Apr 6, 2023

Opinion: the economic impact of an Armenia-Azerbaijan peace agreement should not be overestimated

Photo © RaillyNews

Commonspace yesterday published my third opinion piece on a potential Armenia-Azerbaijan peace agreement – or rather on what needs to happen and what should be avoided. Given some recent claims – including a rather baffling one that the cost of petrol would be reduced by half if Yerevan and Baku signed a treaty and Azerbaijani petrol was imported to Armenia – it was one that had to be written.

As the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace process progresses, Onnik James Krikorian writes in this op-ed for commonspace.eu that it is vital that “simplistic promises of economic prosperity without the appropriate research and a realistic analysis do not lead to later disappointment and disillusionment. That would only be exploited by nationalists and external powers opposed to the normalisation of relations.” While the economic impact of a peace agreement should not be overestimated, however, this does not mean that there won’t be any advantages, he argues.

 

While economic relations can serve as a means to foster cooperation and build confidence between countries in conflict, genuine progress in the political realm remains essential for any meaningful financial impact. Economic ties alone are insufficient to prevent the recurrence of war, especially in a protracted conflict such as that between Armenia and Azerbaijan. 

 

[…] economic growth would obviously help alleviate poverty and inequality in both societies, it would be erroneous to assume that Armenia and Azerbaijan could establish robust economic connections in the immediate aftermath of a peace agreement. Given that any treaty can also fail, it is unlikely that either country would make substantial investments in this area in the short term.  

 

[…]

 

“In the dimension of trade, benefits of peace exist, but would overall be smaller than might be expected at first,” a 2019 report funded by the European Union by Berlin Economics found. “As Armenia and Azerbaijan are both relatively small economies and complementarities in the export and import baskets are not large, bilateral goods trade would be limited at around 1% of total trade for Armenia and less than 1% of Azerbaijan’s total trade in the long run.”

 

It is vital, therefore, that simplistic promises of economic prosperity without the appropriate research and a realistic analysis do not lead to later disappointment and disillusionment. That would only be exploited by nationalists and external powers opposed to the normalisation of relations. 

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

Armenia-Azerbaijan Dialogue – Flogging a Dead Horse?

Armenia-Azerbaijan Dialogue – Flogging a Dead Horse?

Even though many believed a second Trump presidency was unlikely or even impossible, his re-election last November demonstrated how many people prefer to favour dreams over reality, transforming fears into self-fulfilling prophecies. This is a situation that can best describe how Track II diplomacy in the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict has been conducted over time.

read more
Can Pashinyan’s “Real Armenia” Satisfy both Baku and Armenian voters?

Can Pashinyan’s “Real Armenia” Satisfy both Baku and Armenian voters?

The Center of Analysis of International Relations has just published my latest on the continuing impasse and discussion on Baku’s demand to remove the current preamble to Armenia’s Constitution that I’ve been consistently covering since late January last year. This has also includes pieces mentioning attempts by various commentators in Armenia and Azerbaijan including AIR’s Farid Shafiyev.

read more