Armenia’s process of decolonization is continuing, making a return to the previous level of Russian influence increasingly unlikely, according to political analyst Edgar Vardanyan. At the same time, he stresses that Moscow still retains certain tools for influencing domestic political developments in the country.
Russia’s Instruments of Influence in Armenia
According to Vardanyan, Russia will attempt to preserve at least a limited ability to affect Armenia’s internal politics.
“This is mainly done through disinformation and, of course, through certain political circles,” he said.
The analyst added that the latest elections brought political forces associated with Russian interests into parliament.
“Two factions will essentially represent that orientation, and Russia will naturally try to use them. Perhaps Moscow believes that an economic crisis may emerge in Armenia tomorrow or the day after, allowing that instrument to be activated and its presence expanded,” Vardanyan said.
For now, he continued, Moscow relies heavily on Armenia’s economic dependence and on its continuing military presence, even if that presence is limited.
In his assessment, the combination of economic ties, political partners, information influence and remaining military infrastructure still allows Russia to affect certain developments inside Armenia.
Decolonization and Public Attitudes
Despite these instruments, Vardanyan believes there is no meaningful public support for restoring Russia’s former influence.
“I do not think such public support exists. On the contrary, we can see that anti-Kremlin attitudes are becoming increasingly pronounced in Armenia,” he said.
According to the analyst, Armenia has already crossed an important threshold in the process of moving beyond Russia’s sphere of influence.
“We have passed a very important point in this process of decolonization. In my view, the likelihood of Russia restoring its previous level of influence in Armenia is very small,” Vardanyan stated.
He argues that public perceptions of Russia have changed so substantially that a return to the former relationship model would be difficult even if Moscow retains economic and political leverage.
Russia’s policy toward Armenia can no longer follow the previous pattern, he says, when Moscow relied on broad public loyalty and an almost uncontested position in security and economic affairs.
Economic Reorientation Is Reducing Dependence
Vardanyan believes Armenia’s economic reorientation is also contributing to the decolonization process.
“We can see that we are able to find new markets fairly quickly. The West is naturally providing substantial assistance in this regard. The interests of Armenia and the West fully coincide, particularly with the European Union as a bloc and also with the United States,” he said.
According to the political analyst, expanded access to new markets and stronger connections with Western partners are gradually reducing Armenia’s dependence on Russia.
This process concerns not only exports but also new investment, technological, infrastructure and political opportunities.
The more alternatives Armenia develops, he argues, the fewer opportunities Moscow will have to use economic dependence as an instrument of pressure.
Moscow May Be Waiting for a Domestic Crisis
Vardanyan does not rule out the possibility that Russia will wait for a favorable moment to activate its political tools.
Such a moment could emerge through an economic downturn, growing social dissatisfaction or a new domestic political crisis.
Under those conditions, Russia-oriented forces could try to present a return to the previous foreign policy model as a means of stabilizing the country.
The analyst doubts, however, that such a strategy would gain broad public support.
Even serious economic difficulties would not necessarily restore pro-Russian attitudes, he argues, because a significant part of Armenian society now views excessive dependence on Moscow as one of the sources of the country’s vulnerability.
Armenia Is Trying to Avoid Involvement in Regional Conflicts
Addressing foreign policy and Armenia’s possible involvement in confrontations among competing powers, Vardanyan said Yerevan is seeking to avoid playing any role in regional conflicts.
“We are doing everything possible to avoid participating in any conflict. Quite the opposite. This is extremely difficult given our neighbors, the region in which we live and the fact that Armenia is a small state, but we are managing to follow this approach,” he said.
The analyst emphasizes that even when Armenia may have grounds to support one side or another, Yerevan attempts to exercise restraint.
In his assessment, this policy is designed to preserve Armenia’s room for maneuver and reduce the risk of becoming involved in confrontations whose consequences it cannot control.
A Return to the Former Relationship Model Is Unlikely
Summarizing his assessment, Vardanyan says Russia still possesses certain instruments of influence in Armenia.
These include economic dependence, a limited military presence, information resources and political forces oriented toward cooperation with Moscow.
However, public attitudes, economic reorientation and changes in Armenia’s foreign policy direction significantly limit the possibility of restoring the previous relationship model.
Russia may still influence individual decisions and attempt to use emerging crises, the analyst concludes, but it is unlikely to regain the level of presence and control it once held.