A version of this story appeared in the daily Threat Status newsletter from The Washington Times. Click here to receive Threat Status delivered directly to your inbox each weekday.
OPINION:
Armenia’s June 7 election will determine whether the country continues its cautious westward shift or drifts back into Moscow’s orbit.
The election is a test of whether Western political and economic partnerships can compete with Russia’s long-standing influence on its own doorstep.
Over the past several years, Yerevan’s government has strengthened ties with the U.S. and Europe while pursuing normalization with neighboring Turkey and Azerbaijan. It recognizes that Armenia’s security dependence on Russia failed to deliver stability.
Yet Armenia’s geopolitical reorientation remains fragile. The central figure is Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, who, since coming to power after the 2018 Velvet Revolution, has attempted a delicate balancing act: reducing Armenia’s dependence on Moscow while cautiously expanding cooperation with Western partners and seeking normalization with regional neighbors.
For a country long constrained by closed borders and unresolved conflicts, this strategy represents an effort to reposition Armenia economically and diplomatically.
Despite the finalization of a treaty text with Azerbaijan earlier this year, implementation remains uncertain: Azerbaijan demands constitutional changes in Armenia before signing.
Critics accuse Mr. Pashinyan of conceding too much, while supporters say normalization offers Armenia its best chance to escape decades of economic isolation. It’s fertile ground for political challengers.
The fragmented opposition is largely rooted in the political networks that governed Armenia before 2018. Most of the prominent opposition forces, including the largest opposition bloc in the current parliament, advocate for closer strategic alignment with Russia. Deeply rooted in the oligarchic system Russia reproduces, the pro-Russia forces say Armenia should restore a traditional security partnership with Moscow rather than Western integration.
A defeat for Mr. Pashinyan would not necessarily begin a sweeping ideological shift in Armenian society. Rather, it would signal a convergence of grievances: economic anxieties and the enduring influence of political and business networks tied to the previous political order.
A Pashinyan loss would create opportunities for external interference. Russia retains considerable leverage through economic ties, media influence and politics, and it possesses a well-established playbook for shaping political environments in neighboring states.
Under Vladimir Putin, the Kremlin has repeatedly used disinformation, covert financing and digital manipulation to weaken pro-Western governments across Eastern Europe.
Recent elections in Moldova and Romania offer clear examples. Moldovan authorities say Russian-linked networks spent hundreds of millions of dollars on vote-buying and propaganda during the country’s recent election cycles. In Romania, the Constitutional Court annulled the country’s 2024 presidential election after intelligence services warned that coordinated digital influence operations had distorted the outcome.
In Armenia, similar tactics could prove effective. Claims that Western partners offer rhetoric but few meaningful security guarantees could resonate.
The objective would not necessarily be to install a loyal proxy government but rather to generate enough political fragmentation and uncertainty to derail the reorientation away from Moscow.
That reorientation expanded significantly in recent years. European Union investments are expected to reach roughly $2.87 billion under its Global Gateway initiative, along with a $310 million Resilience and Growth Plan to accelerate economic reforms and infrastructure development.
The EU has also deployed a civilian monitoring mission along Armenia’s border with Azerbaijan, an unprecedented European presence in the country’s security landscape.
Washington also has begun exploring deeper economic and strategic cooperation with Yerevan. The Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity (TRIPP) — a U.S.-supported framework aimed at expanding Armenia’s connectivity, energy integration and access to global markets — is key.
Last year, the U.S. and Armenia signed a Strategic Partnership Commission Charter, formalizing cooperation in economic development, democratic governance and security. Over the past three decades, the U.S. has invested more than $3 billion in Armenia to support economic reform and institutional development.
Armenia will hold its election while global geopolitics are shifting in ways not seen since the end of the Cold War. The assumption that smaller states could operate largely outside great power rivalry has eroded. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and rising geopolitical tensions across Eurasia have underscored the return of hard geopolitical competition.
So Armenia is a test case: Can democratic alignment and economic partnership compete with the coercive tools authoritarian powers deploy?
A regression risks restoring a political and economic system shaped by oligarchic patronage networks and Moscow-linked influence.
In an era when the geopolitical choices of small states increasingly shape the balance of power, Armenia’s voters are about to make a decision that could echo far beyond the Caucasus.
Correction: A previous version of this story mentioned the wrong TRIPP.
• Nerses Kopalyan is an associate professor-in-residence of political science at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.