Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Türkiye Discuss Peace, Development and Connectivity

Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Türkiye Discuss Peace, Development and Connectivity

Photo: Georgian Ministry of Foreign Affairs

With this year’s Antalya Diplomacy Forum held under the theme of “Advancing Diplomacy in Times of Turmoil,” it was perhaps only natural that a panel on the opening day of the event held 1-3 March in Türkiye focused on the South Caucasus. This focus comes amidst a lack of further progress in the Armenia-Azerbaijan and Armenia-Türkiye normalization processes. Of course, this was not the first time the Antalya event attempted such a seemingly monumental task.

For example, at the first Antalya Diplomacy Forum held in 2021, former Ter-Petrosyan adviser Gerard Libaridian shared the stage with Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Jeyhun Bayramov, and at the second in 2022, Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan held his first ever informal meeting with then Turkish counterpart Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu. Also present at that meeting were Ruben Rubinyan and Serdar Kılıç, two diplomats responsible for negotiating Armenia-Türkiye normalization.   

This year, both Rubinyan and Kılıç had the opportunity to discuss such matters in the public eye. Alongside them were Azerbaijani Presidential Advisor Hikmet Hajiyev, Georgian Deputy Foreign Minister Lasha Darsalia, and EU Special Representative for the region, Toivo Klaar, to discuss the general region at large. But falling on the day after the resumption of talks between the Armenian and Azerbaijani foreign ministers in Berlin, it was no surprise where the main focus would be. 

Yet, amidst the potential for progress, stark realities loom large. Entrenched disagreements between Armenia and Azerbaijan over key issues continue to cast a shadow over the prospect of lasting peace between the sides. Despite efforts to find common ground, divergent viewpoints prevail between Baku and Yerevan, and also Ankara, something that Türkiye’s Kılıç acknowledged on the panel. 

“After listening to Ruben [Rubinyan] and Hikmet [Hajiyev], the audience has a clear-cut idea of how sensitive the situation is and how difficult the ongoing negotiations between the parties [are],” he said. Indeed, even TRT World presenter Alican Ayanlar sounded despondent and downbeat after the exchange.   

While Yerevan blames Baku for attempting to force concessions from Armenia, Azerbaijan remains concerned about external interference in the peace process. “The peace treaty should not be just for the sake of a peace treaty. There should be real ownership and a real and genuine intention for peace,” said Hajiyev. “Peace lies between Baku and Yerevan. Peace is not in Paris or Brussels.” 

Hajiyev also raised the issue of territorial claims made against Azerbaijan and Türkiye contained within the Armenian Constitution. Though Georgia’s Darsalia was largely silent throughout, he did at least voice Tbilisi’s support for the normalization processes between its neighbours. The EU’s Klaar also emphasized the same, particularly the need to unblock regional transportation, including from Azerbaijan to Nakhichevan through Armenia. Ankara’s support here was vital. 

“Türkiye is the immediate neighbour of Georgia and Armenia and has a special relationship with Azerbaijan,” he said. “For this reason, Türkiye has a unique opportunity to help forge a durable and prosperous peace [and] cement its role as the region’s leading power.” 

Nonetheless, Armenia continues to charge that Türkiye is dragging its feet on opening the border between the two countries, which has been closed since 1993, save for a rare exception last year when Yerevan sent humanitarian assistance to Türkiye following a devastating earthquake. It also still believes that Ankara has failed to meet its July 2022 obligation to open the border for third-country nationals and diplomats by the summer of 2023.   

Kılıç, in turn, reminded Rubinyan of the reason why the border was closed in the first place—the occupation by Armenian forces of the Kelbajar region of Azerbaijan—and also why the agreement to reopen it remains unfulfilled. “Certain developments took place in Armenia,” he said, possibly referring to the unveiling by now Yerevan Mayor Tigran Avinyan of the Nemesis monument. The process, however, is not dead.   

“I told Ruben several times that I am ready to come to Yerevan to conduct further negotiations, and I have invited him to Ankara,” he said. “But if he puts the opening of borders for third country nationals and holders of diplomatic passports as a precondition for our meeting in Ankara or Yerevan then we have a problem.” 

“I would like to propose to Ruben that we meet in Yerevan next week,” Kılıç ended. “We’ll discuss it, dear Serdar,” Rubinyan responded. However, although media reports suggest that such a meeting is expected in the future, an announcement of where and when the two diplomats will resume their official talks has yet to surface.

 

CONFLICT VOICES e-BOOKS

 

Conflict Voices – December 2010

Short essays on the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict
Download in English | Russian

 

Conflict Voices – May 2011

Short essays on the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict
Download in English | Russian

Clarity, Consistent Rhetoric, and Multitrack Diplomacy Still Lacking in Armenia-Azerbaijan Normalisation Talks

Clarity, Consistent Rhetoric, and Multitrack Diplomacy Still Lacking in Armenia-Azerbaijan Normalisation Talks

It was touch and go for a while. Even a day before this year’s prestigious Munich Security Conference it was unclear whether both Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev would attend. In the past, Armenian leaders have more often shunned the event and even despite December’s much-lauded bilateral COP-29 joint statement made bilaterally by Baku and Yerevan, the war of words between the sides unfortunately continues.

