Context of Pashinyan-Putin Phone Conversation

The phone call initiated by Nikol Pashinyan on July 27 with Russian President Vladimir Putin was the first since the parliamentary elections in June. Political scientist Suren Surenyants noted that this conversation was politically significant as it occurred against the backdrop of accumulated tensions in Armenian-Russian relations and economic difficulties arising from restrictions on the export of Armenian goods to the Russian market.

"Notably, prior to the conversation with Putin, Pashinyan had phone calls with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz (July 22) and French President Emmanuel Macron (July 25). Communication with European partners apparently did not yield the results that could have mitigated the restrictions on the Russian market. In these circumstances, turning to Moscow has become not so much a political choice as an objective necessity.

According to the official message from Yerevan, Pashinyan raised the issue of restrictions on the export of Armenian-origin goods, emphasizing that they contradict both the Armenian-Russian legal framework and the principles of the Eurasian Economic Union, and requested measures to resolve the issue.

However, the official message from the Kremlin reveals entirely different priorities. The Russian side has again brought up the issue of Armenia's European integration. Putin reaffirmed the logic of the joint statement adopted by the leaders of the four EAEU member states (Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia) on May 29 in Astana and emphasized the need to conduct a nationwide referendum in Armenia as soon as possible to clarify which strategic direction the country is choosing — the European Union or a continuation in the EAEU.

In response, Pashinyan effectively acknowledged that the process of joining the EU is not yet in a practical phase, noting that a referendum could only be held if Armenia officially applies to the European Union.

Nevertheless, even this cautious position did not yield visible results. After the conversation, no statements were made regarding the lifting or easing of export restrictions. Moreover, the Kremlin's message did not even mention economic issues, clearly indicating Moscow's priorities.

Another noteworthy point is that this is yet another instance where Putin did not congratulate Pashinyan on his victory in the parliamentary elections. In the practice of interstate relations, such silence is rarely coincidental and usually carries a political message.

The content of the conversation was clearly a continuation of the political logic of the meeting between Pashinyan and Putin on April 1 and the Astana statement. Moscow is no longer willing to tolerate Yerevan's policy of "sitting on two chairs." Furthermore, the Astana document stipulates that by December 2026, the EAEU intergovernmental council must report on the possible consequences of suspending the application of the EAEU treaty to Armenia. This is no longer a warning but a specific process with established deadlines.

Thus, the Pashinyan-Putin phone conversation did not mark the beginning of overcoming the existing crisis in Armenian-Russian relations. On the contrary, it reaffirmed that the strategic disagreements between the parties continue to deepen, and economic issues are already among the most visible manifestations of this crisis. Moscow is clearly not prepared to be guided by Yerevan's economic difficulties or political explanations. Russia continues to expect from Armenia not assurances, but a clear and final strategic choice.

"Moscow does not believe in tears." The political content of yesterday's phone conversation best illustrates this expression,