Briefing: Pashinyan ready to sign, not everyone in Stepanakert is happy, Baku hopeful but keeping up pressure

This briefing first appeared in the 25 May 2023 issue of our newsletter, Karabakh Concise. If you would like to subscribe to Karabakh Concise, or any other of our newsletters, please click here.

As Armenia and Azerbaijan edge closer to signing an agreement ending decades of conflict between them, the future of the Armenian population in Nagorno-Karabakh remains one of the most crucial outstanding issues, writes commonspace.eu.

Intense discussions and negotiations have been ongoing throughout May, with meetings in Washington, Brussels and Moscow involving the leaders of the two countries, their foreign ministers, and other senior officials. In a lengthy press conference on 22 May, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said that he wants to reach an agreement "as soon as possible".

The international community's perception of the negotiations is that Armenia and Azerbaijan should, without reservations, recognise each other's territorial integrity of 29,800 square kilometers and 86,600 square kilometers, respectively, said Pashinyan. He added that a dialogue between Stepanakert and Baku should take place on the issue of the "rights and security of Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians".

"We agree with this logic and conduct the negotiations with this logic, emphasising that the international mechanisms for guaranteeing the Stepanakert-Baku dialogue are extremely important. At the same time, I am convinced that the strategic guarantee of ensuring Armenia’s security is peace, which is possible by normalising relations with all neighbours. This is not an easy process at all, but I believe it is what our people want and expect," said Pashinyan. 

When asked by a reporter whether Armenia's recognition of Azerbaijan's area as being 86,600 square kilometres includes Nagorno-Karabakh, Pashinyan confirmed this to be the case. "No matter what the current government of Armenia says, all the governments of Armenia have recognised the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. I have made it more concrete, and I find it difficult to imagine more concretely [...] Armenia is ready to recognise the territorial integrity [of Azerbaijan] of 86,600 square kilometers, and in our opinion, Azerbaijan is ready to recognise the territorial integrity of Armenia of 29,800 square kilometers," said Pashinyan.

Washington talks were a critical moment in the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace process, according to Pashinyan

On the talks between the Armenian and Azerbaijani foreign ministers just outside Washington D.C. at the start of May, Pashinyan said that from this moment the sides began communicating with each other more openly, directly, and with a greater mutual understanding than previously.

Pashinyan said that, during the Washington talks, "many nuances have emerged, which may not have been mutually visible to the parties before, or at least not recorded."

"When I say 'mutual understanding,' I mean that I consider the style of conversation to be the biggest feature of the Washington talks, that a lot of it was a direct conversation. At some point, the hidden meanings started to be less, and the conversations were more mutually understandable," he said.

He did caution, however, that this was only his interpretation and that he could not say how Baku perceived the dynamic of the Washington talks.

Pashinyan calls for troop withdrawals to allow for border delimitation work

In the press conference on Monday (22 May), Pashinyan repeated the Armenian position that both sides should withdraw their troops from the Armenia-Azerbaijan border as shown by the maps of the USSR General Staff of 1975. This would allow for border delimitation work to commence, according to Pashinyan.

"Also, I want to emphasise that the simultaneous withdrawal of troops does not in itself predetermine the border delimitation work. That is a separate process, this is just about ensuring the stability of the border situation. However, we also believe that the 1975 map can and should be the basis for further border delimitation work, too, because it implies the agreements reached in Prague on 6 October 2022, regarding carrying out border delimitation based on the Alma Ata declaration [of 1991]," said Pashinyan.

In Stepanakert, political elites come out largely against Pashinyan’s position, but the Armenian leader is convinced he has the Armenian people behind him

In the self-declared Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, the political entity established by the Karabakh Armenians after their military victory in 1994 the mood was sombre. The political elite is broadly against the territory returning to Azerbaijani control. This was expressed clearly after a session of the territory’s parliament called with urgency at 11pm following Pashinyan’s speech. Equally negative was the position of two former de facto presidents of the self-declared NKR – Arkadi Ghukasyan and Bako Sahakian. They were joined in chorus by former Armenian presidents Robert Kocharian and Serzh Sargsyan, both of whom hail from Karabakh.

