“The conclusion of a peace treaty between Azerbaijan and Armenia will open new opportunities for security in the South Caucasus.” This often-repeated phrase from experts and politicians underscores the importance of such an event in establishing stability and prosperity in the region. A peace agreement would create conditions for developing economic cooperation and strengthening political, cultural, and humanitarian ties between Azerbaijan and Armenia.
However, the peace process is far from complete, and much work remains to achieve long-term peace and harmony. It is also important to understand that peace treaties do not always lead to immediate and sustainable peace. The reasons for the absence of peace between Azerbaijan and Armenia are complex and multifaceted. Without additional efforts to overcome phobias, historical grievances, territorial claims, and revanchist ideas, sustainable peace will remain a distant dream.
The Thorny Path to Peace
In the past year, Armenia has faced a challenging period, caught between the collective West and Russia, adding complexity to the peace process, complicating negotiations, and intensifying internal contradictions often fueled by external forces. These forces give Armenia unfounded hopes of reversing the situation and push it toward a new arms race in the region.
Parallel to these inertia-driven processes, the demarcation and delimitation process between Armenia and Azerbaijan began some time ago and continues, which is an important step toward stability and peace. History shows that demarcation and delimitation processes can be lengthy and complex, but when successfully completed, they play a crucial role in establishing peace and stability.
Protests have been ongoing in Armenia for several months due to these demarcation and delimitation efforts at the border. Although the scale of protests has significantly decreased recently, Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan, a religious leader of the political movement in this secular country, continues to cause headaches for the government. He forces the authorities to focus on internal conflicts instead of key issues such as making peace with Azerbaijan. The Church’s influence in Armenia is significant, impacting public opinion and the political situation.
Nevertheless, Nikol Pashinyan still enjoys substantial public support, allowing him to continue his peace efforts. This support remains a key resource for continuing negotiations and making painful concessions. However, Pashinyan’s actions are often accompanied by mistakes: vague statements, attempts to sidestep issues, emotional outbursts, and general inexperience in political and diplomatic games complicate the negotiation process.
Contradictory but Realistic
Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan may seem inconsistent due to frequent changes in his position. However, his desire to establish communication and restore economic relations with Azerbaijan and Turkey is evident. In the current situation, Armenia has little choice, as opening transport routes is also beneficial for the Armenian state. This step could be crucial for renewing economic ties, strengthening mutual trust between countries, improving transport and trade infrastructure, fostering economic growth, and increasing the well-being of both countries’ populations. In this context, the successful cooperation between Georgia and Azerbaijan over the past three decades, which continues to bring significant benefits to both sides, can be recalled.
One of the key issues complicating the process is the territorial claims against Azerbaijan enshrined in the Armenian constitution. Azerbaijan demands the removal of these articles, a critical condition for continuing negotiations and achieving long-term peace. This requirement naturally sparks intense discussions and debates within Armenian society, where the issue of national pride remains highly sensitive. For many Armenian citizens, territorial claims against Azerbaijan symbolize “historical justice,” making this issue particularly complex.
It is clear that resolving this problem will require significant political effort and a willingness to compromise from the Armenian leadership. Armenia must realize the inevitability of these painful changes, overcoming internal contradictions and striving for long-term peace and stability in the region. It is important to continue educational work and dialogue with the population to overcome revanchist sentiments and demonstrate the benefits of peaceful coexistence.
The conclusion of a peace treaty between Azerbaijan and Armenia also requires global geopolitical processes. Stability in the South Caucasus is necessary to ensure the security and development of the entire region. Rational elements in Armenian society must understand that peace with Azerbaijan is the only guarantee of this security.
As strange as it may sound, today, Azerbaijan appears to be the most interested party in seeing Armenia achieve full sovereignty.
