Menu
Latest
Menu
Latest
Commentary

Azerbaijan to spend $59 billion to rehabilitate territories, but development also requires peace

17 February 2021
This is a commentary by the political editor of commonspace.eu. A shorter version of this commentary appeared on our weekly newsletter Caucasus Concise on 11 February 2021

 

Azerbaijan plans to spend up to $59 billion over the next ten years to rehabilitate the territories it has recently taken back after being for decades under Armenian control. It is a huge sum even for an oil rich country, but for President Ilham Aliyev developing the new territories now has become the primary mission of his presidency. Aliyev, still basking in popularity after the convincing victory in the 44 day war with Armenia last autumn, has been visiting the regained territories and giving instruction on their development.

The majority of Azerbaijanis who in the past had lived in the Karabakh territories that came under the control of Baku after November 10, 2020, would like to return, several sources in the local government told Izvestia. However, there is nowhere to return to, only the names and endless minefields remain. Nonetheless, the Azerbaijani authorities are confident that the active development of the seven regions in question will soon turn Karabakh into a driver of economic development for the entire country.

 "The regions should not only be revived and brought into sync with the socio-economic development of the entire country, but [they] also should be territories of advanced development,   Azerbaijani Economy Minister Mikayil Jabbarov told the Russian newspaper Izvestia, earlier this week. The economy minister noted that the Karabakh territories are considered advantageous from an economic point of view, since the mining and agriculture sectors are present there, and in the long run, tourism and logistics may enable the area to serve large flows of cargo. Moreover, Baku noted that Armenia would also benefit from the development of road and rail communications. These measures will help create jobs and industries not related to the oil industry, Jabbarov said.

But this will be easier said than done. Three months after the end of the 44-day Second Karabakh War, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Russia are still trying to tie up loose ends following their 10 November trilateral declaration. The process of searching for bodies of missing servicemen continues, and there are still issues related to the exchange of prisoners, particularly a large group of Armenians in Azerbaijan captivity who Azerbaijan says continued to fight after 10 November.

The bigger challenge, however, is related to post-war reconstruction. Both sides have a lot of work ahead, but the challenge facing Azerbaijan is enormous. Diplomats based in Baku were last weekend taken to visit some of the territories retaken by Azerbaijan after nearly three decades of Armenian control. They were genuinely shocked at the state of ruin of what had previously been bustling communities. Azerbaijan President Ilham Aliyev is making reconstruction and the return of the Azerbaijanis displaced from these territories in the 1990s the core objective of his government for the next 5-10 years.

Shusha will be the dream city at the top of the mountain

At the centre of this plan is Shusha, a small citadel and city sitting atop Stepanakert, and what remains of Armenian controlled Nagorno-Karabakh. While both sides claim their historical connections with Shusha, all anecdotal evidence suggests that this was in recent centuries a mainly Azerbaijani town. Militarily it dominated the settlements below it. Aliyev has a different strategy for Shusha going forward. He wants to turn it into a shining light to which Armenians below can look up in awe and envy. He has already declared Shusha Azerbaijan’s capital of culture.  

Going forward there are three problems:

Reconstruction will be difficult, not only because the level of destruction is high but also due to the problem of landmines which infest most of the areas that have reverted back to Azerbaijani control. Azerbaijan is complaining that Armenians are refusing to give up the maps of minefields, and in any case, that will only help a little bit. Already several Azerbaijani soldiers and civilians have been killed by landmines in the last three months, and the scale of the problem will be daunting;

The second problem for Aliyev is more home-grown. Given the potential of Shusha to become one of the most expensive pieces of real estate in Azerbaijan, greedy Azerbaijani officials have been looking how to get a part of the cake. A fuming Aliyev told journalists that departments ranging from the Ministry of Emergency Situations to the Central Bank had been asking to open branches in Shusha. What for? Aliyev asked, there is nothing and no one there. Aliyev issued a warning across the board that he will not allow officials to carve up Shusha, or any of the rest of the regained territories, and that reconstruction and rehabilitation had to be done according to a master plan;

The third problem is less easily solved. It is about security. If Shusha, and places like it in the regained territories, become the shining light to which Armenians will look in awe and envy, then this may not only lead them to seek peace and reconciliation in the hope of sharing the new bonanza, but may lead, at least some, back to violence. For Shusha, and for the rest of the regained territories, peace and stability are going to be hugely important.  Securing that peace is now central for Azerbaijani strategy.

Unsurprisingly, Armenian perspectives are different, as Benyamin Poghosyan argued in an op-ed on commonspace.eu a few days ago. Read more: In 2021 Armenia can only wait and watch whilst others decide the fate of Karabakh

The future of Shusha as the beacon at the top of the mountain, and of the other territories Azerbaijan has regained, may well depend on how quickly all the sides share in a vision for future peace. One can sense conflict fatigue across the region. This now needs to evolve into a genuine desire for peace, which political leaders must harness as they plan the future.

source: This is a commentary by the political editor of commonspace.eu. A shorter version of this commentary appeared on our weekly newsletter Caucasus Concise on 11 February 2021
photo: The town of Agdam was left in ruins for the last three decades (archive picture)

The views expressed in opinion pieces and commentaries do not necessarily reflect the position of commonspace.eu or its partners

You may subscribe to the Caucasus Concise newsletter, here

 

Latest

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?
Trending

Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

19 October 2026
Making peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan was never going to be simple, nor easy, nor quick. It is taking time, writes Dennis Sammut in this Monday Commentary. “There is a sense of realism coming from the leaders of the two countries – President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and prime minister Nikol Pashinyan of Armenia, that frankly, is necessary and welcome”, he writes. At a time when conflicts are raging all over the world – from Ukraine to the Gulf, from Africa to South Asia, the prospect that Armenia and Azerbaijan had finally, after decades of conflict that left thousands of dead and many more displaced, decided on embarking on a journey of peace was welcomed. Peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan can be top-down up to a point. Both leaders have spent political capital preparing for a peace deal. But both are aware that their people are not ready for peace yet. In fact, in Armenia, most of the elite are negative toward a peace deal with Azerbaijan. Pashinyan needs time to persuade his countryfolk. That is why 2031 is realistic. Ilham Aliyev runs a tighter shop, but he is also not immune to public opinion. Every time someone hits a landmine in Karabakh, which unfortunately happens often, peace comes into question. Which is why Aliyev chooses to sound hardline, more often than not. In pursuing the peace agenda, both Aliyev and Pashinyan need to proceed cautiously. But they are right in making peace the central issue in their agenda. It is the main issue, and the one that will define them in history. So forward, cautiously but resolutely! In pursuing the peace agenda, Aliyev and Pashinyan need to be supported clearly and unambiguously. There are too many people in Baku and Yerevan who are sitting on the sides, waiting. The international community is not doing enough. It is time to be counted. Otherwise, the spoilers will win, and the region will go back to its bad habits. (Click the image to read the full commentary).
Dennis Sammut

Popular

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

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

7 September 2026
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)
Dennis Sammut
Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”
Trending

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

21 September 2026
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)
Dennis Sammut