Politicians supporting prime minister Nikol Pashinyan have however, perhaps for the first time, come out fighting on this issue, repeating Pashinyan’s message that there was no other option but to normalise relations with all neighbours and sign a peace treaty with Azerbaijan, and dismissing opposition accusations of betrayal. Pashinyan has over the last five years read the mood of the Armenian people much better than his opponents, or even his allies. In his press conference Pashinyan appeared confident that he had the people of Armenia behind him – even if most of the political and intellectual elite were not.

Things are now expected to move quickly, with meetings between the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan scheduled to be held in Moscow, Chisinau, and possibly Brussels, over the coming days and weeks. It is possible that the two leaders will start by signing a number of agreements on specific issues, such as border demarcation and transport connections, whilst negotiations continue on the last stumbling blocks.

Baku hopeful, but keeping up the pressure, just in case

In Azerbaijan people close to the political leadership are hopeful that a peace agreement with Armenia is now within reach. But the Azerbaijani government appeared to be keeping up the pressure on both Yerevan and the Karabakh Armenians, just in case. The issue of how to manage the future of the Armenian community in Nagorno-Karabakh, is now one of the main outstanding issues. Baku has withdrawn previous offers of political autonomy, and now insists on no special status and rejects the idea of a long-term international presence in the territory. This notwithstanding, however, there may be things that the Azerbaijani leadership may be willing to offer to the Armenian community, and reassurances to the international community, but for the moment it has decided not to make them public.

For decades in the South Caucasus, people were apprehensive with the approach of summer. The warm weather was usually also the harbinger of increased violence and tension, especially on the Armenia-Azerbaijan line of contact. For the first time this summer may be remembered for different reasons, including a historic breakthrough towards peace that can open a new chapter in the region’s history.

source: commonspace.eu editorial team
photo: EPA/EFE
The views expressed in opinion pieces and commentaries do not necessarily reflect the position of commonspace.eu or its partners 

Latest

Editor's choice
News
Kazakhstan set for major construction program after Tokayev’s speech

Kazakhstan set for major construction program after Tokayev’s speech

Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev called for the construction and renovation of public infrastructure across all regions of Kazakhstan, and proposed declaring 2027 “the Year of Large-scale Construction”. Delivering his address to the people of Kazakhstan in his “state of the union” address, Tokayev stressed the need to launch construction and renovation projects in regional centers, districts and settlements throughout the country. Our collective nationwide response to the approaching era of artificial intelligence should be to build — and, once again, to build!, Tokayev emphasized. According to the President, key priorities include the construction of roads, airports, railway stations and healthcare facilities. Special attention will also be given to rehabilitation centres for children with special needs. In addition, every region should have creative development centres, sports complexes, libraries and scientific centres. Tokayev also highlighted housing construction as an important priority. Kazakhstan’s large-scale “People’s Construction” program, announced by the President, will pave the way for major infrastructure development and reforms across all sectors of the economy, Kazakh Prime Minister Olzhas Bektenov said at a government meeting. Bektenov stressed the need to develop a clear action plan to implement President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev’s state-of-the-nation address, delivered on October 28. The Prime Minister said the address sets out the central goal of building a fair, strong, clean and progressive Kazakhstan. Achieving this objective will require making the fullest possible use of the country’s existing potential and the opportunities emerging from modern innovation. Bektenov highlighted the significance of the “People’s Construction” initiative, describing it as the starting point for major infrastructure transformations and comprehensive reforms throughout the economy. “This large-scale project will provide significant momentum for employment growth and improving citizens’ well-being. This address is the most substantive policy document for the near future. We must have a clear action plan for its implementation”, he said. Kazakhstan also plans to build nearly 70 new healthcare facilities across the country. (click image to read more)

