By Moreta Bobokhidze, ModusA
Front: Picture from happier relations between Ukraine and Georgia, the inauguration of President Zelensky accompanied former georgian president in 2019 (Wikimedia Commons).
Volodymyr Zelensky’s visit to Armenia, the first by a Ukrainian president in more than twenty years, felt like a moment when the political map of the South Caucasus shifted just a little. It wasn’t only about diplomacy. It was about who is moving forward, who is redefining themselves, and who is being left behind. Armenia used the European Political Community summit in Yerevan to show the world that it is stepping out of Moscow’s shadow and choosing a different future. Ukraine, even under the pressure of a full‑scale war, showed that it still has the capacity to shape regional conversations. And Georgia, once the region’s democratic pioneer, arrived carrying the weight of its own contradictions, a government drifting away from Europe while its people remain firmly committed to it.
Zelensky’s meeting with Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan had a sense of shared experience. Both countries know what it means to face Russian coercion. Armenia, long dependent on Moscow for security, is now openly questioning that dependency after the fall of Nagorno‑Karabakh and the CSTO’s refusal to defend Armenian territory. Hosting Zelensky alongside leaders like Emmanuel Macron and Ursula von der Leyen was Armenia’s way of saying: we are choosing a different path. Their discussions on security, economic cooperation, and reviving a bilateral commission were not just technical points; they were signs of a relationship being rebuilt on new terms, with Europe as the anchor rather than Russia.
Georgia’s presence in Yerevan told a very different story. Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze’s meeting with Zelensky was polite, but the tension was impossible to ignore. Years of deteriorating relations hung in the air. Ukraine has repeatedly criticised the Georgian government for its treatment of Mikheil Saakashvili, for refusing to join sanctions against Russia, and for what many international observers describe as a steady erosion of democratic institutions. Zelensky was diplomatic, but the message was unmistakable: Ukraine is willing to talk, but it sees clearly where Georgia’s government is heading. The Georgian Dream leadership insists it is committed to EU integration, yet its actions, its laws, its rhetoric, its alliances tell a different story, one that aligns far more comfortably with Moscow’s interests than with Brussels.
In Yerevan, this contrast was visible everywhere. Armenia, despite its vulnerabilities, is taking risks to redefine its future. Ukraine, despite the war, is expanding its diplomatic reach and strengthening ties across the region. The European Union is stepping in more confidently, recognising that the South Caucasus is no longer a distant neighbourhood but a strategic space where Europe must be present. And Georgia the country that once inspired the region with its reforms and its democratic ambition now risks becoming the outlier. Georgians remain overwhelmingly pro‑European, but its government is moving in the opposite direction. That gap was impossible to ignore.
Zelensky’s broader regional strategy only sharpened this picture. His visit to Armenia came after a high‑profile trip to Azerbaijan, where Kyiv and Baku signed defence‑industrial agreements. Ukraine is building a multi‑directional presence in the South Caucasus, engaging all three countries on their own terms. For Armenia, this is an opportunity to diversify its alliances. For Georgia, it is a reminder that regional relevance is not something you inherit; it is something you maintain through credibility, consistency, and democratic commitment.
The events in Yerevan captured a region in motion. Armenia is moving forward. Ukraine is reaching outward. The EU is stepping in. And Georgia stands at a crossroads, pulled between the aspirations of its people and the choices of its government. Zelensky’s visit made one thing clear: the South Caucasus is changing, and Georgia’s place in that new landscape will depend entirely on the decisions its leaders make now, decisions that will shape not only the country’s foreign policy, but its democratic future.