Indeed, it has only been since 2020 that Armenian and Azerbaijani leaders have attended the prestigious conference at the same time. Controversy has always followed. Not to be outdone, perhaps, Georgia even got in on the act this year too when Georgian President Salome Zourabichvili attended without clearing it first with the government in Tbilisi. Newly appointed Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze anyway stayed away, favouring Brussels for his first official foreign trip.

 

Perhaps the publication of this year’s Munich Security Report which also criticised Georgian Dream founder Bidzina Ivanishvili just days before the conference was another possible reason for the no-show.

 

Cetin discussed the issue with then President Suleyman Demirel who instructed him to talk to his counterpart, Abulfaz Elchibey. “No-one should be deprived of God-given bread. It’s a humanitarian issue,” the then-Azerbaijani president responded even though the conflict with Armenia over Karabakh had already descended into a full-scale war. Grain shipments, as well as processed commodities from warehouses in Turkey transported by the United States, were dispatched.

 

But even that paled into insignificance compared to the shenanigans usually surrounding Armenia and Azerbaijan. In February 2020, for example, Aliyev and Pashinyan found themselves on the same stage in a well-intended effort by organisers to bring the sides together. Though the two did attempt to put a jovial face on proceedings, it nonetheless descended into petty bickering and a tiresome journey through a bitterly disputed history rather than look to the future.

 

[…] 

The full opinion piece can be read here. 

 

CONFLICT VOICES e-BOOKS

 

Conflict Voices – December 2010

Short essays on the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict
Download in English | Russian

 

Conflict Voices – May 2011

Short essays on the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict
Download in English | Russian

European Union Mission in Armenia Marks First Anniversary

European Union Mission in Armenia Marks First Anniversary

European Union Mission in Armenia Head of Mission Markus Ritter speaking in Yerevan on 21 February to mark the deployment’s first anniversary © Onnik James Krikorian 2024

The European Union Mission in Armenia (EUMA) marked the first anniversary of its deployment on the country’s border with Azerbaijan last week. To celebrate the occasion, an event attended by Western Ambassadors, Armenian government officials including Security Council Secretary Armen Grigoryan, and some members of local civil society was held in a central Yerevan hotel. Thirty civilian unarmed mission monitors wearing blue mission vests were awarded Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) Service medals by EUMA Head of Mission (HoM) Markus Ritter. The former German police chief reiterated the mission’s aim to contribute to the normalisation of Armenian-Azerbaijani relations.

Deployed on 20 February 2023, EUMA followed the much shorter term two-month European Union Monitoring Capacity (EUMCAP) that temporarily monitored the Armenia-Azerbaijan border from October 2022. Initially numbering “up to 100” staff when EUMA was first announced, that number has since risen to 138 and will reach 209. At the anniversary event, Ritter said that 48 of its current staff are actual monitors operating from bases in Goris, Ijevan, Jermuk, Kapan, Martuni, and Yeghegnadzor, also the mission’s headquarters. To date EUMA has conducted over 1,720 patrols.

 

“Reinforcing the Mission and increasing the number of staff enables us to conduct more patrols, contributing to overall security and stability in the region”, said Ritter. “We are conducting daily patrols to observe and report the situation on the ground. On this special day, I want to acknowledge the valuable work of the Mission’s personnel and thank the 23 EU Member States who are contributing staff to the mission”.

 

[…]

 

Nonetheless, Azerbaijan’s Representative for Special Assignments Elchin Amirbayov also blamed  EUMA for making such incidents more likely. Baku has long accused EUMA of engaging in what it terms “binocular diplomacy”, taking European diplomats to the still problematic border to look at “Azerbaijani positions through binoculars, taking photos and then distributing this on different social media and claiming that it is because only of [the EU] that Azerbaijan is not attacking Armenia”. Last week, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan claimed a new war was ‘very likely’.

 

Despite the controversies, however, EUMA’s presence is considered a much-needed confidence-building measure in Armenia, especially for communities situated on its border with Azerbaijan. “I am sure that the EU monitoring mission is bringing an important contribution to Armenia and the region, which symbolises the EU’s involvement for peace and stability”, CSDP commander Tomat said at the anniversary event. “I’m fully aware of the limits of what we can accomplish in such a delicate and complex environment”, noted Ritter.

