Uncertainty of N. Pashinyan's position

Forecast: "Global World Events in the Upcoming Months" (published on March 18, 2026, link)

S. Dragan:

Regarding Pashinyan, difficulties in his situation are likely by mid-May 2026, and his position appears tenuous. It is very possible that these circumstances have already been making themselves known since the beginning of March 2026.

"Regarding Pashinyan, difficulties in his situation are likely by mid-May 2026, and his position appears unstable," largely due to the upcoming parliamentary elections in Armenia.

The parliamentary elections scheduled for June 7, 2026, in Armenia are drawing to a close. The electoral campaign, officially launched on Friday, May 8, 2026, has already been dubbed by experts as the most "geopolitically charged" in Armenia's recent history.

Against the backdrop of a complex regional situation, Armenian voters will have to choose not only between political leaders but also between development paths: deepening integration with the European Union or returning to closer cooperation with Russia, which was once considered Armenia's closest ally.

According to data from a February survey by the International Republican Institute (IRI), if elections were held this Sunday, 24% of voters would be ready to vote for the ruling party (N. Pashinyan) with a pro-European orientation.

In second place with 9% of the votes is the recently formed "Strong Armenia" bloc of the Russian billionaire of Armenian origin, Samvel Karapetyan, from the Forbes list. Currently, Karapetyan is under house arrest in Armenia, accused of public calls for violent seizure of power.

The level of political confrontation between the prime minister and his main opponent is best illustrated by their recent online spat, which turned personal.

At one of the press conferences, Nikol Pashinyan ironically noted that he does not fear Karapetyan, but "fears for him greatly," sarcastically predicting that by the end of the year, the billionaire will lose everything and become a "homeless person."

Karapetyan's response did not take long. The businessman stated that the prime minister's words do not deserve a comment, as he "is no longer taken seriously even within his own team."

The chances of overcoming the passing barrier are also preserved by two other political forces: the opposition bloc "Armenia" (3%) led by the country's second president, Robert Kocharian, and the "Thriving Armenia" party (3%) of the prominent businessman Gagik Tsarukyan.

The main intrigue of the elections lies in who voters will prefer. According to IRI, 30% of respondents still don't know whom to vote for, and another 9% refused to answer.

These 39% of undecided or hiding their choice voters, as experts note, could ultimately decide the fate of the new parliament.

What is the precarious position of N. Pashinyan in mid-May of this year, and how can it be confirmed? Let's focus on the experts' opinions about the results of two events in which N. Pashinyan played an important role in the past few weeks: the meeting with V. Putin in Moscow and then the European Political Community summit in Yerevan.

Based on the initial media comments about the meeting in Moscow, it became clear: this was a difficult conversation between partners feeling each other out to determine if they are still partners or not.

A polite discussion about declining financial turnover, security no longer guaranteed, and most importantly, an exchange of careful accusations that "you can't be in two places at once." Such discussions are usually not openly aired in the media, but here, they were.

Will we be able to preserve a grand historical "adult divorce" or a relationship between two Christian nations? Without illusions: V. Putin and N. Pashinyan discussed the breakup openly for the first time.

The main conflict was directly named by V. Putin: membership in the Eurasian system and movement towards the EU are incompatible, and he explained why.

One day, perhaps years will pass, and we, the EAEU and the European Union, - I hope that's how it will eventually be, as we live on the same continent, - will be able to resolve these issues. But even before the Ukrainian crisis, we tried to reach an agreement with Europeans to work together, but nothing came of it. They took a very hard line on almost every issue, as I saw it at the time, even on what seemed like a minor matter.

And as long as N. Pashinyan does not give up both the European course and his statements about leaving the EAEU, Armenia seems to be at a crossroads, waiting for something.

Economy has become the most important topic for an open conversation. First, gas at a 'friendly' price, suggested V. Putin:

Gas prices in Europe are soaring above $600 per thousand cubic meters, while Russia sells gas to Armenia for $177.5 per thousand cubic meters. The difference is significant.

V. Putin cited a sharp drop in trade volume, reminding that in 2024, this figure was $6.5 billion, with $1.2 billion coming from agricultural exports, vegetables, fruits, and Armenian wine.

However, the most striking topic was security. N. Pashinyan tried to play on old grievances by asking why CSTO did not help Armenia in 2022. Yet, V. Putin was ready and dismissed it easily: if Armenia itself in Prague acknowledged Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan, on what basis should CSTO intervene?

Although N. Pashinyan later focused on a different, later conflict, even that was border-related, with significant doubt about the need for CSTO intervention.

Nadezhda Shevchenko, a psychologist, physiognomist, and adaptive intelligence coach, notes that throughout the meeting, Pashinyan appeared quite disoriented, trying to take a defensive stance.

Despite occasionally leaning forward in the conversation, showing external interest in the dialogue, the overall picture suggests a desire to justify himself. There is a clear feeling that he acknowledges his opponent having a stronger position than himself.

The overall picture was complemented by the slowed-down speech, as if Pashinyan carefully chose his words before speaking. All non-verbal cues point to a classic model of human behavior, who is forced to justify and admit defeat in this communication, according to a psychologist.

In the conversation, Putin extended the last straw to Pashinyan, reminding him of the repressed pro-Russian Armenian politicians:

“Some, I know, are in detention despite having Russian passports. It’s your decision, we don’t interfere, but it would be nice if they all could participate in this intra-political work.”

