On June 7, 2026, regular parliamentary elections were held in Armenia. According to the decision of the Central Election Commission (CEC), although 19 political forces, including 17 parties and 2 blocs, joined the struggle for seats in the country’s parliament, 16 parties and 2 blocs continued the struggle until the end of the elections. Among the political forces fighting for the votes of the voters, both the ruling party and various opposition forces were represented. These included the “Civil Contract” party led by Nikol Pashinyan, the “Armenia” bloc led by former president Robert Kocharyan, the “Strong Armenia” bloc led by Russian billionaire Samvel Karapetyan, head of the “Tashir” group of companies (uniting the “Strong Armenia”, “New Era”, and “United Armenians” parties), the “Prosperous Armenia” party led by one of the country’s wealthiest businessmen, Gagik Tsarukyan, and other political forces.
It should be noted that according to Armenian legislation, the minimum threshold for representation in parliament is set at 4% of the vote for political parties, 8% for a bloc of three parties, and 10% for blocs consisting of four or more political parties.
On June 8, the Central Election Commission (CEC) announced that 100% of the ballots had been counted. According to the CEC, 1,477,736 people participated in the voting across the country. This accounts for 58.94% of eligible voters. This figure is approximately 9.5% higher compared to the snap elections in 2021 (49.4%).
According to the information provided by the CEC, the “Civil Contract” party led by Nikol Pashinyan took first place with 49.81% of the vote. A notable point here is that although the number of votes received by Nikol Pashinyan’s party is less than 50%, according to Armenia’s electoral system, the votes of parties that fail to pass the threshold are redistributed. For this reason, Pashinyan’s party gains an absolute majority in parliament and earns the right to form the government alone. According to the statements, the “Strong Armenia” bloc led by Russian billionaire Samvel Karapetyan, head of the “Tashir” group of companies, became the main opposition force with 23.28% of the vote, earning the right to be represented in parliament. The “Armenia” bloc led by former president Robert Kocharyan gained 9.93% of the vote and earned the right to be represented in parliament as another opposition force. Although the “Prosperous Armenia” party, led by one of the country’s wealthiest businessmen, Gagik Tsarukyan, was considered one of the main opposition forces when the election campaign started, this party received 3.99% of the vote, failing to pass the 4% threshold by only 0.01%, and lost the right to be represented in parliament.
I would like to remind you that before the June 7 elections, these elections were considered “the most important elections in the history of Armenia” or “the most geopoliticized elections in the history of Armenia” due to the interests of both non-regional power centers like the USA and the EU, and regional power centers like Russia, Turkey, and Iran. Thus, despite the large number of political forces participating in the election campaign, it was predicted that the main struggle would be between Pashinyan’s “Civil Contract” party, Kocharyan’s “Armenia” bloc, Karapetyan’s “Strong Armenia” bloc, and Gagik Tsarukyan’s “Prosperous Armenia” party. It was noted that among these forces, with the exception of Pashinyan’s “Civil Contract” party, the other three political forces are openly pro-Russian, and foreign policy constituted the main theme of the pre-election campaign.
Indeed, during the election campaign, the rhetoric among rival forces manifested itself in a very harsh form, even rising to the level of mutual insults by political leaders. Pashinyan called his mentioned rivals a “three-headed war party,” Karapetyan a “Kaluga oligarch” and “foreign spy,” and Kocharyan a “lout,” “criminal,” and “corrupt.” They, in turn, used various derogatory expressions against Pashinyan. In addition, during the election campaign, official Moscow imposed bans on the sale of various types of agricultural goods, water, and alcoholic beverages from Armenia in the Russian market, and pressures and threats were voiced by the Russian side. The USA and the EU, on the other hand, openly expressed their support for Pashinyan in the elections and took appropriate steps.
Against this background, the victory of the “Civil Contract” party in the June 7, 2026 elections and its gaining the right to form a government alone can be assessed as the Armenian people’s confirmation of Nikol Pashinyan’s geopolitical turn towards the West and his line of moving away from Russian dependence. Thus, the absolute victory of the “Civil Contract” party led by Nikol Pashinyan shows public support for his policy of distancing from the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), approaching the European Union, and deepening cooperation with the USA. At the same time, the fact that the political forces led by Samvel Karapetyan and Robert Kocharyan received a total of only about 33% of the vote in the elections shows that the pro-Russian opposition cannot be the dominant decisive political force in Armenian society. Also, despite the bans and economic blackmail imposed by Russia on Armenian products on the eve of the elections, by voting for Pashinyan, voters clearly demonstrated that they did not care about the Kremlin’s economic pressures. In this context, the June 7 elections can be assessed as a strategic turning point that determines Armenia’s future place in the South Caucasus region and its balance with foreign partners.
