Opinion: Germany must help EU diplomacy succeed in the South Caucasus

"It is urgent for Germany to add its weight as an active participant and co-facilitator" in EU diplomacy in the South Caucasus, write Lara Setrakian and Benyamin Poghosyan in this op-ed for commonspace.eu. "Germany is a key architect and leader in the long-term thinking that is the basis for effective foreign policy. To be a peacemaker requires firm resolve and solid nerves. Germany has both and it can use them in the service of this EU project," they add.

In March, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz hosted visits from Azerbaijan's President Ilham Aliyev and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan. Since the brutal war between Armenia and Azerbaijan in 2020, both countries have called for Berlin to play a larger role in resolving the long-standing conflict between them. Germany’s economic and political capital with both parties, as well as its generally balanced position on the issue, made it an appealing candidate to co-lead the peace process. But it hasn’t heeded those calls to date. Now, as Azerbaijan and Armenia walk a thin line between war and peace, it is urgent for Germany to add its weight as an active participant and co-facilitator in the diplomatic process. 

The meetings in Berlin were the highest-level signals to date that Germany might raise its level of engagement in the South Caucasus. Doing so would be of great benefit to the cause of regional peace, helping to save lives, prevent humanitarian upheaval and stem mass abuses of human rights. It would also boost the EU’s efficacy and credibility in its extended neighborhood. In the wake of the conflict in Ukraine, Europe’s influence and its diplomatic footprint in the South Caucasus has been expanding. A peace process led by Brussels is now one of the two main negotiating tracks – the other one led by Moscow. In February 2023, after a preliminary two-month deployment in the fall, an extended EU civilian observer mission was established to monitor the border between the two countries from the Armenian side.

Germany has much to offer EU diplomacy in the South Caucasus

There is ample reason for Germany to invest in this process; above all, it wants to see geo-economic stability and support the success of major EU projects. It may be the case that what Europe is trying to achieve in its foreign policy – solving problems and maintaining stability at the edge of Europe – simply cannot be done without the weight of Berlin.

Paired with the longtime engagement of France in the South Caucasus, Germany can offer a range of highly effective interventions, from hosting track 2/track 1.5 diplomacy forums to confidence-building economic initiatives. Berlin can become a platform for regular contact between officials, experts and civil society stakeholders at various levels. So far, such platforms have been far too sporadic and lacking in coherent vision; different actors have funded disparate and uncoordinated programs that did not make a lasting impact. 

There are real areas for potential cooperation between Armenia and Azerbaijan, as distant as they may seem at the moment. Both countries have economic development imperatives and need to provide for the long-term welfare of their citizens; the success of both their governments depends on it. Both countries strive for greater economic ties with the block. Armenia’s government, since its Velvet Revolution in 2018, has also accelerated a set of reforms aligned with the EU democratization and anti-corruption agenda. In particular Armenia has followed the blueprint of the Armenia-EU Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement (CEPA), which entered into force in 2021. Azerbaijan, for its part, signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the EU in 2022 on Strategic Partnership in the Field of Energy.

Germany can also be a significant part of the post-conflict reconstruction and rehabilitation process

A sustained platform for dialogue and peacebuilding will help surface more opportunities for economic cooperation with Europe and, eventually, with each other. As the EU’s economic heavyweight, Germany can provide incentives in trade and sustainable development that entice both countries to move forward, rather than looking back on their past grievances. Germany also has the moral credibility and capacity for stricture to serve as a no-nonsense referee in what has become a messy human rights imbroglio. Pulling the region back from the brink and preventing the risk of ethnic cleansing in Nagorno-Karabakh would be a huge achievement.

Berlin can also be a significant part of the post-conflict reconstruction and rehabilitation process, which will lay the foundation for long-term sustainable development in the region. The potential for the South Caucasus is rich and robust in opportunities, starting with transit and transport corridors that connect Europe to China and India, without the added expense and congestion of the Suez Canal. Clean energy and traditional fossil fuels, as well as goods and technology can be readily supplied to European markets. Moving Armenia and Azerbaijan forward, through this rocky period, ensures that they will be stable, long-term partners for the EU. That will also provide a stronger foothold in the South Caucasus for EU relations with Georgia and, in the long run, potentially Iran. 

Europe must not repeat mistakes of the past – namely, letting short-term energy deals prevent it from building a better long-term strategy that meets all of its goals and needs. Germany is a key architect and leader in the long-term thinking that is the basis for effective foreign policy. To be a peacemaker requires firm resolve and solid nerves. Germany has both and it can use them in the service of this EU project. It is urgent from a humanitarian perspective and for EU geostrategic interests that this conflict be solved. The problems in Europe’s extended neighborhood will always penetrate back into the core of the continent; a new war in the South Caucasus will likely draw in Turkey and Iran, while potentially opening a window for confrontation between Iran and Israel. It is far less costly to enable peace and stability today than to pay the cost of instability tomorrow, with another major war in the European arena.

source: Lara Setrakian is the President of APRI Armenia. Benyamin Poghosyan is a Senior research fellow, APRI Armenia, and the founder and Chairman of the Centre for Political and Economic Strategic Studies in Yerevan.
photo: Prime Minister of Armenia
The views expressed in opinion pieces and commentaries do not necessarily reflect the position of commonspace.eu or its partners
 

 

Latest

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

Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

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).

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)