Opinion: Armenia and Azerbaijan again at crossroads as informal COP29 deadline passes

November marks the fourth anniversary of the end of the 2020 Karabakh war. It was also the month considered as an informal deadline for initialling or signing some kind of document ending the conflict between Yerevan and Baku or at least a joint statement cementing points agreed in peace talks to date. Instead, having failed to do so by the time of this month's United Nations Climate Change Conference COP29 in Baku, and with Yerevan effectively shunning the event, Azerbaijan says that negotiations will now resume in December. As usual, Azerbaijan says Armenia must change its constitution. Armenia refuses to do so – or at least not until other constitutional changes are put to referendum still most likely in 2027. 

That is unfortunate and a far cry from December last year when Armenia and Azerbaijan issued a unique joint statement supportive of Baku’s bid to host COP29, fuelling speculation of an agreement within a year. Almost three dozen Armenian detainees imprisoned in Baku were repatriated then as were two Azerbaijanis held by Yerevan.

It is worth noting, incidentally, that many pro-opposition commentators in Armenia and its Diaspora were reluctantly supportive of Yerevan attending the event in Baku if the remaining detainees, likely with the exception of Karabakh’s de facto ethnic Armenian leadership, were set free too. Though it was unclear whether such a deal was even possible let alone considered, the government only voiced such a requirement last week when National Assembly Speaker Alen Simonyan articulated it. Otherwise, ever since Baku invited Yerevan in the summer, officials instead avoided any questions about attendance.

Indeed, when COP29 started in Baku on 11 November, Deputy Foreign Minister Vahan Kostanyan still refused to clarify the situation despite Simonyan’s remarks. Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan had already departed for Sweden on a two-day visit as well, though this would not have prevented a low-level delegation from participating at the high-profile event. Moreover, the signal it would send out at this stage of peace talks would have been unprecedented. Nobody was really expecting Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan to attend COP29, though other Armenians have visited Azerbaijan mainly for international conferences in the past. At any rate, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev’s response was nonchalant. It was up to Armenia to decide.

Ironically, on the second day of COP29, the Armenian government blocked an opposition resolution calling for the release of those same prisoners. It is uncertain whether Simonyan’s comments were simply a negotiation tactic or not. So far, it is mainly among nationalist segments in the diaspora, especially those opposed to normalised relations, that launched a campaign against COP29 instead. That might have even spread to neighbouring Georgia where Swedish environmental activist Greta Thunberg unexpectedly materialised. Boycotting COP29 in Baku, Thunberg seemed as much concerned with echoing maximalist and nationalist narratives regarding Karabakh. Presumably on an overland journey to Georgia, she also met ethnic Armenian activists in Türkiye. In Georgia, she instead focused on a tiny group of left-wing dissident and feminist activists in Tbilisi.

There was no talk of a peace agreement, regional environmental protection, or cross-border cooperation to tackle the huge problem of climate change. A small event held in Yerevan days later, ostensibly organised by Armenian environmental NGOs likely also opposed to current negotiations likely staged to also provide Thunberg with a platform, focused almost entirely on environmental damage caused by Azerbaijan in Karabakh while ignoring the almost complete devastation of the eco-system as well as entire rural and urban centres in the seven regions formerly occupied by Armenia and Karabakh over almost three decades. Meanwhile, nobody in Tbilisi seemed to care given last month’s controversial elections in Georgia. Even local activists were critical of Thunberg, who some accused of attempting to ‘hijack’ their own political protests for her own sake, criticising her pro-Palestinian and anti-capitalist positions. Some even demanded she immediately leave the country.

Not that any of this mattered. November also saw the re-election of former U.S. President Donald Trump. Along with the issue of climate change, it was this that many consider to cast the darkest shadow over any positive developments emerging from COP 29. Not that there aren’t major problems in Azerbaijan, but the issue at hand was an event to somehow agree on an effective global response to climate change. Trump could frustrate that.

Nonetheless, even with Armenia’s absence, there was at least some good news when U.S. Ambassador to Baku Mark Libby announced that hydrologists and engineers from Armenia and Azerbaijan were working together on integrated water management for transboundary rivers. No further details are known but if a peace treaty does not surface again this year, and along with border delimitation and demarcation, it does at least demonstrate that some cooperation can still occur. Pashinyan has also since said that an informal chat with Aliyev at the recent BRICS Summit in Kazan on unblocking regional communications was positive. Such developments will be crucial if he is to demonstrate that there have been some successes from his “peace agenda” even if in lieu of an actual treaty.

Regardless, make no mistake, it is high time for Armenia and Azerbaijan to sign that already long overdue agreement, but even fewer now expect such a breakthrough by the end of the year. After hearing the same promises for the past three years, the danger is that the process could again become an imitation of talks just as it had prior to the last war. That must not happen. The lives of future generations in the entire region depend on it.

 

source: Onnik James Krikorian is a journalist, photojournalist, and consultant from the U.K. who has covered the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict since 1994.

