Armenia-Azerbaijan direct talks

“Armenia is ready to engage in negotiations again,” was the official Yerevan’s reaction to Azerbaijan’s proposal to hold direct talks on the border. In response, the Armenian side offered Baku to hold a meeting of delimitation commissions on the state border.

In fact, Armenia did not express readiness for direct negotiations with a broader agenda.

The Armenian Foreign Ministry said in a statement that the sixth edited version of the text of the peace treaty was handed over to the Azerbaijani side. The deputy speaker of the Armenian parliament said the previous day that “the exchange of written proposals is also a negotiation, which the Armenian side has never avoided.”

Political scientist Gurgen Simonyan believes that Yerevan should refuse the offer of direct negotiations, as they do not correspond to the country’s interests. In his opinion, Armenia should insist that Azerbaijan “appear at the negotiations on impartial platforms of Europe and the United States.”

About Baku’s proposal, Yerevan’s reaction, as well as the expert’s commentary.

• A new stage of Armenian-British cooperation. What is behind it?

• “Take aid to Armenia off the agenda” – Yerevan’s appeal to the CSTO

• “Armenia is not an outpost for the realization of foreign plans” – Pashinyan

The Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry said in a statement that Yerevan and Baku should jointly decide the future of their relations.

Azerbaijan has recently refused to negotiate with Armenia on Western platforms. At the same time, declares that “stagnation in peace talks does not contribute to stability and prosperity in the region.” The Foreign Ministry urged the Armenian side “not to allow new unnecessary delays.”

“Azerbaijan is ready for direct bilateral negotiations with Armenia to conclude a peace agreement as soon as possible. Both countries are responsible for the continuation of the peace process, including the choice of a mutually acceptable location or the decision to meet at the state border”.

The Armenian Foreign Ministry’s response to Baku’s proposal says that peace can be achieved if there is an appropriate political will on both sides. And in confirmation, on November 21, the next version of the agreement on normalization of relations was handed over to the Azerbaijani side.

The Armenian Foreign Ministry emphasizes that the text could have been presented earlier, during the pre-agreed meetings in Granada and Brussels, but Azerbaijan refused to participate in them:

“One of the expressions of the existence of political will [to achieve peace] is also the fact that Armenia proposed to Azerbaijan to hold a meeting of the delimitation commissions on the state border between the two countries.”

However, the Armenian Foreign Ministry statement says nothing about the proposal to negotiate directly, without mediators.

At the same time, it expresses confidence that there is a “real possibility of establishing peace” despite all the difficulties and challenges. In this regard, the Foreign Ministry recalls the principles that are undeniable for the Armenian side:

• “mutual recognition and respect for each other’s territorial integrity without ambiguities,
• realization of further delimitation process on the basis of the Alma-Ata Declaration and the last legitimate Soviet maps,
• unblocking of the region’s infrastructure on the basis of the principles of full respect for the sovereignty and jurisdiction of states, equality and reciprocity”.

Political scientist Gurgen Simonyan warns: before entering into direct negotiations, one should realize that Azerbaijan is backed by two countries – Russia and Turkey. And Armenia will not be able to negotiate and balance alone against the three major players. In his opinion, the main problem of direct talks is the absence of “the institution of eyewitnesses.”

“If we go for bilateral negotiations on the border, how will we be able to justify and explain to the world that Azerbaijan is grossly violating the agreements? We see that it violates even those agreements that were reached on international platforms,” he said.

The analyst emphasizes that if Armenia’s military-political leadership agrees to negotiate on the border, it will not only lose the institution of moderation, but also “will face the Russian-Turkish alliance threatening the country with aggression.” I am convinced that this proposal should be rejected:

“Baku should be returned to Western negotiating platforms, where balanced solutions can be worked out. But I have no illusions that Azerbaijan will come to the negotiations. Baku’s goal is not peace and regional coexistence, but the dismantling of Armenian statehood”.

This, according to Simonyan, is evidenced by “false, unsubstantiated talks about West Azerbaijan”, with the help of which Baku is trying to challenge Armenia’s territory.

He is convinced that the Armenian authorities should announce their withdrawal from the Russian military bloc CSTO as soon as possible, before the end of the year.

In the interests of the country, according to him, “step by step to associate with the EU and the North Atlantic security system”.

The expert believes that Armenia can develop military-technical cooperation with Canada and the United States, as well as with EU countries, India, Egypt, North Korea, Japan and Singapore.

• utilize military educational institutions,
• import special-purpose technologies, including military technologies,
• system building, i.e. changing the logic of the Armed Forces.

The expert believes that Armenia can develop military-technical cooperation with Canada and the USA, as well as with EU member states, India, Egypt, North Korea, Japan and Singapore. Unfortunately, no one will be interested in communicating with the RA unless it is “dangerous.”

‘ No one will be interested in talking to Armenia unless it is ‘dangerous.’ Armenia should be able to raise its danger level until it becomes a force majeure, an irresistible force for Azerbaijan and its allies. And in that case they will want peace. This is a simple calculation,” the political scientist summarized.