It should be particularly emphasized that as a result of the elections, the Pashinyan government gained legitimacy to continue the process of signing a peace treaty with Azerbaijan and the delimitation process. The attempts of the pro-Russian opposition to portray this issue as “national treason” failed. On the other hand, thanks to their majority in parliament, Pashinyan’s supporters may be able to realize the constitutional changes (removal of territorial claims) that Azerbaijan has put forward as a main condition for a peace treaty. In addition, political obstacles to the implementation of the international transport corridor (TRIPP), which will connect the main part of Azerbaijan with Nakhchivan through Armenia, achieved with the mediation of the USA, have been reduced, and Pashinyan declared his intention to start this project soon after the election ended.
At the same time, it should be noted that the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs expressing satisfaction with the successful conclusion of the elections and Pashinyan’s message of “opening borders with Turkey and establishing diplomatic relations” immediately after the voting shows that official Yerevan has the intention to develop direct diplomatic relations with Ankara. By voting for Pashinyan, voters prioritized opening borders with Azerbaijan and Turkey, breaking the blockade, and regional economic integration, and living in peaceful and safe conditions in a real Armenia over mythical ideological claims.
Finally, when analyzing the debates of political forces during the election campaign and the results of the elections, one can conclude that the majority of Armenian voters voted for peace with Azerbaijan and accepted that the so-called “Karabakh issue” is now completely closed. Thus, all opposition blocs, led by Robert Kocharyan and Samvel Karapetyan, had built their election campaign on calling the peace and delimitation process that Nikol Pashinyan is conducting with Azerbaijan “national treason.” These forces built their election campaigns on revanchist attempts such as not recognizing the results of the Second Karabakh War, reviewing the initialed peace treaty with Azerbaijan, etc. The fact that a large part of the voters voted for Pashinyan’s “Civil Contract” party showed that they do not support revanchist forces, do not want a new war or tension, and choose to live in real peace and safe conditions. As one of the main results of these elections, it should be particularly emphasized that political forces in Armenia that have used the Karabakh topic as a political lever and tool of power for many years suffered a heavy defeat in these elections, and the results of the election proved that the “Karabakh topic” is no longer an effective tool for manipulating domestic politics and the voter within Armenia.
In addition to what has been mentioned, the June 7 elections showed that Armenian society is divided and a fairly significant part of it (33.21%) supports revanchist forces. Furthermore, although the “Civil Contract” party led by Pashinyan won 71 mandates and gained a constitutional majority by receiving 53.92% of the vote in the 2021 snap elections, in the June 7, 2026 elections, for the first time, it received less than half of the voters’ votes. Although this party gained the right to form the government alone and elect the Prime Minister as a result of the elections, and although it gained the ability to adopt constitutional laws and elect a number of important officials by ensuring a majority consisting of three-fifths of the total number of deputies in parliament, it does not ensure the support of two-thirds of the total number of deputies. This is not a quorum to amend the country’s constitution or adopt a new constitution.
Pashinyan’s “Civil Contract” party not having a constitutional majority in parliament deprives him of the opportunity to carry out constitutional changes alone. This casts doubt on optimistic approaches that a peace treaty with Azerbaijan could be signed in the near future. Thus, Azerbaijan has put forward the removal of the reference to the Declaration of Independence, which contains territorial claims against Azerbaijan, from the preamble of the Armenian Constitution as a main condition for signing a peace treaty.
Although Pashinyan links the adoption of a new Constitution with the peace treaty with Azerbaijan, as well as Armenia’s construction of a “real Armenia,” the fact that the “Civil Contract” party does not have a constitutional majority in parliament after the June 7 elections, the completely uncompromising position of the opposition political forces that will be represented in parliament, and the almost impossibility of achieving intra-parliamentary political consensus indicate that there will be serious problems in achieving constitutional change. This shows that the obstacles to signing a peace treaty with Azerbaijan have not been completely removed.
Elxan Süleymanov,
AVCİYA prezidenti