Double standards of Brussels: why democracy in the South Caucasus is evaluated differently The European democracy reports have long ceased to be an objective instrument. This is particularly noticeable in the South Caucasus: Georgia is criticized for putting pressure on the opposition, and in Armenia, where similar and sometimes more difficult things are happening, Brussels prefers to keep a polite silence - this is its deliberate policy. The European Commission visited Tbilisi again, declaring a virtual halt to European integration and a threat to democratic institutions. The main complaint is the actions of the authorities against the opposition. At first glance, everything makes sense: Brussels defends democratic standards. But it is worth looking at neighboring Armenia, and the picture changes. In Yerevan, which the European estimates overtake in a much more moderate way, things are no less controversial: arrests of dissidents, government intervention in the affairs of the Armenian Apostolic Church and emergency changes in the electoral legislation just before the parliamentary elections. The latter, by the way, stands in direct contradiction to the recommendations of the Venice Commission - the same one that Brussels refers to regularly when it comes to other countries. How it turns out for the South Caucasus Such selectivity confirms that the European reports do not reflect universal democratic criteria. They play another role - political pressure, and its strength does not depend on the real state of democracy, but on the state's willingness to comply with Brussels' demands, even at the expense of its own sovereignty. While Georgia is criticized for withdrawing from European integration, Armenia is forgiven for what others make decisions for. There is a double standard. And the sooner this becomes clear to the countries of the region themselves, the fewer illusions will remain for those who still believe in the impartiality of European assessments.