He revealed that Armenia previously rejected a framework agreement, instead proposing the removal of three articles from the draft treaty, which pertain to constitutional territorial claims regarding Karabakh, international legal measures, and foreign force deployment along the border. These issues are critical for both the peace treaty and long-term stability in the South Caucasus.
The first of these—territorial claims—remains a core issue. Without a definitive renunciation of claims over Karabakh by the Armenian populace, any future government could potentially seek a return to the pre-2020 status quo. This obstacle could undermine the prospects of a stable peace.
Secondly, Shafiyev emphasized that Armenia appears inclined to pursue a peace agreement without addressing lingering legal and diplomatic confrontations. This selective approach could pave the way for future disputes, leveraging third countries and the Armenian diaspora in a sustained legal and diplomatic battle.
The third issue involves the presence of the EU civilian mission on the Armenian border, which Azerbaijan perceives as biased, considering the EU’s past inaction during the Armenian occupation of Azerbaijani lands. Shafiyev highlighted Azerbaijan’s reservations about the EU mission, especially given concerns that it could eventually evolve into a military deployment, potentially compromising Azerbaijan’s security.
A recurring argument is that no treaty can wholly ensure peace, as evidenced by the failure of the 1994 Budapest Memorandum in Ukraine’s case. According to Shafiyev, the peace process may require measures like Armenia’s demilitarization to curb any risk of renewed conflict. Moreover, he pointed out that economic cooperation could strengthen security in the region, though he noted that international actors often deepen regional divides rather than promote unity.
