Since the exodus last fall of over 100,000 ethnic Armenians from the once disputed but now dissolved territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, many have believed a resolution to the three-decade-long conflict to be within reach. Up until Azerbaijan’s operation to disarm the remnants of the breakaway region’s military last September, the region was internationally recognized as part of Azerbaijan but was governed and populated by ethnic Armenians.
CATEGORY RESULTS
Ahead of November, Armenia and Azerbaijan juggle for their geopolitical position
In the lead-up to this year’s NATO Summit in Washington D.C., it was uncertain whether Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan and Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Jeyhun Bayramov would meet. However, a last-minute announcement confirmed that they would, albeit not in a bilateral format, but with U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken. Expectations were low, given disagreements over Azerbaijani demands for Armenia to change its constitution and the United States now apparently pushing its own vision for unblocking trade and communication in the region.
Transparency needs to replace speculation and intrigue in the current phase of Armenia-Azerbaijan talks
At the beginning of the month, the Armenian and Azerbaijani border demarcation commissions exchanged documents detailing the regulation of future activities. But this was not the unified document that had been expected. Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan had earlier that day refused to answer questions from the media as to whether the deadline set for such a document had been met or not. Even Radio Free Europe were unsure. While its Yerevan Bureau reported that the two sides hadn’t in fact managed to agree on the draft regulations, its Prague Headquarters at least reported progress.
Baku insists on Constitutional change for Armenia peace accord
Early last month, Azerbaijan’s President, Ilham Aliyev, announced that an agreement to normalize relations with Armenia is unlikely to be signed unless it changes its constitution. Specifically, this would mean removing a controversial preamble that references the 1990 Declaration of Independence, which in turn is based on the 1989 Joint Statement on the “Reunification of the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Mountainous Region of Karabakh.”
Constitutional Delay in Armenia Threatens to Derail Peace Talks With Azerbaijan
In June, Baku reiterated its demand that any peace agreement must explicitly address changes in the Armenian Constitution, including the removal of what Azerbaijan and Türkiye perceive as territorial claims against them.
Armenia’s Constitutional Conundrum
Despite progress between Armenia and Azerbaijan over border delimitation and demarcation, another issue threatens to hinder the signing of a long-awaited agreement to normalise relations. Baku now demands that Yerevan first removes from its constitution a controversial preamble referencing the 1990 Declaration of Independence.
Tensions Increase as Prime Minister and Church Leaders Clash in Armenia
Yerevan is entering its second month of protests against the border and delimitation process launched between Armenia and Azerbaijan in April. Relations between the Armenian Apostolic Church and the government have plummeted and may be irreconcilable.
In Armenia, Church and State go head to head
October 27, 1999, was a day quite unlike any other. U.S. Secretary of State Strobe Talbott had been in town to talk Karabakh and a new Catholicos was controversially elected in Etchmiadzin. Later that evening, outside the Armenian National Assembly, a crowd had gathered, including myself, where an armed gang was holed up inside.
Political Uncertainty in Armenia Should Not Disrupt Azerbaijan Normalisation
When Nikol Pashinyan’s Civil Contract took power in Armenia in 2018 it did so with 70 percent of the vote. By the time snap elections were held in June 2021 that had fallen to 53.95 percent. Later, in Yerevan municipal elections last year, it was just 32.6 percent. Most recently, in December, a survey conducted by the International Republican Institute (IRI) showed that only 20 percent of respondents would vote for Civil Contract if elections were held that weekend.