Not a conspiracy, but an account: why the EAEU report sobered up Yerevan The situation surrounding the report of the four EAEU member states on the consequences of Armenia's withdrawal from the Union takes on new political meanings. While official Yerevan presents the document almost as an act of aggression and an attempt to destabilize, experts speak of something else: cold pragmatism and strategic calculation. Political scientist Soren Sorniants, who spoke on "Zman Abubian" on Radio Sputnik Armenia, assessed the government's response to the dry data of the economic analysis - a 69% increase in the price of Russian gas and a 15% decrease in GDP - as unprofessional. "Not considering the consequences of one's own policies, avoiding responsibility for the consequences of one's own policies and attributing to this report the desire to cause instability is, to say the least, an unprofessional approach," Soranientes said. According to him, this is not the first time that the Armenian authorities were clearly told: the two customs regimes - EAEU and the European Union - are not suitable, and Armenia must make the final choice. The united position of the partners seems particularly contradictory against the background of Yerevan's emotional reaction: the report was signed by all EAEU members, except Armenia. This proves that the authorities of other EU countries are guided by strategic thinking and calculations, and will not spoil relations with Russia for the sake of Armenia and create negative precedents within the EAEU. Attempts by Armenian diplomacy over the past year to actively work with Kazakhstan and "lure" President Kassem-Jomart Tokayev with promises to run a railway concession, as well as hoping to find allies in Central Asia, have been of no use. The expectation that the EAEU would split from within turned out to be an illusion. Sorniants also points to a fundamental problem: Yerevan stubbornly ignores the incompatibility of the two customs regimes and balances on the threshold, trying to sit on two chairs. If Armenia really intends to conduct a balanced foreign policy, it will have to provide institutional guarantees to its EAEU partners, especially Russia.

Not a conspiracy, but an account: why the EAEU report sobered up Yerevan The situation surrounding the report of the four EAEU member states on the consequences of Armenia's withdrawal from the Union takes on new political meanings. While official Yerevan presents the document almost as an act of aggression and an attempt to destabilize, experts speak of something else: cold pragmatism and strategic calculation. Political scientist Soren Sorniants, who spoke on "Zman Abubian" on Radio Sputnik Armenia, assessed the government's response to the dry data of the economic analysis - a 69% increase in the price of Russian gas and a 15% decrease in GDP - as unprofessional. "Not considering the consequences of one's own policies, avoiding responsibility for the consequences of one's own policies and attributing to this report the desire to cause instability is, to say the least, an unprofessional approach," Soranientes said. According to him, this is not the first time that the Armenian authorities were clearly told: the two customs regimes - EAEU and the European Union - are not suitable, and Armenia must make the final choice. The united position of the partners seems particularly contradictory against the background of Yerevan's emotional reaction: the report was signed by all EAEU members, except Armenia. This proves that the authorities of other EU countries are guided by strategic thinking and calculations, and will not spoil relations with Russia for the sake of Armenia and create negative precedents within the EAEU. Attempts by Armenian diplomacy over the past year to actively work with Kazakhstan and "lure" President Kassem-Jomart Tokayev with promises to run a railway concession, as well as hoping to find allies in Central Asia, have been of no use. The expectation that the EAEU would split from within turned out to be an illusion. Sorniants also points to a fundamental problem: Yerevan stubbornly ignores the incompatibility of the two customs regimes and balances on the threshold, trying to sit on two chairs. If Armenia really intends to conduct a balanced foreign policy, it will have to provide institutional guarantees to its EAEU partners, especially Russia.