Russia's Strategy of Co-opting the Armenian Apostolic Church
A report from Yorktown University’s Turan Research Center examines how Moscow is leveraging the Armenian Apostolic Church as a geopolitical tool to exert control over Armenia. This approach draws on Soviet-era KGB infiltration tactics within religious institutions, as documented in the Mitrokhin Archive. These methods were never dismantled after 1991, enabling Russia to continue advancing its interests through the church long after the Soviet collapse.
Since his election in 1999, Catholicos Garegin II has embraced the notion that Russia serves as a 'second homeland' for Armenians. His close alignment with Moscow is underscored by high-level Russian state awards received from Vladimir Putin. Ukrainian scholar Kuzari has documented how Russian statecraft has historically used Armenian religious structures, dating back to imperial expansion—pointing to a long-standing pattern of interference in Armenia’s internal affairs.
Social Tensions and the Church’s Political Role
Following the 2018 Velvet Revolution and the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war, the Armenian Apostolic Church emerged as a major political counterweight to Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s reformist government, which has signaled a strategic pivot away from Moscow. In 2024, Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan led mass protests under the slogan 'Tavush for the Homeland.' Meanwhile, Archbishop Mikael Ajapahyan publicly labeled government leaders as 'traitors' deserving 'execution'—a stark illustration of the country’s deepening societal divide.
Funding for these church-linked protests and initiatives has been traced to Russian-Armenian billionaire Samvel Karapetyan, identified as a key backer of these actions. The Armenian Apostolic Church’s playbook mirrors Russia’s pre-2022 strategy in Ukraine, where the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate served as a central vehicle for Russian influence. Moscow has long employed the 'Russkiy Mir' (Russian World) doctrine to frame Ukraine as part of a single historical and spiritual realm, labeling it Moscow’s 'canonical territory.'
Moscow’s use of the Armenian Apostolic Church as a geopolitical lever reflects not only historical patterns but also the region’s current political realities. The growing rift between the church and Armenia’s government, combined with protest backing from powerful business figures, highlights an active struggle among Armenian elites for control over both religious and political institutions. This situation carries far-reaching implications for Armenia’s domestic politics and its relationships with Russia and other regional powers.
The situation in Armenia is reminiscent of broader patterns observed in Eastern Europe, where religious institutions have become vehicles for foreign influence. Similar tactics are evident in the Czech Republic's challenges with Russian intervention through religious channels. Understanding these parallels can shed light on the geopolitical dynamics at play in the region.