The Geopolitics and Security Studies Center organised an online discussion on Armenia’s parliamentary elections, focusing on the results, public attitudes, Russia’s influence tools, and the country’s future political direction.The discussion featured Sigita Vegytė, journalist at NARA, Denis Cenusa, Associate Expert at GSSC, and Monika Tamulaitytė, Communications Manager at Repsense. The event was moderated by Roberta Rakauskaitė, Project Assistant at GSSC.Participants noted that the elections took place in a difficult context shaped by the loss of Nagorno-Karabakh, relations with Azerbaijan, economic dependence on Russia, and domestic polarisation. Despite these challenges, the process was assessed as broadly smooth and as a sign of Armenia’s democratic resilience.The discussion also addressed Russia’s informational and economic pressure, the significance of the peace process with Azerbaijan, economic diversification, and Armenia’s relations with the European Union.
Key Takeaways:
· A smooth process with a clear mandate. Turnout was significantly higher than in previous elections, international observers were present throughout, and only minor procedural infractions were recorded. Many voters, especially elderly, cast their ballots not out of enthusiasm for Nikol Pashinyan, but to block a return to the era of oligarchy and corruption. His winning combination of personal visibility on the ground, direct voter engagement, and strong backing from Western leaders helped offset Russian pressure and counter a fragmented opposition.· Existing divisions within society. Young Armenians remain particularly alienated – critical of Pashinyan’s handling of Nagorno-Karabakh and his public persona, yet lacking a credible alternative, many cast votes for parties that did not reach the parliamentary threshold. Meanwhile, Nagorno-Karabakh remains an open wound: with borders closed for decades and fears rooted in historical trauma, many Armenians support peace in principle but have little sense of what open borders or a formal agreement would mean in practice.· Russia’s information campaign failed. Kremlin-linked networks ran a coordinated disinformation operation, using the same playbook seen in Moldova, sometimes with near-identical texts, built on three narratives: the government betrayed Nagorno-Karabakh, the peace deal is surrender, and the election is rigged. Despite saturating social media, particularly TikTok, the campaign backfired. Russian economic pressure similarly hardened, rather than softened, voters’ resolve.· Economic pressures and the diaspora. Pashinyan’s mandate will depend on his ability to protect living standards while pursuing structural reforms and reducing economic dependence on Russia – a difficult balance with no quick fixes. Adding further complexity, unlike in Moldova where diaspora communities largely vote pro-EU, a significant share of Armenia’s diaspora is based in Russia and leans pro-Russian.