On December 25, it became known that Baku gave Yerevan a new package of proposals regarding the peace treaty. It was preceded by a series of notable statements by Azerbaijani and Armenian officials regarding the document, providing insight into the underlying logic of the developments in this agenda.
Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Jeyhun Bayramov recently expressed optimism about the process, noting that the peace treaty can become a document defining the principles between the two states, laying the foundation for good-neighborly relations.
Hikmet Hajiyev, assistant to the president of Azerbaijan on foreign affairs, earlier also commented on the content of the document. Hajiyev’s comments regarding the border demarcation process were particularly noteworthy. He specifically said that the issue of border delimitation and demarcation can be separated from the agenda of the peace treaty. Armenia’s Parliament speaker Alen Simonyan responded to Hajiyev’s statements, not excluding that the separation of the two issues might be acceptable for Armenia.
Deciphering the meaning of Alen Simonyan’s statement is challenging. It is evident that, from the outset, the border delimitation process occurs in a distinct format from the peace treaty negotiations. Additionally, it is clear that the delimitation and demarcation process will extend far beyond the ongoing negotiations for the peace treaty.
Another evident circumstance is that following the ethnic cleansing of Artsakh, the issues within the border package have emerged as the primary obstacle in the ongoing peace treaty negotiations. In this context, Hikmet Hajiyev’s statement is entirely logical from the Azerbaijani perspective. Baku aims to eliminate another problematic issue from the peace treaty agenda (similar to what was done earlier with Nagorno-Karabakh-related issues) and sign the document without making any concessions or commitments in this regard. Essentially, Azerbaijan seeks Armenia’s signature on the peace treaty without reaching an agreement on the principles related to the demarcation and delimitation process, as well as the maps underlying that process.
In the event of such a scenario unfolding, a number of issues will persist even after the document is signed. We are particularly talking about the issue of enclaves and the withdrawal of Azerbaijani troops from the occupied territories of Armenia.
Similar circumstances arise with other pivotal issues. The peace agreement does not provide a solution for unblocking regional communications, and Baku’s stance on this matter remains unequivocal. Azerbaijan is primarily interested in opening communication to Nakhichevan through the south of Armenia. During the forum titled “Karabakh: Back Home After 30 Years. Accomplishments and Challenges,” Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev announced that in his discussions with the Prime Minister of Armenia, he consistently insisted that there should be no customs and border checks on the road connecting mainland Azerbaijan with Nakhichevan. Aliyev noted that, since Yerevan opposes the opening of the railway and the road in that way, Azerbaijan has reached an agreement with Iran to open that route through their territory.
Aliyev’s statements imply that either Yerevan will agree to grant Azerbaijan a passage with a simplified regime through the south of Armenia, or regional communications will not be unblocked at all. It is probable that there will be some mention of the de-blocking process in the text of the peace treaty, but the aforementioned issues will persist even after the document is signed.
At this stage, Baku is also trying to modify the issue of the implementation mechanisms of the peace agreement, excluding any role for major players and mediators in this matter. This also corresponds to Azerbaijan’s approach, according to which regional problems should be solved within the region.
Considering the experience of the previous few years, it is evident that Baku has successfully achieved its negotiation goals in almost all cases. The persistent power imbalance between Armenia and Azerbaijan, coupled with the focus of major players on other regions and their reluctance to take a more substantial and proactive role in the Armenian-Azerbaijani context, contributes to this outcome. In that sense, there is a high probability that Baku will be able to advance its objectives in the peace treaty agenda without resolving any significant existing problems.
Most likely, the peace treaty will be a framework document in which the parties agree on some principles rather than specific issues. By signing that document, Armenia will legitimize the ethnic cleansing carried out by Azerbaijan in Nagorno-Karabakh without gaining anything in return. The unsettled border issues, the region with closed communications, the lack of guarantees for the implementation of the agreement, the depopulated Nagorno-Karabakh and the absence of any mention in the document regarding the rights of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh will be “sold” to the Armenian public as peace.
Read the article in Armenian.
The post The peace agreement is unlikely to address any of the fundamental issues in the Armenia-Azerbaijan context appeared first on CIVILNET.