Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan meets with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev in a meeting facilitated by U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference on 18 February 2023 © Official Photo
Unannounced until the last moment, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken yesterday facilitated and mediated a long overdue meeting between Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev on the sidelines of the annual Munich Security Conference in Germany. With Blinken were Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Karen Donfried and newly appointed Senior Advisor for Caucasus Negotiations, Louis L. Bono.
Aliyev and Pashinyan had not met since Russian President Vladimir Putin in Sochi convened a trilateral summit in Sochi on 31 October. Attempts to facilitate another by European Council President Charles Michel on 7 December were aborted when Pashinyan reportedly attempted to change the negotiation format by insisting on the presence of French President Emmanuel Macron. Armenia claims that this was agreed upon after the 6 October meeting in Prague though there is so far nothing to support this, including in statements even from Paris.
Little is known about the substance of the meeting with Blinken, but it was a first for the U.S. to organise a meeting of the Armenian and Azerbaijani leaders. Previously, the U.S. Secretary of State had only hosted the two foreign ministers, Ararat Mirzoyan and Jeyhun Bayramov, while National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan facilitated a meeting between Armenian Security Council Secretary Armen Grigoryan and Azerbaijani Presidential Advisor Hikmet Hajiyev on 27 September in Washington D.C..
All six officials – Aliyev, Pashinyan, Bayramov, Mirzoyan, Grigoryan, and Hajiyev – constitute the various negotiation formats led by the West. Their presence at yesterday’s meeting with Blinken therefore arguably highlighted the seriousness of the talks.
“We believe that Armenia and Azerbaijan have a genuinely historic opportunity to secure enduring peace after more than 30 years of conflict,” Blinken said in brief opening remarks covered by the media until talks continued behind closed doors. Prior to the meeting, Yerevan had also confirmed that it had sent its comments on the text of a bilateral peace agreement to Baku for consideration. Aliyev confirmed receipt in comments following the meeting that he also described as “constructive.”
“Three days ago, we received new responses to our proposals from Armenia. We are elaborating them now,” he told reporters. “At first glance, there is progress in Armenia’s position, but it is not sufficient.”
Indeed, the two sides do remain far apart on certain issues and this has only intensified during the standoff on the Lachin Corridor, a topic that was also discussed during the meeting with Blinken. As I’ve highlighted for well over a year now, the need for reciprocity on customs and passport controls on both the Lachin and Zangezur ‘corridors’ arguably remains the most pressing, something that was also alluded to by Aliyev. Basically, in a nutshell, if there are to be checks on the route from Azerbaijan to Nakhichevan there should be similar for Lachin.
“I have also stated that it would be good if Armenia and Azerbaijan established checkpoints on the Armenian-Azerbaijan border in a bilateral manner,” Aliyev said. “We made this suggestion earlier and made it official today. Previously, this suggestion was communicated through unofficial channels. Armenia did not voice any position. They probably need some time to discuss it. But our initial impression is that both Europe and America view this proposal of ours as logical.
“[…] if we are talking about border delimitation, it is impossible to achieve without checkpoints. If we are talking about the opening of communications, of course, checkpoints should be established at both ends of the Zangezur corridor and at the border between Lachin district and Armenia. Today, at the meeting held with the participation of Secretary of State Blinken, I officially put forward this as a proposal. We will wait for a response from Armenia.”
What little else is known is only that Blinken appeared largely satisfied with the outcome of the meeting. “Pleased to hear that the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace process is on track and negotiations between the two sides are continuing,” the Secretary of State tweeted.
“The course of the works around a peace treaty draft between Armenia and Azerbaijan was discussed at the meeting, as well as the unblocking of regional transport infrastructures and delimitation between the two countries in accordance with the agreement reached in Prague,” read the official Armenian statement. “Prime Minister Pashinyan reiterated Armenia’s commitment to achieve the signing of a peace treaty that would truly guarantee lasting peace and stability in the region.
At the same time, Nikol Pashinyan stressed the fact of the illegal blockade of Lachin corridor by Azerbaijan and the resulting humanitarian, environmental and energy crisis in Nagorno Karabakh. The continuity of the peace process between Armenia and Azerbaijan was highlighted.”
Unfortunately, and despite the historic nature of hosting the Armenian and Azerbaijani leaders alongside Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Garibashvili, any hopes for a constructive public discussion as part of the Munich Security Conference quickly disappeared. Even though it was the first time that all three shared the same stage, the panel on “Moving Mountains: Building Security in the South Caucasus” soon descended into confrontation in no small part because of the moderator, Chair of the Munich Security Conference Christoph Heusgen.
For many, there were already concerns given the catastrophic nature of the last Aliyev and Pashinyan head-to-head in Munich in March 2020, just months before the devastating war over Karabakh that broke out months later. This was why, although some did decry the initial absence of Pashinyan on the panel, many others were privately relieved to see the panel’s announcement list only Aliyev and Garibashvili as representing the South Caucasus. This, incidentally, had been the case last month at the World Economic Forum in Davos.
“Initially, the participation of the Armenian Prime Minister was not envisaged,” said Aliyev before the panel. “His name was not mentioned in the initial proposal given to me. He probably decided to attend last night. I think this is a good development because, finally, some cooperation among the three South Caucasus countries can be started.”
Aliyev also said discussions with Garibashvili on the creation of a “Tbilisi Format” between the sides might be brought up on the panel. “We are also welcoming that. This issue was discussed during my visit to Georgia. The Armenian side is somewhat hesitant about this. But I think it would be fair,” he said.
This idea was also recently supported by the European Union’s Special Representative for the South Caucasus, Toivo Klaar. But if there had been the opportunity to facilitate and encourage a more amenable discussion on security concerns in the region and ways to resolve them, Huesgen instead seemingly goading the participants into confrontation, including by confronting Garibashvili on the situation of imprisoned former Georgian President, Mikheil Saakashvili. By no stretch of the imagination could this be considered on-topic.
Indeed, there is little point in dwelling more on the panel that could have been a historic opportunity to encourage a truly constructive and regional discussion at the level of the three leaders. Meanwhile, and although European Council President Charles Michel had met with both Aliyev and Pashinyan separately, there was also no trilateral meeting, leaving many still uncertain about the future of the hitherto encouraging Brussels format of negotiations. It can only be hoped that the meeting with Blinken was as constructive as is claimed.