But Pashinyan responded by stating that Armenia has no political prisoners in principle and that Armenia is a democratic country, and even hinted at:

“There are citizens who think there’s too much democracy in Armenia. <...> We have social media, for example, 100% free. There are no, absolutely no, restrictions.”

In this regard, Pashinyan forgets that Western partners are adept at making beautiful promises and sympathetic nods, but over hundreds of years, they have not shed a drop of blood or invested a single cent free of charge in Armenian land.

The tragedy is that the ordinary person always pays for the mistakes of "revolutionary" leaders. No matter how far one moves away from Moscow, one cannot escape geography. If Pashinyan ultimately chooses the role of a political kamikaze, Armenia risks forever losing itself, left alone with those who never considered its presence on the map as mandatory.

From May 4-5, 2026, a summit of the European Political Community took place in Yerevan, and during this event, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan made a bold proposal - to create a new community of 14 former Soviet republics, excluding Russia. It sounds ambitious, but when looking at the numbers and history, the picture becomes much more modest.

Interestingly, the economic basis for such unions appears quite fragile. According to IMF estimates, the combined GDP (PPP) of all 14 former republics without Russia is less than a third of Russia's figure, excluding Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, which are openly uninterested in confronting Moscow. The second-largest economy in the post-Soviet space (Kazakhstan with a GDP (PPP) of around $900 billion) is consistently building relations with both Russia and China, and there is no reason for it to join an "anti-CIS" (Commonwealth of Independent States) bloc.

It seems strange that Armenia, with a population of around 2.8 million, would propose to unite countries with vastly different economic models and political orientations. The Baltic countries have been in the EU and NATO for a long time, Moldova is currently leaving the CIS - the parliament approved the denunciation of basic treaties in April 2026. Georgia left the CIS back in 2009. Meanwhile, Belarus has already opposed Pashinyan's initiative, and the Central Asian republics - Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan - are economically closely tied to the Russian market and membership in the EAEU.

Nevertheless, Yerevan signed strategic partnership agreements with the UK and France at the summit, and Pashinyan himself declared Armenia's desire to join the European Union. The irony is that Armenian products, in demand on the CIS markets, are virtually non-competitive in Europe, and Armenia's main trading partner remains Russia.

The Yerevan summit had a strong anti-Russian character. In his address to the forum participants, Zelensky stated that "Ukrainian drones could fly over and even explode over Red Square during the parade."

The Armenian ambassador to the Russian Foreign Ministry was told of the "categorical inacceptability" of allowing Mr. Zelensky to make "terrorist threats against Russia" at the EU summit.

Pashinyan responded to Kremlin criticism of Zelensky's statements in Yerevan. According to him, Armenia does not claim to interfere in all global issues. "To the extent that it is my event, so it is for our other partners," the Armenian prime minister explained.

Zelensky, during the European Political Community summit in Yerevan on May 4, stated that Ukraine could send drones to Moscow during Victory Day celebrations. The Kremlin called it "unnatural" for Armenia to provide a platform for such statements and called for Yerevan to provide clarifications.

The Armenian Prime Minister noted that there were instances when the President of Russia made statements about leaders of different countries in his presence. "But I don't remember Russia expecting a reaction from me on these statements," said Pashinyan. "Armenia is a member of the European Political Community, the EAEU, CSTO, but that doesn't mean we claim the right to intervene in all global issues," he added.

Pashinyan's policy is based on promises of support from the European Union. As late as April, Brussels announced the establishment of the EUPM Armenia civil partnership mission aimed at countering "malicious influence" from outside.

"The mission, which claims to fight against certain interventions in the affairs of a sovereign state, itself becomes a tool of such intervention," Maria Zakharova, the official spokesperson for the Russian Foreign Ministry, noted in this context at a briefing.

The actions of European bureaucrats only aim to keep Pashinyan in power. Europe is unlikely to be able, or even want, to provide Yerevan with the extensive economic support needed to replace revenues from participation in the EAEU.

According to open data, Armenia's trade with the EAEU in 2025 reached over $8 billion. This is approximately 38.5% of its external trade. The volume of trade with the European Union for the same year was up to $2.81 billion - slightly over 13%.

The experience of all post-Soviet years in Central Asia and the Caucasus shows that the European Union, like the United States, is not planning to support and ensure the interests of its "pups." Brussels and Washington pursue their own interests there. And the political and economic aspirations of Armenia hold no interest for the European Union - they are separated by territories, so Armenian dreams of joining the EU are even amusing, experts note.

Upon leaving the EAEU, Armenia will very quickly face economic issues.

"We see that everything that is happening there today is staged very pompously, and perhaps this image warms the hearts of Armenians, thinking, 'We are respected in Europe.' But, as they say, in an argument between a refrigerator and a TV, the refrigerator will win. And when Armenia leaves the EAEU, they will feel it. How soon? I think it will be within three to four months. That is, it's not a question of years, it's much faster - months," concluded Vadim Kozulin, head of the center at the Diplomatic Academy of the Russian Foreign Ministry."

Experts note that understanding of this socio-economic situation by Armenia's citizens creates instability for N. Pashinyan's position in the upcoming elections. However, to what extent the various opinions prevail in Armenia and which way the country should go - to the EU or the EAEU - will be shown by the elections in early June of this year.