The current problems surrounding Armenian exports are only a secondary issue. According to analyst Hovsep Khurshudyan, Russia’s primary objective remains preserving its influence over Armenia’s strategic infrastructure. In his view, the economic restrictions are being used as leverage against Armenia, with the railway sector standing at the center of this strategy.
Moscow’s Main Goal Is Control of Armenia’s Railway Network
Khurshudyan argues that the South Caucasus Railway has failed for years to make the investments required under its concession agreement, instead focusing on operating the existing infrastructure.
He claims that the reported investment figures were overstated and that this could constitute a breach of the concession contract.
According to the expert, these violations provide sufficient grounds to reopen the case. He recalled that the investigation had been closed several years ago, describing that decision as a mistake and arguing that a new investigation should begin.
Khurshudyan noted that the Armenian authorities say they prefer resolving the issue through negotiations. However, he believes Russia is unlikely to agree because it considers the railway one of its key instruments of influence over Armenia.
He also argued that Moscow has little economic interest in transforming Armenia’s railway into an international transit corridor.
According to Khurshudyan, international freight operators and insurance companies are reluctant to cooperate with Russia because of existing sanctions, making such a project unattractive for Moscow.
As a result, he believes Russia is also not interested in Armenia expanding its own transit potential and strengthening its strategic security.
Railway Control and the Russian Military Base
Khurshudyan also commented on Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s recent statement that “it may turn out that Russia should pay Armenia around two billion dollars annually.”
According to the analyst, the prime minister was referring to the Russian military base.
He considers it unacceptable that Armenia not only provides territory for the base but also contributes to covering its utility expenses.
Gas Remains Moscow’s Second Lever
According to Khurshudyan, Russia has increasingly relied on the gas issue by raising the possibility of higher prices or even suspending supplies.
He believes Armenia should accelerate the development of alternative energy routes.
The first option, he said, is to make greater use of the existing gas pipeline from Iran. After installing additional compressor stations, he believes it could satisfy Armenia’s domestic demand.
The second option is the construction of a new large-capacity pipeline from Iran based on proposals that were discussed before 2004.
Khurshudyan also noted that swap deliveries of Turkmen gas through Iran and transit across Armenian territory are under discussion.
He said Iran is interested in using Armenia as a transit country.
According to the analyst, his earlier assessments showed that a high-capacity pipeline crossing Armenia toward Georgia and then the Black Sea and Europe could generate hundreds of millions of dollars annually in transit revenues and, according to some estimates, more than one billion dollars.
Such a project, he argued, would both strengthen Armenia’s energy security and provide substantial transit income.
A Gas Cutoff Would Be Considered a Hostile Act
Khurshudyan stated that existing contractual obligations currently prevent Russia from immediately changing gas supply conditions.
However, he believes Moscow could later announce higher prices or even suspend deliveries entirely.
If gas prices increase, Armenia could reconsider its membership in the Eurasian Economic Union, he argued.
According to the analyst, the additional costs of more expensive gas could be offset by eliminating the economic losses Armenia currently incurs within the EAEU framework.
At the same time, he described a complete interruption of gas supplies as a hostile rather than an economic action.
“If Russia shuts off the gas, that becomes a hostile act. We have far more that we can take from them than they can do against us,” he said.
Armenia Could Reconsider the Entire Relationship
According to Khurshudyan, such a scenario would require Armenia to reassess the entire framework of its relations with Russia, from participation in international organizations to bilateral agreements.
He believes the agenda could eventually include withdrawal from the EAEU, revision of military agreements, ending the presence of Russian border guards in Armenia and other major policy changes.
The analyst also argued that Armenia should review Russian companies’ control over the country’s mineral resources.
According to him, many mining assets remain under Russian ownership, including companies linked to sanctioned Russian oligarchs.
Khurshudyan also referred to the “property-for-debt” agreement, claiming that the transferred assets were provided in exchange for investment commitments that were never fulfilled.
He specifically mentioned the Mars factory, the Mergelyan Institute and several other enterprises and research centers, arguing that instead of being modernized they gradually lost their industrial and technological potential.
In conclusion, Khurshudyan said Armenia should conduct a comprehensive assessment of all the advantages and disadvantages of its relationship with Russia and evaluate the overall balance.