'Baku seeks to sow doubt in Armenian society over peace treaty' – expert opinion
Yerevan denies Baku’s claims of shelling
Azerbaijan’s Defence Ministry accused Armenian forces three times of allegedly opening fire on Azerbaijani positions in the southeast. Armenia denied the claims, reiterating its proposal to establish a joint mechanism for investigating ceasefire violations—a suggestion Azerbaijan has yet to respond to.
The EU civilian monitoring mission, observing the Armenian side of the border, also dismissed Baku’s allegations.
“On 16 and 17 March, the EU Monitoring Mission in Armenia deployed patrols along different sections of the Armenian-Azerbaijani border. The situation remains calm and stable, with no unusual activity observed,” the mission stated on X.
Baku’s claims coincided with the reports of the conclusion of Armenian-Azerbaijani talks on the peace treaty’s text. Similar accusations of Armenian shelling have previously preceded escalations initiated by Azerbaijan.
Political analyst Robert Gevondyan suggested in an interview with JAMnews that Baku is leveraging fears of renewed war to influence Armenian society. However, he believes escalation is unlikely for now, as Azerbaijan lacks motivation.
“Capturing heights in the southeastern border region is pointless—they already control key positions there. Forcing a so-called corridor [seizing an extraterritorial road through Armenia by military means] is currently neither feasible nor permitted, given the stance of international players and Armenia’s defence capabilities,” he noted.
- Pashinyan under pressure from Baku? Experts weigh in on ‘Real Armenia’ concept
- Why is Baku rejecting Yerevan’s proposals? Pashinyan’s take on regional unblocking
- Opinion: ‘If Baku cared about security, it could have negotiated practical guarantees with Yerevan’
‘Attempt to justify Aliyev’s statement’ – Armenian parliament speaker
Armenian Parliament Speaker Alen Simonyan told journalists he does not view Azerbaijan’s latest claims as a failure of the peace process:
“I believe this is an attempt to justify the statement made by Azerbaijan’s president, who said that trust in the Armenian side is close to zero. This is surprising to me, as our work, approaches, and the very logic of announcing an agreement on the peace treaty text suggest the opposite.”
When asked about the likelihood of escalation, Simonyan responded: “I don’t think they will take such a step at this stage.”
On 13 March, Armenia and Azerbaijan announced they had agreed on the text of a peace treaty and concluded negotiations. However, the next day, Ilham Aliyev stated: “Our level of trust in Armenia is close to zero. These are not people we can trust, including the current government. Again, whatever they say means nothing to us. We need documents, we need papers. We need their constitution to contain no territorial claims against Azerbaijan. Those claims are still there.”
Expert commentary
Political analyst Robert Gevondyan sees two possible motives behind Azerbaijan’s Defence Ministry’s recent statements:
- “Baku creates a pretext for a new escalation”
- Azerbaijan is thereby trying to manipulate Armenian society by distorting the positive atmosphere that emerged after the finalisation of the peace treaty text.”
Gevondyan considers a new escalation unlikely. Instead, he believes these claims serve to pressure Armenian society:
“They want to undermine perceptions of stability and peace within Armenia. This is meant to maintain pressure on Armenia’s leadership and secure better negotiating positions in future talks on unblocking transport routes, border delimitation, and demarcation.”
According to Gevondyan, Azerbaijan aims to “sow doubt” about the peace treaty in Armenian society to retain leverage over Yerevan.
At the same time, he argues that the signing of a peace agreement will depend on the broader geopolitical landscape:
“If the situation remains as it is now—with the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war, tensions around Iran, and Trump’s various initiatives—while international support for the peace process continues, the treaty could be signed within 2025.”
Gevondyan believes that while the agreement would reduce the risk of escalation, it would also become a tool for Azerbaijan to pressure Armenia, with Baku likely to accuse Yerevan of violating different provisions over time.
One obstacle to Azerbaijan’s ambitions, he notes, is the EU monitoring mission patrolling the Armenian border:
“EU observers are a thorn in Azerbaijan’s side. Baku has not been able to fully implement its plans, which is why both Baku and Moscow are eager for them to leave as soon as possible.”
Notably, the agreed peace treaty text states that Armenia and Azerbaijan will not allow third-country presence on the border. It remains unclear whether EU observers will leave Armenia after the treaty is signed.
“They may withdraw from the border but remain in regional centres. Or they might stay at a distance of 1–3 km from the border. There are several possibilities,” Gevondyan notes.
He adds that if the treaty is implemented, border delimitation progresses, and peace is effectively established, “the direct presence of EU observers at the border may no longer be as necessary for Armenia.”
Yerevan denies Baku’s claims of shelling
