Armenia will not leave either the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) or the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) in the foreseeable future. This view is expressed by political analyst Sergey Melkonyan.
According to the expert, both political and economic calculations indicate that such steps would carry excessively high risks at this stage. Moreover, there is currently no readiness to manage these risks.
Leaving the EAEU: a risk of economic disaster
Melkonyan notes that all existing economic assessments show that leaving the EAEU could turn into a real economic disaster for Armenia. This would involve not only the disruption of trade relations but also serious blows to markets, the investment environment, and macroeconomic stability.
“Another important factor is that even the current authorities state that the issue of leaving the EAEU is not on the agenda. This shows that the government clearly understands the negative consequences of such a step and realizes that no one is ready to manage these risks, whether external actors or domestic political forces,” the analyst emphasizes.
The CSTO as part of the security architecture
As for the CSTO, Melkonyan argues that the situation is far more complex and sensitive. De jure, Armenia’s membership in the CSTO is one of the key components of the broader Armenia–Russia security architecture. Therefore, withdrawing from the organization could lead to the collapse of the entire security system.
“If Armenia leaves the CSTO, it puts into question not only relations with the organization but the entire system on which the country’s security has been built for years,” he notes.
What could serve as a “trigger”
According to the analyst, a clear and substantial “trigger” would be required for Armenia to leave the CSTO. Such a trigger could be a serious security challenge or an attack against Armenia if, in that situation, the CSTO fails to respond in line with Yerevan’s expectations under treaty obligations.
“In that case, Armenia would have a casus belli — a legal and political basis — to decide on leaving the CSTO,” Melkonyan explains.
In all other scenarios, Armenia is likely to remain in the organization in a so-called “frozen” format, with limited participation but without radical steps.
Lack of security alternatives
Melkonyan stresses that a possible withdrawal from the CSTO could only be considered if Armenia were offered a clearly better security arrangement. At present, however, no such alternative is visible.
“I do not see Armenia receiving a more realistic and advantageous offer in terms of security,” the analyst concludes.
As a result, discussions about leaving either the EAEU or the CSTO remain largely rhetorical rather than part of a real policy agenda. Economic dependencies, existing security infrastructure, and the absence of viable alternatives compel Armenia to maintain its current formats, even with restrictions and dissatisfaction, but without abrupt shifts.