Armenia After the Parliamentary Elections
By Malkhaz Matsaberidze
Tuesday, June 30, 2025
According to preliminary results of the parliamentary elections held in Armenia on June 7, seats in the legislative body (which has at least 101 seats) were distributed among three political forces. The party of incumbent Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan secured nearly 50% of the vote and retained a parliamentary majority, although it won fewer seats compared to the previous elections. These elections were one of the most pivotal political events in the country's recent history. Analysts often described them as a "referendum on the country's future and foreign policy direction."
The elections became a litmus test of how much influence Moscow still retained over its traditional ally. Pashinyan's victory showed that, despite Russia's efforts (including economic pressure and support for pro-Russian candidates), Armenian society backed a course of closer alignment with the West. Following the 2023 events in Karabakh, where Russian peacekeepers failed-or were unable-to prevent the displacement of ethnic Armenians, Russia's image as a "security guarantor" in Armenia was ultimately shattered.
Pashinyan ran his election campaign on a promise to establish long-term peace in the region. His victory signals a green light for normalizing relations with Azerbaijan and Turkey, including the implementation of a Washington-mediated peace agreement and the so-called "transit corridor" project, named after US President Donald Trump (who had openly expressed support for Pashinyan ahead of the elections).
The main opposition forces-the bloc "Strong Armenia" led by pro-Russian billionaire Samvel Karapetyan (which received around 23% of the vote) and the "Armenia Alliance" led by former president Robert Kocharyan (around 10%)-were defeated, and despite the pain caused by the loss of Karabakh, Armenia's population rejected the return of old elites associated with corrupt regimes.
According to preliminary data from the Central Election Commission, Gagik Tsarukyan's party "Prosperous Armenia" fell short of the 4% electoral threshold by just 0.004 percentage points. The party received 3.996% of the vote (58,378 votes). To reach exactly 4.0%, they would have needed roughly 60 additional votes (depending on the total number of ballots cast).
Due to such a minimal margin, Tsarukyan's campaign headquarters has already announced that it will formally request a recount of the ballots, in the hope that these few dozen votes might be "found" somewhere, allowing them to secure parliamentary seats.
The June 7 elections legitimized Armenia's new geopolitical reality: the country is decisively shifting away from Russia's orbit toward the West, choosing a policy of regional peace and open borders-even at the cost of painful territorial concessions.
The United States and the European Union quickly and very positively assessed the results of the parliamentary elections in Armenia. While the US and the EU celebrate Pashinyan's victory as a triumph of democracy and a Western-oriented trajectory, Russia, Iran, and China (each in its own way) recognize that Armenia is increasingly distancing itself from Moscow. However, all three countries signal to Yerevan that, given geographical and economic realities, Armenia will not be able to easily free itself from dependence on Russian and regional markets.
As for Georgia, positions in Tbilisi were sharply divided between the government and the opposition. The Georgian officials and the ruling party, Georgian Dream, adopted a traditionally cautious and pragmatic stance. Irakli Kobakhidze congratulated Nikol Pashinyan on his election victory. He emphasized the "strategic partnership" between the two countries and expressed hope that good-neighborly relations and regional projects would continue successfully.
At the same time, he showed caution in geopolitical rhetoric: unlike Western leaders, who highlighted Armenia's "pro-Western choice" and distancing from Russia, Georgian Dream avoided such explicit assessments. The rhetoric focused instead on the idea that the Armenian people had voted for stability and peace.
Georgia's pro-Western opposition welcomed the results of the Armenian elections with great enthusiasm, using them to reinforce their own message. For them, Armenia became a model for Georgia: opposition leaders noted that while, under "Georgian Dream," Georgia had effectively moved into confrontation with the West, Armenia-long considered part of Russia's orbit-had demonstrated a clear will to become a member of the European family.
In opposition statements, the phrase "even Armenia is choosing Europe, while we are moving backwards" was frequently heard. The Georgian opposition praised Nikol Pashinyan for withstanding unprecedented economic and political pressure from the Kremlin, for not being intimidated by protests organized by the church and pro-Russian forces, and for bringing the elections to a democratic conclusion.
Armenia's elections once again highlighted the paradoxical shift in regional roles in Georgia: the opposition emphasizes that Armenia is "outpacing" Georgia in the dynamics of European integration, while the ruling party seeks to maintain balance to avoid triggering new military or economic escalation from Moscow in the South Caucasus following Yerevan's sharp pro-Western turn.
Questions have been raised about whether, despite his political victory, Pashinyan's government could remain exposed to indirect economic pressure from Russia, given Armenia's continued reliance on Russian energy and trade routes. This could, in a more stressed scenario, affect energy costs or logistics flows, potentially leading to short-term economic strain that might require external financial support.
Defeated pro-Russian forces and certain factions within the Church are unlikely to accept the results. Periodic waves of protests are expected, during which Pashinyan is likely to be accused of "betraying national interests" and making concessions to Azerbaijan.
Following the rejection of Russia's security umbrella, Armenia is entering a transitional phase in which Western military assistance-such as arms deliveries from France and the presence of an EU monitoring mission-still does not provide full security guarantees. Any disruption in negotiations with Baku carries the risk of localized border clashes.
The absence of a constitutional majority means that Pashinyan has a mandate to govern the country, but not the authority to unilaterally alter Armenia's fundamental state framework. This compels him to act with greater caution in negotiations with Baku and to continuously seek a broader public consensus.
Developments suggest that Armenia is entering a phase of "major geopolitical transformation." The country is attempting, in a very short time frame, to transition from a Russian outpost into a Western partner and a regional transit actor. Success on this path will depend on how quickly Yerevan reaches a peace agreement with Baku, and how effectively the West helps absorb potential Russian economic pressure.
A key shortcoming of Western policy to date has been the expectation that Armenia would make a geopolitical turn without being offered robust security guarantees. If the United States and the European Union once again limit themselves to expressions of concern, Pashinyan may struggle to withstand simultaneous pressure from Russia and Azerbaijan. Accordingly, Western engagement would need to be swift, substantial, and financially robust.