Armenia & Azerbaijan on the Path to Final Peace Agreement

2024/11/19 | interview, Politics, Top News

Strategic Council Online – Opinion: According to what the Republic of Azerbaijan and Armenia authorities officially announce these days, the two South Caucasus countries are taking the last steps to reach a peace treaty.

Hamed Khosrowshahi – researcher of Caucasus issues

It seems that this process took place after the recent bilateral meeting between Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Jihun Bayramov and his Armenian counterpart Ararat Mirzoyan on the sidelines of the third meeting of the 3+3 Regional Cooperation Platform in Istanbul. Also, a brief talk by Ilham Aliyev and Nikol Pashinyan at the BRICS summit accelerated the trend.

This possible agreement is considered an important step towards ending tensions and establishing stability in the Caucasus region. Any agreement after years of conflict and border disputes can create a new perspective for the two countries’ regional cooperation and economic development.

The emphasis of the two sides, as well as major foreign players such as Russia, the United States, the European Union, Turkey, etc., on signing the treaty as soon as possible shows the serious will of the parties to end the existing crisis and start a new chapter in the relations between the two countries.

This agreement is important not only for the two countries but for the whole Caucasus region and even beyond. Reducing tensions in this region can help strengthen regional cooperation and reduce the influence of foreign powers.

Despite this agreement, there are still challenges to be overcome. These include historical differences, border issues, and building trust between the two sides.

Azerbaijan believes that one of the prerequisites for signing the peace treaty is the amendment of the Armenian constitution’s clauses, which emphasizes Karabakh’s belonging to Armenians. Also, the claim of Armenians about the genocide of Armenians living in Türkiye in the last years of World War II is one of the things that the main actors emphasize. However, recently, Ararat Mirzoyan, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Armenia, said: “The issue of the Armenian Genocide is not a priority of Armenia’s foreign policy,” a statement that met with a sharp reaction from the opponents of Pashinyan’s government and the opposition.

In any case, this possible agreement will have important consequences: the two countries (especially Armenia) can have investment and economic development opportunities by reducing tensions and establishing stability, and this is significant  for Armenia, which has been blocked on the western and eastern borders for three decades. Armenia’s weak economy has suffered from the lack of large industries in these three decades, depending on foreign aid.

This agreement can also help strengthen regional cooperation in various fields, including energy, transportation, and trade.

Of course, the full details of this treaty have not yet been published, and there are many questions about its provisions, including border issues, the return of Armenians from Karabakh, and ensuring the security of Armenians in that region.

The reaction of other regional actors, such as Russia, Türkiye, and Iran, to this agreement will be very important. Some believe that with the reduction of tensions, the influence of foreign powers in the region, especially Russia, will decrease, and the opportunity for regional cooperation will increase. This is while Russia, by supporting the agreement between Armenia and Azerbaijan, considers it an important step for the stability of its surroundings and the expansion of regional power.

Also, there are two conflicting views regarding the impact of normalizing relations between Armenia and the Republic of Azerbaijan on the interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The first group believes that this agreement can have positive and tangible effects for Iran since a peaceful and stable region provides more opportunities for economic development and regional cooperation and reduces the possibility of regional conflicts and their spread to neighboring countries. Also, this can help increase trade, investment, and job opportunities in the region.

But the second group, on the other hand, believes that the normalization of relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan may lead to an increase in the influence of foreign powers in the region, especially Russia and Turkey, which can affect Iran’s national interests. This development may change the balance of power in the region and affect Iran’s geopolitical position.

Iran should adopt an active and multilateral policy to take advantage of the opportunities arising from the normalization of relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan and reduce the challenges ahead. This policy should be formulated based on Iran’s national interests, considering regional developments, seeking to strengthen regional cooperation, and actively participating in creating regional mechanisms for cooperation and resolving disputes. Therefore, Iran must increase its active consultation in the region and deepen the dialogue with other countries, including Russia and Türkiye, regarding the issues of the Caucasus.

Finally, implementing this agreement requires strong political will from both sides and the cooperation of the international community.