Popular

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Last week I visited Baku, Azerbaijan. My visit was relatively short, but very intensive, and had many meetings with stakeholders and colleagues. When I arrived in Baku first time in 1996,  Azerbaijan was a different country: weak, poor, and shaken by defeat in war. For thirty year the Karabakh issue dominated the agenda: the political agenda but also the popular mindset. Now, thirty years later, Azerbaijan has returned to Karabakh, and peace with Armenia is on the horizon. It is a new era for Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, for the South Caucasus, but also for Europe.  But we cannot be complacent: the Peace agreement has been initialed but not signed; borders remain closed; TRIPP is ambitious but remains an idea; and there are spoilers who want to turn the clock back. We must not allow them, and in this Europe and Azerbaijan must work together. Europe’ vanguard organization is the European Union – it is a free union of 27 member states; it is a strong global economic force, and increasingly a diplomatic and military force too. But it remains “work in progress” and can often appear dysfunctional. It often lacks collective and institutional memory. In its dealings with Azerbaijan the EU has made many mistakes – not least opening the delegation here late – in 2008. It sometimes appears condescending. Some utterances from the European Parliament and from some quarters in some member states are not understandable even for me. They irritate the Azerbaijanis, but serve no other purpose But Azerbaijan has also not handled relations with the EU well. It has failed to respond when the hand of friendship reached out; and it confused irritating actions, sometimes by well-meaning people; sometimes by outright spoilers, with strategic action. In short, EU-Azerbaijan relations have suffered from a lack of proper dialogue. This dialogue must be frank, honest and multi-faceted involving different segments of society on both sides.   Is Azerbaijan Europe? When Azerbaijan applied to join the Council of Europe in the 1990s, there were some who opposed, saying this was not Europe. I was one of the people who argued that Armenia and Azerbaijan may be on the periphery of the continent geographically, but were European in essence. Certainly their elites. During the discussion on 4 September in Baku, my friend Farhad Mammedov, mentioned that Azerbaijan is not interested in joining the EU, and was now close to the Central Asian countries in the 5 plus 1 format. Neither things mean that Azerbaijan is not Europe. There are several European countries that are not in the EU, and do not want to be, for example Norway and Switzerland. Iceland has recently voted to stay out of the EU. The UK was a member and left. Europe is bigger than the EU, and the holding of the European Political Community summit in Baku in 2027 proves that. Despite all the rhetoric, I never heard the president of Azerbaijan  saying that Azerbaijan is not Europe, nor have I heard any European president say it either. Not wanting to join the EU and forging close relations with neighbouring regions does not make Azerbaijan any less European. It is only logical that when Europeans talk to Azerbaijan they talk like family. The conversation is often frank. It must also be honest, and Europeans need always to remember this too. A frank, honest and multi-faceted dialogue A frank, honest and multifaceted dialogue will contribute to relations between Azerbaijan and the rest of Europe: it will avoid misperception, which unfortunately is very common on both sides; it will provide a forum where problems can be discussed and resolved, and it will increase mutual trust, so that together common problems can be addressed. (click image to read the full Monday Commentary)
Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

There are two early 20th-century tunes that mark foreign attempts to occupy and “pacify” Yemen. The Scottish tune “The barren rocks of Aden” marks the mobilisation of Highland soldiers, enlisted to be deployed to the Yemeni port of Aden, that in 1837 became the last colony to be incorporated into the British Empire. The tune talks of the harshness of the terrain, but is celebratory, It was even played as a farewell tune to Sir William Luce at the parade in Sharjah celebrating his end as “British Viceroy” in the Middle East in 1966. The second tune is an Anatolian lament. As Ilker Sezer reminded us this weekend, in his weekly feature on “Turkiye Today”, it “mourns the tragic fate of Ottoman soldiers dispatched to the harsh, remote deserts of Yemen during the fall of the empire, young men who marched away from their villages and never returned home. Most of their names, and numbers, were never recorded. Yet, their fate left a mark on the Turkish psyche.” Subsequent invaders have discovered that Yemen is a grave that cannot be overcome by the strength of modern technology, and that whilst Yemeni society is splintered and divided, building a reliable alliance with Yemeni factions is difficult. These are the harsh lessons facing Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom faces its biggest challenge in its modern history. The leadership of the Kingdom now has to respond decisively. At stake is their very credibility. This is likely to be a long and messy conflict. Saudi military objectives need to be focused: to box in the Houthis rather than destroy them. This is likely to include: (a) regaining territory lost on the Red Sea coast; (b) control over Bab el Mandeb Strait; (c) some kind of cordon sanitaire on the Saudi-Yemeni border; and if things go well (d) the capture of Sanaa. All this would not eliminate the Houthi problem, but it will contain it. In the end the Saudis will have to continue managing Yemen with a mixture of carrot and stick. For the moment, the stick is likely, but the carrot cannot be forgotten either. (click the image to read the Monday Commentary in full)