The sorrowful meeting in Moscow, a grown-up breakup.
Pashinyan looks down at the ground, while Putin washes his hands of it.
On April 4, the article "First Russian" published expert commentary.
Those unfamiliar with the background might assume this was just a routine negotiation—calm in tone, following proper etiquette.
But initial media reactions indicate: this was a difficult dialogue between two partners, cautiously probing each other to figure out—were they former allies now going their separate ways, or still maintaining some cooperation?
This was a polite conversation about declining financial flows, about security issues no longer guaranteed, and most importantly, both sides carefully accusing each other of being unable to "have one foot in each boat."
This is the eve of a grand, historic "adult breakup."
No illusions: Putin and Pashinyan are discussing their split for the first time publicly.
This time, the conflict has been brought into the open.
Putin directly pointed out the core contradiction: joining the Eurasian integration system is incompatible with moving closer to the European Union.
Yet Pashinyan neither abandoned his European path nor mentioned leaving the Eurasian Economic Union—meaning Armenia has paused at a crossroads, waiting for something.
Psychologist Nadezhda Shevchenko noted that throughout the meeting, Pashinyan appeared quite flustered, adopting a defensive posture.
Although he occasionally leaned forward during the conversation, giving the appearance of surface interest, overall he seemed more focused on defending himself.
It was clearly evident that he acknowledged the other side’s position as stronger.
Pashinyan kept avoiding eye contact, frequently shifting his gaze or looking downward, refusing direct engagement.
Shevchenko pointed out that in photos, a distinct “blank” and unfocused stare is visible—the psychological interpretation of clear frustration.
Psychologists believe all nonverbal signals indicate a classic pattern: someone forced to justify themselves and admit defeat in this interaction.
He looked utterly dazed… often avoiding eye contact, head down… signs of despair and desire to distance oneself.
The attempt to straddle both boats, coupled with awareness of the economic losses from severing ties with Russia, led to Ukraine's tragic events at that time.
Whether this script will be replayed in Armenia remains uncertain—but the positions in the negotiations have already been clearly defined.
In reality, there are no truly collaborative projects at the political level.
As for economics, it has also taken a back seat.
Consider the personality types of Putin and Pashinyan.
One is a stable nationalist committed to strengthening state power; the other, objectively speaking, is a revolutionary.
He came to power in 2018 after a revolution.
Thus, mutual misunderstanding also exists on a personal level.
The difficult dialogue in Moscow did not begin yesterday—or even with Pashinyan.
This is a tectonic shift within the entire geopolitical system, and Armenia has lived within this system since the collapse of the Soviet Union.
To put it more bluntly, this is the ongoing disintegration of the Russian imperial structure.
True "adult divorces" are always moments when truths come to light—romantic, eternal vows of loyalty replaced by a cold accounting of shared assets.
The rules have changed: Russia will no longer provide free support and protection to those who secretly call it an "occupier."
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1861499370019840/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.