Overall, the peace agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia is an essential event in the Caucasus region that can contribute to stability and development. However, to fully realize these goals, it is necessary to identify and try to solve the upcoming challenges.

0 Comments

LATEST CONTENT

Balancing in the chain of chokepoints; from sea-based deterrence to pluralistic diplomacy

Strategic Council Online – Note: Recent developments in the political geography of West Asia, from rising tensions in the Persian Gulf to missile and drone activities in the Red Sea and the recent warning by Kaja Kallas, the European Union’s foreign policy chief, regarding the threat to freedom of navigation, indicate a key pattern shift; the US-Iran war has moved beyond the scope of a regional and local confrontation and has linked two vital passageways for the global economy: the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.

Indicators for Choosing Between War and Diplomacy

SCFR Online – Opinion: Foreign policy analysis is valid when it evaluates decisions based on the information and circumstances prevailing at the time they were made, not on the basis of outcomes that only become apparent after the crisis has ended.

Loading

Últimas publicaciones

Balancing in the chain of chokepoints; from sea-based deterrence to pluralistic diplomacy

Strategic Council Online – Note: Recent developments in the political geography of West Asia, from rising tensions in the Persian Gulf to missile and drone activities in the Red Sea and the recent warning by Kaja Kallas, the European Union’s foreign policy chief, regarding the threat to freedom of navigation, indicate a key pattern shift; the US-Iran war has moved beyond the scope of a regional and local confrontation and has linked two vital passageways for the global economy: the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.

Indicators for Choosing Between War and Diplomacy

SCFR Online – Opinion: Foreign policy analysis is valid when it evaluates decisions based on the information and circumstances prevailing at the time they were made, not on the basis of outcomes that only become apparent after the crisis has ended.

Loading

DERNIER CONTENU

Balancing in the chain of chokepoints; from sea-based deterrence to pluralistic diplomacy

Strategic Council Online – Note: Recent developments in the political geography of West Asia, from rising tensions in the Persian Gulf to missile and drone activities in the Red Sea and the recent warning by Kaja Kallas, the European Union’s foreign policy chief, regarding the threat to freedom of navigation, indicate a key pattern shift; the US-Iran war has moved beyond the scope of a regional and local confrontation and has linked two vital passageways for the global economy: the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.

Indicators for Choosing Between War and Diplomacy

SCFR Online – Opinion: Foreign policy analysis is valid when it evaluates decisions based on the information and circumstances prevailing at the time they were made, not on the basis of outcomes that only become apparent after the crisis has ended.

Loading

DERNIER CONTENU

Balancing in the chain of chokepoints; from sea-based deterrence to pluralistic diplomacy

Strategic Council Online – Note: Recent developments in the political geography of West Asia, from rising tensions in the Persian Gulf to missile and drone activities in the Red Sea and the recent warning by Kaja Kallas, the European Union’s foreign policy chief, regarding the threat to freedom of navigation, indicate a key pattern shift; the US-Iran war has moved beyond the scope of a regional and local confrontation and has linked two vital passageways for the global economy: the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.

Indicators for Choosing Between War and Diplomacy

SCFR Online – Opinion: Foreign policy analysis is valid when it evaluates decisions based on the information and circumstances prevailing at the time they were made, not on the basis of outcomes that only become apparent after the crisis has ended.

Loading

DERNIER CONTENU

Balancing in the chain of chokepoints; from sea-based deterrence to pluralistic diplomacy

Strategic Council Online – Note: Recent developments in the political geography of West Asia, from rising tensions in the Persian Gulf to missile and drone activities in the Red Sea and the recent warning by Kaja Kallas, the European Union’s foreign policy chief, regarding the threat to freedom of navigation, indicate a key pattern shift; the US-Iran war has moved beyond the scope of a regional and local confrontation and has linked two vital passageways for the global economy: the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.

Indicators for Choosing Between War and Diplomacy

SCFR Online – Opinion: Foreign policy analysis is valid when it evaluates decisions based on the information and circumstances prevailing at the time they were made, not on the basis of outcomes that only become apparent after the crisis has ended.

Loading