The trauma of the 2020 war, the displacement of the Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians in 2023, and the ongoing uncertainty in its relations with neighbours and strategic partners are all key concerns in Armenia. These developments have reshaped political life, strained social trust, and challenged the resilience of Armenian democracy. The upcoming 2026 parliamentary elections will be an important test of the country's democracy.
In August, US facilitation brought Armenia and Azerbaijan’s leaders together in Washington to attend the 'Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity' initiative. Some EED partners see that this milestone carries the danger of becoming merely transactional – offering economic promise and strategic symbolism, but failing to address deeper complexities. Others see it as a long-term strategic blunder, a capitulation, that could have significant impact on Armenia’s future democracy. In the meanwhile, the current Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Armenia’s former leaders are laying blame on each other for dragging Armenia into the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
In this moment of flux, independent media and civil society organisations, including many EED partners, are playing a crucial role in holding power to account, safeguarding democratic values, and ensuring that the public remains informed. Yet they face increasing political polarisation, funding shortages, disinformation, and security risks.
Polarisation as the Dominant Frame
One of the clearest insights from partners is that Armenia’s politics are locked in a cycle of polarisation, leaving little space for nuance. The government, once the product of a popular democratic revolution, is increasingly seen as intolerant of criticism, while the opposition is associated with the corrupt and authoritarian practices of the past.
Independent voices are caught in this zero-sum game. “Depending on what we investigate, we get attacked from both the authorities and the opposition,” one editor explained. Another described the political climate as “a tug-of-war where both sides have their own media megaphones, and the independent outlets are drowned out.”
This dynamic has consequences beyond the media. Civil society organisations warn of creeping co-optation, as some NGOs align themselves too closely with the government. As one civic leader states: “constructive engagement is necessary, but when organisations become an extension of the state, they lose their watchdog role and public trust.”
Security First, Democracy Later?
Regional security dominates Armenia’s public discourse, shaping the political agenda and even serving as a justification for domestic shortcomings. Partners state that citizens are exhausted by years of crisis – war in 2020, the fall of Nagorno-Karabakh in 2023, and ongoing uncertainty on the border.
“Security has become the lens through which every issue is judged,” said one journalist. “This means that social justice, economic reform, even environmental issues receive far less attention. They are framed as secondary, or even as luxuries Armenia cannot afford.”
Some opposition voices have even advanced the idea that democracy itself is a liability in times of insecurity – a narrative that found traction after the 2020 war. While this rhetoric has since weakened, it lingers in the background of Armenia’s politics. Civil society leaders caution that such framing risks undermining democratic resilience: “A strong democracy is not a weakness. It is precisely what prevents the concentration of power that has failed Armenia in the past.”
Between Moscow and Brussels and China
Another striking trend is Armenia’s shifting geopolitical orientation. Where once Russia was regarded as Armenia’s main ally, today trust has collapsed. “Before 2020, Russia was considered a guarantor of our security. Now many see it as a threat,” noted one partner. Surveys confirm this dramatic reversal: fewer than one-third of Armenians now see Russia as a friend, while nearly half consider it a political danger.
Conversely, support for Europe has remained consistently high. Young people in particular express strong pro-European sentiments, and many citizens welcome Prime Minister Pashinyan’s recent steps towards EU accession.
Yet partners warn against confusing rhetoric with reality. “Passing symbolic laws on EU membership does not bring us closer to Europe,” one civil society expert argued. “What matters is implementing the reforms we have already committed to under the EU–Armenia agreement.”
In addition, Armenia has recently established a strategic partnership with China that aims to open up new economic opportunities for the economy, increase areas of cooperation, and marks a further step within the government’s balanced foreign policy diversification.
Independent Media Under Strain
Despite Armenia’s improvement in global press freedom rankings, the reality for independent journalism is precarious.
CivilNet describes a narrowing environment, with disinformation, financial strain, and politically captured media dominating the landscape. “Public Television has become a government propaganda tool,” one editor observed.
Factor TV highlights the structural weakness: “There is not a single truly independent news television channel in Armenia.” Online, only two or three outlets – Factor TV among them – produce impartial, high-quality video content, while television remains the main news source for over half the population.
The funding crisis has sharpened these pressures. Factor TV lost nearly 60 percent of its budget overnight following the halt of US funding, forcing it to cut staff, close its Russian-language website, and suspend several major projects. Hetq was forced to halt admissions to its Hetq Media Factory, threatening the training of new investigative journalists. CivilNet, too, warns that without alternative support, Armenia’s independent media could face “existential problems”.
Civil Society in the Crosshairs
Civil society groups also find themselves under attack. The Regional Centre for Democracy and Security describes how pro-Russian channels and domestic political actors routinely brand NGOs as “foreign agents”. Hetq has documented smear campaigns, defamatory fake sites, and even spyware attacks against its journalists. CivilNet’s FactCheck team faces near-daily harassment online.
Yet these organisations continue their work. RCDS, together with CivilNet, runs the Democracy Watch initiative, monitoring democratic backsliding. NGOs remain engaged in reform efforts, even as they navigate the fine line between collaboration and co-optation. “Our role is not to be cheerleaders for one political camp,” one civic leader insisted. “It is to defend democratic principles, regardless of who is in power.”
2026: A Defining Test
Looking ahead, the 2026 parliamentary elections are widely seen as a defining test. CivilNet plans to scrutinise electoral platforms and push for constitutional reforms that strengthen checks and balances. Factor TV will intensify pre-bunking and fact-checking, complemented by hard-talk interviews and 24/7 election coverage. Hetq is preparing investigations into party financing and regional campaign practices, while RCDS intends to monitor external interference and disinformation.
Partners also anticipate heightened risks. Factor TV has already faced cyberattacks and smear campaigns and warns of possible violence against its staff during the elections. Hetq expects “2026 will be heated in every sense", with pressures and threats against independent media likely to escalate.
A Call to Action