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

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Key European countries back Denmark in the face of Trump's continuing insistence on taking over Greenland

Key European countries back Denmark in the face of Trump's continuing insistence on taking over Greenland

 Six major European countries have declared their support to Denmark following renewed insistence by the US that it must have control over Greenland. "Greenland belongs to its people, and only Denmark and Greenland can decide on matters concerning their relations," said the leaders of the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and Spain, in a joint statement, issued on Tuesday (6 January), together with Denmark. On Sunday, Donald Trump said the US "needed" Greenland - a semi-autonomous region of fellow Nato member Denmark - for security reasons. He has refused to rule out the use of force to take control of the territory, and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned on Monday that an attack by the US would spell the end of Nato. The issue of Greenland's future resurfaced in the wake of the US military intervention in Venezuela, during which elite troops went in to seize the country's President Nicolás Maduro and take him to face drugs and weapons charges in New York. Following the raid, Trump said the US would "run" Venezuela for an unspecified period of time. He also said the US was returning to an 1823 policy of US supremacy in its sphere of influence in the Western hemisphere - and he warned a number of countries the US could turn its attention to them. The US military raid in Venezuela has reignited fears that the US may consider using force to secure control of Greenland. A day after the raid, Katie Miller - the wife of one of Trump's senior aides - posted on social media a map of Greenland in the colours of the American flag, alongside the word "SOON". On Monday, her husband Stephen Miller said it was "the formal position of the US government that Greenland should be part of the US". In an interview with CNN, he also said the US "is the power of Nato. For the US to secure the Arctic region, to protect and defend Nato and Nato interests, obviously Greenland should be part of the US." Asked repeatedly whether the US would rule out using force to annex it, Miller responded: "Nobody's going to fight the US over the future of Greenland." Stressing they were as keen as the US in Arctic security, the seven European signatories of Tuesday's joint statement said this must be achieved by Nato allies, including the US "collectively" - whilst "upholding the principles of the UN Charter, including sovereignty, territorial integrity and the inviolability of borders". Greenland's Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen welcomed the statement and called for "respectful dialogue". "The dialogue must take place with respect for the fact that Greenland's status is rooted in international law and the principle of territorial integrity," Nielsen said. Trump has claimed that making Greenland part of the US would serve American security interests due to its strategic location and its abundance of minerals critical to high-tech sectors. Greenland, which has a population of 57,000 people, has had extensive self-government since 1979, though defence and foreign policy remain in Danish hands. While most Greenlanders favour eventual independence from Denmark, opinion polls show overwhelming opposition to becoming part of the US.
Editor's choice
News
Donald Tusk: "One for all, and all for one! Otherwise we are finished."

Donald Tusk: "One for all, and all for one! Otherwise we are finished."

Europe is rattled by events in Venezuela, and there are serious concerns that US disregard for international law may have consequences close to home.  The BBC diplomatic correspondent, James Landale, said, the question is how Europe may respond in the longer term to America's military operation in Venezuela. Will it provide a catalyst for the continent to take greater responsibility for its own security in the face of so much instability from what many see as an unreliable ally? Polish prime minister, Donald Tusk, appears to have answered the question, saying on social media: "No-one will take seriously a weak and divided Europe: neither enemy nor ally. It is already clear now. "We must finally believe in our own strength, we must continue to arm ourselves, we must stay united like never before. One for all, and all for one. Otherwise, we are finished." The US seizing of Venezuela's leader has faced strong criticism from both America's friends and foes at an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council, held on Monday, 5 January. Many member states agreed with the US that Nicolás Maduro had been an illegitimate and repressive leader. But many also condemned the US military action as a breach of international law and the UN Charter, and they demanded a democratic transition that reflected the will of the Venezuelan people. (click the image to read the full article).

Popular

Editor's choice
News
Key European countries back Denmark in the face of Trump's continuing insistence on taking over Greenland

Key European countries back Denmark in the face of Trump's continuing insistence on taking over Greenland

 Six major European countries have declared their support to Denmark following renewed insistence by the US that it must have control over Greenland. "Greenland belongs to its people, and only Denmark and Greenland can decide on matters concerning their relations," said the leaders of the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and Spain, in a joint statement, issued on Tuesday (6 January), together with Denmark. On Sunday, Donald Trump said the US "needed" Greenland - a semi-autonomous region of fellow Nato member Denmark - for security reasons. He has refused to rule out the use of force to take control of the territory, and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned on Monday that an attack by the US would spell the end of Nato. The issue of Greenland's future resurfaced in the wake of the US military intervention in Venezuela, during which elite troops went in to seize the country's President Nicolás Maduro and take him to face drugs and weapons charges in New York. Following the raid, Trump said the US would "run" Venezuela for an unspecified period of time. He also said the US was returning to an 1823 policy of US supremacy in its sphere of influence in the Western hemisphere - and he warned a number of countries the US could turn its attention to them. The US military raid in Venezuela has reignited fears that the US may consider using force to secure control of Greenland. A day after the raid, Katie Miller - the wife of one of Trump's senior aides - posted on social media a map of Greenland in the colours of the American flag, alongside the word "SOON". On Monday, her husband Stephen Miller said it was "the formal position of the US government that Greenland should be part of the US". In an interview with CNN, he also said the US "is the power of Nato. For the US to secure the Arctic region, to protect and defend Nato and Nato interests, obviously Greenland should be part of the US." Asked repeatedly whether the US would rule out using force to annex it, Miller responded: "Nobody's going to fight the US over the future of Greenland." Stressing they were as keen as the US in Arctic security, the seven European signatories of Tuesday's joint statement said this must be achieved by Nato allies, including the US "collectively" - whilst "upholding the principles of the UN Charter, including sovereignty, territorial integrity and the inviolability of borders". Greenland's Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen welcomed the statement and called for "respectful dialogue". "The dialogue must take place with respect for the fact that Greenland's status is rooted in international law and the principle of territorial integrity," Nielsen said. Trump has claimed that making Greenland part of the US would serve American security interests due to its strategic location and its abundance of minerals critical to high-tech sectors. Greenland, which has a population of 57,000 people, has had extensive self-government since 1979, though defence and foreign policy remain in Danish hands. While most Greenlanders favour eventual independence from Denmark, opinion polls show overwhelming opposition to becoming part of the US.