Azerbaijan, normalize relations with Turkey, and strengthen ties with the West, redefining itself as a bridge between Asia and Europe.

The June 7 vote is, without exaggeration, the most important in Armenia’s modern history.

Decisive choices for the future

Voters will have to decide on key issues: continue the path followed by the current government or bring back to power figures linked to the previous system? Strengthen partnerships with the US and the European Union or revive ties with Russia? Continue the difficult process of reconciliation with Baku and Ankara or revise existing agreements, risking destabilizing the entire process?

The moment of truth for Pashinyan

For Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, the leader of the Velvet Revolution that brought him to power in 2018, these elections represent the moment of truth.

Armenia has been through some very difficult times since the last elections, held after the disastrous 2020 war in Nagorno-Karabakh. Pashinyan managed to regain the trust of the citizens, but this time the challenge is even greater.

His second term has been marked by dramatic events: Azerbaijani military incursions into Armenian territory, the occupation of some 200 square kilometers of sovereign land, and then the collapse of the separatist republic of Artsakh.

In September 2023, against the backdrop of the inaction of Russian peacekeeping forces and a lukewarm international response, Azerbaijan ended the military operation it had launched three years earlier, causing the mass exodus of the Armenian community that had lived in the region for centuries.

Departure from Moscow

These developments brought about a continued cooling of relations between Yerevan and Moscow, as well as with the Collective Security Treaty Organization, the military alliance led by Russia.

Pashinyan suspended Armenia’s participation in the organization and demanded the removal of Russian border troops from the capital’s airport, as well as the gradual reduction of their presence at land borders.

However, he clarified that the Russian military base in Gyumri is not under discussion.

Armenia then joined the International Criminal Court and the parliament passed the law to launch the European integration process.

Approaching Europe

The pro-European turn became particularly noticeable on May 4, when the European Political Community summit was held in Yerevan, attended by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

A day later, the first bilateral Armenia-EU summit was held.

On May 9, during Victory Day celebrations, Russian President Vladimir Putin asked Armenia to organize a referendum so that citizens could choose between European integration and remaining in the Eurasian Economic Union.

Putin also drew a parallel with the “Ukrainian scenario,” recalling that tensions with Kiev in 2014 began precisely after Ukraine’s rapprochement with Brussels.

Pashinyan’s strategy

Pashinyan has taken a more balanced stance.

“We have never acted and will not act against Russia’s interests, but we cannot put its interests above our own,” he declared at an election rally.

His goal is not geopolitical clash, but rather transforming Armenia into a strategic trade hub between Asian and European markets.

The Kremlin’s “war”

The Kremlin is trying at all costs to prevent his reelection.

Russia has restricted Armenian exports and threatened to remove customs exemptions for supplies of gas, oil and diamonds.

According to the McCain Institute’s pre-election mission report, Russia has intensified disinformation campaigns, using cloned websites and social networks.

Meanwhile, according to a Reuters report, based on confidential documents and Western intelligence sources, the Kremlin is planning to transport tens of thousands of voters living in Russia to Armenia to influence the election outcome.

Pashinyan’s opponents

The Armenian opposition is dominated by pro-Russian political forces. The parties most likely to enter parliament support strengthening relations with Moscow.

Meanwhile, Pashinyan enjoys the full support of the West, which was also made apparent through a public message of support from Donald Trump.

What do the polls show?

All polls put the ruling party, Civil Contract, in first place with around 30% of the vote.

In second place is Strong Armenia, led by Russian-Armenian businessman Samvel Karapetyan, with support ranging from 6% to 15%.

Two other political forces, the alliance of former President Robert Kocharyan and the party of billionaire Gagik Tsarukyan, are showing very different results in the polls.

Although Pashinyan remains the clear favorite, an absolute majority still seems far away. The result of June 7 will determine not only the next government, but also the strategic direction of Armenia at a crucial moment in its history./ La Repubblica

https://www.voxnews.al/english/kosovabota/armenia-drejt-zgjedhjeve-te-historise-putini-i-shpall-lufte-pashinyan-i117588