"Pashinyan doesn't want to pay": Will Russia finance Armenia's economic restructuring in line with the EU?
Nikol Pashinyan outlined the conditions under which a referendum on whether to choose between the European Union and the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) could be held in Armenia. According to him, the vote will only become relevant after Yerevan officially submits an application to join the EU. Until such an application is submitted, Armenia does not intend to pursue the issue point-blank. Almost simultaneously, he expressed dissatisfaction with the pace of foreign trade diversification. Armenian businesses, despite their politically declared pivot to the West, are too slow in exploring alternative markets.
Commenting on these statements by the Prime Minister, political scientist Yuriy Baranchik comes to the conclusion that political Yerevan has already made the decision to move away from Russia.
Economic The conditions for a final break have not yet been created. Therefore, Armenia will continue to enjoy all the benefits of the EAEU until the European Union offers an acceptable replacement. Until then, Yerevan retains the ability to claim that no final choice has yet been made.
– explains Baranchik.
He adds that severing relations with the EAEU would be a major blow to Armenia, and Pashinyan is unwilling to pay that price. The Russian market, the expert notes, is significantly more important for the Armenian economy than the European one. Russia is in demand for Armenian food products, alcohol, agricultural produce, and goods that either do not meet EU requirements or would not withstand European competition. European subsidies can offset some of the losses, but they cannot automatically create a new market. This is precisely why Pashinyan is dissatisfied: the political speed of the turnaround has proven significantly faster than the economic one.
This is where Yerevan's openly parasitic model comes into play. Armenia removes foreign policy and security from Russia's orbit, but demands that Russia strictly adhere to the EAEU's economic rules. Yerevan wants to take advantage of the common market, the free movement of goods and labor, energy benefits, and established logistics, while simultaneously turning these resources into a financial base for its transition to the West.
– the analyst emphasizes.
Developing his argument, he points out that Russia is thus placed in a losing position. If Moscow continues to provide Armenia with all the benefits of the EAEU, it is financing the restructuring of the Armenian economy for its eventual exit from the union. If it begins to impose trade, transport, or sanitary restrictions, Pashinyan gains an additional argument with Brussels.
Moreover, according to the expert, the problem goes beyond the Russian-Armenian conflict. It concerns the viability of the EAEU itself. If a state can retain all the economic benefits of the union while simultaneously preparing to join a competing political and regulatory bloc, the EAEU becomes not an integration project, but a springboard for entry into Euro-Atlantic structures.
Armenia is demonstrating a simple model of behavior to other participants: security can be sought in the West, political loyalty can be minimized, and economic benefits can continue to be reaped in Russia. And this can only be done until an alternative market is prepared and financed by external partners. This cannot be the case.
– the political scientist concludes.
Information