Menu
Latest
Menu
Latest
News

Azerbaijani president says negotiations with Armenia are "virtually non-existent"

20 September 2020

The president of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, has said that negotiations with Armenia are currently non-existent, and accused the Armenian leader of disrupting the negotiations on the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabaklh conflict. Aliyev was speaking to journalists in an interview with the main Azerbaijani TV channels on Saturday (19 September).

In excerpts of the interview, carried by the official Azertac News Agency, president Aliyev gave a negative assessment of the negotiations process. 

"Negotiations are virtually non-existent. I have said before that we will not participate in negotiations for the sake of their imitation. This does not mean that we are refusing to negotiate. It means that we do not want to join Armenia's cunning policy. Our participation in an imitation of negotiations would correspond to the essence of this imitation. In fact, the Armenian leader has disrupted the process of negotiations. He is not disrupting it, but has already disrupted it. Because their nonsensical statements and provocative steps make the talks meaningless. Unfortunately, the current leadership of Armenia does not realize this responsibility. They also fail to properly analyze the consequences of their actions. However, there are rationally thinking people and politicians in Armenia, and these politicians are already raising this issue and telling the Armenian public that the incumbent Armenian leadership is leading Armenia into the abyss."

related content on commonspace.eu: 

Opinion: The current framework of negotiations has exhausted itself

Opinion: Secret diplomacy has failed and it is now time to think of new approaches

Opinion: Restoring trust in the Karabakh peace process

 

The Azerbaijani president also accused Armenia of preparing for a new war.

"Armenia is an aggressive state. Their hatred for Azerbaijan and Azerbaijanis is reflected in their ugly policies. I want to say again and warn them that if they do not give up their ugly plans, they will face very serious consequences. They are preparing for a new war. They are concentrating their forces near the line of contact. We see everything and we watch everything. We follow all their actions. Of course, we will defend ourselves. Just as we defended ourselves in Tovuz, we will defend ourselves in all other directions. The events in Tovuz were yet another lesson for them. If they want to learn a new lesson, we are ready for it."

"The nonsensical thoughts voiced by the Armenian prime minister last year dealt a serious blow to the negotiations. By saying 'Karabakh is Armenia', he not only spread lie all over the world and this continues to this day, but also made the negotiations meaningless. If he thinks that Karabakh is Armenia, then what can we talk about? If he thinks that Karabakh is Armenia - although the whole world rejected this nonsense - then what kind of peace agreement can we talk about? In other words, it was a political provocation."

"The second political provocation was that Azerbaijan should hold negotiations with Nagorno-Karabakh, not Armenia. This also means changing the format, and, of course, we can never agree to that. Because we have no contact with this puppet regime of criminal junta. At the same time, the co-chairs of the Minsk Group, of course, could never agree to that. In fact, these statements give grounds to say that Armenia has withdrawn from the talks - not us but Armenia. This being the case, if we say that let's start negotiations or continue them, it will just be irresponsible and we should not deceive ourselves, we should not deceive our people. Negotiations are not going on, and this is not due to the pandemic. Of course, the pandemic has intervened, but negotiations are not taking place without the pandemic. These politically flawed and harmful statements do not leave room for negotiations."

Aliyev spoke about the issue of settlements in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict zone.

"Armenia is conducting illegal settlement. This contradicts all international conventions. They are not smart enough, they don't have experience, they don't have knowledge to show it so demonstratively. This is completely contrary to the Geneva Convention. It is a crime. It is a crime to bring people to the occupied territories and settle them there illegally. The Pashinyan regime is doing this consciously. This is a provocation. We are being provoked, they show it on the Internet - some Lebanese Armenian family has come and is doing something there. After that, the so-called leader of the so-called regime is allegedly sworn in our ancient historical city of Shusha. This is another provocation. This is an open insult to us. Do they think we can tolerate that? Who is doing this provocation? They are! We do not commit any provocations. We have stood our ground."

Aliyev said he has one condition.

"The prime minister of Armenia puts forward seven conditions to us. First of all, who are you to speak to us in the language of conditions? If we wanted to talk to him in the language of conditions, his political life would not last long. I have said that we are rejecting these nonsensical conditions. We have one condition - they must leave our lands unconditionally and completely. This is reflected in UN Security Council resolutions. There are staging some comedy-like trainings there. In other words, every single step is an open provocation against us."

related content on commonspace.eu: 

In Nagorno-Karabakh, de facto president outlines his red lines for conflict resolution

source: commonspace.eu with Azertac News Agency (Baku)

photo: President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan speaking to TV journalists after the opening of a new oil facility on 19 September 2020 (picture courtesy of the press service of the president of Azerbaijan)

 

 

 

 

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