The economic restrictions imposed by Russia on Armenia have so far not had an impact that would be felt by the majority of Armenia’s population. Instead, they could contribute to a further rise in anti-Russian sentiment. Political scientist Benyamin Poghosyan made this assessment while discussing the logic behind possible Russian economic pressure and its impact on the “EU or EAEU” discourse in Armenia.
No Blow to the “Refrigerator” Yet
According to Poghosyan, Russia has so far refrained from using severe economic measures that could deal a significant blow to Armenia’s entire economy.
“So far, Russia has not used the heavy artillery — sanctions or restrictions,” the political scientist said.
According to him, the measures applied so far have primarily affected agricultural producers.
At the same time, most of Armenia’s population, particularly in Yerevan and other major cities, has barely felt their direct consequences.
Moreover, in some cases citizens may even benefit indirectly from the situation by purchasing agricultural products and flowers at relatively affordable prices.
According to the political scientist, if Russia’s objective is to make the majority of Armenia’s population feel economic pressure in their own pockets or “refrigerators,” Moscow would have to take much tougher measures.
Poghosyan cites the suspension of direct flights between Russia and Armenia, restrictions on money transfers from Russia to Armenia, and a sharp increase in gas prices as possible examples.
In his assessment, only such measures could have a tangible impact on broad sections of the population.
The Consequences of “Heavy Artillery”
According to Poghosyan, a Russian ban on direct flights to Armenia could reduce the number of tourists by around 30%.
In his assessment, this would be a severe blow to Armenia’s hospitality sector, particularly hotels, guesthouses, cafés, restaurants and other tourism-related businesses operating in Yerevan.
“That would already be a severe blow to the thousands of people employed in the hospitality sector,” the political scientist said.
Poghosyan considers restrictions on money transfers from Russia to Armenia another potentially severe measure.
He recalled that last year, according to the figures he cited, approximately $3.9 billion was transferred from Russia to Armenia.
If that flow declines sharply, according to the political scientist, the supply of foreign currency in Armenia could decrease, potentially leading to a sharp depreciation of the dram.
As a result, prices for imported goods would rise even further.
According to Poghosyan, suspending gas supplies or sharply increasing gas prices could have the strongest impact on the population.
“As for the price of gas — either stop gas supplies altogether or, for example, raise the price two or three times — that would already hit everyone,” he said.
In that case, unlike the current restrictions affecting agricultural producers, the economic consequences could spread to almost every segment of society.
Economic Restrictions Could Backfire
At the same time, according to Poghosyan, the measures applied so far are producing political rather than economic consequences, contributing to the growth of anti-Russian sentiment.
He says some Armenian citizens may view Russia’s actions in the context of existing grievances, recalling Russia’s policy regarding Artsakh, the situation that emerged after the 2020 war, and Moscow’s policy toward Armenia.
Against this backdrop, restrictions affecting agricultural producers are perceived as another blow to Armenia’s economy.
Poghosyan also addressed changing attitudes toward Russia within Armenian society.
He recalled that according to data published by the International Republican Institute (IRI) in May 2026, Russia is perceived as a threat by a significant portion of Armenia’s population and ranks third on this indicator after Azerbaijan and Turkey.
In the political scientist’s view, additional Russian economic restrictions could deepen these attitudes further.
The “EAEU Instead of the EU” Scenario May Not Work
According to Poghosyan, if Russia’s calculation is that economic pressure will force Armenian citizens to reconsider their position on the process of joining the EU and choose the EAEU instead, the current measures do not correspond to that objective.
By his reasoning, under such a scenario, the economic restrictions would have to be much tougher, and citizens would need to experience their consequences for a sufficiently long period.
For example, even if the toughest economic restrictions were introduced in September 2026 and the referendum were held in mid-November, two months would not be enough for their consequences to become significant for most of the population.
“Two months is not enough for the majority of the population to feel that they and their families have suffered a severe financial blow and may find themselves in a very difficult situation,” Poghosyan said.
According to the political scientist, imposing harsh economic restrictions over a short period could produce the opposite effect rather than increase the likelihood of voting in Russia’s favor.
If citizens associate the economic pressure with Russia, anti-Russian sentiment could intensify further.
According to Poghosyan, this could also increase the likelihood of voting in favor of launching the EU accession process.
“Therefore, this scenario would work if Russia took somewhat different steps. But if Russia really wants to make this scenario work, then, in my view, the steps it is taking are not entirely correct,” the political scientist concluded.