Less than a month remains before Armenia’s next parliamentary elections, and many observers link the outcome to the country’s future geopolitical and geostrategic direction. Predictions are increasingly framed in simple terms: either integration with the European Union or a return to complete dependence on Russia.
Armenia cannot “sit on two chairs”
Under current conditions, maintaining a balance between the European and Eurasian directions is becoming increasingly difficult. This is likely why the term “complementary policy,” once strongly associated with former President Serzh Sargsyan, has gradually disappeared from Armenia’s political vocabulary.
To be fair, neither the EU nor Russia truly believed in the long-term sustainability of complementarity.
In 2013, during an official visit to Warsaw, Serzh Sargsyan reaffirmed Armenia’s desire to maintain good relations with both Russia and the West. At the time, however, Western experts already argued that it would be impossible to continue economic integration processes based on such an approach.
Less than two months later, Sargsyan unexpectedly announced that Armenia — then on the verge of signing a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement with the EU — would instead join the Eurasian Economic Union.
Today, warnings about the impossibility of balancing between Russia and the EU are also coming from Moscow. Russian presidential aide Yuri Ushakov recently stated that Armenia would not be able to “sit on two chairs.”
The main question is whether Armenia’s current authorities still want to pursue such balancing.
Diversification with a European tilt
Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has never considered Armenia’s accession to the Eurasian Economic Union to have been the correct decision.
As an opposition politician, he voted against Armenia’s participation in Eurasian integration projects. However, after becoming prime minister, he chose to operate within the existing reality.
“If we once considered something a mistake, that does not mean we should do the exact opposite in order to correct it,” he stated during a briefing in Moscow in January 2019.
“Today Armenia is a member of the EAEU, and I do not believe sharp turns in international affairs are correct… We are doing everything possible to make Armenia’s membership in the Eurasian Union more effective, useful, and promising.”
It must be acknowledged that Pashinyan largely remained faithful to his promise to avoid abrupt geopolitical shifts.
However, it took seven years and several major developments — the Karabakh conflict, Armenia’s loss of control over the region, the exodus of the Armenian population, and the war in Ukraine — for the shift in orientation to become fully visible.
Today, Armenia’s policy is no longer about complementarity or balancing. Instead, it is increasingly about diversification, with closer relations with the European Union becoming the central element.
Integration within limits
European analysts note that Armenian rhetoric regarding the EU sometimes creates the impression that Armenia’s ultimate goal is EU membership.
This became especially relevant after Armenia’s parliament adopted a law on launching the process of EU accession.
Within the EU, Armenia is occasionally presented as a new regional leader of European integration — a label previously used for Georgia and one that even then raised questions.
Even today, however, EU-Armenia relations remain focused more on expanding cooperation than on discussing concrete membership prospects.
An analytical report by the Polish Institute of International Affairs (PISM) states that Armenia’s growing ties with the EU reflect the weakening of Russian influence both within Armenia and across the South Caucasus more broadly.
Due to its relatively small market and unfavorable investment climate, Armenia is not considered a major economic partner for the EU.
Nevertheless, the EU could become a key pillar for Armenia in further distancing itself from Russia and, in the long term, potentially leaving the Eurasian Economic Union.
EU membership remains unlikely
According to PISM, further development of EU-Armenia relations will largely depend on the election results.
At the same time, some actions taken by the Armenian authorities during the election campaign — such as changes to electoral legislation perceived as unfavorable to the opposition — may already be raising concerns within the EU.
PISM analyst Wojciech Wojtasiewicz emphasized that even in the medium term, Armenia’s accession to the European Union remains unlikely.
“The victory of the ruling team will not lead to Armenia’s complete independence from Russia, including in economic and security matters, especially energy,” the analyst noted.
According to him, this is a long-term challenge that would require much greater financial and political support from the EU.
He also stressed that tougher EU sanctions against Russia could remain a difficult issue in bilateral relations because they may negatively affect Armenia’s already fragile economy.
In addition, the EU’s plans to improve transport connections through the South Caucasus toward Central Asia will depend on progress in the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace process, over which the EU currently has less direct influence than the United States.
Diana Nersisyan.