Armenia is navigating a fraught and high-stakes strategic realignment away from its long-time ally Russia and toward Western partners, according to a new report by the Central Asia‑Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Program (CACI-SRSP). The shift, the report argues, is “driven not by choice but by necessity” as Yerevan is “militarily inferior, diplomatically isolated and abandoned by unreliable security guarantors.”

The paper, titled “Armenia’s Strategic Dilemma: Geography versus History”, warns that Yerevan’s drive to break free from its dependency on Moscow is generating profound internal political turbulence and exposing the country to new external risks. 

Armenia’s change of direction stems from setbacks in its security environment. The report notes that Russia’s failure to defend Armenia from repeated incursions by Azerbaijan played a decisive role in prompting the shift: “Russia’s increasingly accommodating stance toward Azerbaijani and Turkish regional ambitions … exposed the weakness and untrustworthiness of Moscow’s security guarantees.” 

Changes in the South Caucasus 

In August 2025, Armenia initialled a historic peace deal with Azerbaijan at the While House, which has already led to a dramatic change in the geopolitical balance in the South Caucasus. 

Armenia has a rare chance to “resolve its longstanding grievances with neighbouring Turkey and Azerbaijan … establish fruitful economic partnerships with countries around the world, and to finally break free of its stifling dependence on Russia and Iran.” The report suggests that success could turn Armenia into “a sovereign, stable, and democratic” partner contributing to regional stability and serving as a bulwark against influence from Russia or Iran. 

The proposed Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity (TRIPP) transit corridor would give the United States “exclusive development rights to a transit route straddling Armenia’s southern border … linking former adversaries (that is, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Turkey) to one another in a mutually beneficial economic arrangement,” as the report points out. 

Meanwhile, Armenia has embarked on “diversified strategic partnerships and, more painfully, détente with its former enemies to ensure its security”. In practical terms, the report cites new defence cooperation with France, weapons partnerships with India, and security exercises with the US. 

For Western partners, Armenia offers “considerable value as a stable partner in the strategically vital South Caucasus region.” 

Domestic backlash

Despite the gains, the report sounds an alarm about the domestic costs of Armenia’s foreign-policy shift. The authors write that “the very concessions required for strategic survival generate domestic opposition that threatens to undermine the partnerships Armenia desperately needs.” 

They identify a coalition of opposition forces—including “clergy of the Armenian Apostolic Church, disillusioned oligarchs, the exiled leadership of the Republic of Artsakh, and ordinary citizens unwilling to accept that former enemies can become partners.” The report characterises the country’s domestic politics as shaped by “the trauma and insecurity of abandoning historical narratives, territorial claims, and institutional protections.” 

In one example, a movement led by church figures challenged Prime Minister Nikol  Pashinyan over border demarcation with Azerbaijan, mobilising more than 30,000 protesters in Yerevan in May 2024. 

The CACI-SRSP paper warns that Armenia is caught in a “dangerous feedback loop” in which external pressure exacerbates internal division, which in turn undermines the pivot toward the West. “The government’s strategic pivot creates — or further inflames — domestic opposition that refuses to accept why such changes are necessary,” the report says. 

High stakes election 

Looking ahead to the 2026 parliamentary election in Armenia, the report presents it as “the definitive test” of whether the government can break this cycle.  

The authors stress that the stakes go beyond domestic politics: for Armenia, “failure to do so could result in democratic backsliding … subordination to hostile neighbours, or even further territorial losses.”

The question is whether the Pashinyan government can deliver visible gains to ordinary Armenians. If the pivot fails to deliver results such as improved border security, economic opportunities, or sustained peace agreements—the paper warns the backlash could strengthen pro-Russian forces, reverse the strategic realignment and leave Armenia more dependent than before.