The full article is here

CONFLICT VOICES e-BOOKS

 

Conflict Voices – December 2010

Short essays on the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict
Download in English | Russian

 

Conflict Voices – May 2011

Short essays on the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict
Download in English | Russian

Pashinyan Reignites Constitutional Reform Debate Amid Declining Ratings

Pashinyan Reignites Constitutional Reform Debate Amid Declining Ratings

On January 18, six years after the street protests that brought him to power in 2018, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan raised the issue of reforming the country’s constitution during a meeting with the Armenian Ministry of Justice. The constitution was originally introduced under Levon Ter-Petrosyan in 1995 and controversially amended under his successors, Robert Kocharyan and Serzh Sargsyan. Pashinyan stated that constitutional reforms are needed to make Armenia “more competitive in the new geopolitical environment.” The opposition claims that talk of constitutional reform comes under pressure from Azerbaijan in the stalled peace talks. Earlier, the Armenian premier claimed that constitutional reforms would give Yerevan a more stable position in negotiations with Baku.

Pashinyan’s initial efforts to hold a referendum to amend the constitution in April 2020 were indefinitely postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the declaration of a state of emergency in Armenia (Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia, March 16, 2020). As a result, a crucial amendment to strip constitutional court judges appointed under previous governments passed with a two-thirds majority in the Armenian National Assembly without a popular referendum (JAMnews, June 3, 2020). The opposition charged that the move was unconstitutional as the referendum could have been rescheduled to a later date.

  

The push for extensive constitutional reforms has remained a priority for the current Armenian government. After the canceled referendum, Pashinyan noted that the population did not trust the existing constitution in July 2020. He argued that a new constitution should be drafted and released for public discussion, with a referendum scheduled for the following year (Azatutyun.am, July 5, 2020). Armenia’s defeat in the Second Karabakh War in late 2020, however, postponed the referendum again in favor of snap parliamentary elections (Azatutyun.am, June 24, 2021).

 

[…]

 

At the heart of the matter is the inclusion of a preamble in successive constitutions directly referring to the 1990 Armenian Declaration of Independence. That document emphasizes the 1989 joint declaration on the “Reunification of the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Mountainous Region of Karabakh” (Parliament of the Republic of Armenia, accessed January 24). It also refers to “achieving international recognition of the 1915 genocide in Ottoman Turkey and Western Armenia.”

 

[…]

 

The extensive reforms to the Armenian Constitution come with key geopolitical implications. On the one hand, removing some of the territorial claims could facilitate real progress in peace talks. On the other hand, potentially doing so at the behest of Baku would do little to infuse public confidence in the new constitution. The reforms that Yerevan does agree on and the way they are implemented will undoubtedly have a significant impact on prospects for peace and stability in the South Caucasus.

The full piece can be read online here.

CONFLICT VOICES e-BOOKS

 

Conflict Voices – December 2010

Short essays on the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict
Download in English | Russian

 

Conflict Voices – May 2011

Short essays on the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict
Download in English | Russian

Pashinyan’s Constitutional Gambit

Pashinyan’s Constitutional Gambit

Reforming the constitution of any nation is inherently challenging, but in Armenia it has always proven particularly controversial. Introduced by referendum in 1995 under then President Levon Ter-Petrosyan, the current constitution has been amended twice by his successors – Robert Kocharyan in 2005 and Serzh Sargsyan in 2015. The second led to demonstrations in 2018 when provisions transforming Armenia from a presidential to parliamentary republic kicked in allowing Sargsyan to retain power past his second and final term in office. Leading the protestors was Nikol Pashinyan so it was not unexpected that he too would change the constitution once in office.

His attempt to do so four years ago was thwarted by the pandemic. Now he is trying again.

  

Speaking at the Ministry of Justice in January, Pashinyan not only emphasised the necessity of constitutional reform but even argued for a comprehensive overhaul rather than piecemeal amendments. The purpose, he said, in addition to possibly switching from majority to minority governmental system, was to make Armenia “more competitive and viable” in a new “geopolitical and regional situation.” The opposition instinctively interpreted those words as referring to his administration’s attempts to normalise relations with Azerbaijan.

 

At the heart of these claims is a belief that the preamble in the current constitution referring to the 1990 Declaration of Independence, itself based on the 1989 decision on the “Reunification of the Armenian SSR and the Mountainous Region of Karabakh,” could be removed. The opposition claims that doing so would only be at the behest of Baku. Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan has not categorically denied the claim but does confirm that Azerbaijan continues to raise this issue in negotiations, interpreting the preamble as indisputable claims on its territory.

 

[…]

 

Time will tell, but whatever happens next, an unprecedented debate on Armenia’s future and where the small land-locked country stands in the region could be on the near horizon, something that has arguably happened only once before. Forecasting future defeat unless compromise was reached, Ter-Petrosyan addressed the nation in an article simply entitled War or Peace? Time to get Serious.

The full opinion piece can be read online here.

CONFLICT VOICES e-BOOKS

 

Conflict Voices – December 2010

Short essays on the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict
Download in English | Russian

 

Conflict Voices – May 2011

Short essays on the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict
Download in English | Russian