Aliyev unwilling to pursue peace or strategic deal with Armenia: expert in Yerevan
Armenia proposes strategic peace deal
“For peaceful coexistence, Armenia and Azerbaijan need not only a peace treaty but also a strategic deal,” Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan stated in parliament the day before.
He revealed that this idea emerged during discussions with Azerbaijan’s president at the BRICS summit. Pashinyan described his communication with Ilham Aliyev positively. “We have not spoken this long, or perhaps ever before,” Pashinyan noted, though he did not disclose the specifics of the “strategic deal.”
Armenian authorities continually make constructive statements and proposals, says political scientist Lilit Dallakyan. However, Azerbaijan’s actions show it is uninterested in either a peace treaty or a “strategic deal.”
“Alongside the constantly updated list of demands on Armenia, Ilham Aliyev has created a group in the Milli Majlis to protect the rights of the ‘Western Azerbaijan’ community [referring to the return of Azerbaijanis to ‘Western Azerbaijan,’ meaning Armenia’s entire sovereign territory]. It must be understood and accepted that he does not intend to make peace with Armenia,” Dallakyan emphasized.
- “Armenia isn’t militarizing but raising cost of attacking it”: opinion
- “Unacceptable focus” and “Baseless claims” – the “dialogue” between Yerevan and Baku
- “Baku wants Yerevan to acknowledge its hegemony” – Armenian political analyst
“Armenia envisions strategic deal”
Pashinyan considers his conversation with Aliyev at BRICS significant and constructive:
“The main point, in my opinion, is that the following idea was voiced: Armenia and Azerbaijan not only need peace and various agreements for peaceful coexistence but, in my view, they also need a strategic deal. This deal should outline the principles by which we will live side-by-side as independent states for the coming centuries. This is the most important and fundamental issue.”
According to the Prime Minister, Armenia has a vision for this deal:
“Our understanding of a strategic deal is based on the principle of a ‘real Armenia’ [referring to Armenia’s territory of 29,743 square kilometers].”
“We can reach mutually acceptable solutions on reopening communications”
Pashinyan also addressed the issue of unblocking regional communications, noting he discussed this with Aliyev as well:
“Another important development in Kazan was that we might be close to a mutually acceptable solution for unblocking regional communications.”
The Prime Minister mentioned that Yerevan submitted its proposal on unblocking to Baku in document form.
“We are close to finalizing the peace agreement text”
Once again, the Armenian Prime Minister announced that the sides are close to finalizing the peace agreement text. Yerevan received Azerbaijan’s response to the 11th draft on November 5.
“We submitted our proposals on the two remaining [unagreed] articles of the peace agreement to Azerbaijan on Monday,” Pashinyan said.
Previously, it was mentioned that the agreement contained 17 points, of which 13 were fully agreed upon, three partially. There is one provision on which the sides failed to reach a compromise. Last week, Baku leaked the unresolved points of agreement. Azerbaijani expert Farid Shafiyev, head of a think tank funded by Aliyev’s administration, wrote on his X page that the following demands to Armenia remain unresolved:
- Amendment of Armenia’s constitution;
- Absence of foreign forces on the Armenia-Azerbaijan border (i.e., the EU’s civilian observation mission);
- Cessation of legal and diplomatic disputes in international bodies.
Armenia did not comment on the “leak,” but the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister stated the need to agree on two, not three provisions.
During the government hour in parliament, Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan informed deputies that “two articles” remain to be agreed upon. He noted that work in this direction continues “more intensively than before, and in a more constructive atmosphere.”
Political commentator Lillit Dallakyan
Nikol Pashinyan used incorrect terminology. A “strategic deal” can only be made between allies, says political commentator Lilit Dallakyan.
“In the case of Armenia and Azerbaijan, we can only speak of ‘mutually beneficial conditions,’ nothing more.It is hard to say what kind of deal the Prime Minister was referring to. Perhaps he meant that there should be mechanisms for mutual arms acquisition limits. Simply put, he may have been referring to mechanisms that would allow us to understand whether Azerbaijan continues to arm itself tenfold more than we do, and what its intentions are,” Dallakyan told JAMnews.
Regarding the unblocking of communications, Dallakyan notes that Baku rejected Yerevan’s proposals for using roads both under Armenia’s jurisdiction and under private company control.
The expert is unsure what the Prime Minister meant by “mutually acceptable solutions.” However, she believes that progress in this matter may be influenced by the positions of geopolitical centers, particularly:
- Trump’s policies and potential economic sanctions against China;
- the weakening or strengthening of Russia’s position in Ukraine;
- the alignment or divergence of interests among Russia, Iran, and Turkey.
When asked which of the unagreed provisions of the peace treaty Armenia and Azerbaijan reached a compromise on, and why Yerevan speaks of two instead of three unagreed articles, Dallakyan responded:
“I do not rule out that Pashinyan may find it acceptable to compromise on the provision regarding the presence of third countries on Armenia’s border. If such a decision is made, it will lead to Armenia’s capitulation. The fragile peace that exists now is not the result of the November 9 document or our CSTO membership [referring to the Russia-brokered document and the Russia-led military bloc], but the presence of EU observers on the border with Azerbaijan.”
Lilit Dallakyan believes that, despite recent statements, Yerevan and Baku’s positions on the peace process diverge.
“No matter how much it is said that we are close to signing an agreement, allegedly 95 percent agreed. Time shows there is no consensus on critical issues.”
Moreover, Dallakyan believes that Armenia’s authorities should not constantly declare their readiness for peace:
“This weakens Armenia’s position. Once you’ve said, ‘We are ready,’ that’s enough. Otherwise, it looks like we are begging, pleading for peace. Can peace be achieved in this way? Certainly not. And the government itself admits that an attack by Azerbaijan on Armenia after COP29 is possible.”
Armenia proposes strategic peace deal
