(C) EurasiaNet
This story was originally published by EurasiaNet and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .



News analysis: Real Armenia and public trust [1]

['Alexander Thompson']

Date: 2025-06

Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan (left) speaks with local residents during a recent visit to Syunik Province. His government has spent the past 18 months promoting the Real Armenia strategy, but it is now confronting a critical test: can the government convince ordinary Armenians to buy into Real Armenia’s promises and accept short-term pain for longer-term gain? (Photo: primeminister.am)

Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s government in Armenia finds itself embroiled an increasingly bitter conflict with the ArmenianApostolic Church’s hierarchy. A major source of rancor is Pashinyan’s Real Armenia program that aims to overhaul society.

The Real Armenia concept represents a strategic shift toward focusing on its present, internationally recognized territory and geopolitical realities rather than nostalgic visions of historic Armenia. Initiated in response to intense regional security challenges and the perceived unreliability of traditional allies, this vision promotes alignment with Western institutions, primarily the European Union and the United States.

The transition aims to position Armenia as a self-reliant, democratically oriented nation capable of sustainable economic and political development; however, it faces significant backlash from the diaspora and citizens at home, who perceive it as a white flag recognizing the permanent loss of Nagorno Karabakh. This view is fueled by Pashinyan’s political opposition.

The Armenian government has spent the past 18 months promoting the Real Armenia strategy, arguing that the country must focus on developing the state as it currently exists, the 29,800 square kilometers of sovereign territory, and relinquish romanticized visions of a “historic” Armenia. This shift has translated into unprecedented steps: the government has launched a bid for European Union membership and signed a strategic partnership agreement with the United States.

This foreign policy reorientation is driven by strategic necessity. After Russia declined to intervene when Armenia was attacked by Azerbaijan during the closing phase of the Second Karabakh War, Pashinyan openly questioned the reliability of Russia’s security umbrella. Hence, Real Armenia’s call for a geopolitical pivot toward the United States and the European Union—even at the cost of painful compromises.

Underscored by his feud with the Church, which is viewed by many as a bastion of support for the historical Armenia viewpoint, Pashinyan is taking a high-risk gamble.

Economic alignment

An economic calculus underpins Pashinyan’s westward tilt. Closer ties with Europe promise long-term development through structural reforms and access to larger markets. Armenia has already been implementing the Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement and now sees an EU accession bid as the logical next step. At the same time, the government insists it is not severing economic ties with the Russia-dominated Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). Russia, however, has repeatedly stated that Armenia cannot be a member of both the EU and EAEU.

In theory, Armenia hopes to enjoy the best of both worlds. In practice, EU membership would likely require Armenia’s exit from the EAEU, and that prospect carries heavy risks, given Moscow’s messaging of displeasure.

In 2024, Russia accounted for 55 percent of Armenia’s imports and 24 percent of its exports. Armenia’s gross domestic product (GDP) grew by more than 74 percent between 2021 and 2023, driven primarily by the skyrocketing growth of re-exports amid the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Some officials estimate that quitting the EAEU could cost the country up to 40 percent of its GDP, resulting in a decline in output, job losses, and a reduction in living standards.

Armenian officials acknowledge these challenges and speak of a gradual approach. But time may not be on Yerevan’s side. If Brussels eventually demands exclusive alignment with EU policies as a condition of accession, Armenia will face a fateful choice that pits long-term aspiration against immediate economic pain.

The Real Armenia strategy is now confronting a critical test at home: can the government convince ordinary Armenians to buy into Real Armenia’s promises?

So far, there is a noticeable gap between the ambitions of the ruling elite and the mood on the street. Despite the government's pro-European shift, recent polling indicates that most Armenians still favor close ties with Russia, emphasizing the enduring public attachment to traditional alliances. In other words, almost four decades after the collapse of the Soviet Union, many citizens still view Russia as a source of economic and strategic security.

Even Pashinyan’s supporters acknowledge that the government needs a better communications strategy to manage expectations. The Real Armenia doctrine asks people to accept short-term pain for longer-term gain. But patience already is running thin. The trauma of the loss of the Second Karabakh War to Azerbaijan has left Armenians exhausted. Many say they want to live in peace, without enemies and crises, but are unsure which path will lead them there. Is it Pashinyan’s peace-at-any-price course, or the opposition’s promise of security through a Russian embrace? The public remains torn.

Bridging this trust gap is now one of Pashinyan’s foremost challenges. His feud with the Church only compounds the degree of difficulty of achieving this aim. His administration has begun a public outreach campaign to sell the merits of the peace treaty with Azerbaijan and the pivot to Europe. The prime minister pledges that any final decision on EU membership will be subject to a national referendum. He is also trying to show tangible early benefits of Western engagement. For instance, EU monitoring along the border provides a sense of security, and new economic deals with France, Germany, and the United States promise to bring investment and create jobs. Still, results must materialize quickly to reassure a skeptical populace.

Between aspiration and reality

Armenia’s current course is nothing less than an attempt to redefine the country’s identity after decades of post-Soviet dependency. It encapsulates the quintessential post-revolution dilemma: how far can a nation leap toward its aspirations without losing its footing in reality?

On the one hand, Pashinyan’s drive to align economically and politically with the West is rooted in a sober assessment: the old way of relying on Russia has left Armenia isolated, insecure, and economically stagnant. On the other hand, the constraints of Real Armenia are real; geography, economics, and public sentiment all tug Yerevan back toward caution. The country’s pro-Western leadership talks about a future in the EU. However, in reality, an Armenian farmer still depends on selling apricots to Russia, and an Armenian construction worker still relies on a seasonal job in Russia. These realities cannot be upended overnight by parliamentary actions.

Ultimately, the success or failure of Real Armenia depend on factors that Pashinyan cannot completely control. A peace deal with Azerbaijan could remove one existential worry and free Armenia to focus on internal development, but Azerbaijan remains cagey about signing the already finalized treaty text. For its part, the EU and United States might recognize that helping Armenia succeed could pay strategic dividends in a region where democracy is increasingly embattled. That could mean more robust economic assistance or security coordination to back up the warm words from Brussels and Washington.

Conversely, any stumble—a breakdown in the peace process, a severe economic shock or instability fanned by external forces—could push Armenia back into Russia’s embrace.

The struggle over Armenia’s direction is about more than geopolitical orientation; it is about public trust. Can the government persuade citizens that the pragmatic Real Armenia concept is not just a theory? Pragmatism means that Pashinyan must acknowledge people’s fears and the limits of rapid change.

[END]
---
[1] Url: https://eurasianet.org/news-analysis-real-armenia-and-public-trust

Published and (C) by EurasiaNet
Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons CC BY-ND 4.0.

via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/eurasianet/

You are viewing proxied material from magical.fish. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.