Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s Civil Contract Party secured a majority by winning 61 of 105 seats in the parliamentary elections held in Armenia on Jun 7. The Civil Contract Party received 49.81 percent of the vote.
Businessman Samvel Karapetyan’s Strong Armenia Alliance obtained 23.29 percent of the vote, followed by former President Robert Kocharyan’s Armenia Alliance at 9.94 percent, and the Prosperous Armenia Party at 4 percent.
Congratulating the people of Armenia on the election results, Pashinyan said, “With their vote, the people of Armenia protected the state, protected independence, protected the future, protected peace, and protected the Republic of Armenia. The tripartite party of war has suffered a heavy defeat. The people clearly demonstrated their will that the tripartite party of war and its associated criminal-oligarchic system must be eradicated from Armenia.”
Journalist Vartan Estukyan a member of Turkey's Armenian community, evaluated the Armenian society’s choice to re-elect Pashinyan, despite the territorial losses and military defeat in the Karabakh process, as a decision made in favor of peace and normalization.
According to Estukyan, Pashinyan also used the conditions created by the war economy to his advantage. He transformed into a stronger political figure domestically by moving away from Russia and turning toward the European Union and the US.
Did his approach to domestic policy, in addition to his stance on foreign policy, play a decisive role in the election outcome? During the election campaign, we also witnessed protests against Pashinyan, and objections regarding Karabakh were at the center of those protests. There were also numerous detentions and arrests during that same period. Was there a connection between the protests and the church?
Yes, one of the most significant challenges Pashinyan faces in domestic politics is his relationship with the church. Tensions between the government and the Armenian Apostolic Church became particularly visible in the post-Karabakh period. In Armenia, the church stands out as a powerful political and social actor due to its influence on society. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, the resurgence of religious identity in Armenia has amplified the church’s social influence.
The current tension between Pashinyan and the church, however, has garnered more limited social support compared to the Sarkisyan era. For this reason, I believe the political impact of the conflict between the government and the church remains a subject of debate. The protests you mentioned were more limited and fragmented rather than a mass movement. But of course, this does not mean the opposition sphere is entirely weak. The church’s indirect influence has created an environment where criticism of the government can be expressed more freely. Objectively speaking, the tension between the church and the government continues intensely, and in my view, both sides occasionally strike at each other from highly unethical angles. Given this ongoing, mutually hostile rhetoric that never loses its intensity, achieving a lasting reconciliation seems difficult.
From an economic perspective, Armenia is in a more vulnerable position compared to Turkey and Azerbaijan. For this reason, a significant portion of society believes that dialogue and normalization could yield economic benefits through a pragmatic approach. But of course, there are serious concerns within society as well, and some of these anxieties are entirely understandable.
MASİS KÜRKÇÜGİL ON TURKEY-ARMENIA RAPPROACHMENT
'Armenia is looking for ways to breathe'
16 May 2026
Anti-Russian sentiment among Armenians
Due to his stance on both domestic and foreign policy, Pashinyan’s third term is viewed as a critical threshold. How do you assess this?
If he continues in office without incident, Pashinyan’s total time in political office will reach 12 years. This will naturally bring discussions of “authoritarianism” in the coming years. However, Armenia is seeking a multifaceted balance in foreign policy. While there is a continuing trend of distancing from Russia, it is also striving to strengthen its relations with the EU and the US. The warming of relations with France and the meetings with Macron are also part of this process. Of course, the strong Armenian diaspora in France plays a significant role in this relationship. We are talking about an Armenian population of over 500,000 in France. Consequently, the Armenian issue represents a significant voting bloc for Macron. In this context, they have also signed a military cooperation agreement with Armenia.
On the Trump front, however, the picture is more uncertain. Due to the unpredictable nature of U.S. politics and Trump’s approach, there is not yet a solid foundation of trust for Armenia. For this reason, I am among those who believe Yerevan is “investing” more in the EU than in the U.S. I also observe and read that this trend is gaining trac…
Read the full article at Bianet →
TR