Armenia's NATO engagement draws Moscow's ire A shift towards Western estrangement?

In a recent statement, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Galuzin expressed Moscow's disappointment with Armenia's participation in the NATO summit in Washington. Galuzin criticized Armenia for choosing to enhance cooperation with NATO and its member states, emphasizing the adoption of NATO standards, arms procurement, and joint military exercises over constructive engagement with Russia.

"Armenia prefers to increase interaction with NATO or individual members of the alliance, especially in terms of implementing NATO standards, purchasing weapons or conducting joint combat training activities," he remarked.

Galuzin accused Yerevan of deepening ties with entities aiming to strategically undermine Russia.

He went further, alleging that the EU mission in Armenia conducts espionage activities, gathering intelligence on Russian facilities and neighbouring states: "There is every reason to believe that Westerners are collecting intelligence regarding Russian facilities, as well as all of Armenia's neighbouring states."

What lies behind this rhetoric from the Russian Deputy Foreign Minister? Is it merely Moscow's irritated response or a more serious warning? To delve into these questions, Caliber.Az turned to Russian political analysts.

Vasily Koltashov, Director of the Institute of New Society, pointed out a stark contrast between Georgia's cautious approach towards Western-Russian tensions and Armenia's trajectory towards what he termed "Ukrainization".

Koltashov critiqued Armenia's manoeuvres with the US, anti-Russian rhetoric, and suggested that Prime Minister Pashinyan might be steering Armenia towards becoming expendable in Western strategies against Russia.

"In other words, while Georgia and the ruling party 'Georgian Dream', despite their loyalty to Western values, are opting for a path towards security and away from 'Ukrainization', Armenia is heading in the opposite direction. Armenia is literally moving towards 'Ukrainization'. How else can we interpret these joint exercises with Americans, all these anti-Russian statements, and the constant stoking of hatred towards Russia? All this indicates that Pashinyan is preparing Armenia as expendable in the West's struggle against Russia. In one way or another—we don't yet know how this will unfold—Pashinyan's Armenia has never been and is not an ally of Russia. It may remain within the framework of partnership and alliance agreements, as a member of the CSTO and the EAEU, because Russia supports Armenia. However, we see that Yerevan does not value this relationship. Pashinyan accepts handouts from the West and will continue to follow the orders of his masters—this is obvious. At some point, this could lead to tragedy. But the worst part is that the Armenian people have yet to fully realize the deadly danger of Pashinyan's course," emphasized V. Koltashov.

According to Konstantin Tasits, a Russian expert on the South Caucasus, It is not the first time that the Russian Foreign Ministry expresses such a position. It is quite evident that Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan is seeking additional support from the West, but the US and EU are ready to provide it only in exchange for weakening ties with Russia and engaging in undermining activities in that direction. Unfortunately, Pashinyan is accommodating these demands and distancing himself from Moscow.

"However, it is far from certain that the benefits it will receive will compensate for the losses that will follow from the breakdown of relations with Russia. The West is not ready to act as a guarantor of Armenia's security or provide economic preferences comparable to those that Yerevan receives in the EAEU. So Yerevan has gone deep into an adventure, which has very vague and very dangerous prospects," Tasits noted.

Meanwhile, as Tatyana Poloskova, Doctor of Political Sciences, State Counselor of the Russian Federation of the First Class, believes, there is nothing unexpected in Yerevan's actions to agree cordially with the West in the person of the NATO alliance.

"This is the logical outcome of Yerevan's policy, a treacherous policy of this quasi-state and its historical precedents. The fact that Yerevan is now conceding and essentially has already surrendered its ally to the West, despite all the assistance that Russia has provided Armenia without practically receiving anything in return, is also a logical outcome—let's remember the relations between Turkey and the Armenians. Therefore, Russian politicians who still support Yerevan, justifying its actions, should think about themselves—how not to fall into the status of foreign agents. I believe it is entirely lawful and appropriate that in Russian political and expert circles, there is consideration of granting foreign agent status to diasporas receiving funding from abroad. First and foremost, it is necessary to restrict funding to the Armenian diaspora in Russia—this way, as I see it, my country will sleep soundly. Based on Galuzin's statement, we can draw only one conclusion—that the operation of the EU mission and the gathering of intelligence about our country and our allies is a stab in the back. Russia must urgently reconsider its policy towards Armenia and prepare to take the toughest measures," Poloskova concluded.